In the era of globalization, several challenges, particularly on socioeconomic injustices have arisen. The international law is expected to provide solutions to international conflicts and social injustices. However, the inflexibility nature of the international law and its fragmentation limits its ability to addressing emerging issues at the global sphere. As the society, particularly the nongovernmental institutions loss faith in international laws, the social justice is considered to be the alternative to addressing the social in justices. There is a tendency for nations to pursue their interests oblivious of the social injustices caused in the process. For instance, governments might create an enabling environment to attract investors, but fail to address the plight of employees who are sometimes exploited in the workplace. The fragmentation of the international law and the potential conflict and inconsistent with the local laws, explains why ‘global justice’ approach is considered to be more effective. The national societies are not ‘moral watershed of justice’ because they justice systems tend to be biased and prejudiced. National societies tend to protect the interests of the country rather than enhancing the global justice. For instance, the United States has recently approved Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, against the interests of the international community and the international laws. The local institutions cannot be trusted to provide justice at the international level since most of them are an extension of the executive. This means that the local justice system helps national governments to achieve their self-interests, which are mostly in conflict with the international laws and justice.
Bibliography
Fourcade, Marion & Savelsberg, Joachim. Introduction: Global Processes, National Institutions, Local Bricolage: Shaping Law in an Era of Globalization. Law & Social Enquiry. Volume 31, Issue 3, 513–519, Blackwell Publishing. 2006. Wilson, Matthew. “Demystifying the Determination of Foreign Law in U.S. Courts: Opening the Door to a Greater Global Understanding.” 46 Wake Forest L. Rev 887. 2011 Week 3 Notes- Theories of Transitional and Transnational justice, APUS CLE: IRLS405 I001 Spr 18 Zumbansen, Peer. Defining the Space of Transnational Law: Legal Theory, Global Governance, and Legal Pluralism. 21 Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Probs. 305
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
