{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015710919088766692, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.8173515981735155, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Commitment to the Rule of Law: From a Political to an Organizational Ideal

We are used to thinking of the rule of law as a political ideal, governing the institutions of a state. By now there is ample recognition that the rule of law also has relevance in international law and in multi-level legal orders such as the European Union. In those contexts, however, the rule of law is usually seen as a set of principles international or supranational organizations use to assess others, primarily (member) states. In this contribution, the accompanying question will be addressed what the rule of law means as a standard for international organizations themselves. A crucial preliminary question is what the rule of law concept entails in this context. I will argue that a conception of the rule of law as reduction of arbitrariness needs to given particular shape in order to function as a standard for international organizations, which needs to cover both the external conduct of the organization and its internal governance. Building on the socio-legal theories of Krygier, Selznick and the legal philosophy of Waldron, this contribution explores the extent to which the rule of law can be seen as both an organizational and a personal ideal in the international context.