English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

This issue of Theoretical Inquiries in Law critically explores efforts to address the paradoxes of sovereignty. One paradox is internal, and was formulated by David Dyzenhaus in his contribution to this issue: “if the sovereign is the highest authority, and hence not answerable to any other authority, how can the sovereign be subject to law?”1 The second paradox is external, and could perhaps be phrased, along Dyzenhaus’s lines, as follows: “if the sovereign is independent, and hence not answerable to any other authority, how can the sovereign be subject to the duty to recognize and respect the independence of other sovereigns?”2 Responses to both types of paradoxes have been reflected in states’ claims to legitimacy from within, through, for example, their commitment to the rule of law; and to legitimacy from without, through their assertion of “statehood” as understood by the contemporaneous international

The Paradoxes of Sovereigns as Trustees of Humanity: Concluding Remarks