John Austin, an early nineteenth-century English jurist, argued that “law properly so called” is the command of a sovereign backed by coercive sanctions. If states in the international system
acknowledge no higher authority than themselves, and if powerful countries cannot be forced to comply with legal rules against their will, then international law in Austin’s view is not true law.
After almost two hundred years of empirical changes in world politics and theoretical developments in the field of international law since Austin’s writings, is the above view still ultimately
correct? Draw on relevant legal theory, state practice and/or case law to support your argument.
Sample Solution