LA RISOLUZIONE DEI CONFLITTI TRA TRATTATI: METODI TRADIZIONALI ALLA PROVA DEI REGIMI AUTONOMI

The work aims to investigate the adequacy of traditional norm conflict resolution principles to manage and solve contradictions between autonomous regimes of international law. The analysis starts from the observation that, with the expansion and specialization of international law, traditional types of conflict between conventional provisions have been replaced by a new type of treaty antinomy: between autonomous regimes of international law, such as WTO law and environmental law. These are treaty- based systems governing a specific area of law, institutionally organized (around international organizations and specialized dispute settlement centers) and characterized by a common value base, objectives, ethics, and language. Considering this, the work critically examines the norm conflict resolution principles discussed in academia, applied by international courts and tribunals and in state practice, and codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969). Given the inadequacy of those traditional principles (lex prior, lex posterior and lex specialis), the thesis then examines whether other techniques, foreign to public international law (in particular, private international law methods and the balancing test) could better respond to the issues raised by regime conflicts. Finally, a reflection is offered about the convenience (and necessity) of a change of perspective and the abandonment of the individuality of regimes in favor of an integrated approach.