Compliance & Enforcement in International Law: Achieving Global Uniformity in Aviation Safety

74 Pages Posted: 18 Mar 2013

Date Written: March 17, 2013

Abstract

Law without compliance and enforcement is like poetry - it is pleasing to the ear, but has little to do with the practical world in which we live. The study of efforts to achieve uniformity in international norms and compliance with international legal obligations reveals mixed success, even in areas where there is widespread consensus for the need to have international harmony. Given the inherent sovereignty of states, the heterogeneous levels of economic ability, and the diversity of political priorities, securing compliance with international obligations is rarely an effortless task.

This article addresses legal norms governing international aviation safety, as well as both unilateral and multilateral efforts to achieve state compliance with those international legal obligations. Commercial international aviation provides a useful case study of how the world community seeks to achieve mutual self-interest by securing global harmony in law. The interplay between conventional international law, quasi-legal standards promulgated by international organizations, and national laws, regulations, and procedures offers insights as to how complex international enterprises, such as commercial aviation, play on the world stage.

In 1944, the world community acknowledged the need to achieve safety in international aviation through uniformity in law by establishing an organization to govern international aviation, conferring upon it quasi-legislative power to prescribe standards governing international aviation safety, and obliging member states to implement these standards through their domestic laws. Despite the efforts of major aviation nations and international organizations, those goals are only sluggishly being achieved. Thus, aviation safety can serve as a case study to inquire into the ability and willingness, on the one hand, or inability and unwillingness, on the other, of states to conform to their international obligations and the means by which they can be encouraged, or coerced, to comply.

This inquiry is important for another less theoretical and more practical reason. Safety and security are two sides of the same coin. The regulation of both is designed to avoid injuries to persons and property, and the deprivation of man's most valuable attribute - life. Yet the two are quite different, as well. Safety regulation focuses on preventing accidental harm. Security regulation focuses on preventing intentional harm. Like the common law difference between fault-based negligence and intentional torts, the latter involves more culpability than the former, and is deterred by more serious penalties. Since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, security has become a paramount concern in international aviation community. Yet a passenger is ten times more likely to lose his life in an aviation safety-related accident than in an aviation terrorist event. Hence, the study of aviation safety is of far more practical importance than the more emotionally driven study of aviation security. Safety must be among the highest priorities in commercial aviation.

All statistical evidence indicates that international aviation has become decidedly safer in recent decades. Though much of that positive result can be attributed to improvements in technology, much can also be attributed to improvements in the law. It is the latter subject that is the focus of this article.

Keywords: Aviation Industry, International Civil Aviation, Aviation Safety, International Law, Aviation Safety Law, ICAO, Chicago Convention, Commercial Aviation, SARPs, CASA, US Domestic Law, National Laws, National Regulations, Procedures

Suggested Citation

Dempsey, Paul Stephen, Compliance & Enforcement in International Law: Achieving Global Uniformity in Aviation Safety (March 17, 2013). North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2004, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2234766

Paul Stephen Dempsey (Contact Author)

McGill University - Faculty of Law ( email )

3690 Peel Street
Montreal, Quebec H3AIW9
Canada

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
449
Abstract Views
2,046
Rank
118,241
PlumX Metrics