There are two principal theories on the relationship between international law and domestic law- Monism and Dualism. The monistic theory maintains that the subjects of two systems of law, i.e., international law and municipal law are essentially one. The monistic theory asserts that international law and municipal law are fundamentally the same in nature, and arise from the same science of law, and are manifestations of a single conception of law. The followers of this theory view international law and municipal law as part of a universal body of legal rules binding all human beings, collectively or singly. In a monist system, international law does not need to be incorporated into domestic law because international law immediately becomes incorporated in domestic legal system upon ratification of an international treaty. According to this theory, domestic law is subordinate to international law. The Statute of the International Criminal Court, therefore, can be directly applied and adjudicated in national courts according to the monistic theory. According to dualism theory, international law and municipal law represent two entirely distinct legal systems, i.e., international has an intrinsically different character from that of municipal law. International law is not directly applicable in the domestic system under dualism. First, international law must be translated into State legislation before the domestic courts can apply it. For example, under dualism, ratification of the Statute of the International Criminal Court is not enough-it must be implemented through State legislation into the domestic system. Most states and courts presumptively view national and international legal systems as discrete entities and routinely discuss in dualist fashion incorporation of rules from one system to the other.
‘d’, a dualist State, has signed and ratified the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of intellectual Property rights (triPS Agreement), an international agreement administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO). If ‘D’ is compelled to fulfill its international obligations under the triPS Agreement, which of the following statements is correct?
Correct Answer :
‘d’ must incorporate the provisions of the triPS Agreement into an existing domestic legislation or in a new domestic legislation.
Solution :
The correct answer is: ‘d’ must incorporate the provisions of the triPS Agreement into an existing domestic legislation or in a new domestic legislation.
Step-by-Step Explanation:
1. Understanding Dualism Theory:
Based on the passage, Dualism posits that international law and domestic (municipal) law are two completely separate and distinct legal systems. International law is not directly applicable in domestic courts simply by being signed or ratified.
2. Requirement for Domestic Legislation under Dualism:
Under a dualist system, for an international agreement or treaty to have legal force domestically and for the State to fulfill its obligations within its domestic system, the international rules must be translated or transformed into national law through domestic legislation.
3. Application to State ‘D’:
Since ‘D’ is explicitly identified as a dualist State, merely signing and ratifying the TRIPS Agreement is not sufficient for its domestic courts to apply the provisions. To fulfill its international obligations within its legal system, State ‘D’ must actively incorporate the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement by either enacting new domestic legislation or amending existing domestic legislation.
Therefore, the statement that ‘D’ must incorporate the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement into an existing domestic legislation or in a new domestic legislation is correct.
Access expert-curated educational resources and study materials—completely free.
Create, conduct, and manage professional online assessments with Mindyard. Perfect for teachers and institutes.
Copyright © 2026 Mindyard. All Rights Reserved.