According to a widely shared perception, international peace and security
law is in crisis. Yet it often remains unclear what the constitutive features of
this crisis are, how novel it really is, and what its sources, forms, and effects
are. In the introduction to this symposium, we unpack the current crisis
narrative by focussing on norm contestation in the law against war: Which
norms are contested? Who are the actors that contest these norms and how?
What are the effects of these contestations on peace and security law as a
whole? To answer these questions, we draw on recent scholarship on illegality
in Public International Law (PIL) and on contestation in International
Relations (IR); we propose an interdisciplinary analytical framework that
distinguishes between applicatory, legislative, and systemic contestation.
Challenges to the application of norms and the factual basis are a common
theme in legal disputes that specify international norms. Legislative contestation
challenges the content of norms on a more abstract level, aiming to
change its boundaries. Systemic contestation fundamentally questions the
cornerstones of the international order. This typology invites PIL and IR
scholars to study how different forms of contestation shape international
norms in the law against war.
