Norm Contestation in the Law Against War: Towards an Interdisciplinary Analytical Framework

Abstract

According to a widely shared perception, international peace and security law is in crisis. Yet it often remains unclear what the constitutive features of this crisis are, how novel it really is, and what its sources, forms, and effects are. In the introduction to this symposium, we unpack the current crisis narrative by focussing on norm contestation in the law against war: Which norms are contested? Who are the actors that contest these norms and how? What are the effects of these contestations on peace and security law as a whole? To answer these questions, we draw on recent scholarship on illegality in Public International Law (PIL) and on contestation in International Relations (IR); we propose an interdisciplinary analytical framework that distinguishes between applicatory, legislative, and systemic contestation. Challenges to the application of norms and the factual basis are a common theme in legal disputes that specify international norms. Legislative contestation challenges the content of norms on a more abstract level, aiming to change its boundaries. Systemic contestation fundamentally questions the cornerstones of the international order. This typology invites PIL and IR scholars to study how different forms of contestation shape international norms in the law against war.