Textualism and Evolutive Interpretation Approaches in International Tribunals

The present thesis will deliver to the reader the four methods of interpretation of law in Domestic and in International Law. The methods of interpretation that were investigated by the research are classified as (textual, systematic, teleological and historical). These methods were identified and will be given some reasons why and how each one of them can be used. Using as a departure point, for instance, the contributions of Kant, who seems to provide the horizon for many contemporary re-interpretations of international law as a normative or political project. Followed, then by the pandectist Savigny, on regarding with the division on the types of the interpretative methods. The present work is going to deliver a propose to solving this issue which can be found on the conundrums of History, Philosophy, Politics, Diplomacy, Psychology and Law and as a tool for this work it will take into account the legacy used by the cannon law which is the base for the foundation of the modern legal systems of common and civil law countries. Moreover, the aim is not to justify and to convince the reader which method is better than others and/or one method should prevail on regarding others, but instead, the mainly aim is to bring clarity about these methods and the possible and better applicability of each of them whether in Domestic or on all different sources of International Law including courts`decisions. The researchable problem is raised and usually faces constant debates, due to the fact that, on domestic level the judges face constant disagreements towards its decisions, which result on the criticism from the other judges, the civil society including the litigant parties and also the political partisans of the opposite side. Alongside, the research has to prove that the positivistic approach towards international law and the consequent effects on the interpretation in international courts and tribunals are the most appropriate to be used in order to reach a common understanding among the existent different types of legal law systems and to pursue a settlement of a unified opinio iuris towards International Law. Due to the fact that it decreases the likelihood of a bad judgement simply because it takes in consideration the text by itself and what is written on the black letter of the law. The textuality, as argued above, helps to find the legal truth about the issue, simply because the method follows what is written on the law and the legal logic behind the text and because it avoids the judges overruling and the absurdity solution over the cases, which corroborate for the integrity of the Rule of Law. Thus, as we will see, these methods are the most frequently used because they are very well known and they are not restricted to a concrete issue as the canons of interpretation. Moreover, the methods of interpretation are helpful not only to understand better the law, but also the actors that are involved on the process of interpretation and creation of law. And finally, when the methods applied correctly, they help to prevent the state of anarchy, to support and to feed the Rule of Law. Key words: Textualism, Living Constitutionalism, Rule of Law, International Law, Arbitrability, Kant, Savigny, Kelsen, Scalia, opinio iuris.