University of the National Education Commission in Kraków

English abstract: Research purpose: The aim of the article is to assess the usefulness of Marxist approaches to international law in the discussion on the existing and developing international legal order. It is a proposal to enrich the theoretical foundations of the discourse on international law that takes place within the walls of Polish scientific and academic centres. Questions arise as to whether Marxist approaches to the law of nations solve the problem of the possibility of changes taking into account the positions of the “ordinary people”, i.e., the Marxian working class, within the existing imperial international legal order? Or maybe this order ruthlessly defends the interests of the capitalist class, which makes any evolutionary change beneficial to the “ordinary people” impossible? Research assumptions/methodology: The article uses the legal theory method, which boils down to analysing doctrinal views on the Marxist theory of law, starting with Marx and Engels, to Pashukanis, and ending with Chimni and Miéville.
Basic theses/findings: The presented Marxist approaches to international law (Chimni and Miéville) differ in terms of the theoretical basis (Miéville drew on Pashuknis and Chimni directly on Marx), which in turn leads to different views on the essence of international law (Chimni proclaims the “class approach” while Miéville builds his theory around Pashukanis’ “commodity theory of law”) and the possibility of reforming the law of nations. Originality of results/epistemic value: Chimni’s approach turns out to be more useful, as, unlike Miéville, he sees the possibility of changing the imperial international legal order serving the transnational capitalist class within the international rule of law and with the use of human rights. Miéville’s theory is too skeptical and nihilistic. Yet, this should not prevent

Keywords: Marxism, international law, imperialism, reform, social class

Language: Polish

Published: Number 2(43)/2025, pp. 97-119.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.2.97

Download: Download

Number of downloads: 138

This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

University of Łódź

Abstract: The theoretical reflection formulated in the neo-scholastic School of Salamanca has been regarded as the source of the contemporary concept of international relations: going beyond the paradigm of the time – determined, on the one hand, by the idea of the holy war and, on the other, by the doctrine of the just war – the Salamanca scholars laid down foundations for the edifice of modern international law. In this article the author argues that similar ideas preceding the reflection of the school of Salamanca, and often going even further, had appeared a hundred years earlier in the Cracow Academia in the context of a dispute between the Kingdom of Poland and the Teutonic Order. The culmination of this dispute was the Council of Constance. The Polish argument after the battle of Grunwald was based on law, and its unique feature was the return to the universalistic (Augustinian) nature of the just war. What is the most important element in Augustinian theology of war is Christianity’s universalism and recognition of moral equality of those engaged in military operations.

Keywords: just war, holy war, Paulus Vladimiri, international law

Language: English

Received: 11.08.2019
Accepted: 28.10.2019

Published: Number 2(20)/2019, pp. 39-50.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2019.2.39

Download file: Download
Number of downloads: 988

University of Gdańsk

Abstract: During his academic career Ronald Dworkin did not show much interest in the fundamental philosophical questions on international legal issues. This had changed towards the end of his life when he wrote an article titled „A New Philosophy for International Law” published posthumously. The aim of this article is to summarise the key arguments of Dworkin’s approach, address some of its critics as well as to suggest the possibility of further development of this discussion in the context of current global constitutionalism. In the first part, three thesis of Dworkin’s approach are reconstructed. The first one claims that international law requires interpretative understanding which should be grounded in the political morality of the international community. The second thesis can be formulated as follows: the legitimacy of political power at the national and international levels is uniform. The third thesis demands the implementation of the principle of salience in international law as the basic structural principle. After discussing critically Dworkin’s theory, in second part the article proposes a constitutional interpretation of the new philosophy for international law. Two conditions of global constitutionalism have to be satisfied by the theory in order to consider it as a constitutionalist approach. The first condition is the primacy of individual rights and second is the primacy of constitutional norms within the system. The conclusion is that the conditions are satisfied for Dworkin’s new philosophy of international law and his principle of salience is in fact a deeply constitutional arrangement based on moral justification. Dworkin’s proposal constitutes only a rough sketch, however there is a potential for developments. Lawyers and philosophers have at least an intellectual responsibility for building new viable theoretical models for international law.

Keywords: Ronald Dworkin, international law, international society, principle of salience, global constitutionalism, constitutionalization of international law, international legal theory, global law

Language: Polish

Published: Number 1(12)/2016, p. 64-77.

Download file: Download

Number of downloads: 490