Reconsideration of the "state of war" doctrine in international law

2020 Fiscal Year Final Research Report

• Project/Area Number: 17K03385
• Research Category: Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
• Allocation Type: Multi-year Fund
• Section: 一般
• Research Field: International law
• Research Institution: Osaka University
• Principal Investigator: Wani Kentaro 大阪大学, 国際公共政策研究科, 准教授 (40451851)
• Project Period (FY): 2017-04-01 – 2021-03-31
• Keywords: 戦争 / 戦争状態 / 戦時国際法 / 戦争法 / 講和条約 / 国際法の構造転換

Outline of Final Research Achievements

It is generally conceived, especially in Japan, that international law before World War I was a dualistic legal system: it was sharply divided into peacetime international law and wartime international law; the outbreak of a state of war had the effect of replacing peacetime international law with wartime international law. This study has challenged this widely held view. War was a means of resolving international disputes in international society, where there was no central legislative or judicial organs. Disputes in this context include political disputes, namely, disputes concerning the demand for changing existing rules of international law, as well as legal disputes, namely, disputes concerning the demand for implementing existing rules of international law. In other words, war was a means of changing and enforcing rules of so-called peacetime international law.

Free Research Field

国際法学

Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements

伝統的国際法においては、戦争状態の発生により平時国際法の効力が停止し、戦時国際法への「切り替え」が生じていた、という通説的見解の下では、平時には許されない様々な行為が戦時国際法上許されていたことについて、「平時国際法から戦時国際法への切り替え」とだけ言ってそれで終わるという思考停止が生まれる。本研究は、そうした思考停止を終わらせる学術的意義を有する。もちろん、戦時国際法の適用によって平時国際法は大幅に修正されたが、あくまでも「大幅な」修正であって、平時国際法がまるごと戦時国際法に切り替わるというように二元論的に考えられていたのではない。それぞれの制度ごとに正当化根拠を明らかにする必要がある。