Public Law Studies Quarterly

The nature of the obligations of G20 in the balance of sources of international law with emphasis on modern financial markets

Articles in Press

Document Type : Article

Authors

Farhad Abedini Saadabad 1
sayyed Ghasem Zamani 2

1 Ph.D. Student in International Law at Faculty of Law and Political Science, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor at Faculty of Law and Political Science, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.22059/jplsq.2024.364119.3375
Abstract
In recent years, G20 has emerged as a relatively new, yet influential actor on the world stage which brings together the leaders of the twenty systemically most important economies. Its informality and flexible character warrant the use of the term ‘Informal International Lawmaking. ‘Informal International Lawmaking’ (or “IN-LAW”) comprises networks of global cooperation that are distinct from ‘traditional’ international law as they display fewer formal characteristics; the actors are not necessarily diplomats or heads of state, the process is not necessarily structured by formal proceedings and the output is not (always) an internationally binding legal instrument. Implementation is underway. But how binding are the commitments? Are they any more than soft law? Are the commitments enforceable in their own right? Can they be enforced through other existing obligations or structures? This Article sets out a framework for analyzing G20 commitments under international law, namely, as unilateral declarations, customary international law, or interfacing with general principles of law including reciprocity and estoppel.

Keywords

G20
General Principles of Law
Customary International Law
Unilateral Declaration
reciprocity
Estoppel
Subjects
  1. فارسی

الف) کتاب‌ها

  1. ضیایی بیگدلی، محمدرضا (1390). حقوق بین‌الملل عمومی. تهران: گنج دانش.
  2. والاس، ربکا (1387). حقوق بین‌الملل. ترجمۀ سید قاسم زمانی و مهناز بهراملو، تهران: مؤسسۀ مطالعات و پژوهش‌های حقوقی شهر دانش.نصیری، محمد (1402). حقوق بین‌الملل خصوصی. تهران: آگاه.

 

ب) مقالات

  1. ابراهیم گل، علیرضا؛ نیک‌بین، محسن (1402). جایگاه و کارکرد اصول کلی حقوق در حقوق بین‌الملل سرمایه‌گذاری. فصلنامۀ مطالعات حقوق عمومی، (2)، 619-639.
  2. حاجیان، محمدمهدی؛ ایمانی، محمدامین (1397). بررسی سیر تحول مقررات‌گذاری ابزارهای مشتقه با تأکید بر معاملات انرژی و نفت در ایالات متحدۀ آمریکا. مطالعات حقوق انرژی، (1)، 77-96.
  3. حبیب‌زاده، توکل؛ عطار، محمدصالح (1391). ارزیابی مفهوم حقوق نرم در نظام منابع حقوق بین‌الملل. پژوهش‌های حقوق تطبیقی، (2)، 2-21.
  4. حدادی، مهدی؛ کریمی، سیامک (1397). اعمال یکجانبة دولت‌ها به‌عنوان منبع تعهد بین‌المللی در حقوق بین‌الملل. فصلنامۀ تحقیقات حقوقی، (81)، 289-313.
  5. زرنشان، شهرام (1392). شکل‌گیری قاعدۀ عرفی در حقوق بین‌الملل؛ ارزیابی امکان نقش‌آفرینی بازیگران غیردولتی. مجلة حقوقی بین‌المللی، (47)، 72-88.
  6. صبوح، صقر؛ زمانی، سیدقاسم؛ رضوی؛ سیدعلی (1402). مشروعیت شناسایی الحاق بلندی‌های جولان به اسرائیل از سوی دولت آمریکا از منظر حقوق بین‌الملل. فصلنامۀ مطالعات حقوق عمومی، (2)، 579-599.
  7. الهویی نظری، حمید؛ محمدی، عقیل (1394). تحلیل ابعاد اصل حسن نیت در حقوق بین‌الملل در پرتو رویۀ قضایی. مجلۀ حقوقی بین‌المللی، (53)، 99-126.

 

  1. انگلیسی
  2. A) Books
  3. Cheng, B. (1987). General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals. Cambridge.
  4. Dolzer, R. and Others (2022). Principles of International Investment Law. Oxford, Oxford university prees.
  5. Eckart, C. (2012). Promises of States under International Law. Portland, Hart Publishing.
  6. Kassoti, E. (2015). The Juridical Nature of Unilateral Acts of States in International Law. Boston, Brill nijhoff.

 

  1. B) Articles
  2. Barbara C. Matthews. (2010). Emerging Public International Banking Law? Lessons from the Law of the Sea Experience. Chicago journal of international law. (10), 501-530.
  3. Csatlós, E. (2010). The Legal Regime of Unilateral Act of States. Miskolc Journal of International Law, (7), 33-60.
  4. T. Bloom, (2019). The Legal Underpinnings of the Global Foreign Exchange Market. North Carolina Banking Institute, (23), 27-60.
  5. Henley Peter Holcombe & M Blokker, (2013). The Group of 20: a short legal anatomy from the perspective of international institutional law. Melbourne Journal of International Law, (14), 550-607.
  6. Gunning, (1991). Modernizing Customary International Law: The Challenge of Human Rights. Virginia Journal of International Law, (31), 211-245.
  7. Kennedy, D. (1987). The Sources of International Law. American University International Law Review, (2), 1-96.
  8. Kirchner, S. (2010). Effective Law-Making in Times of Global Crisis- A Role for international Organizations. Goetingen Journal of international Law, (2), 267-292.
  9. Lee, E. (2015). The Soft Law Nature of Basel III and International Financial Regulations. Journal of International Banking Law and Regulation, (29), 603-612.
  10. Lehmann, M., & Tietje, C. (2010). The Role and Prospects of International Law in Financial Regulation and Supervision. Journal of International Economic Law, (13), 663–682.
  11. Paliwal, S. (2012). The Binding Force of G-20 Commitments. Yale Journal of International Law online, (40), 1-10.
  12. Pauwelyn, J. (2012). Informal International Lawmaking: Framing the Concept and Research Questions. Oxford Scholarship Online, (12), 13-34.
  13. Reisman, M. W., & Arsanjani, M. H. (2004). The Question of Unilateral Governmental Statements as Applicable Law in Investment Dispute. ICSID Review, (19), 328-343.
  14. Rubin, Alfred P. (1977). The International Legal Effects of Unilateral Declarations. AJIL, (71), 1-30.
  15. Sohn, L. B. (1996). Sources of International Law. Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, (25), 399-406.

 

  1. C) Reports
  2. COPLIN, NATHAN (2013). New Rules for Global Finance, Global Financial Governance & Impact Report 26, 26-31 (2013), http://www.new-rules.org/storage /documents/global_financial_governance__impact%20report_2013%20.pdf. 24 - 4 - 2021

 

  1. D) Judgment
  2. ICJ, Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear, Preliminary Objections, Cambodia v. Thailand Judgment of 26 May 1961
  3. ICJ, Nuclear Tests, Australia v. France, Judgment of 20 December 1974
  4. ICJ, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, Nicaragua v. United States of America, Judgment of 26 November 1984
  5. ICJ, Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo v. Rwand, Judgment of 3 February, 2006
  6. ICJ, Right of Passage over Indian Territory, Port. v. India, 1960
  7. ICJ, Asylum, Colom. v. Peru, 1950

 

  1. E) Documents
  2. Cannes Summit Final Declaration, 2011
  3. Financial Stability Board Charter, 2012
  4. A. Res. A/61/10, 2006
  5. International Law Commission (ILC), A/CN.4/SER.A/1963
  6. Regulation 648/2012, of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC Derivatives, Central Counterparties and Trade Repositories, 2012
  7. The G20 Toronto Summit Declaration, 2010
Public Law Studies Quarterly

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 22 May 2026

  • Receive Date 20 August 2023
  • Revise Date 25 December 2023
  • Accept Date 06 May 2024

Home

Journal Process Ethics

Peer Review Process

Submission

Indexing and Abstracting

Contact Us