Sovereignty, International Law and Democracy

In my reply to Jeremy Waldron's article Are Sovereigns Entitled to the Benefit of the International Rule of Law?, I draw upon and in some ways expand Waldron's important contribution to our understanding of the international rule of law. First of all, I suggest that Waldron's argument about the international rule of law can be used to illuminate how we should understand the legitimate authority of international law over sovereign states, but also how some of sovereign states residual independence ought to be protected from legitimate international law. Secondly, I argue that the democratic pedigree of the international rule of law plays a role when assessing how international law binds democratic sovereign states and whether the international rule of law can and ought to benefit their individual subjects. Finally, I emphasize how Waldron's argument that the international rule of law ought to benefit individuals in priority has implications for the sources of international law and for what sources can be regarded as sources of valid law.