Article contents
The Is and the Ought of International Constitutionalism: How Far Have We Come on Habermas's Road to a “Well-Considered Constitutionalization of International Law”?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 March 2019
Extract
In recent years, a growing chorus of publicists – lawyers, philosophers, political scientists and others – has discussed and often advocated the “constitutionalization” of international law, i.e. the gradual transformation of the whole or at least parts of international law into a world constitution. These “constitutionalists,” many of them having a German background, point to various recent phenomena such as international legal norms with erga omnes effects and peremptory norms (jus cogens) which seem to establish a hierarchical order of global values, going far beyond the classical inter-State relationships of coexistence and synallagmatic exchange. They further list compulsory judicial or quasi-judicial dispute settlement mechanisms (e.g., in the WTO). The constitutionalists put particular emphasis on the human rights revolution since 1945 and the rise of international criminal law that is administered by various international criminal tribunals – phenomena which have transformed individuals into (partial) subjects of international law alongside the states.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- German Law Journal , Volume 10 , Issue 1: Special issue: The Kantian Project of International Law , 01 January 2009 , pp. 31 - 62
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2009 by German Law Journal GbR
References
1 See, e.g., Frowein, Jochen A., Konstitutionalisierung des Völkerrechts, 39 Berichte der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Völkerrecht 427 (2000); Walter, Christian, Constitutionalizing (Inter)national Governance, 44 German Y.B. Int'l L. 170 (2001); Peters, Anne, Global Constitutionalism in a Nutshell, in Weltinnenrecht – Liber Amicorum Jost Delbrück 535 (2005); Fassbender, Bardo, The Meaning of International Constitutional Law, in Towards World Constitutionalism 837 (Ronald St. John Macdonald & Johnston, Douglas M. eds., 2005); Bogdandy, Armin von, Constitutionalism in International Law: Comment on a Proposal from Germany, 47 Harv. Int'l L. J. 223 (2006); Kennedy, Paul, The Parliament of Man: The United Nations and the Quest for World Government (2006); Wet, Erika de, The International Constitutional Order, 55 Int'l & Comp. L.Q. 51 (2006); Kadelbach, Stefan & Kleinlein, Thomas, International Law — a Constitution for Mankind?, 50 German Y.B. Int'l L. 303 (2007). An early “constitutionalist” was Alfred Verdross (Die Verfassung der Völkerrechtsgemeinschaft [1926]). See also Alfred Verdross & Bruno Simma, Universelles Völkerrecht 59 (3d ed. 1984).Google Scholar
2 World Trade Organization, Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization Annex 2 Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes of 15 April 1994, art. 23, available at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/28-dsu.pdf [hereinafter Dispute Settlement Rules].Google Scholar
3 Bernhardt, Rudolf, Art. 103, margin note 9, in The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, Vol. Il (Bruno Simma, et al. eds., 2d ed. 2002). See also the Lockerbie cases, 1992 I.C.J. 3 §39 and 1992 I.C.J. 114 § 42 – provisional measures; 1998 I.C.J. 9 §§ 50; 1998 I.C.J. 115 §§ 49 – preliminary objections (due to an out of court-settlement between the parties, there is no ICJ decision on the merits). But see Derek W. Bowett, Judicial and Political Functions of the Security Council and the International Court of Justice, in The Changing Constitution of the United Nations 71, 81 et seq (Hazel, Fox ed. 1997). The U.K. House of Lords held in R. (on the application of Al-Jedda) (FC) v. Secretary for Defence, [2007] U.K.H.L. 58, available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldjudgmt.htm) that, by virtue of Art. 103 of the UN Charter, the authorization by S.C. Resolution 1546 (2004) to maintain security in Iraq overrode the rights of individual detainees from Art. 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (see the case note by Alexander Orakhelashvili, 102 Am. J. Int'l L. 337 (2008)).Google Scholar
4 Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations (Advisory Opinion of 11 April 1949), 1949 I.C.J. 174, 185.Google Scholar
5 See Fassbender supra note 1, at 848 (speaking of “the fog of indistinct constitutional rhetoric”).Google Scholar
6 Jürgen Habermas, The Divided West, 115 (2007). This is a translation by Ciaran Cronin of Jürgen Habermas, Hat die Konstitutionalisierung des Völkerrechts noch eine Chance?, in Der gespaltene Westen 113 et seq (2004).Google Scholar
7 Kant's most relevant pieces are Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht (1784); ///. Vom Verhältnis der Theorie zur Praxis im Völkerrecht in allgemein-philanthropischer, d.i. kosmopolitischer Absicht betrachtet, Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis (1793); Zum ewigen Frieden. Ein philosophischer Entwurf (1795); Die Metaphysik der Sitten, Erster Teil: Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre §§53 (1797).Google Scholar
8 This has been the quasi-official doctrine of the current U.S. administration under George W. Bush after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, first propagated rather aggressively, recently pursued in a more restrained manner.Google Scholar
9 Carl Schmitt, Völkerrechtuche Großraumordnung mit Interventionsverbot für raumfremde Mächte (1991) (1941); Schmitt, Carl, Der Nomos der Erde im Völkerrecht des Jus Publicum Europaeum (1997) (1950).Google Scholar
10 Habermas mentions two further counter-models to the Kantian vision (the neoliberal model of a global market society beyond the state and the post-Marxist scenario of a dispersed empire without a power center) but ultimately considers them as unrealistic. See Habermas, supra note 6, at 185Google Scholar
11 See Guglielmo Verdirame, The Divided West: International Lawyers in Europe and America, 18 Eur. J. Int'l L. 553 (2007).Google Scholar
12 See Habermas, supra note 6, at 179Google Scholar
13 Jean Bodin, Les six Livres de la République (1961) (1583); Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan (Rogers, G.A.J. & Schuhmann, Karl eds., 2003) (1651).Google Scholar
14 John Locke, Two Treatises of Government (Laslett, Peter ed., 3d ed. 2005) (1698); Montesquieu, Charles de, De l'Esprit des lois (Goldschmidt, Victor ed. 1979) (1748).Google Scholar
15 See Habermas, supra note 6, at 128.Google Scholar
16 Id. at 135Google Scholar
17 Habermas does not use the term “supranational” in the technical sense in which it is used in European Community law. There it denotes the quasi-federal direct legal relationship between the EC and the individual Union citizens which is based on the direct effect of much of the Community's primary and secondary law.Google Scholar
18 On necessary UN reform measures see Habermas, supra note 6, at 173 and infra VI.Google Scholar
19 See Habermas, supra note 6, at 136. On his concept of the UN constitution, see infra VI.Google Scholar
20 The two fields are obviously not exhaustive but representative of all the problems of global domestic politics.Google Scholar
21 See Habermas, supra note 6, at 136.Google Scholar
22 Id. at 133.Google Scholar
23 Id. at 131.Google Scholar
24 Id. at 138 In the phraseology of the late 18th century, the term “republican” denotes what we call “democratic,” i.e. a government deriving its legitimacy from the consent of the governed. Cf. Kant, Erster Definitivartikel, Zum Ewigen Frieden supra note 7. See also U.S. Const. art. IV, § 4.Google Scholar
25 See Habermas, supra note 6, at 139Google Scholar
26 Id. at 140Google Scholar
27 Kant assumed that a republican (i.e. democratic) form of government was most conducive to peaceful external behaviour (Zum Ewigen Frieden, Erster Definitivartikel) and that accordingly perpetual peace could best be secured if all states were republics (See Kant, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe, supra note 7, at 354).Google Scholar
28 Habermas, supra note 6, at 141.Google Scholar
29 Id. at 142Google Scholar
30 Protocol on the Application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to Poland and to the United Kingdom, 2007 O.J. (C 306) 156.Google Scholar
31 Id. at 160Google Scholar
32 Compare U.N. Charter art. 2 (4), 51, available at http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html with the League of Nations Covenant art. 10 – 16, available at http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/leagcov.htm and their tightening up by the Kellogg-Briand Pact (Treaty providing for the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy) of 27 August 1928, available at http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/kbpact/kbpact.htm.Google Scholar
33 Cf. U.N. Charter Preamble, art. 1 (3), 55 (c) and 56. See also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217A, U.N. GAOR, 3d Sess., 1st plen. Mtg., U.N. Doc. A/810 (Dec. 12, 1948), available at http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm.Google Scholar
34 Habermas, supra note 6, at 162.Google Scholar
35 One recent example is G.A. Res. 1769 (July 31, 2007) on Darfur.Google Scholar
36 G.A. Res. 60/251 (Mar. 15, 2006), available at http://www.un.org/Depts/dhl/resguide/r60.htm. See also G.A. Res. 48/141 (Dec. 20, 1993) (establishing the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights).Google Scholar
37 Habermas, supra note 6, at 162Google Scholar
38 See Habermas, supra note 6, at 124, wrongly invoking Kant's Über den Gemeinspruch, where Kant deals only with states forming a “cosmopolitan commonwealth under a single head.” But see Zum Ewigen Frieden, Erster Definitivartikel, where Kant, in a footnote, spoke of a constitution (based on cosmopolitan right) under which individuals and states may be regarded as citizens of a universal state of mankind.Google Scholar
39 Treaty Establishing the European Community art. 17, Nov. 10, 1997, 1997 O.J. (C 340) 3 [hereinafter EC Treaty].Google Scholar
40 Habermas, supra note 6, at 161.Google Scholar
41 U.N. Charter art. 25, 27 (3), 39Google Scholar
42 Frowein, Jochen A. & Krisch, Nico, Introduction to Chapter VII, margin notes 7, in The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, Vol. I (Bruno Simma, et al. eds., 2d ed. 2002).Google Scholar
43 G.A. Res. 827 (May 25, 1993) (amended), available at http://www.un.org/icty/legaldoc-e/index.htm; G.A. Res. 955 (Nov. 8, 1994) (amended). (http://69.94.ll.53/ENGLISH/basicdocs/statute/2007.pdf [last visited on 4 August 2008]).Google Scholar
44 See, e.g., S.C. Res. 1267 (Oct. 15, 1999); S.C. Res. 1822 (June 30, 2008), available at http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/.Google Scholar
45 Habermas, supra note 6, at 164.Google Scholar
46 Non-State Actors as New Subjects of International Law (Hofmann, Rainer ed. 1999).Google Scholar
47 The figure of 193 UN members given by Habermas is incorrect. The few territories at least factually outside the UN are Kosovo, Palestine, Taiwan, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and most recently Abchasia and South Ossetia, whose independent statehood is each still open to doubt and has not been universally recognized so far, as well as the Vatican City which is inextricably connected with the Holy See, a non-state subject of international law.Google Scholar
48 The UN Charter contemplates the pacific settlement of disputes to which non-members of the United Nations are parties (U.N. Charter art. 35 (2)) as well as enforcement action against non-members (Thomas M. Franck, Is the U.N. Charter a Constitution?, in Verhandeln für den Frieden. Liber Amicorum Tono Eitel 95, 97 (2003)). See also U.N. Charter art. 2(6).Google Scholar
49 HABERMAS, supra note 6, at 165.Google Scholar
50 See infra VI. 3.Google Scholar
51 Habermas, supra note 6, at 141. See Reparation for injuries supra 4.Google Scholar
52 “Idee zu einer Allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht” (English translation of Ted Humphrey quoted at Habermas, supra note 6, at 122 n. 14).Google Scholar
53 Cf. Louis Henkin's famous aphorism “It is probably the case that almost all nations observe almost all principles of international law and almost all of their obligations almost all of the time” (Louis Henkin, How Nations Behave: Law and Foreign Policy 47 (2d ed. 1979)).Google Scholar
54 See infra VI. 1. (b).Google Scholar
55 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 22, 1969, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331, available at http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf [hereinafter Vienna Convention].Google Scholar
56 Beyond its wording, Art. 103 of the UN Charter sets aside conflicting obligations also from non-treaty sources (Bernhardt supra note 3, at margin note 21).Google Scholar
57 Habermas, supra note 6, 159 (citing Brun-Otto Bryde, Konstitutionalisierung des Völkerrechts und Internationalisierung des Verfassungsrechts, 42 Der Staat 61, 62 (2003)).Google Scholar
58 Numerous states have made reservations against Art. 66 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (supra note 55) which was intended to establish the jurisdiction of the ICJ with regard to such disputes.Google Scholar
59 Habermas, supra note 6, at 131Google Scholar
60 Id. at 148–149.Google Scholar
61 See supra II. 5.Google Scholar
62 Cf. Aureuus Augustinus, Liber IV, De civitate Dei, §4 (“Justice removed, then, what are kingdoms but great bands of robbers?”)Google Scholar
63 Grimm, Dieter, Ursprung und Wandel der Verfassung, in Handbuch des Staatsrechts der Bundesrepubuk Deutschland, vol. I 4 (Isensee, Josef & Kirchhof, Paul eds., 3d ed. 2003).Google Scholar
64 But see Tomuschat, Christian, Obligations Arising for States Without or Against Their Will, 241 Recueil des Cours 195 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
65 Id. at 216.Google Scholar
66 See Dispute Settlement Rules supra note 2, at art. 3 (2), 19 (“…Recommendations and rulings of the DSB cannot add to or diminish the rights and obligations provided in the covered agreements.”)Google Scholar
67 I therefore disagree with Habermas's apodictic remark that the WTO has a mandate to make political decisions (Habermas, supra note 6, at 175).Google Scholar
68 World Trade Organization, Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization of 15 April 1994, art. X, available at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/04-wto.pdf [hereinafter WTO].Google Scholar
69 Id. at art. IX:2.Google Scholar
70 Id. at art. IX:1. According to an official footnote, the body concerned shall be deemed to have decided by consensus if no member, present at the meeting when the decision is taken, formally objects to the proposed decision.Google Scholar
71 Id. at art. IX:3, 4.Google Scholar
72 José E. Alvarez, International Organizations as Law-makers 241 (2005); Qureshi, Asif H. & Ziegler, Andreas R., International Economic Law 223 (2d ed. 2007).Google Scholar
73 Verdross, supra note 1; Simma, supra note 1, at 69; Fassbender, Bardo, UN Security Council Reform and the Right of Veto — A Constitutional Perspective 89 (1998); id., The United Nations Charter as Constitution of the International Community, 36 Colum. J. Transnat'l L. 529 (1998); Dupuy, Pierre-Marie, The Constitutional Dimension of the Charter of the United Nations Revisited, 1 Max Planck Y.B. of U.N. L. 1 (1997); see also the more cautious approach by Franck, supra note 48, at 95Google Scholar
74 See supra note 47.Google Scholar
75 Schermers, Henry G., We the Peoples of the United Nations, 1 Max Planck Y.B. OF U.N. L. 111 (1997).Google Scholar
76 U.N. Charter, art. 108, 109: Amendments to the UN Charter enter into force once they have been ratified by two-thirds of the UN members, including all the permanent members of the Security Council.Google Scholar
77 Vienna Convention, supra note 55, at art. 39; EC Treaty, supra 39, at art. 48.Google Scholar
78 On the distinction between constitutions in the descriptive sense and in the normative sense, see Grimm supra note 63, at 3Google Scholar
79 Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 163 (1803). The first edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica (Edinburgh 1771) had already asserted that the British constitution had established “an empire of laws and not of men.”Google Scholar
80 See the preamble of the Virginia Bill of Rights of 12 June 1776 which is still in force as part of the Constitution of Virginia of 1971, available at http://legis.state.va.us/Laws/search/constofva.pdf.Google Scholar
81 Habermas, supra note 6, at 135; Cottier, Thomas & Hertig, Maya, The Prospects of 21st Century Constitutionalism, 7 Max Planck Y.B. U.N. L. 261,299 (2003).Google Scholar
82 Cf. Oeter, Stefan, Souveränität — ein überholtes Konzept?, in Tradition und Weltoffenheit des Rechts. Festschrift für Helmut Steinberger 259, 281 (Hans-Joachim Cremer et. al. eds. 2002).Google Scholar
83 Cf. Tomuschat, Christian, International Law as the Constitution of Mankind, in International Law on the Eve of the Twenty-first Century. Views from the International Law Commission 37, 40 (1997).Google Scholar
84 U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779, 838 (1995) (Kennedy, J. concurring). According to the opinion prevailing in Germany since 1871, however, even in a federal system sovereignty is indivisible and belongs to the federal government alone. See Stefan Oeter, Souveränität und Demokratie als Probleme in der “Verfassungsentwicklung” der Europäischen Union, 55 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 659, 667 (1995).Google Scholar
85 Damian Chalmers et al., European Union Law 182, 196 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
86 See, e.g. Grundgesetz(GG-Basic Law/Constitution) art. 93 (1) No. 2, 2a and 3.Google Scholar
87 Id. at art. 79 (2).Google Scholar
88 See, e.g, U.S. Const. art. VII; EC Treaty, supra 39, at 48.Google Scholar
89 See, e.g. EC Treaty, supra 39, at art. 6 (1); U.S. Const. art. IV § 4; Grundgesetz (GG- Basic Law/Constitution) art. 28.Google Scholar
90 See Grundgesetz (GG- Basic Law/Constitution) art. 1 (3). But see the more limited effect of the federal fundamental rights guarantees on the states in U.S. constitutional law (Erwin Chemerinsky, Constitutional Law 499 (3d ed. 2006)) and in the EU (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union art. 51 (1), 2000 O.J. (C 364) 21).Google Scholar
91 See infra VI. 3.Google Scholar
92 This is also the essence of Art. 16 of the French Déclaration quoted above: the assurance of fundamental rights pertains to the legitimacy, the separation of powers to the control of governmental power.Google Scholar
93 2007 O.J. (C 306).Google Scholar
94 U.N. Charter art. 25, 39, 103.Google Scholar
95 Abraham Lincoln, Selected Speeches and Writings 405 (First Vintage Books 1992). The Gettysburg formula was adopted by Art. 2 (5) of the French Constitution of 1958 as the maxim of the French Republic, available at http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/connaissance/constitution0708.pdf.Google Scholar
96 Government by the people.Google Scholar
97 Government for the people.Google Scholar
98 Government of the people.Google Scholar
99 Europe has three permanent members (including Russia) and three non-permanent members. Africa has only three non-permanent members, while Asia and Pacific as well as the Americas have one permanent and two non-permanent members.Google Scholar
100 See Thomas Giegerich, “Fork in the Road” — Constitutional Challenges, Chances and Lacunae of UN Reform, 48 German Y. B. Int'l L. 29, 33 (2005).Google Scholar
101 EC Treaty, supra 39, at art. 34 (2) (b).Google Scholar
102 Giegerich, supra note 100, at 42; Johnstone, Ian, Legislation and Adjudication in the UN Security Council: Bringing Down the Deliberative Deficit, 102 Am J. Int'l L. 275, 285 (2008).Google Scholar
103 Giegerich, supra note 100, at 46.Google Scholar
104 See Habermas, supra note 6, at 176.Google Scholar
105 On (3), cf. Johnstone, supra note 102, at 278. (quoting Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action (Thomas McCarthy trans., 1985) and Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy (William Rehgtrans., 1996)).Google Scholar
106 Giegerich, supra note 100, at 53.Google Scholar
107 See supra VI. 1. b).Google Scholar
108 See supra note 44.Google Scholar
109 Pursuant to Art. 34 (1) of the ICJ Statute, only states my be parties in cases before the ICJ. Statute of the International Court of Justice art. 34(1), June 26, 1945, 59 Stat. 1055, [hereinafter ICJ Statute].Google Scholar
110 Giegerich, supra note 100, at 63.Google Scholar
111 E.g. in the Kadi case, 2005 E.C.R. II-3649 [T-315/01].Google Scholar
112 Case C-402/05 P, Kadi v. Council 2008 E.C.J.; Case C-415/05 P, Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council 2008 E.C.J.Google Scholar
113 Id., § 280.Google Scholar
114 Behrami v. France, App. No. No. 71412/01 May 2, 2007); Saramati v. France, Germany and Norway, App. No. 78166/01. See the case note by Pierre Bodeau-Livinec et. al., 102 Am. J. Int'l L. 323 (2008).Google Scholar
115 Berić et al. v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, App. No. 36357/04 (Oct. 16, 2007).Google Scholar
116 See Kadi, supra note 112, § 310.Google Scholar
117 Bosphorus Airlines v. Ireland, App. No. 45036/98 (June 30, 2005).Google Scholar
118 After the Swiss Federal Court dismissed an action by a listed individual against the application of the Swiss government's regulation implementing the SC's individualized sanctions against him (1A.45/2007, BGE 133 II 450 (Nov. 14, 2007), available at http://www.bger.ch/index/juridiction.htm), a pertinent individual application is now pending in Strasbourg.Google Scholar
119 Al-Adsani v. United Kingdom, App. No. 35763/97 (Nov. 21, 2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
120 See supra (i).Google Scholar
121 Bosphorous supra note 117, § 155.Google Scholar
122 On de-listing, see the information available at http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/fact_sheet_delisting.shtml. Further improvements are currently under discussion. In its recent Kadi judgment, the EJC considered the “remedies” provided by the SC as inadequate [See Kadi, supra note 112, § 318).Google Scholar
123 See Kadi, supra note 112, § 315.Google Scholar
124 See Wet, Erika de & Nollkaemper, André, Review of Security Council Decisions by National Courts, 45 German Y.B. Int'l L. 166, 184(2003).Google Scholar
125 See Zemanek, Karl, Is the Security Council the Sole Judge of its Own Legality?, in The Law of International Relations–Liber Amicorum Hanspeter Neuhold 483, 503 (Reinisch, August & Kriebaum, Ursula eds. 2007).Google Scholar
126 Mainly for this reason, James Crawford denied the UN Charter's quality as a world constitution (James Crawford, The Charter of the United Nations as a Constitution, in The Changing Constitution of the United Nations 3, 10 et seq. (Hazel, Fox ed. 1997).Google Scholar
127 But see Universal Declaration, supra note 33, at art. 21.Google Scholar
128 Id. Google Scholar
129 In its current form, it has been established by Resolution 1 of the 5th Session of the Human Rights Council. It is the successor of the old “1503-procedure.” (Human Rights Council Res. 5/1 § 85 (June 18, 2007)).Google Scholar
130 Bosphorous supra note 117, § 156.Google Scholar
131 See also Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Constitutionalism, International Law and “We the Peoples of the United Nations,” in Tradition und Weltoffenheit des Rechts 291, 301 (Hans-Joachim Cremer et. al. eds. 2002).Google Scholar
132 Cf. Crawford, James, Multilateral Rights and Obligations in International Law, 319 Recueil des Cours 325, 373 (2007). See also Fassbender, supra note 73, at 131.Google Scholar
133 Peters, Anne, Compensatory Constitutionalism, 19 Leiden J. Int'l L. 579 (2006).Google Scholar
134 On the model character of European unification for other world regions and the indispensability of an intermediate level of regional actors in a multilevel system of world constitutionalism see Habermas, supra note 6, at 177.Google Scholar
135 Winston Churchill, Address to the House of Commons (May 13, 1940). (quoting Churchill's famous “blood, toil, tears and sweat” speech).Google Scholar
136 Rechtslehre, supra note 7, at 350 – 51, 354 – 55.Google Scholar
137 See Habermas, supra note 6, at 117.Google Scholar
138 Id. at 116.Google Scholar
139 Id. at 147.Google Scholar
140 See supra II. 2.Google Scholar
- 7
- Cited by