Available in Russian
Authors: Daniil Sechin, Ksenia Shestakova
DOI: 10.21128/2226-2059-2025-3-40-65
Keywords: jus cogens; peremptory norms; general international law; law of treaties; international legal system; theoretical approaches; pluralist universalism
This article traces the evolution of the concept of jus cogens from its initial emergence in international legal discourse as an abstract novelty to its present-day articulation through specific substantive norms. The analysis highlights how this category has been shaped by diverse intellectual traditions, ranging from natural law and positivist approaches to critical, sociological, and postcolonial perspectives. Particular emphasis is placed on the work of the International Law Commission, which in 2022 proposed a “non-exhaustive list” of jus cogens norms. While the list has provided a useful reference point for both institutional and doctrinal debates, it has also created challenges: there is a risk that it may be treated as a closed canon, resistant to further development, while excessive reliance on it could narrow the flexibility of the concept and obscure its systemic role. Methodologically, the study draws on historical and doctrinal analysis, institutional practice, and the jurisprudence of international courts — most prominently the International Court of Justice — as well as on state practice where the peremptory character of norms has been explicitly invoked. The article also considers social and cultural perspectives, regional initiatives, and alternative forms of justice that give weight to the experiences of victims and affected communities. Additional focus is placed on comparative perspectives: national legal traditions — civil law, common law, socialist, and others — have profoundly influenced the interpretation of peremptory norms and continue to shape contemporary understandings of jus cogens across different contexts. The authors argue that jus cogens has consolidated its role both as a structuring category of international law and as a cornerstone of the international legal order. It performs protective and preventive functions, ensuring that fundamental values are insulated from derogation. At the same time, the long-term viability of the concept depends on its openness to renewal in the spirit of “pluralist universalism”, which requires balancing universal claims with recognition of diverse legal traditions and historical experiences. By contrast, attempts to instrumentalize jus cogens as a universalizing device for “improving the world” without sufficient grounding in practice and consensus risk producing counterproductive outcomes — an outcome aptly captured in the ironic title of this article.
About the authors: Daniil Sechin – Ph.D. Student, Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia; Ksenia Shestakova – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Associate Professor, Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Citation:
Shestakova K., Sechin D. (2025) Jus cogens: kak izmenit' mir (stanet tol'ko khuzhe) [Jus cogens: how to improve the world (you will only make things worse)]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.15, no.3, pp.40–65. (In Russian).
References
Aleksidze L.A. (1969) Problema jus cogens v sovremennom mezhdunarodnom prave [The problem of jus cogens in contemporary international law]. Sovetskiy ezhegodnik mezhdunarodnogo prava, pp.127–149. (In Russian).
Alexidze L. (1981) Legal Nature of Jus Cogens in Contemporary International Law. The Hague Academy Collected Courses Online, vol.172, pp.219–270.
Anghie A. (2005) Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Anzilotti D. (1928) Corso di diritto internazionale (ad uso degli studenti dell’Università di Roma), Roma: Athenaeum.
Bourdieu P. (1987) The Force of Law: Toward a Sociology of the Juridical Field. Hastings Law Journal, vol.38, no.5, pp.805–853.
Bromley Yu.V. (1973) Etnos i etnografiya [Ethnos and ethnography], Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian).
Brownlie I. (1988) Comment. In: Cassese A., Weiler J.H.H. (eds.) Change and Stability in International Law-Making, Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Case S.R., Mégret F. (2024) The Colour of Jus Cogens. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4779577 (accessed: 14.09.2025).
Cage J. (1967) A Year from Monday: New Lectures and Writings, Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, pp.3–21.
Cançado Trindade A.A. (1987) Co-existence and Co-ordination of Mechanisms of International Protection of Human Rights (at Global and Regional Levels). The Hague Academy Collected Courses, vol.202, pp.9–435.
Cançado Trindade A.A. (2005) International Law for Humankind: Towards a New Jus Gentium. General Course on Public International Law (I). The Hague Academy Collected Courses, vol.316, pp.9–439.
Chimni B.S. (2016) Third World Approaches to International Law: A Manifesto. International Community Law Review, vol.8, no.1, pp.3–27.
Chinkin C.M. (2001) Women’s International Tribunal on Japanese Military Sexual Slavery. American Journal of International Law, vol.95, no.2, pp.335–341.
Combacau J. (1986) Le droit international: bric-à-brac ou système? Archives de Philosophie du Droit, vol.31, no.1, pp.85–105.
Fabri H.R., Stoppioni E. (2022) Jus Cogens Before International Courts: The Mega-Political Side of the Story. Law and Contemporary Problems, vol.84, no.4, pp.153–180.
Foucault M. (1995) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, A.Sheridan (transl.), New York: Vintage Books.
Foucault M. (1972) The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language, A.Sheridan (transl.), New York: Pantheon Books.
Fuller R.B. (1978) Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth, New York: E.P.Dutton.
Gaja G. (1981) Jus Cogens beyond the Vienna Convention. The Hague Academy Collected Courses Online, vol.172, pp.271–316.
Gómez Robledo A. (1981) Le ius cogens international: sa genèse, sa nature, ses fonctions. The Hague Academy Collected Courses Online, vol.172, pp.9–218.
Husserl E. (2012) Krizis evropeyskikh nauk i transtsendental'naya fenomenologiya [The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology], Moscow: Valdimir Dal'. (In Russian).
Hegel G.V.F. (1977) Entsiklopediya filosofskikh nauk. Tom 3: Filosofiya dukha [Encyclopedia of the philosophical sciences. Vol.3: Philosophy of spirit.], Moscow: Mysl'. (In Russian).
Ispolinov A. (2025) Neskol'ko zhizney doktriny imperativnykh norm (jus cogens) v mezhdunarodnom prave [The lives of the doctrine of peremptory norms (jus cogens) in international law]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.15, no.1, pp.70–97. (In Russian).
Kadysheva O. (2025) Regional'nye imperativnye normy v mezhdunarodnom prave: mif ili real'nost' [Regional peremptory norms in international law: myth or reality]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.15, no.1, pp.98–116. (In Russian).
Koeck H.F. (2011) Alfred Verdross — A Visionary of Contemporary Doctrine. Studia Iuridica Toruniensia, vol.8, pp.7–33.
Kondurov V. (2021) Politicheskaya teologiya mezhdunarodnogo prava: grani i granitsy metoda [Political theology of international law. Methodological facets and borders]. Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie, no.1, pp.50–71.
Koskenniemi M. (2001) The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870–1960, Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kraevskiy A.A. (2023) Chistoe uchenie o prave Gansa Kel'zena [Hans Kelsen’s pure theory of law]. In: Timoshina E.V. (ed.) Tri tsarstva prava: deystvitel'nost', deystvennost', legitimnost' [Three kingdoms of law: reality, effectiveness, legitimacy], Saint Petersburg: Izdatel'stvo Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, pp.454–511. (In Russian).
Lauterpacht H. (1950) International Law and Human Rights, London: Stevens & Sons Ltd.
Lauterpacht H. (2011) The Function of Law in the International Community, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lévi-Strauss C. (1984) Pechal'nye tropiki [Sad tropics], G.A.Matveeva (transl.), Moscow: Mysl'. (In Russian).
Malinowski B. (1967) A Diary in the Strict Sense of the Term, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Mandelstam A. (1923) La protection internationale des minorités. The Hague Academy Collected Courses, vol.1, pp.363–478.
Mandelstam A. (1931) La protection internationale des droits de l’Homme. The Hague Academy Collected Courses, vol.38, pp.125–232.
Mark J., Betts P. (eds.) (2022) Socialism Goes Global: The Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the Age of Decolonization, Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
Merlo-Ponti M. (1999) Fenomenologiya vospriyatiya [Phenomenology of perception], A.B.Solov'ev (transl.), Saint Petersburg: Yuventa. (In Russian).
Morgenthau H.J. (1948) Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, New York: Alfred A.Knopf.
Mutua M.W. (2001) Savages, Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights. Harvard International Law Journal, vol.42, no.1, pp.201–245.
Orford A. (ed.). (2006) International Law and Its Others, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Penny H.G. (2002) Objects of Culture: Ethnology and Ethnographic Museums in Imperial Germany, Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Pels P., Salemink O. (eds.) (2000) Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Said E. (2006) Orientalizm. Zapadnye kontseptsii Vostoka [Orientalism. Western concepts of the Orient], A.V.Govorunov (transl.), Moscow: Russkiy mir. (In Russian).
Schmitt C. (2008) Nomos Zemli v prave narodov Jus publicum Europaeum [The nomos of the Earth in the international law of the Jus publicum Europaeum], K.Loshchevskiy, Yu.Korinets (transl.), Saint Petersburg: Vladimir Dal'. (In Russian).
Shaw M.N. (2021) International Law, 9th ed, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shestakova K., Sechin D. (2023) Genealogiya istoricheskogo znaniya i sovremennye teorii mezhdunarodnogo prava [Genealogy of historical knowledge and modern theories of international law]. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4986921 (accessed: 14.09.2025). (In Russian).
Shestakova K.D., Yataeva P.S., Avdeeva V.S., Suponin V.V. (2024) Stanovlenie mezhdunarodnoy zashchity prav cheloveka v mezhvoennyy period: figura i vzglyady A.N.Mandel'shtama. Chast' 1 [The emerging international legal protection of human rights in the interwar period: the life and ideas of André Mandelstam. Part 1]. Zhurnal VShE po mezhdunarodnomu pravu, no.1, pp.4–18. (In Russian).
Shestakova K.D., Yataeva P.S., Avdeeva V.S., Suponin V.V. (2024) Stanovlenie mezhdunarodnoy zashchity prav cheloveka v mezhvoennyy period: figura i vzglyady A.N.Mandel'shtama. Chast' 2 [The emerging international legal protection of human rights in the interwar period: the life and ideas of André Mandelstam. Part 2]. Zhurnal VShE po mezhdunarodnomu pravu, no.2, pp.4–27. (In Russian).
Simma B. (1995) The Contribution of Alfred Verdross to the Theory of International Law. European Journal of International Law, vol.6, no.1, pp.33–54.
Tladi D. (2020) The International Law Commission’s Draft Conclusions on Peremptory Norms of General International Law (jus cogens): Making Wine from Water or More Water than Wine. Nordic Journal of International Law, vol.89, no.2, pp.244–270.
Tunkin G.I. (1962) Voprosy teorii mezhdunarodnogo prava [Issues of the theory of international law], Moscow: Gosyurizdat. (In Russian).
Tunkin G.I. (1970) Teoriya mezhdunarodnogo prava [Theory of international law], Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. (In Russian).
Verdross A. (1926) Die Verfassung der Völkerrechtsgemeinschaft, Wien; Berlin: Springer.
Verdross A. (1937) Forbidden Treaties in International Law: Comments on Professor Garner’s Report on “The Law of Treaties”. American Journal of International Law, vol.31, no.4, pp.571–577.
Verdross A. (1963) Abendländische Rechtsphilosophie. Ihre Grundlagen und Hauptprobleme in geschichtlicher Schau, 2nd ed., Wien: Springer.
Verdross A., Simma B. (1984) Universelles Völkerrecht: Theorie und Praxis, 3rd ed., Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Westlake J. (1904) International Law. Part 1: Peace, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zimmerman A. (2001) Anthropology and Antihumanism in Imperial Germany, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Zweigert K., Kötz H. (1998) An Introduction to Comparative Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press.