II. Answer the questions.

1. How can the term “International Law” be defined?

2. What is general or common international law?

3. What does particular international law comprise?

4. In what case can conduct of a state be considered a delict?

5. When shall international law be considered true law?

6. How can the tern “customary law” be defined?

7. Does international law have the same sense as national law?

8. Who is bound by the norms of international treaties?

III. Complete the following sentences. Use the required information from the text above.

1. National or municipal law prevails within the ________.

2. It is, in principle, possible to interpret the employment of force directed by one state against another either as __________ or as ___________.

3. Particular international law is valid for some ________ only.

4. International law is the _________ prevailing in the relations among the states.

5. In speaking of ________ law, reference is made only to ________ or _________ international law, not to __________ international law.

6. Particular international law is ________ for some states only.

7. Particular international law comprises especially norms created by _______ valid only for the __________ parties.

8. General or common international law is __________ law.

IV. Define if the following sentences are true or false. Use the required information from the text above and correct the false statements.

1. International Law regulates the conduct of the states.

2. International law prevails within the state.

3. Particular international law is valid for all international community.

4. Conduct of a legal person can be considered a delict only if international law attaches to this conduct.

5. International law is law in the same sense as national law.

6. International law is true law if the coercive acts of states are permitted only as a reaction against a delict.

7. Customary law is law of international treaties.

8. Norms created by treaties are valid for all states.

V. Read the text. The nature and function of international law2

International law is not rules. It is a normative system. All organized groups and structures require a system of normative conduct — that is to say, conduct which is regarded by each actor, and by the group as a whole, as being obligatory, and for which violation carries a price. Normative systems make possible that degree of order if society is to maximize the common good — and, indeed, even to avoid chaos in the web of bilateral and multilateral relationships that that society embraces. Without law at the domestic level, cars cannot safely travel on the roads, purchases cannot be made, personal safety cannot be secured. Without international law, safe aviation could not be agreed, resources could not be allocated, people could not safely choose to dwell in foreign lands. Two points are immediately apparent. The first is that this is humdrum stuff. The role of law is to provide an operational system for securing values that we all desire — security, freedom, the provision of sufficient material goods. It is not. As is commonly supposed, only about resolving disputes. If a legal system works well, then disputes are in large part avoided. The identification of required norms of behaviour, and techniques to secure routine compliance with them, play an important part. An efficacious legal system can also contain competing interests, allowing those who hold them not to insist upon immediate and unqualified vindication. Of course, sometimes dispute-resolution will be needed; or even norms to limit the parameters of conduct when normal friendly relations have broken down and dispute resolution failed. But these last elements are only a small part of the overall picture.

The second point is that, in these essentials, international law is no different from domestic law. It is not, as some suppose, an arcane and obscure body of rules whose origin and purpose are shrouded in mystery. But, if the social purpose of international law and domestic law is broadly similar, there are important differences arising from the fact that domestic law operates in a vertical legal order, and international law in a horizontal legal order. Consent and sovereignty are constraining factors against which the prescribing, invoking, and applying of international law norms must operate.

[…] I will endeavour to show international law as a normative system, harnessed to the achievement of common values — values that speak to us all, whether we are rich or poor, black or white, of any religion or none, or come from countries that are industrialized or developing.