The study aimed to examine the issue of the ineffectiveness of international legal norms. This research was conducted using a combination of general scientific and specialised research methods. The historical method was employed to trace the general, persistent trend in the assessment of aggressors’ actions that led to violations of international legal norms. A systemic approach was applied to identify the reasons for the ineffective implementation of international legal norms by international institutions and to analyse the behaviour of states that violate these norms. It was established that the current state of international law has been shaped by the historical evolution of the international legal order, which has been influenced by cycles of wars, revolutions, and other socio-political crises, with each preceding period concluding in the establishment of a new global order. It has been established that the absence of an international act formalising a new legal order following the dissolution of the USSR – the last significant global geopolitical crisis – provided grounds for claims advocating the restoration of “historical justice” and for engaging in expansionist and other aggressive actions against the countries that were once part of it. This legal uncertainty in the international order has created a backdrop for numerous violations of international legal norms by the Russian Federation. In Ukraine’s international legal relations with other subjects of international law, two main reasons for the ineffectiveness of international legal norms have been identified. The first is the incomplete recognition of Ukraine as a sovereign state. The second is the incorporation of moral, ethical, and psychological categories into the norms of international acts as conditions for shaping the behaviour of subjects of international law – namely, states, which, as legal entities, neither possess nor can possess moral, ethical, or psychological characteristics. This study may serve as a theoretical foundation for developing an effective mechanism for the implementation of international legal norms
Zavalna et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: