Monism in international law

The science of international law has been discussed by many authors throughout history, both philosophically and practically. The main reason is that international law is based on very different norms and principles compared to national law. The historical development and current state of international law can be interpreted by evaluating its resources, subjects and scope. International law is one of the main discussion topics of dualism and monism schools, which host different arguments. While dualism defends two different legal systems, national and international, separate and independent from each other, monism defends the necessity of integrity and interconnectedness. Throughout history, international agreements, supranational courts and all consensus transactions have guided national law and enabled certain regulations to be made locally. When states become parties to a treaty text of their own will, it means that the state undertakes to comply with this text on a national level. The shaping or regulation of national law by international law has shown itself since the emergence of state formations. Today, regardless of the government style or political structure of the states, the aim of the regulations in their local legislation to comply with international law is quite clear. It is seen that international agreements, especially those made to protect human rights, are almost exactly integrated into national law by states. This enables us to examine the thesis of the integrity of international law and national law, which was brought into question by the philosophy of monism.