Sovereignty and the conflict of international and domestic law

Abstract

The article provides a comparative analysis of the consideration of the sovereignty of the state from the point of view of international and constitutional law. The differences in understanding the impact of international law and constitutional norms on sovereignty are highlighted and erroneous approaches to this issue are identified, which consist in seeking recognition of the limitation of state sovereignty, denying its constitutional origin and the result of the institutionalization of national sovereignty and statehood. Thus, the author comes to conclusions about the application of completely different criteria to the assessment of sovereignty by international and constitutional law. The author finds no reason to conclude that sovereignty is limited both in international relations, for example, when joining an international organization, and in constitutional relations from the point of view of constitutionalism. From this point of view, the author examines and compares existing approaches to the reception of international law norms in the national legal system in a new way. The author comes to conclusion that, considering modern trends in the development of law, the theoretical concepts of monism and dualism do not exist in their pure form in practice, regardless of which approach to the reception of international law norms is fixed at the constitutional level.

References

1. Lefkowitz, D. (2020). Philosophy and International Law a critical introduction. Cambridge.
2. Blackstone, W. (1765). Commentaries on the Laws of England. Oxford.
3. Cassese, A. (2005). International Law. London.
4. Wallace, R.M.M. (1986). International Law. London.
5. Merrills, J.G. (1998). Judge Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice and the Discipline of International Law. Alphen aan den Rijn.