Free The States under Conditions of New Economics Law Essay Sample
According to (Subedi, 2006) International economic law is responsible for the economic relations among nations or the international economic order. He however talks about the international economic law as encompassing a wide area. “It at times includes public and private international law of trade to certain aspects of international commercial law and the law of international finance and investment”( Subedi, 2006).This law is thus based on the principles of traditional international law namely; Freedom ,Pacta sunt servanda ,reciprocity ,economic soverrignity.It further integrates other modern principles such as; Permanent sovereignty over natural resources ,the duty to co-operate ,the least developed countries and preferential treatment for developing countries in general (Subedi, 2006).
• An analysis of the nature of State and peculiarities of State is acting in International Economic Law under conditions of globalization.
Prof Boutaleb, 2003 defines Globalization by first looking at it as a “Global village” with the expansions in the network of communication ,gradual shrinking of geographical borders and hence the subsequent human attachment to citizens and identities. The removal of regulation to acquire a passport or visa in order to access another country, the international legality and international organizations and law, the consecration of a new era when the national state is fading away and the sovereignty and authority towards regional grouping. He further proceeds by equating Globalization to the initially well-known universal trend that was instigated by the human instincts, but in an evident quest to dominate the world in a broader environment (Prof Boutaleb, 2003).
Prof further goes a head to define Globalization in his own words as “an act and a practice. It is equally an integrated system wherein the subject leaves no choice to the object destined to be shaped up. That is why globalization advocates describe it as inevitable for humanity, sooner or later” (Prof Boutaleb, 2003).Globalization takes an upper hand in the International economic law because of the following.
Economic Globalization is the market economy that allows all trading collaborates a non-discriminatory equal chance to freely trade in goods and services with ease. This is hence fostered through the establishment of trade of free competition and the liberalization of trade (Prof Boutaleb, 2003).
Globalization was born out of the well-organized freedom between the goods and service market and the capital market, this was also made possible by the non-member countries rush to join the GATT.After the Uruguay round of talks in a bit to fulfill the world trade organization directives (Prof Boutaleb, 2003).
Globalization has led to what is referred to as Global economic openness by Prof Boutaleb, this entails opening up of markets to consumers and the goods and services produced in another country to be freely and non discriminatory sold in a foreign country like the locally produced goods in that country (Prof Boutaleb, 2003).
Globalization has cultivated ground for private sector organization to flourish in the economy; it is prudent to note that as of today the Private sector is the biggest employer as per the available statistics, it is clear that Globalization led to the abnormal growth in the private companies to 50,000 from only 100 in 1970s.2oo out of this companies were given ranks as either multinational or nation-states. Economic Globalization, reduction of the state roles in trade and privatization, has thus out smarted the timid liberal capital market that progressed under a snail pace (Prof Boutaleb, 2003).
Despite all that has been attributed to Globalization. Economists came up with an argument on Globalization peculiarities that have “challenged their own immunity”. It is reported that Globalization has over stepped its jurisdiction to affect the humans in divergent ways as follows;
Evidence later came to reveal that Globalization was rather a curse than a blessing to the economy as many had earlier own anticipated. It established through statistically that the private companies only provided seven employments despite boasting of owning over 80% of the trade world over.
• The manner in which States have participated in the development of IEL;
According to Kariyawasam 2007 Article 3(3) states that the “States have the duty to co-operate with each other in ensuring development and eliminating obstacles to development .States should realize their rights and fulfill their duties in such a manner as to promote a new international economic order based on sovereign, interdependence, mutual interest and co-operation among all states, as well as to encourage the observance and realization of human rights”. The member states have tried to embrace this by elimination of unrealistic trade barriers between countries (Kariyawasam 2007).
While talking on the Development theory an American administrator Andrew Natsios is quoted as has follows “put simple, economic development assistance in poor countries work best when you’re pursuing good policies that that are conducive to growth”. By these, he means that that so as tangible development to be achieved, the poor countries agenda should be put on the forefront in the formulation of laws to for development. Still on the same fold The Heritage, foundation is also quoted as saying as having said the following “Adherence to policies that promote political freedom, should be most heavenly weighed of the three criteria that countries must see in order to qualify for MCA funding. Only economic freedom, which depends on the rule of law, leads to higher per capita income and the alleviation of poverty.”(Kariyawasam 2007)
The member countries have come together to advocate for sovereign equality and the compensation equality fund for the under developed countries in a move to ensure that the low development countries also get elevated on the development greed. Economic sovereignty has also come to play has the Most developing countries have been left to decide make their own economic decisions free of the external counties interference or indulgence in their issues.
An analysis of the common principles of International Economic Law and New International Economic Order;
The fundamental principles of International economics were formulated in a bid to establish the international economic relations norms and the new economic international order. It is reported that the U.N adopted it in 1974 as part of its charter on Economic Rights and Duties. It is in its first chapter that the charter outlines both Political and economic relations between states “in ter alia”.
The principles include but are not limited to the following; Sovereignity that includes political independence and territorial Integration is argued that each country has its own obligation to decide upon its economy with accordance to its peoples needs.
Sovereign equality of all states is yet another principle that was contained in the U.N chatter, states that a country will have permanent sovereignty over the utilization of all its resources.
On-aggression while dealing with member states. Mutual and equitable benefits this is yet another principle, it is also said that every country has the freedom to participate in international trade with whichever country it deems best for its trade policies.
Mutual, equitable benetite, Peaceful settlement of desputes, Remedying of injustices that have been brought about by forced, and which deprives a nation of the natural means necessary for its normal development. ,fulfilling in good faith of international obligations, No attempt to seek hegemony and sphere of influence ,promotion of international social justice, promotion of international social justice ,International co-operation for development.
A definition of the concept of economic sovereignty and sovereign equality; sovereign material equality (inequality);
Economic Sovereignty is the power of a national government to make decisions independently from those made by other governments.
According to Nahar (2008), Sovereign Equality is one of the principle laws that international relations and international law greatly relies on. With regard to the law all, the countries that have governments are sovereign. This principle is at times however divided into two parts; namely, the legal sovereignty and the Behavioral .Oppenheimer further define Sovereignty as a “supreme authority, which on the international plane means not legal authority over all other states but rather legal authority which is not in law dependent on any other earthly authority (Jennings and Watts 1996).
Nahar 2008, talks about the concept of Sovereignty being linked to the intrinsically status of “International personality which happens simultaneously on its becoming an international community member”. It is thus prudent to note that international laws and sovereignty are a bit antagonistic towards each other. The conceptual idea behind the sovereignty of a state is the fact that states ought to practice self-governance from interference from the external sources. While on the other hand, the international laws are in a position of regulating the behavior of any state under its own laws. As it is widely acclaimed that, the Sovereign equity principle is supposed to apply to all states ,it is however impractical as the International governing law on relations among sovereign states gives no provision for a particular state to modify her acceptance declaration unilaterally unless the right is reserved expressly.(Nahar 2008).
Sovereign material equity according to (Hohenveldern 1999) may be referred to as the granting of equal treatment to only materially equal subjects. With accordance to the international law, this may be under pinned on variables such as; the gross national product of a country, its population size, its population might among others. He goes ahead to note that thanks’ to the equality sovereignty that states “one man one vote”. The third world countries have used that platform to conduct the three third majorities in the United Nations General assembly. Since the third world, countries cannot favorably compete with the Developed countries. They end up begainning for “Compensation inequality” (Hohenveldern 1999).It is under the sovereign material equality that the third world countries mostly loss out on the competition with the more developed countries that haves all the variables that are used while gauging trade collaborates.
Simpson 2004 defines Material inequalities as “that sanctioned by the principle of sovereign equality”. He further notes that there is no single international law that mandates economic equality between states. By this, he means that each state determines its own material wealth basing on the quality and quantity of resources it is endowed with. It thus becomes unrealistic for one country to fall victim to an international sanction for not distributing its material wealth to the less endowed states. Simpson further adds that that material inequality is an element that is experienced in the inter-state system same as at the international law level of structure (Simpson 2004). Material inequality is one of the benchmarks that the developed counties have set up so as to rein supremacy over the Low developed countries. Material inequality doesn’t only touch on the natural resources of a country per say but it also puts into consideration the labor training and expertise in handling different developmental tasks.
Concisely the international economic law has acted as a yardstick to guide the budded economies of the third world countries y. The Principles of Economic Sovereignty, material equity, Sovereign Equality and Material inequalities have been very instrumental in protecting the development economies. It is however prudent to note that some of these principles are only apply to the developed economies.