The international order has changed significantly over the last few decades through obligation to subject themselves to international courts in a system in which state consent still plays a crucial role for international rule-setting and treaty-making. This paper aims to discuss what concept and standards of legitimacy should be applied to the international judiciary in a world of separate domestic states, evaluating different procedural and substantive standards, such as, independence vs. accountability, transparency, and human rights promotion. Taking into account the tension between constitutional democracy and the international judiciary, which is not democratically legitimised or even regarded as undemocratic, the domestic democratic procedures under which it is legitimate for democratic states to subject themselves to international courts need to be clarified. In particular, the proposed paper will elaborate on the concept of “recognitional legitimacy” between different international institutions and states for international courts.
