Relationship between International Law and Municipal Law

Monistic Theory Dualistic Theory

1. Proponent- Kelson, Wright,
Westlake etc.
2. IL and ML are part of the same
universal Legal system.
3. All laws are made for men and
men only. Both systems
regulate the conduct of
individuals, while municipal
law does so immediately, IL as
a matter of technique, does so
mediately (through States).
4. The substance of law is same in
both systems i.e. command.
5. Both systems have common
origin through grund norm.
6. In reality, states do not follow
this principle.
1. Proponents- Starke, Triepel and
Anzilloti.
2. IL and ML are two separate
and self contained legal
systems.
3. The subjects of ML are
individuals where as in IL they
are states, Organizations and
individuals.
4. Origin is different. ML- will of
the state, IL- Common will of
the states.
5. The substance is also different.
ML- Command of the
sovereign; IL- in the nature of
promises.

Other Theories
• Specific Adoption theory/ Transformation Theory- According to this
theory, IL does not automatically become part of the ML. It is only when
the state legislatures specifically adopts it into the domestic legislation, it
becomes applicable.
Criticism- it ignored those IL which do not require specific adoption. Eg-
Customary rules.
• Delegation theory- Monists contend that each state has been given
certain constitutional rules of International law which permit each state to
determine as to how international treaties will become applicable.
Criticism- It is not clear what is Constitutional rule of International Law,
who gave that rule, every state is sovereign, so how can they follow the
orders of other sovereign.
Primacy of ML or IL?
• Harmonization Theory
- Neither ML nor IL has supremacy over each other.
- Both have been made for the human beings, so if there arises a
contradiction, it should be harmonized.
- Two ways to harmonize- firstly, the judges should apply judicial mind
and eliminate the contradiction. Secondly, the Ml should not be
framed in such a manner so as to have any contradiction with IL.