Self-Defense in International Law constitutes one of the most important doctrines regulating the lawful use of force between states. The contemporary international legal order is structured around the prohibition of force established in Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations, which requires states to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of other states.

The Principle of Self-Determination of Peoples is one of the foundational norms of contemporary international law. It expresses the idea that people have the right to determine their political status and pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. The principle plays a decisive role in the structure of the modern international system, particularly in the legal processes that shaped decolonization, state formation, and political autonomy.

The principle of territorial integrity occupies a central place in the architecture of modern international law. It protects the territorial unity of states and prohibits external interference aimed at fragmenting, annexing, or otherwise altering recognized borders through coercion.

The principle of sovereign equality of states stands at the core of the contemporary international legal order. It represents one of the fundamental organizing ideas of the system of states and is expressly affirmed in Article 2(1) of the Charter of the United Nations, which declares that the Organization is founded on the sovereign equality of all its members.

The Assassination of Ali Khamenei presents a precise legal question under public international law: can a sitting head of state lawfully be targeted and killed during an armed conflict? The answer depends neither on political judgment nor on the symbolic weight of the office involved.

The USA-Iran War of 2026 represents one of the most significant interstate confrontations of the contemporary era and a direct test of the legal framework governing the use of force. The conflict began on 28 February 2026 with coordinated military strikes conducted by the United States and Israel against targets within Iranian territory. These operations marked the transition from prolonged geopolitical tension to open armed hostilities between sovereign States.

The Epstein files raise a precise and technically demanding question under public international law: can the conduct reflected in those materials, if established by reliable evidence, meet the legal threshold of crimes against humanity under Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC, 1998)?

The marine plastic pollution treaty represents the most ambitious attempt to date to regulate plastic pollution at the global level through a legally binding instrument grounded in public international law.

The phenomenon commonly described as Climate Refugees has emerged as one of the most pressing yet legally unsettled challenges in contemporary public international law. Climate change is no longer a prospective or abstract risk; it is already shaping patterns of human mobility through sea-level rise, desertification, extreme weather events, and the gradual erosion of livelihoods.

Private international law addresses a structural problem that emerges whenever private legal relationships extend beyond the territorial limits of a single state. Commercial contracts are concluded between parties located in different jurisdictions, tortious conduct produces effects across borders, families and successions span multiple legal systems, and assets are held or transferred internationally.

International law on the use of cyber espionage has become one of the most complex and contested fields within contemporary public international law. Cyber espionage is now a routine instrument of state practice, carried out on a continuous basis by states against allies, competitors, and neutral actors.

The Principle of Good Faith in International Law occupies a foundational yet persistently contested position within the international legal order. It is invoked across treaty law, dispute settlement, negotiations, and State responsibility, but rarely articulated with doctrinal precision.