This is partially an answer to the question to point that has been raised that apparently because there is

no authority which makes the rules, hence there can be no hierarchy of norms .The answer is that
authority is states. Should they agree that there is a hierarchy that hierarchy will exist. The law makers
are states! yes these are states . You don’t need a centralized legislative body for hierarchy to come to
existence. Nazrin :I want to add to this that law-making in international law is horizontally, in domestic
law it is vertically. Equal sides with equal rights make law equally. This means horizontally. Ulker: when
drafting the original text of the international court of justice there was a proposal to include a
suggestion about undermentioned order of laws, but this proposal was he stated that it can suggest idea
that the judge doesn’t have an authority to implement to follow like the opinion juris in certan cases.
That he doesn’t have the authority to draw upon certain conventions and treaties. This means the
interpretation of statute was rejected by most of state. Farid m: There is no stated hierarchy. The
question is can we actually establish. Lily used the latin term erga omnes obligations. I wrote my phd on
erga omnes obligations. I have to establish the fact that is arguing in favor that there is a possibility of
arguing in favor of the proposal that the hierarchy in international law exist. Before that let me go first
to the concept lex specialis derogate lex generale. Nigar said that this concept suggests that there is a
hierarchy, because if there is the conflict between the special rule and general rule, the special rule
prevails. Let me come up with the example about honor code. So there is a provision in the honor code
that the amendments to the honor code can be only made through the referendum by two third
majority of students and faculty. What if we come as a Senate with a rule that all decisions in the
university are to be adopted by the Senate with a simple majority? Would the decision of the senate
also effect to the decisions about amendments to the honor code? Could we as a Senate amend the
honor code? I am trying to find avoidance to the system to avoid the referendum. Can we simply rely on
this new rule? Amendments to honor code are also decisions, and because there is a new rule that all
the decisions are adopted by the 50+1 by simple of majority, will that new rule apply to the decisions of
making amendments to the honor code? The answer will be NO, because the new decision will….is it of
general nature because it says that all decisions in the university will be made by majority. Whereas the
provision of the honor code states that this honor code, the amendments to this honor code will be
made through…that law will be lex specialis. So, and hence the rule of lex specialis will apply. Now pay
attention to the words I used. I didn’t say lex specialis will prevail. I said lex specialis will apply. Not
because lex specialis is more important, not because the provision in the code regarding two third of
majority is more important, but simple because it is rule of interpretation. It is you, you simply apply to
it because it is a special rule, it is special circumstances for that special case. And therefore being so that
rule applies, it is not because that rule is important, this rule as many lawyers are misleading is a rule
about hierarchy. Is not a rule about hierarchy of norms, it is a rule of interpretation that you choose to
apply between two contradictory norms.