Public Law Studies Quarterly

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

Author Index

Keyword Index

Journal About

Editorial Board

Journal Aim Scope

News

Journal FAQ

Journal Links

Guide for Authors

Author Guidelines for Manuscript Submission

Reviewers List

Law-making by the International Court of Justice from the point of ‎view of Weberian rationality

Articles in Press

Document Type : Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student‏ ‏in International law, Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law and Political ‎Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran‎

2 Professor, Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, ‎Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Establishing the Law-making of the International Court of Justice based on rationality, while it can play a significant role in the public acceptance of the Court's opinions, by adopting a legal sociological approach to this action of the Court, it theoretically facilitates the development of international law through the Law-making of the Court. Therefore, the current research, relying on the descriptive-analytical method, aims to theorize on the possibility of adapting the law-making action of the court to rational actions and types of Weberian rationality. This article, while acknowledging Weber's special approach to rationality, has come to the conclusion that the court's law-making as a meta-linguistic concept, meaning the creation of rules and the creation of rational and mandatory action patterns by the court, conformed to Weber's rationality. This article, while acknowledging Weber's special approach to rationality, has come to the conclusion that the court's law-making as a meta-linguistic concept, meaning the creation of rules and the creation of rational and mandatory action patterns by the court, conformed to Weber's rationality. Also, the action of the court in creating the law can be included under the Value- Rational Action and the Means-end Rational Action action and the relationship between the action of the court and the Affectual Action and the Traditional Action is the contrast. Also, among the four types of Weber's rationality, the law-making of the court can be described as theoretical, intrinsic and formal rationality, and according to the components calculated for practical rationality, this action of the court cannot be considered practical rationality.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. English

    1. A) Books
    2. Aharon, B. (2005). Purposive Interpretation in Law. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
    3. Bennett, Christopher (2012). The Apology Ritual: A Philosophical Theory of Punishment. first edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    4. Luhmann Niklas (2016). A Sociological Theory of Law. edited by: Martin Albrow. translated by: Elizabeth King-Utz, and Martin Albrow. Published by Routledge, Schawrnzenbergr, G. (1972). Equity in International Law. Yearbook of World Affairs.
    5. Schawrnzenbergr, G. (1972). Equity in International Law. Yearbook of World Affairs.
    6. Schutz, A. (1962)1984. Collected Papers: The Problem of Social Reality. The Hague/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff.
    7. Thirlway, Hugh (2019). The Sources of International Law. Oxford: Oxford Public International Law.
    8. Weber, M. (1930) 2005. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. translated by Talcott Parsons. London and New York: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
    9. Weber, M. (1946/1958). Essays in Sociology. In M. Weber, H. Gerth, & C. W. Mills (Eds.) From Max Weber. New York: Oxford University Press.
    10. Weber, M. (1951). The Religion of China. Translated and edited by Hans H. Gerth. New York: Free Press.
    11. Weber, M. (1968). Economy and Society. Edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. New York: Bedminister. Originally: (1921) 1976. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Edited by Johannes Winckelmann, Tubingen: Mohr.

     

    1. B) Articles
    2. Brunnée, J. & Christopher Campbell-Duruflé (2022). International Legislation. Max Planck Encyclopedias of International Law [MPEPIL], 1-20.
    3. Kalberg, S. (1980). Max Weber's Types of Rationality: Cornerstones for the Analysis of Rationalization Processes in History. The American Journal of Sociology, 85(5), 1145-1179.
    4. Kolb, Robert (2006). Principles as Sources of International Law; with Special Reference to Good Faith. Netherlands International Law Review, (53), 1-36.
    5. Mosterín, J, (2002). Acceptance Without Belief. Manuscrito, Instituto de Filosofía CSIC Calle Pinar, (25), 313–335.
    6. Swidler, Ann (1973). The Concept of Rationality in the Work of Max Weber. Sociological Inquiry, 43 (1), 35-42.
    7. Tucker, William, T. (1965). Max Weber's Verstehen. The Sociological Quarterly, Taylor & Francis, 6 (2), 157-165.
    8. Weber, M, (1946) 2010. Politics as Vocation, H. Gerth and C. W. Mills (eds). Oxford University Press. 77-127.

     

    1. C) Cases
    2. Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v Turkey) (Judgment), ICJ Reports 1978.
    3. Amco Asia Corporation and Others v. Republic of Indonesia, (1986), ICSID Case No. ARB/81/1, Ad hoc Committee Decision on the Application for Annulment of May 16, 1986, 25 ILM 1439.
    4. Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. case (jurisdiction), judgment of July 22nd, I952: I. C. Reports I952.
    5. Case Concerning Barcelona Traction, Light, and Power Company, Ltd [1970] ICJ Reports 1970.
    6. Case concerning Right of Passage over Indian Territory, (1960) Merits,(Portugal v. India) Merits, ICJ Reports, 1960.
    7. Case Concerning Rights of United States Nationals in Morocco, (France v. United States of America), JUDGMENT OF AUGUST 27th, 1952.
    8. Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. People's Republic of Albania) (Merits), ICJ Reports 1949.
    9. Dispute Regarding Navigational and Related Rights, (2009) Merits,(Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), ICJ Reports, 2009.
    10. Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America, Declaration of judge ad hoc Momtaz, December 2022, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders: Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) , pp 65-79, Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures - Order of 3 October 2018.
    11. Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia Notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276, Advisory Opinion of 21 June 1971, I.C.J Reports, 1971.
    12. Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970) (Advisory Opinion), ICJ Reports 1971.
    13. North Sea Continental Shelf Cases, (1969) Merits, (Federal Republic of Germany/Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany/Netherlands), ICJ Reports.
    14. Norway v. USA (Norwegian shipowners’ claims), 13 October 1922.
    15. Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic aka "Dule" (Opinion and Judgment), IT-94-1-T, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), 7 May 1997.
    16. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment of 20 April 2010.
    17. Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion 11 April 1949, ICJ. Reports, 1949.
    18. Reservations To The Convention On The Prevention And Punishment Of The Crime Of Genocide, Advisory Opinion, International Court of Justice, 1951 ICJ Report 1951.
    19. Special Court of Sierra Leone, Prosecutor v. Sam Hinga Norman, 31 May 2004, No. SCSL-2004-14-AR72(E).

     

    References In Persian:

    1. A) Books
    2. Abazari, Y. (2022). Wisdom of Sociology. fifth edition. Tehran: New Design (In Persian).
    3. Ansari, B. (2013). The role of the judge in the transformation of the legal system. second edition. Tehran: Mizan (In Persian).
    4. Brubaker, R. (2015). The limits of rationality. translated by Shahnaz Mosamaparast. Tehran: Parse (In Persian).
    5. Cassese, A. (1991). International Law in a Divided World. translated by Mortaza Calantarian. First Edition. Tehran: The International Law Office (ILO) (In Persian).
    6. Freund, J. (2004). Sociology of Max Weber. translated by Abdul Hossein Nik-Gohar. first edition. Tehran: Tutia (In Persian).
    7. Giddens, A. (2005). Central issues in social theory, action, structure and contradiction and social analysis. translated by Mohammad Rezaei. first edition. Tehran: Saad (In Persian).
    8. Keynia, M. (2021). Fundamentals of Criminology. 19th edition. Tehran: University of Tehran (In Persian).
    9. Khalafi, M. (2009). Legal foundations of crime prevention. first edition. Qom: Noor al-Sajad (In Persian).
    10. Majdfar, F. (2013). General Sociology. first edition. Tehran, Shua (In Persian).
    11. Mirzaei, K. (2006). English-Persian specialized dictionary of humanities. , first edition. Tehran: Hafiz (In Persian).
    12. Mohibi, M. (2014). Discussions of oil and gas rights in the light of international arbitration procedure. third edition. Tehran: Shahr Danesh (In Persian).
    13. Mohseni, M. (2016). Sociology of social deviations. third edition. Tehran: Tahori (In Persian).
    14. Sadat Meidani, H. (2008). Legislative authority of the Security Council. second edition. Tehran: Bureau of Political and International Studies (In Persian).
    15. Tanhaee, H. A. (2014). An introduction to sociological schools and theories. Gonabad: Marandiz Publishing (In Persian).
    16. Tebbit, M. (2014). Philosophy of Law. translated by Hasan Rezaei Khavari. 4th edition Mashhad: Razavi University of Islamic Sciences (In Persian).
    17. Weber, M. (2019). Economy and society. translated by Abbas Manouchehri, Mehrdad Tarabinejad and Mostafa Emadzadeh. 7th edition. Tehran: Samt (In Persian).
    18. Weber, M. (2021). Protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism. translated by Abdul Karim Rashidian and Parisa Manouchehri Kashani. 10th edition. Tehran: Scientific and Cultural Publications (In Persian).
    19. Zarneshan, S. (2012). Formation and identification of customary international law. first edition. Tehran: Ganj Danesh (In Persian).
    20. Ziaei Bigdeli, M. R.(2022). Public International Law. 77th edition .Tehran: Ganj Danesh (In Persian).

     

    1. B) Articles
    2. Ahmadi, O. (2012). Legitimacy of law from the perspective of Islam and Max Weber. comparative law researches, 17 (1), 1-21 (In Persian).
    3. Azad Barmaki, T, (1996). Sociology of Rationality. Qabasat, 1 (1), 39-57 (In Persian).
    4. Bagherzadeh, R., & Ranjbarian, A.H. (2015). Knowledge of international legislation in the light of general considerations of legislation in legal science. Shahid Beheshti University Legal Research Journal, 19 (74), 169-192 (In Persian).
    5. Bashiriyeh, Hosein (1989). Fundamentals of Max Weber's Religious Sociology - Part II. Tehran University Faculty of Law and Political Science Journal, (24), 203-223 (In Persian).
    6. Gha`eminia, A. R. (2004). What is rationality. Mind (Zihn) Scientific Research Quarterly, (17), 1-12 (In Persian).
    7. Habibi Majandeh, M., & Kamyar-rad, S. (2017). Rule-making in the International Court of Justice through dynamic interpretation. International Law Review (ILR), (58), 65-88 (In Persian).
    8. Habibi, H., & Shamlu, S. (2012). The role of the International Court of Justice in the development of international law. Journal of Public Law Research, 15 (41), 71-114 (In Persian).
    9. Hoseini Jebeli, M. (2002). Customs from a sociological and legal perspective. Ma`rifat, (56), 110-129 (In Persian).
    10. Mohebbi, M., & Amini, A. (2013). The principle of fairness and its rule-making capacity in the procedure of the International Court of Justice. International Law Review (ILR). (51) 9-40 (In Persian).
    11. Moradi Pasand, G., Bashirieh, T., & Gholami, H. (2019). Fundamentals of ethical, philosophical and legal interactional decriminalization. Ethical Researches, 10(3), 263-286 (In Persian).
    12. Mumtaz, J. (2010). Introduction, in: collection of articles of the conference on the role of the International Court of Justice in the continuation and development of international law, Tehran: Iranian Association of United Nations Studies, first edition (In Persian).
    13. Ramezani, M. H. (2010). Looking at environmental issues in the decision of the International Court of Justice in the paper pulp factory case. Comparative Law, (85), 79-100 (In Persian).
    14. Rasoolpour, A., & Abedini, A. (2012). Moving towards rule-making and contemporary concepts: judicial procedure in the mirror of the International Court of Justice. Legal Researches, (21), 133-176 (In Persian).

     

Public Law Studies Quarterly

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 20 March 2026
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 19 September 2023
  • Revise Date: 10 December 2023
  • Accept Date: 15 April 2024
Share
How to cite
Statistics