Abstract

International law aims at being universal. In the past, rationalistic approaches based on natural law or based on state equality aimed at establishing a single legal system above every State and equally valid for all of them. More recently, the decolonization process, the end of state-centered legal theory following the failure of the totalitarian states, the explosion in the number of states acting in the international legal sphere, and the growth of powerful states aiming at a hegemonic presence have undermined the unity of international law. Cultural relativism, by describing international law as a European, male-oriented tool for power, has also contributed to this shift. International law itself, by proliferating both in terms of specialized, technical areas and in terms of regional agreements, has abandoned the notion of a single, unified set of material rules regulating a global legal system. Today, international law attempts to renew its goal of regulating an international society formed by different values and actors on a fair basis through its form, particularly the rules regulating law ascertainment and the interpretation of written law in the judicial context. In fragmented, contemporary international law, a unified international judicial reasoning is the attempt to re-propose the universalist tradition of international law.