HOW TO DO THINGS WITH GENERAL PRINCIPLES – JURISTS, INFORMATIZATION AND THE MAKING OF THE GLOBAL LAW
Access to this document is restricted. Some items have been embargoed at the request of the author, but will be made publicly available after the "No Access Until" date.
During the embargo period, you may request access to the item by clicking the link to the restricted file(s) and completing the request form. If we have contact information for a Cornell author, we will contact the author and request permission to provide access. If we do not have contact information for a Cornell author, or the author denies or does not respond to our inquiry, we will not be able to provide access. For more information, review our policies for restricted content.
Increased reference to general principles of law (GPL) in international dispute settlement is hardly questioned in scholarship. Adjudicators, counsels, and diplomats use them in different ways, including overruling explicit treaty provisions and making new law. Absent a text or fact as a point of departure (unlike in treaties and custom respectively), in what manner are GPL identified? The dissertation answers this question by examining how references to GPL are justified in judicial opinions. The dissertation shows that interventions via GPL become commonplace in international adjudication. In general, GPL enable jurists to escape formal rules crystallized by States and improvise new ones. Most notably, GPL are overwhelmingly identified performatively or by reference to the work of a handful of scholars, demonstrating the changing role of international law professionals. The dissertation theorizes this shift: Not only legal knowledge but international law itself is socially produced as an immaterial good by a rather small epistemic community, a transnational space that can no longer be defined by public international law.