Critique de l'intégration normative

State Sovereignty, Jurisdiction, and ‘Modern’ International Law: The Principle of Complementarity in the International Criminal Court

“…124 A similar view seems to be shared by those arguing that complementarity is a new, 'revolutionary' concept, meaning 'neither the absolute autonomy of national and international systems of criminal justice, nor the strict subordination of one to the other', and as such difficult to understand 'by reference to traditional concepts of legal systems based on hierarchical systems'. 125 While the 'revolutionary' nature of complementarity may be questioned on the basis of the proposed construing of the 'primacy' of the ad hoc tribunals as its ante litteram application, it seems apparent that the ICC will not fail its mission only to the extent that it will be faithful to its role of 'representing the community of nations' 126 and acting as 'a trustee of the fundamental values of the international community' 127 in punishing the worst crimes. The 'formidable achievement' 128 of having states accept some kind of incursion into their sovereign criminal jurisdictions, justified by the need to ensure fulfilment of obligations erga omnes, cannot be wasted by interpreting the relevant provisions of the Statute in such a way as to deprive the ICC of its purpose.…”

Internationalization of Law

“…It would therefore be important to impose coercive mechanisms with particularly dense levels of cooperation, casting off from the international financial system countries that refuse to cooperate. 66 The FATF is a working group that requires states to implement increasing levels of transparency. 65 64 Faria (2004), p. 259.…”

“…Others see current structures as a transition phase, necessary in the development of society. 67 Logically, this means greater control over financial flows and, as a consequence, restrictions on individual liberty and banking secrecy. 65 "The need for crime in order to make society (and, in turn, law) progress is the object of Durkheim's provocation.…”

Global Standards of Constitutional Law: Epistemology and Methodology

“…214 At present, universalism becomes, for example, "ordered pluralism" in the work of Mireille Delmas-Marty, who asserts that, between the monist unification and the radical relativist pluralism, it is enough, for the "systematization" of a comparative law by means of a search for "harmonization" or the "settlement" of legal systems, that "the norms be close enough to the reference principle in order to be regarded as compatible." 215 Even when this reference principle is, in fact, a standard, it still normally allows for a variety of ways to conform to it. The universalism on which the standardizing methodology is based makes it possible to avoid the Scylla of "excessive rationalization" and the Charybdis of the "radical cultural relativism."…”