Accessible Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter June 25, 2015

Choosing among the Shades of Nuance: The Discourse of Proportionality in International Law

Grigory Vaypan
From the journal Global Jurist

Abstract

Proportionality has been largely misunderstood both by its proponents and by its critics. On the one hand, it has been wrongly regarded as a more transparent and at the same time a more controllable alternative to other types of legal discourses. On the other hand, it has been incorrectly viewed as a realm of unlimited subjectivity and pure politics. In fact, proportionality oscillates between law and politics, trying to reconcile the two yet constantly falling into one or another. The article studies the dialectical structure of proportionality and explores proportionality as an argumentative practice.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Jean Grosdidier, David Kennedy, and Duncan Kennedy for intellectual support and inspiration.

References

Aleinikoff,T. Alexander.1986–1987. Constitutional Law in the Age of Balancing. Yale Law Journal96:9431005. Search in Google Scholar

Arai-Takahashi, Yutaka. 2002. The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in the Jurisprudence of the ECHR. Antwerp, New York: Intersentia. Search in Google Scholar

Arangio-Ruiz, Gaetano. 1991. International Law Commission, Third Report on State Responsibility, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/440 and Add. 1. Search in Google Scholar

Barak, Aharon.2008. Text of a Debate Held December 18th, 2007 under the Auspices of the Jim Shasha Center for Strategic Studies of the Federmann School for Public Policy and Government of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. In Can Democracy Overcome Terror?: Democracy Fights Terror with One Hand Tied behind Its Back: Why, When and How – Must This Hand Be Untied. Search in Google Scholar

Barak, Aharon.2012. Proportionality: Constitutional Rights and Their Limitations. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Best, Geoffrey.1994. War and Law Since 1945. Oxford, New York: Clarendon Press. Search in Google Scholar

Brownlie, Ian.1963. International Law and the Use of Force by States. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Search in Google Scholar

Cannizzaro, Enzo.2000. Il Principio della Proporzionalità nell’ordinamento Internazionale. Milano: A. Giuffrè. Search in Google Scholar

Cannizzaro, Enzo.2014. Proportionality in the Law of Armed Conflict. In The Oxford Handbook of International Law in Armed Conflict, edited by Andrew Clapham and Paola Gaeta, assistant editors, Tom Haeck and Alice Priddy, 332352. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Christoffersen, Jonas.2009. Fair Balance: Proportionality, Subsidiarity and Primarity in the European Convention on Human Rights. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Search in Google Scholar

Crawford, Emily.2011. Proportionality. Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1459. Search in Google Scholar

Dworkin, Ronald.1977. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Falk, Richard.1970. The Status of Law in International Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Franck, Thomas M.2008. On Proportionality of Countermeasures in International Law. American Journal of International Law102:715767. Search in Google Scholar

Gardam, Judith.2004. Necessity, Proportionality and the Use of Force by States. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Search in Google Scholar

Higgins, Rosalyn.1994. Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It. Oxford, New York: Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Jütersonke, Oliver. 2010. Morgenthau, Law and Realism. New York: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kelsen, Hans. [1928] 1945. Natural Law Doctrine and Legal Positivism. In General Theory of Law and State, translated by Anders Wedberg, Wolfgang Herbert Kraus, 390446. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kelsen, Hans. [1934] 1992. Introduction to Problems of Legal Theory. A Translation of the First Edition of the Reine Rechtslehre or Pure Theory of Law. Oxford, New York: Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, David.1987. International Legal Structures. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, David.2006. The “Rule of Law,” Political Choices, and Development Common Sense. In The New Law and Development: A Critical Appraisal, edited by David M.Trubek and AlvaroSantos, 95173. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Duncan.1994. A Semiotics of Legal Argument, reprinted with “European Introduction: Four Objections” and bibliographies. In Collected Courses of the Academy of European Law, Vol. III, Book 2, 309–365. Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Duncan.1997. The Critique of Adjudication (Fin de Siècle). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Duncan.2006. Three Globalizations of Law and Legal Thought: 1850–2000. In The New Law and Development: A Critical Appraisal, edited by David M.Trubek and AlvaroSantos, 1973. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Duncan.2011. A Transnational Genealogy of Proportionality in Private Law. In The Foundations of European Private Law, edited by RogerBrownsword, Hans-W.Micklitz and LeoneNiglia, 185220. Oxford, Portland: Hart Publishing. Search in Google Scholar

Kingsbury, Benedict, and StephanSchill.2009. Investor-State Arbitration as Governance: Fair and Equitable Treatment, Proportionality, and the Emerging Global Administrative Law. In 50 Years of the New York Convention, edited by Albert Jan vanden Berg, 568. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International. Search in Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, Martti.2002. The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law, 1870–1960. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, Martti.2005. From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal Argument. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, Martti.2007. The Fate of Public International Law: Between Technique and Politics. Modern Law Review70:130. Search in Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, Martti.2008. Occupied Zone – “A Zone of Reasonableness?”. Israel Law Review41:1340. Search in Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, Martti.2009. The Politics of International Law – 20 Years Later. European Journal of International Law20:719. Search in Google Scholar

Kumm, Mattias.2009. Democracy Is Not Enough: Rights, Proportionality and the Point of Judicial Review. New York University Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers, Paper 118. Search in Google Scholar

Lauterpacht, Hersch.1933. The Function of Law in the International Community. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Search in Google Scholar

Lauterpacht, Hersch.1950. Sovereignty over Submarine Areas. British Yearbook of International Law27:376433. Search in Google Scholar

Lauterpacht, Hersch.1958. The Development of International Law by the International Court. London: Stevens. Search in Google Scholar

Lauterpacht, Hersch. [1937] 1970. General Rules of the Law of Peace. In International Law, Being the Collected Papers of Hersch Lauterpacht, Vol. 1, edited by ElihuLauterpacht, 179444. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Lauterpacht, Hersch. [1953] 1975. “On Realism, Especially in International Relations.” In International Law, Being the Collected Papers of Hersch Lauterpacht, Vol. 2, edited by ElihuLauterpacht, 5266. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Luteran, Martin.2011. Towards Proportionality as a Proportion between Means and Ends. In Law and Outsiders: Norms, Processes and ‘Othering’ in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Cian C.Murphy and PennyGreen, 322. Oxford, Portland: Hart Publishing. Search in Google Scholar

Marks, Susan.1995. The European Convention on Human Rights and Its ‘Democratic Society’. British Yearbook of International Law66:209238. Search in Google Scholar

Matthews, Jud, and Alec StoneSweet. 2008. Proportionality Balancing and Global Constitutionalism. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law47:72164. Search in Google Scholar

McDougal, Myres, and FlorentinoFeliciano. 1961. Law and Minimum World Public Order. New Haven: Yale University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Morgenthau, Hans.1940. Positivism, Functionalism, and International Law. American Journal of International Law34:260284. Search in Google Scholar

Morgenthau, Hans.1946. Scientific Man vs. Power Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Search in Google Scholar

Morgenthau, Hans.1948. Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Search in Google Scholar

Morgenthau, Hans.1952. Another “Great Debate”: The National Interest of the United States. American Political Science Review46:961988. Search in Google Scholar

Newton, Michael, and LarryMay.2014. Proportionality in International Law. New York: Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Nolte, Georg.2010. Thin or Thick? The Principle of Proportionality and International Humanitarian Law. Law & Ethics of Human Rights4:243255. Search in Google Scholar

Nolte, Georg.2013. Multipurpose Self-Defence, Proportionality Disoriented: A Response to David Kretzmer. European Journal of International Law24:283290. Search in Google Scholar

Orakhelashvili, Alexander.2005. The Impact of Peremptory Norms on the Interpretation and Application of United Nations Security Council Resolutions. European Journal of International Law16:5988. Search in Google Scholar

Pound, Roscoe.1908. Mechanical Jurisprudence. Columbia Law Review8:605623. Search in Google Scholar

Schachter, Oscar.1962. Dag Hammarskjold and the Relation of Law to Politics. American Journal of International Law56:18. Search in Google Scholar

Webber, Gregoire C.N.2009. The Negotiable Constitution: On the Limitation of Rights. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2015-6-25
Published in Print: 2015-7-1

©2015 by De Gruyter