Pääsy PDF-dokumenttiin vaatii sisäänkirjautumisen.
Judicial review of the UN Security Council in national courts: international law or national constitutionalismLebeck, Carl
JFT 2013/3 s. 189
Alkuperäinen julkaisupäivä: 15.10.2013
In relation to the powers of international organizations over individuals there is a general constitutional problem that emerges from their legislative and sometimes executive powers of international organizations, and the limited judicial control of those powers. There is hence a “constitutional deficit” of international governance insofar as the exercise of public powers by international organizations are neither constrained through national constitutional constraints nor subject to effective constitutional constraints at the international level. In the case that there are constitutional constraints of international organizations, the notions of constitutional legitimacy may still diverge considerably between national constitutional orders and international organisations.
The purpose of the research is to analyze forms of constitutional control employed by national courts in relation to measures implementing decisions and rules adopted under the UN Charter, in the context of national constitutionalism, and to analyze the theoretical implications of these national constitutional constraints for the understanding of international law. The argument is that whereas international law has never been constitutionalised in and of itself, constitutional constraints imposed by states on implementation of international norms and hence on the effectiveness of norms and decisions of international organisations may be a way to impose constitutional constraints on exercise of international public authority.