Who Was The Creator Of The Philosophy Of International Law?

Who Was The Creator Of The Philosophy Of International Law
The English phrase “international law” was first coined by the utilitarian philosopher, Jeremy Bentham (Janis 1984). But philosophical engagement with international legal themes stretches back to writings on natural law in ancient Greece and Rome. Philosophers in this tradition—such as Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, and the Stoics—advanced the idea of a universal normative order over and above the laws and customs found in particular societies that is discoverable through the exercise of ordinary human, or “natural”, reason (Nussbaum 2019: 18–96).

In the Middle Ages, Christian beliefs framed the idea of normative universalism which, at times, was cynically deployed to justify the wrongs of Christian rulers but, at its best, provided the basis for subjecting their conduct to moral censure, as the criticisms of the Conquistadores in some of the Spanish Scholastics illustrate (Pagden 2003; Pagden & Lawrence 1991).

In the modern era, the Dutch natural lawyer Hugo Grotius is credited with laying the foundations for the rise of international law as a genuine system of positive law, rather than simply a source of universal moral or “natural law” principles. By insisting that his system of law would be justifiable even if it were assumed that God does not exist, i.e., the ” etiamsi daremus ” argument in the Prolegomena to his De Jure Belli ac Pacis (1625: para.

XI), Grotius paved the way for a more genuinely universalist conception of international law, independent of Christian beliefs and thus more ideologically inclusive (Nussbaum 2019: 97–140).
Subsequently, important contributions were made by other major philosophers, including Pufendorf, Kant, Hegel, Bentham.

Although the two leading legal philosophers of the twentieth century—Hans Kelsen and H.L.A. Hart—devoted attention to international law, and extensively so in the case of the former (Bernstorff 2010), international law was neglected by the Anglophone legal and political philosophers who followed them, and important works by international law scholars with potential significance to philosophical debate—e.g., Brierly (1928) or Lauterpacht (1933)—seldom resonated outside the field of international law.

By the end of the last century, however, there was a surge in philosophical engagement with international law.
This change is reflected in the publication of The Law of Peoples, the last book written by John Rawls (1999), and also in the more philosophically inclined works of prominent international lawyers, such as Thomas Franck (1995).

The focus of this entry is on developments that have occurred since World War II. In the aftermath of World War II, an unprecedentedly sophisticated international architecture of legal norms and institutions, to a large extent associated with the United Nations system, was established.

With the end of the Cold War, and the spread of globalization, this architecture reached new heights of ambition, claiming authority over a diverse range of governmental matters that were formerly treated as falling within the exclusive province of state authority. The scope of international law expanded to cover new subject-matter, such as the relationship between the individual and the State, migration, or the environment.

Many now perceive the “international rule-based order” to be imperilled by the rise of authoritarian powers, on the one hand, and of populist forces in the Western world, on the other; both are said to be hostile to international law, especially to certain aspects of it like human rights (Alston 2017; Ginsburg 2020; Neuman 2020; Wuerth 2017).

Who is the founder of international law?

Read a brief summary of this topic – international law, also called public international law or law of nations, the body of legal rules, norms, and standards that apply between sovereign states and other entities that are legally recognized as international actors. The term was coined by the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832).

Who is the author of Philosophy of Law?

The Philosophy of Law: An Encyclopedia – 1st Edition – Christopher Ber.

Who is the writer of principle of international law?

PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. By Hans Kelsen. New York: Rinehart & Co., 1952.

Who is called the father of international?

Who Was The Creator Of The Philosophy Of International Law In this blog post, Nandini Mukati, a student of the School of Law, Forensic Justice and Policy Studies, National Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, writes about the father of International Law: Hugo Grotius. This is an exhaustive article which deals with the concept of International Law, its history and relevance.

This article has been published by Sneha Mahawar, Relations between independent states are governed by international law. The norms of law that bind states are derived from their own free will, as represented in conventions or usages widely regarded as articulating legal principles and formed to control the relations between these coexisting separate communities or to achieve common goals.

As a result, restrictions on state independence cannot be assumed. Who Was The Creator Of The Philosophy Of International Law Because norms give order and serve to limit damaging conflict, international law arose as a result of an effort to deal with conflict among states. International law reflects the creation and subsequent adjustment of a world order based almost entirely on the concept that independent sovereign states are the only actors in the international system that matter.

Today, every individual has rights that pervade the international community and are profoundly enshrined in an imperfect global law that, in turn, pervades each of our lives. This rule isn’t set in stone; it’s evolving all the time. To realise its emancipatory potential, it must be made effective, challenged, defended, and reinvented.

We will cover the beginnings of international law, Hugo Grotius’ contribution, how international law has evolved in the twentieth century, the sources and theories of international law, and the individualization of international law in this article. Finally, we look at some of the most recent international law objections. Who Was The Creator Of The Philosophy Of International Law Hugo Grotius was a Dutch jurist and scholar who lived from April 10, 1583, in Delft, Netherlands, to August 28, 1645, in Rostock, Mecklenburg-Schwerin. His masterpiece, De Jure Belli ac Pacis (1625; On the Law of War and Peace), is regarded as one of the most important contributions to the development of international law.

Grotius, who was also a statesman and diplomat, has been dubbed the “Father of International Law.” Hugo Grotius was the first child of Jan de Groot and Alida van Overschie, and was born in Delft during the Dutch Revolt. His father was a man of intelligence and political significance, having studied under the great Justus Lipsius at Leiden University.

His forefathers had played a significant part in local administration since the thirteenth century, earning him the title of Delft patrician. Hugo Grotius was an exceptionally gifted child who began writing Latin ballads at the age of eight and entered the arts faculty at Leiden University at the age of eleven.

Grotius studied under the renowned humanist Joseph Scaliger, who was essential in Grotius’ growth as a philologist. He traveled to France with Johann van Oldenbarnevelt, a famous Dutch statesman, in 1598, and visited Henry IV, who dubbed Grotius the “wonder of Holland.” Pontifex Romanus (1598), which has six monologues on the contemporary political situation, reflects this perspective.

In 1599, he established himself as an advocate in The Hague, temporarily residing with the court preacher and theologian Johannes Uyttenbogaert. The Netherlands commissioned an account of the United Provinces’ insurrection against Spain from Grotius in 1601.

In 1604, he became involved in the legal processes following the seizure of a Portuguese carrack and its cargo in the Singapore Strait by Dutch traders. This was his first opportunity to write methodically on themes of international justice. Grotius attempted to justify the seizure by appealing to natural justice considerations.

He’d cast a much wider net here than just the issue at hand; he was interested in the source and foundation of war’s legality in general. The treatise was never published in its entirety during Grotius’ lifetime, possibly because the company’s victory in court negated the need for public support.

In 1608, he married Maria van Reigersberch, through whom he had three daughters and four sons (four of whom lived to adulthood) and who would be important in assisting him and his family in surviving the coming storm. Grotius’ political career was aided by his continuous affiliation with Van Oldenbarnevelt, who maintained him as Oldenbarnevelt’s resident advisor in 1605, Advocate General of the Fisc of Holland, Zeeland, and Friesland in 1607, and then as Pensionary of Rotterdam (the equivalent of a mayor) in 1613.

The resulting work was written in the style of Tacitus, a Roman historian, and covered the years 1559 to 1609. Despite the fact that it was nearly done by 1612, Annales et Historiae de Rebus Belgicis (“Annals and Histories of the Low Countries”) was only published posthumously in 1657.

When Middelburg professor Antonius Walaeus produced Het Ampt der Kerckendienaren in late 1615 (a reaction to Johannes Wtenbogaert’s 1610 Tractaat van ‘t Ampt ende autoriteit eener hooger Christelijcke overheid in kerckelijkcke zaken), he sent a copy to Grotius out of goodwill. This was a moderate counter-remonstrant book “on the connection between ecclesiastical and secular administration.” In early 1616, Grotius received a 36-page letter from his friend Gerardus Vossius advocating a dissenting viewpoint, Dissertatio epistolica de Iure magistratus in rebus ecclesiasticis.

Grotius was extensively involved in the politics of the Netherlands. The combined kingdoms of Spain and Portugal claimed a monopoly on trade with the East Indies in the early 17th century. With the help of his wife and maidservant, Elsje van Houwening, Grotius managed to leave the castle in a book chest and go to Paris in 1621.

He is primarily remembered in the Netherlands today for his audacious escape.
The original book chest is said to be in the collections of both the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam and the museum Het Prinsenhof in Delft.
From 1621 until 1644, Grotius spent nearly his entire life in France.
During his term, Cardinal Richelieu led France under Louis XIII’s rule from 1624 until 1642.

Grotius’ most renowned book, De jure belli ac pacis, was dedicated to Louis XIII of France in 1625 and was published in France. Grotius began work on a treatise that he had originally composed in Dutch verse in jail, presenting elementary but systematic reasons for the reality of Christianity while in Paris.

The Latin dissertation, De veritate religionis Christianae, was published in 1627, while the Dutch poem, Bewijs van den waren Godsdienst, was published in 1622.
He attempted to return to Holland in 1631, but the authorities were still hostile to him.
In 1632, he relocated to Hamburg.
However, he was dispatched to Paris as an ambassador by the Swedes, a European superpower, as early as 1634.

He stayed in this role for eleven years, with the objective of negotiating the end of the Thirty Years War for Sweden. During this time, he was interested in Christian unity and produced a number of papers that would later be combined under the title Opera Omnia Theologica.

Following the death of Prince Maurice in 1625, when toleration was granted to them, many exiled Remonstrants returned to the Netherlands. In 1630, they were given entire autonomy over the construction and operation of churches and schools, as well as the right to dwell wherever in Holland. A presbyterial organization was established by the Remonstrants, led by Johannes Wtenbogaert.

Grotius joined Episcopius, van Limborch, de Courcelles, and Leclerc in establishing a theological seminary in Amsterdam. Grotius was appointed ambassador to France by Sweden in 1634. Grotius accepted the offer and moved to Paris, where he stayed until 1645 when he was relieved of his duties.

In 1644, the queen of Sweden, Christine, who had reached adulthood, began to carry out her responsibilities and returned him to Stockholm.
He moved to Sweden in the winter of 1644 – 1645 but decided to depart in the summer of 1645 due to the tough conditions.
Grotius was shipwrecked on the journey home from his last visit to Sweden.

He washed ashore on the shore of Rostock, ill and weather-beaten, and died on August 28, 1645; his body was finally repatriated to his homeland and buried in the Nieuwe Kerk in Delft. Grotius wrote in a number of fields throughout his life. He edited the North African poet Martianus Capella’s encyclopaedic book on the seven liberal arts, as well as the Greek astronomer Aratus of Soli’s Phaenomena, with commentary.

Grotius wrote a variety of philological studies as well as a drama, Adamus Exul (1601; Adam in Exile), which the English poet John Milton praised.
Grotius also wrote a number of theological and politico-theological writings, including De Veritate Religionis Christianae (1627), which was perhaps his most popular work during his lifetime.

Hugo Grotius is regarded as a prominent figure in the study of international law today. Unfortunately, opinions on the worth of his contribution to the cause of international peace are conflicted. Grotius was able to establish various rational foundations underlying law as a result of his rationalist worldview.

Law was derived from principles rather than being imposed from on high. The axioms that agreements must be kept and that injuring someone necessitates restitution were among the founding principles. Much of subsequent international law has been based on these two concepts. Grotius set out to build a general theory of law (jurisprudentia) that would constrain and govern war between many independent powers, including nations, in order to achieve his practical goal of minimizing bloodshed in wars.

Grotius’ legal masterpiece, De Jure Belli ac Pacis, was published in 1625, and it was heavily affected by the terrible, violent political fights that had erupted in his own nation and throughout Europe, particularly the Thirty Years’ War, which had erupted in 1618.

Grotius placed natural law at the centre of his jurisprudentia, following Roman law and the Stoics’ work. He claimed that law derived from man’s intrinsic nature would be valid to some extent. He made this bold claim because he believed that natural law—the most crucial weapon for preventing and regulating conflicts in Europe—must be independent of religion and apply to everyone, regardless of their religious views.

He knew, however, that secular law alone would not be sufficient to restrict and regulate war. As a result, he reinstated several Christian themes into his jurisprudentia. Grotius was frequently reported as saying that law or natural law should be “secularized,” but this was a hypothetical rather than a categorical statement.

To comprehend De Jure Belli ac Pacis’ crucial character of law, one must first comprehend the complete structure of his argumentation. To control and regulate both the resort to war and the use of violence in combat, Grotius employs a multilayered network of norms, including a variety of religious ones.

Only righteous wars, according to Grotius, should be authorised. War must be accepted as a means of resolving issues because there is no court for legal resolution between nations. Causes of war, on the other hand, should be limited to those that may be litigated.

The defence and restitution of property, for example, are just causes of war (see also just war).
He also devised a theory of crime and punishment, which he used to justify wars as just punishment for crimes committed by autonomous forces, including governments.
Grotius articulated the revolutionary notion that the sea was international territory and that all nations were free to exploit it for nautical trade in his book The Free Sea (Mare Liberum, published 1609).

Grotius supplied an adequate intellectual basis for the Dutch breaking up of numerous trade monopolies through its powerful naval might by asserting “free seas” (Freedom of the Seas) (and then establishing its own monopoly). The Dominion of the British Sea, or That Which Incompasseth the Isle of Great Britain, is, and Ever Hath Been, a Part or Appendant of the Empire of that Island, England claimed in John Selden’s Mare clausum (The Closed Sea), “That the Dominion of the British Sea, or That Which Incompasseth the Isle of Great Britain, is, and Ever Hath Been, a Part or Appendant of the Empire of that Island.” Although many governments in the Indian Ocean and other Asian seas recognised the right of unrestricted passage even before Grotius wrote his De Jure Praedae (On the Law of Spoils) in the year 1604, it is widely considered that Grotius was the first to advocate the notion of sea freedom. Who Was The Creator Of The Philosophy Of International Law “Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it.” The emergence and development of public international law in both conventions and conceptual understanding is examined in the history of international law. Renaissance Europe gave birth to modern international law, which is closely linked to the evolution of western political organisation in the period.

The growth of European concepts of sovereignty and nation-states would entail the establishment of interstate relations methods and norms of behaviour that would provide the groundwork for international law.
While the contemporary system of international law may be dated back 400 years, the formation of the concepts and practices that would underpin it can be traced back thousands of years to ancient historical politics and connections.

Around 1000 BC, Ramses II of Egypt and the Hittite monarch signed an agreement establishing “eternal peace and fraternity” between their two nations, which included dealing with territorial respect and forming a defense alliance. Before Alexander the Great, the ancient Greeks created a slew of minor states that interacted continuously.

In both peace and war, an inter-state culture arose, dictating how these states should interact. These principles did not apply to relations with non-Greek nations, although the Greek inter-state community mirrored the current international community in certain ways within itself. A number of variables collided in the 15th century, contributing to the rapid growth of international law into its modern form.

The arrival of the printing press, as well as the flood of Greek scholars from the falling Byzantine Empire, fueled the growth of science, humanism, and concepts of individual rights. The increased navigation and exploration by Europeans posed a challenge to scholars in terms of developing a conceptual framework for dealing with various peoples and cultures.

The rise of systems of governance like Spain and France brought increased wealth, ambition, and trade, necessitating increasingly complex rules and regulations. International law can be said to have begun in 1648 with the Treaty of Westphalia, which established sovereign equality among states. The Geneva Conventions of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries formalised rules regulating the conduct of war (jus ad bellum and jus in bello), which were most famously codified in the Geneva Conventions of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Organizations arose quickly to aid in the establishment of the law and the resolution of conflicts. The League of Nations attempted but failed to make war illegal. The United Nations has recently emerged as the clearest source of international law. The United Nations Charter establishes the conditions for the lawful use of force, and the United Nations has acted as the primary forum for the development of new international law.

Who is the father of international law Mcq?

10.Correct Answer: D – Explanation- Grotius, the Father of International Law, based the principles of International Law on the law of nature. According to him, human nature was the grandmother natural law was the parent and positive law the child. Hence Option D is correct.

Who is the first founder of philosophy?

Key Points –

People have been discussing philosophical questions since the birth of civilization.
There is philosophical writing that goes back to before 3000 BC in ancient Egypt, Babylonia, and Assyria and later in Persia.
Philosophy as we know it today developed in ancient Greece in the 6th century BC.
Thales was the first philosopher.
Ancient Greek philosophy reached its peak in the classical period because of philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.
Philosophers of the classical period discussed almost all of the fundamental questions still investigated by the sciences, such as how the universe originated, what the universe is made of, and how life began.
Philosophers of the classical period also discussed practical questions affecting the lives of individuals and the development of society.

Who is the founder of all philosophy?

Socrates of (l.c.470/469-399 BCE) is among the most famous figures in world history for his contributions to the development of ancient which provided the foundation for all of Western, He is, in fact, known as the “Father of Western Philosophy” for this reason.

He was originally a sculptor who seems to have also had a number of other occupations, including soldier, before he was told by the Oracle at that he was the wisest man in the world.
In an effort to prove the oracle wrong, he embarked on a new career of questioning those who were said to be wise and, in doing so, proved the oracle correct: Socrates was the wisest man in the world because he did not claim to know anything of importance.

His most famous student was (l.c.428/427-348/347 BCE) who would honor his name through the establishment of a school in Athens (Plato’s Academy) and, more so, through the philosophical dialogues he wrote featuring Socrates as the central character. Whether Plato’s dialogues accurately represent Socrates’ teachings continues to be debated but a definitive answer is unlikely to be reached.

Plato’s best known student was of Stagira (l.384-322 BCE) who would then tutor (l.356-323 BCE) and establish his own school.
By this progression, philosophy, as first developed by Socrates, was spread throughout the known world during, and after, ‘s conquests.
Socrates’ historicity has never been challenged but what, precisely, he taught is as elusive as the philophical tenets of or the later teachings of in that none of these figures wrote anything themselves.

Although Socrates is generally regarded as initiating the discipline of philosophy in the West, most of what we know of him comes from Plato and, less so, from another of his students, (l.430-c.354 BCE). There have also been efforts made to reconstruct his philosophic vision based on the many other schools, besides Plato’s, which his students founded but these are too varied to define the original teachings which inspired them.

The “Socrates” who has come down to the present day from antiquity could largely be a philosophical construct of Plato and, according to the historian Diogenes Laertius (l.c.180 – 240 CE), many of Plato’s contemporaries accused him of re-imagining Socrates in his own image in order to further Plato’s own interpretation of his master’s message.

However that may be, Socrates’ influence would establish the schools which led to the formulation of Western Philosophy and the underlying cultural understanding of Western,

What is the philosophy of law called?

Overview – The word jurisprudence derives from the Latin term juris prudentia, which means “the study, knowledge, or science of law.” In the United States jurisprudence commonly means the philosophy of law. Legal philosophy has many aspects, but four of them are the most common:

The first and the most prevalent form of jurisprudence seeks to analyze, explain, classify, and criticize entire bodies of law. Law school textbooks and legal encyclopedias represent this type of scholarship. The second type of jurisprudence compares and contrasts law with other fields of knowledge such as literature, economics, religion, and the social sciences. The third type of jurisprudence seeks to reveal the historical, moral, and cultural basis of a particular legal concept. The fourth body of jurisprudence focuses on finding the answer to such abstract questions as “What is law?” and “How do judges (properly) decide cases?”

What are the 4 philosophies of law?

MAJOR THEORIES OF LAW Different legal theories developed throughout societies. Though there are a number of theories, only four of them are dealt with here under. They are Natural, Positive, Marxist, and Realist Law theories. You may deal other theories in detail in your course on jurisprudence.

NATURAL LAW THEORY Natural law theory is the earliest of all theories.
It was developed in Greece by philosophers like Heraclitus, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.
It was then followed by other philosophers like Gairus, Cicero, Aquinas, Gratius, Hobbes, Lock, Rousseau, Kant and Hume.
In their studies of the relation between nature and society, these philosophers have arrived at the conclusion that there are two types of law that govern social relations.

One of them is made by person to control the relations within a society and so it may vary from society to society and also from time to tome within a society. The other one is that not made by person but controls all human beings of the world. Such laws do not vary from place to place and from time to time and even used to control or weigh the laws made by human beings.

These philosophers named the laws made by human beings as positive laws and the laws do not made by human being as natural laws. Natural law is given different names based on its characteristics. Some of them are law of reason, eternal law, rational law, and principles of natural justice. Natural law is defined by Salmond as “the principles of natural justice if we use the term justice in its widest sense to include all forms of rightful actions.” Natural law theory has served different societies in many ways.

The Romans used it to develop their laws as jus civile, laws governing roman citizens, and jus gentium, laws governing all their colonies and foreigners. The Catholic Pope in Europe during the middle age become dictator due to the teachings of Thomas Aquinas that natural law is the law of God to the people and that the pope was the representative of God on earth to equally enforce them on the subjects and the kings.

At the late of the Feudalism stage, Locke, Montesque and others taught that person is created free, equal and independent by taking the concept of Natural law as the individual right to life, liberty, and security.
Similarly, Rousseau’s teachings of individual’s right to equality, life, liberty, and security were based on natural law.

The English Revolution of 1888, the American Declaration of Independence and the French Revolution of 1789 were also results of the Natural law theory. Despite its contribution, however, no scholar could provide the precise contents of the natural law.

As a result, it was subjected to criticisms of scholars like John Austin who rejected this theory and latter developed the imperative called positive law theory.
POSITIVE LAW THEORY Positive law theory is also called, imperative or analysts law theory.
It refers to the law that is actually laid down by separating “is” from the law, which is “ought” to be.

It has the belief that law is the rule made and enforced by the sovereign body of the state and there is no need to use reason, morality, or justice to determine the validity of law. According to this theory, rules made by the sovereign are laws irrespective of any other considerations.

These laws, therefore, vary from place to place and from time to time. The followers of this theory include Austin, Bentham and H.L.A Hart. For these philosophers and their followers law is a command of the sovereign to his/her subjects and there are three elements in it: command; sovereign; and sanction.

Command is the rule given by the sovereign to the subjects or people under the rule of the sovereign. Sovereign refers to a person or a group of persons demanding obedience in the state. Sanction is the evil that follows violations of the rule. This theory has criticized by scholars for defining law in relation to sovereignty or state because law is older than the state historically and this shows that law exists in the absence of state.

Thus, primitive law (a law at the time of primitive society) serves the same function as does mature law,
With regard to sanction as a condition of law in positive law, it is criticized that the observance of many rules is secured by the promise of reward (for example, the fulfilment of expectations) rather than imposing a sanction.

Even though sanction plays a role in minority who is reluctant, the law is obeyed because of its acceptance by the community “habit, respect for the law as such, and a desire to reap the rewards which legal protection of acts will bring” are important factors the law to be obeyed The third main criticism of definition of law by Austin (positive law theory) is that it is superficial to regard the command of the sovereign as the real source of the validity of law.

It is argued that many regard law as valid because it is the expression of natural justice or the embodiment of the sprit of people,
MARXIST LAW THEORY Marxists believe that private property is the basis for the coming into existence of law and state.
They provide that property was the cause for creation of classes in the society in which those who have the means of production can exploit those who do not have these means by making laws to protect the private property.

They base their arguments on the fact that there was neither law nor state in primitive society for there was no private property. The theory has the assumption that people can attain a perfect equality at the communism stage in which there would be no private property, no state and no law.

But, this was not yet attained and even the practice of the major countries like the former United Soviet Socialist Russia (U.S.S.R.) has proved that the theory is too good to be turn.
Nevertheless, this theory is challenged and the theory of private property triumphs.
REALIST THEORY OF LAW Realist theory of law is interested in the actual working of the law rather than its traditional definitions.

It provides that law is what the judge decides in court. According to this theory, rules not put to use to solve practical cases are not laws but merely existing as dead words and these dead words of law get life only when applied in reality. Therefore, it is the decision given by the judge but not the legislators that is considered as law according to this theory.

Hence, this theory believes that the lawmaker is the judge and not the legislative body.
This theory has its basis in the common law legal system in which the decision previously given by a court is considered as a precedent to be used as a law to decide future similar case.
This is not applicable in civil law legal system, which is the other major legal system of the world, and as a result this theory has been criticized by scholars and countries following this legal system for the only laws of their legal system are legislation but not precedents.

This implies that the lawmaker in civil law legal system is the legislative body but not the judge. The followers of this theory include Justice Homes, Lawrence Friedman, John Chpman Gray, Jerom Frank, Karl N. Lewelln and Yntema. : MAJOR THEORIES OF LAW

What are the two main philosophies of law?

What are the two main philosophies of law? – Philosophy of law has two main branches: analytical jurisprudence and normative jurisprudence.

Who is the father of law of nations?

Nature and History – Traces of what we now term international law and treaties are as old as written history. Evidence of compacts between states and rulers of states dates back at least 4000 years; they chronicle agreements about, inter alia, war and peace, foreign merchants, and ambassadors, all still lively topics of the discipline.

It is safe to say that international law and treaties figure as necessary features of human society, regardless of any juristic definition, description, or argument.
The modern intellectual tradition relating to international law and treaties owes much to Roman law.
The Roman term jus gentium, the law of nations, described legal rules pertaining generally to foreigners when specific foreign rules were unknown or in conflict.

These were rules thought to be so basic that they were shared by all nations. Hence, like natural law, the law of nations was presumed to exist without positive expression in formal legislation. In Roman law, jus gentium ordinarily was employed in legal matters concerning private transactions, such as marriage, wills, and commerce.

Despite its origins in Roman private law, the law of nations was adopted by European jurists in early modern times to describe certain public legal relations.
For example, in the sixteenth century, Spanish writers such as Suarez and Vitoria employed principles of jus gentium to argue that the Spanish Crown owed legal duties of basic humanitarian conduct to all peoples, even the indigenous peoples conquered by Spain in the Americas.

The often alleged ‘father’ of international law is Hugo Grotius (1583–1645), a Dutch jurist exiled to Paris following the suppression of the liberal party in the Netherlands. Already an accomplished diplomat, jurist, and theologian, Grotius devoted the remainder of his life to the cause of peace.

In the midst of Europe’s disastrous 30 Years War (1618–48), Grotius published the law of nations’ most famous book, De Jure Belli Ac Pacis, to demonstrate that legal rules and processes defined and limited the sovereign rights and aggressions of otherwise bitterly divided Catholic and Protestant states and that such legal rules and processes even applied to relations between Christian and non-Christian states.

Grotius elaborated a legal theory that still serves as the foundation of modern international law. He argued that sovereign states were defined and bound by two kinds of legal rules drawn from the law of nations: positive law and natural law. The positive law of nations, expressed in treaties and custom, was made by the explicit and implicit agreement of sovereign states.

The natural law of nations, expressed in the natural laws of reason and religion, was the result of necessary rules binding everyone, even rulers of states. The first part of Grotius’ theory of jus gentium was quickly married to emerging seventeenth-century political theory, like that of Hobbes, positing the idea of sovereign states.

Grotius’ consensual theory of the law of nations helps explain why treaties, such as the Peace of Westphalia that terminated the 30 Years War in 1648, are legally binding: sovereign states have authority both to legislate rules internally for their own territory and to make rules externally for themselves through interstate agreement.

Grotius’ legal theory also explains why sovereign states should not interfere in the internal affairs of other sovereign states: a nation’s sovereign authority must be limited so that the sovereign authority of other states is protected. Such international legal principles that weave sovereign states together and protect them from each other continue to guide international relations today.

In his age, Grotius’ jus gentium excited many rulers, including Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden (who is said to have used Grotius’ book as a pillow while campaigning on his many wars), as well as many universities. In Germany, The Netherlands, and England, professorial chairs in the new discipline of the law of nations were created, commencing an outpouring of scholarly works further describing and developing the discipline.

Not all students, of course, were pleased by their professors; one of the earliest pupils of the noted English law professor, William Blackstone, rebelled against what he was taught about the law of nations.
In 1789, Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) rejected the term the law of nations as professed by Blackstone; Bentham argued in An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation that the discipline should be renamed international law,

Bentham’s invented word, international, successfully passed from international law to denominate many other disciplines, for example, international relations, international politics, and international economics, More or less inadvertently, Bentham changed not only a term but the very definition of the discipline.

Grotius’ and Blackstone’s classical definition of the law of nations focuses on legal rules and processes generated by more than one state. Bentham’s definition of international law, however, focuses on the subjects of the discipline; these Bentham said were states and states alone. The classic jus gentium regards individuals, as well as states, as its subjects, possessing legal rights and duties and accessing legal process.

For the sake of theory, Bentham rejected individuals as proper subjects of international law, A third definition of the discipline, along with a new term to describe it, was provided by the US jurist Philip Jessup, who in 1956 proposed replacing both the term the law of nations and the term international law with a new term, transnational law,

Jessup defined the discipline of transnational law as encompassing any legal rule or process, municipal or international, that has to do with international transactions of any state, entity, or individual. It may or may not make a difference how one defines the discipline. For example, a rule about delimitation of the continental shelf not only emerges from a multistate source, a treaty, à la Grotius’ law of nations, but it also relates to interstate relations à la Bentham’s international law, and deals with international transactions à la Jessup’s transnational law,

Hence, such a rule easily fits within the discipline as described by all three definitions. However, other times the different definitions lead to conflict. For example, if one believes, along with Bentham, that only states may be subjects of international law, then one cannot believe that individuals have international legal rights and duties.

This means that they cannot be protected by international human rights law against abusive state action or be subject to international criminal law.
A contrary position is usually taken by those who subscribe to the ordinary definitions of the law of nations and transnational law,
Nowadays in practice, although the term international law is very popular, some of its exclusivities have been softened both by the classical tradition of the law of nations and by the modern sentiment expressed in transnational law,

Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780080970868860407

When was international law founded?

International Law Commission – The International Law Commission was established by the General Assembly in 1947 to promote the progressive development of international law and its codification. The Commission is composed of 34 members who collectively represent the world’s principal legal systems, and serve as experts in their individual capacity, not as representatives of their governments.

They address issues relevant to the regulation of relations among states, and frequently consult with the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and UN specialized agencies, depending on the subject. Often, the Commission also prepares drafts on aspects of international law.

Some topics are chosen by the Commission, others are referred to it by the General Assembly. When the Commission completes work on a topic, the General Assembly sometimes convenes an international conference of plenipotentiaries to incorporate the draft into a convention.

Convention on the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, adopted by the General Assembly in 1997 ; Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations, adopted at a conference in Vienna in 1986 ; Convention on the Succession of States in Respect of State Property, Archives and Debts, adopted at a conference in Vienna in 1983 ; Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, adopted by the General Assembly in 1973,

What was the first international law?

Early history – Basic concepts of international law such as treaties can be traced back thousands of years. Early examples of treaties include around 2100 BC an agreement between the rulers of the city-states of Lagash and Umma in Mesopotamia, inscribed on a stone block, setting a prescribed boundary between their two states.

Around 1000 BC, an agreement was signed between Ramses II of Egypt and the king of the Hittites establishing “eternal peace and brotherhood” between their two nations: dealing with respect for each other’s territory and establishing a form of defensive alliance.
The ancient Greeks before Alexander the Great formed many small states that constantly interacted.

In peace and in war, an inter-state culture evolved that prescribed certain rules for how these states would interact. These rules did not apply to interactions with non-Greek states, but among themselves the Greek inter-state community resembled in some respects the modern international community.

The Roman Empire did not develop an international law, as it acted without regard to any external rules in its dealings with those territories that were not already part of the empire.
The Romans did, however, form municipal laws governing the interactions between private Roman citizens and foreigners.

These laws, called the jus gentium (as opposed to the jus civile governing interactions between citizens) codified some ideas of basic fairness, and attributed some rules to an objective, independent ” natural law,” These jus gentium ideas of fairness and natural law have survived and are reflected in modern international law.

Early Islamic law ‘s principles concerning military conduct and the treatment of prisoners of war under the early Caliphate are considered precursors to international humanitarian law, The many requirements on how prisoners of war should be treated included, for example, providing shelter, food and clothing, respecting their cultures, and preventing any acts of execution, rape or revenge.

Some of these principles were not codified in Western international law until modern times. Islamic law under the early Caliphate institutionalised humanitarian limitations on military conduct, including attempts to limit the severity of war, guidelines for ceasing hostilities, distinguishing between civilians and combatants, preventing unnecessary destruction, and caring for the sick and wounded.

Who used the first word international?

Origin of the word – The term international was coined by the utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham in his Introduction to Principles of Morals and Legislation, which was printed for publication in 1780 and published in 1789. Bentham wrote: “The word international, it must be acknowledged, is a new one; though, it is hoped, sufficiently analogous and intelligible.

Who is the mother of international law?

Editor’s Note: This post was first published by the author in French in the Galerie des internationalistes francophones (Gallery of French-Speaking Internationalists) on the website of the French Society for International Law (SFDI). We are particularly grateful that Professor Latty’s translated version will reach the EJIL:Talk! readership around the world.

At the start of 2019 and the year long campaign designed around International Women’s Day on 8 March 2019, it may be particularly apt for the readers of EJIL: Talk! to consider Christine de Pizan (around 1365 – around 1430), a medieval woman of letters, as one of the founders of international law – even if somewhat surprising for several reasons.

One is the anachronism attached to this qualification, the invention of the word “international” attributed to Bentham in 1780 being much later than Pizan’s passage on earth. At that time, only a few States, in the contemporary sense of the term, had taken shape, while the idea of a legal system organizing their relations was still in limbo.

Moreover, Pizan is not a woman of law but an intellectual “all-rounder”.
Above all, she has been completely ignored by internationalist scholars – with the notable exception of the Belgian Ernest Nys who devoted several studies to her work, or rare authors such as Anzilotti who mentioned her contribution in his Corso di diritto internazionale (vol.

I, transl.G. Gidel, Sirey, 1929), She has since disappeared again from the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists, whereas since the end of the 20 th century, the rediscovery of her work has been the subject of extensive study in other fields of human and social sciences. Who Was The Creator Of The Philosophy Of International Law However, her Livre des faits d’armes et de chevalerie ( The Book of Deeds of Arms and of Chivalry) is one of the first known texts on the law of war. This is why a legal historian specializing in the status of women once presented Pizan not without emphasis as the “mother of international law” (M.T.

Guerra Medici, « The Mother of International Law: Christine de Pisan », Parliaments, Estates and Representation, vol.19, 1999, n° 1,pp.15-22), thus supplanting a Grotius whose paternity was already highly doubtful (Ch. Leben, « Grotius : père du droit international », in Dictionnaire des idées reçues en droit international, Paris, Pedone, 2017, pp.279-285).

In any case, in the pantheon of the founding “fathers” of international law, haunted by men, Pizan should occupy a special place: she is not only the first woman to have written about “international” law; she is one of its very first known authors, even before Vitoria, Gentili or Suarez.

Woman of letters and feminist pioneer Daughter of a Bologna astrologist physicist, Christine de Pizan was born in 1364 or 1365 in Venice. Her father having been invited to the Court by Charles V, she joined the Kingdom of France at the age of five where she was educated. Married at fifteen, she was widowed at twenty-five.

She began writing to support herself and her family, including her three children. Her manuscripts – the printing press was invented some twenty years after her death – were distributed with great success to the princes and patrons of the time, many of whom were her protectors.

She is probably the first woman to have lived by her pen. Her work, abundant and varied, “contains charming poems as well as austere philosophical and historical treatises” (S. Solente, « Christine de Pisan », Histoire littéraire de la France, n° 40, 1969, p.14). Contemporary of Joan of Arc, she dedicated a poem to her in 1429.

She is also a renowned letter writer. Her participation in the debate on the Roman de la Rose ( The Romance of the Rose ), a famous poem of the 13 th century, in refutation of Jean de Meung’s misogynistic discourse, has, according to some contemporary analyses, laid the foundations for feminism.

Among her best-known works, La Cité des dames ( The Book of the City of Ladies, 1405) is an allegorical account of a city inhabited exclusively by great women of the past and present, which itself is sometimes presented as one of the first feminist works of literature.
It is therefore not surprising that Pizan, leaving aside “cattails, spinning and household duties” ( The Book of Deeds, Part 1, I) took up subjects perceived then – and still today – as “male”: war and weapons.

The origins of the law of war The Book of Facts of Arms and Chivalry (1410), offered to the Duke of Berry, is a war manual, intended primarily for those who make it. Several passages are taken directly from previous writings on these issues, those of the Romans Vegetius and Frontinus, the Tractatus de bello by the Bolognese lawyer Legnano, but above all L’arbre des batailles ( The Tree of Battles ) by Honoré Bouvet (or Bonet), with whom she stages herself in the last two parts of the book, through a master to disciple dialogue on the rights pertaining the matter of arms “according to customary law and to written law” (Part 3, II).

The Book combines the art of war (strategy, qualities required for combatants, war techniques, etc.) with the rules applicable to this matter, jus ad bellum and jus in bello,
The first part of The Book opens with remarks relating to “just war”.
Pizan writes that wars waged for a just cause are authorized by God (Part 1, II).

Only “sovereign princes” or other “rightfully heads of temporal jurisdictions” have the right to undertake them ( ibid,, III). She identifies five grounds for wars, three of which “rest on law”: “to maintain law and justice” (for example, to defend the Church, or help an ally or vassal); “to counteract evildoers who befoul, injure, and oppress the land and the people”; and “to recover lands, lordships and other things stolen or usurped for an unjust cause”.

In addition to these, two other grounds rest “on will”: “to avenge any loss or damage incurred”; and “to conquer and take over foreign lands or lordships” ( ibid,, IV). Dialogue with Honoré Bouvet is also an opportunity to establish that the Emperor does not have the right to wage war against the Pope (Part 3, II), unlike the latter who can engage in arms against the former ( ibid,, III); or that the sovereign who leads a “just” war has the right of innocent passage through foreign territories, without having to provide hostages ( ibid,, XI).

Many questions relating to the jus in bello of the time are also addressed in the exchange between Pizan and Bouvet. It is established, for example, that certain tricks are prohibited ( ibid,, XIII), or that according to the customs of war, prisoners must be spared and even protected.

In this respect, if ransom is allowed, particularly in wars between nations, it must not be excessive ( ibid,, XIV).
Other issues that are reflected in contemporary international law are addressed in The Book, such as the inviolability of ambassadors ( ibid,, XXII), the exception of non-performance of treaties (Part 4, IV) or reprisals ( ibid,, VI).

Premises of international law Pizan draws from various sources these norms that govern war, whether it occurs between nations or between lords. If civil law is occasionally called upon (for example, to establish that the booty must go to the sovereign who paid the people in arms – Part 3, XV), the mobilization of divine or canonical law, moral, precedents, and especially the “customs of war”, prefigures a “public international law” whose emancipation from natural law and systematization will wait a long time.

The Book of Facts of Arms and Chivalry testifies in any case that, with regard to the law of war, which is “the core of international law”, “medieval thought is far from having been as sterile as we commonly imagine it” ( E. Nys, « Honoré Bonet et Christine de Pisan », Revue de droit international et de législation comparée, t.

XIV, 1882, p.451 ). It is also in this respect that Christine de Pizan’s teachings deserves to be pulled out of internationalist oblivion. Nota bene: There are 25 manuscripts of the Livre des faits d’armes et de chevalerie, The two most important, because they were copied under the control of Christine de Pizan to offer them to patrons, are the following: Livre de faits d’armes et de chevalerie, Paris, BnF, fr.603, feuillets 1-80 Livre de faits d’armes et de chevalerie, Bruxelles, KBR, 10476 The Livre has been translated into modern English: Ch.

Who is the first international jurist?

Home Politics, Law & Government Law, Crime & Punishment Lawyers, Judges & Jurists Alberico Gentili, (born January 14, 1552, San Ginesio, Papal States —died June 19, 1608, London, England), Italian jurist, regarded as one of the founders of the science of international law and the first person in western Europe to separate secular law from Roman Catholic theology and canon law,

A graduate of the University of Perugia, Italy (doctor of civil law, 1572), Gentili was exiled from Italy in 1579 because of his Protestantism, From 1581 until his death he taught at the University of Oxford, becoming Regius Professor of Civil Law in 1587. He was well known for his lectures on Roman law and for his numerous writings.

In 1588 Gentili published De jure belli commentatio prima (“First Commentary on the Law of War”), the first of a three-volume series. A complete revised edition appeared in 1598 as De jure belli libri tres ( Three Books on the Law of War ). In his view, international law should comprise the actual practices of civilized nations, tempered by moral (but not specifically religious) considerations.

Although he rejected the authority of the church, he used the reasoning of the canon law as well as the civil law whenever it suited his purpose. The Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius, in writing the much better-known De Jure Belli ac Pacis (1625; On the Law of War and Peace ), drew extensively on Gentili’s work.

This article was most recently revised and updated by Brian Duignan,

Who is the mother of international law?

At the start of 2019 and the year long campaign designed around International Women’s Day on 8 March 2019, it may be particularly apt for the readers of EJIL: Talk! to consider Christine de Pizan (around 1365 – around 1430), a medieval woman of letters, as one of the founders of international law – even if somewhat surprising for several reasons.

Moreover, Pizan is not a woman of law but an intellectual “all-rounder”.
Above all, she has been completely ignored by internationalist scholars – with the notable exception of the Belgian Ernest Nys who devoted several studies to her work, or rare authors such as Anzilotti who mentioned her contribution in his Corso di diritto internazionale (vol.

Guerra Medici, « The Mother of International Law: Christine de Pisan », Parliaments, Estates and Representation, vol.19, 1999, n° 1,pp.15-22), thus supplanting a Grotius whose paternity was already highly doubtful (Ch.
Leben, « Grotius : père du droit international », in Dictionnaire des idées reçues en droit international, Paris, Pedone, 2017, pp.279-285).

Woman of letters and feminist pioneer Daughter of a Bologna astrologist physicist, Christine de Pizan was born in 1364 or 1365 in Venice. Her father having been invited to the Court by Charles V, she joined the Kingdom of France at the age of five where she was educated. Married at fifteen, she was widowed at twenty-five.

She is probably the first woman to have lived by her pen. Her work, abundant and varied, “contains charming poems as well as austere philosophical and historical treatises” (S. Solente, « Christine de Pisan », Histoire littéraire de la France, n° 40, 1969, p.14). Contemporary of Joan of Arc, she dedicated a poem to her in 1429.

Among her best-known works, La Cité des dames ( The Book of the City of Ladies, 1405) is an allegorical account of a city inhabited exclusively by great women of the past and present, which itself is sometimes presented as one of the first feminist works of literature.
It is therefore not surprising that Pizan, leaving aside “cattails, spinning and household duties” ( The Book of Deeds, Part 1, I) took up subjects perceived then – and still today – as “male”: war and weapons.

The Book combines the art of war (strategy, qualities required for combatants, war techniques, etc.) with the rules applicable to this matter, jus ad bellum and jus in bello, The first part of The Book opens with remarks relating to “just war”. Pizan writes that wars waged for a just cause are authorized by God (Part 1, II).

In addition to these, two other grounds rest “on will”: “to avenge any loss or damage incurred”; and “to conquer and take over foreign lands or lordships” ( ibid,, IV). Dialogue with Honoré Bouvet is also an opportunity to establish that the Emperor does not have the right to wage war against the Pope (Part 3, II), unlike the latter who can engage in arms against the former ( ibid,, III); or that the sovereign who leads a “just” war has the right of innocent passage through foreign territories, without having to provide hostages ( ibid,, XI).

In this respect, if ransom is allowed, particularly in wars between nations, it must not be excessive ( ibid,, XIV). Other issues that are reflected in contemporary international law are addressed in The Book, such as the inviolability of ambassadors ( ibid,, XXII), the exception of non-performance of treaties (Part 4, IV) or reprisals ( ibid,, VI).

The Book of Facts of Arms and Chivalry testifies in any case that, with regard to the law of war, which is “the core of international law”, “medieval thought is far from having been as sterile as we commonly imagine it” ( E. Nys, « Honoré Bonet et Christine de Pisan », Revue de droit international et de législation comparée, t.

Why Hugo Grotius is the father of international law?

Escape in a book chest – Thanks to his work On the law of war and peace Grotius is considered to be the founding father of modern international law. His active involvement in matters of state and religion caused resentment on the part of those in power, and led to his being imprisoned by Prince Maurits in Loevestein Castle.

After three years he managed to escape in a book chest, in what is one of the most legendary stories in Dutch history.
Grotius fled to Paris, where he continued writing.
Thanks to his work ‘De iure belli ac pacis’ (On the law of war and peace, 1625) he is considered to be the founding father of modern international law.

In this book he set out his dream for a system of laws, rules and treaties for all peoples, and the moral duty countries should have to strive for altruism in their relations with other states.

Who is father of law of nations?

It is safe to say that international law and treaties figure as necessary features of human society, regardless of any juristic definition, description, or argument.
The modern intellectual tradition relating to international law and treaties owes much to Roman law.
The Roman term jus gentium, the law of nations, described legal rules pertaining generally to foreigners when specific foreign rules were unknown or in conflict.

Despite its origins in Roman private law, the law of nations was adopted by European jurists in early modern times to describe certain public legal relations.
For example, in the sixteenth century, Spanish writers such as Suarez and Vitoria employed principles of jus gentium to argue that the Spanish Crown owed legal duties of basic humanitarian conduct to all peoples, even the indigenous peoples conquered by Spain in the Americas.

The natural law of nations, expressed in the natural laws of reason and religion, was the result of necessary rules binding everyone, even rulers of states.
The first part of Grotius’ theory of jus gentium was quickly married to emerging seventeenth-century political theory, like that of Hobbes, positing the idea of sovereign states.

Grotius’ legal theory also explains why sovereign states should not interfere in the internal affairs of other sovereign states: a nation’s sovereign authority must be limited so that the sovereign authority of other states is protected.
Such international legal principles that weave sovereign states together and protect them from each other continue to guide international relations today.

Not all students, of course, were pleased by their professors; one of the earliest pupils of the noted English law professor, William Blackstone, rebelled against what he was taught about the law of nations. In 1789, Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) rejected the term the law of nations as professed by Blackstone; Bentham argued in An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation that the discipline should be renamed international law,

Grotius’ and Blackstone’s classical definition of the law of nations focuses on legal rules and processes generated by more than one state.
Bentham’s definition of international law, however, focuses on the subjects of the discipline; these Bentham said were states and states alone.
The classic jus gentium regards individuals, as well as states, as its subjects, possessing legal rights and duties and accessing legal process.

Jessup defined the discipline of transnational law as encompassing any legal rule or process, municipal or international, that has to do with international transactions of any state, entity, or individual.
It may or may not make a difference how one defines the discipline.
For example, a rule about delimitation of the continental shelf not only emerges from a multistate source, a treaty, à la Grotius’ law of nations, but it also relates to interstate relations à la Bentham’s international law, and deals with international transactions à la Jessup’s transnational law,

This means that they cannot be protected by international human rights law against abusive state action or be subject to international criminal law. A contrary position is usually taken by those who subscribe to the ordinary definitions of the law of nations and transnational law, Nowadays in practice, although the term international law is very popular, some of its exclusivities have been softened both by the classical tradition of the law of nations and by the modern sentiment expressed in transnational law,

Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780080970868860407

Who is father of law in India?

N.R. Madhava Menon
Menon in August 2007
Born	4 May 1935 Trivandrum, Travancore, British India (present-day Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India)
Died	May 8, 2019 (aged 84) Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India
Other names	Appu
Alma mater	Government Law College, Trivandrum
Occupation	Legal educator, lawyer
Years active	1956–2019
Known for	Founding the National Law School of India University and the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences
Spouse	Rema Devi
Children	Ramakrishna Menon
Parent(s)	Ramakrishna Menon (Father) Bhavani Amma (Mother)
Awards	Padma Shri (2003) Padma Bhushan (2020) Living Legend of Law Plaque of Honour Rotary Club Award for Vocational Excellence
Signature

Neelakanta Ramakrishna Madhava Menon (4 May 1935 – 8 May 2019) was an Indian civil servant, lawyer and legal educator, considered by many as the father of modern legal education in India. He is the founder of National Law Universities system and first director of the National Law School of India University (NLSIU) and the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal and the founder-vice-chancellor of the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS).

He has also served as Chairman of Indian Statistical Institute from 2002 to 2003. Menon was awarded the Padma Shri in 2003 and Padma Bhushan in 2020 by the Government of India, He was a member of the Law Commission of India and also member of several expert Committees including on Legal Aid (1973), Civil Services Examination Reform (2000-2001), and Criminal Justice Reform (2002-2003), Police Act Drafting Committee (2005-2006) and the Committee on Draft National Policy on Criminal Justice (2006-2007) and Committee on Restructuring of Higher Education in India appointed by the Government of India.

He was a Central Secretariat Service officer,