She teaches and carries out research in International law, International dispute, Human rights and International humanitarian law as well as in History of law and Philosophy of law. Through this research institute, she is the editor in chief of the Doctrine  and the French Studies in International Law Collections. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. This article is an orphan , as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles ; try the Find link tool for suggestions.
|Published (Last):||2 September 2007|
|PDF File Size:||14.92 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.93 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Emmanuelle Jouannet. In this study of contemporary French scholarship in the field of international law, I aimed to reveal its reality at the dawn of the 21st century, but I quickly discovered that it is difficult to understand the current trends in this area of scholarship without first placing French international legal thought in the broader context of the evolution of international law itself. It seems that the increased stature of international law and its considerable expansion since are both accepted and problematic.
This evolution is not problematic in and of itself; the problem lies in the increased interest it arouses and the different meanings attributed to it. At the same time, this study is accompanied by inquiries into the nature, purposes, and functions of international law. While such inquiries are hardly new—these issues have always been the subject of study —they lead to new conclusions when undertaken in a doctrinal context that has itself considerably evolved.
On one hand, it has never been harder to answer these questions given that contemporary French scholarship is dominated by positivism in all its forms: formalist, pragmatic, utilitarian, objectivist, and historicist. This is not necessarily regrettable, nor does it signal a doctrinal decline; rather, I am simply stating my observation that the supremacy of positivist thinking obliterates and amputates law from part of its critical dimension and its possible responses to the evolution of international law.
On the other hand, another intimately related evolution is the decline in major theoretical constructions, even positivist ones, which were the glory of French scholarship during the inter-war period. As a result, it is impossible today to refer to these pre-established theories with certainty.
International law is growing and evolving due to an unprecedented need for law at the international level and because contemporary scholars have given up their illusions of absolute, universal knowledge. Instead, they view this evolution as a present phenomenon and examine a whole series of issues that have solutions apparently owing nothing to the great works of the past.
Of course, authors still do refer to traditional works, but they are no longer satisfied with traditional solutions. It is troubling to see how much contemporary international law needs theorizing, but at the same time does not encourage firm theoretical commitments because it is in constant motion.
Today, public international law scholarship—and all legal experience within international public law—fits within these evolving contexts. As a result, this study of contemporary French scholarship takes account of these contexts to reveal both general and specific trends. Advanced Search. Privacy Copyright. Skip to main content Maine Law Review. Authors Emmanuelle Jouannet. Abstract In this study of contemporary French scholarship in the field of international law, I aimed to reveal its reality at the dawn of the 21st century, but I quickly discovered that it is difficult to understand the current trends in this area of scholarship without first placing French international legal thought in the broader context of the evolution of international law itself.
Select an issue: All Issues Vol. Digital Commons.
Andrew Lang, Emmanuelle Jouannet. These two familiar concepts are defined in a relatively straightforward way. Although its precise content varies across periods, it is associated above all with neutrality as regards the internal organization of the state, and norms of mutual non-interference in inter-state relations. The welfarist purpose of international law, by contrast, is concerned less with the rights of the state, and more with improving and advancing the happiness, well-being, and utility of its population, including its material and moral improvement.
The Masterclass was attended by more than 50 persons, half of them stemming from the institute staff and guest researchers , and brought together researchers from several institutions located both in and outside Europe e. Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Mexico. During the three days of the Masterclass, all participants had the opportunity to exchange ideas with other specialists in international law and learn from their views and experience in their respective fields. On the first day, Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet put her research in a broader context, also situating herself among other internationalists including Martti Koskenniemi who held the Masterclass at our institute and several trends in international legal scholarship e. She defended her choice to adopt constructive criticisms on international law and to develop a historical approach responding to specific needs that implies an understanding of the finalities pursued by the international legal order that she identified as being both liberal and welfarist. In addition, Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet conceptualised a theory of struggle in international law that avoids both a too ideological representation of international law and a denial of the game powers existing in the international legal order.
Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet