Abstract

Despite recent interest in the history of international law, the question of historical justice is a challenging issue due to the principle of intertemporal law. However, such a formalistic application renders historical injustice on a structural level alongside its substantial level. The injustice issue arising from conflicting normative structures is the focus here. Why is it that European international law was considered the only legitimate rule of law when the case in question occurred and when complicated plural or parallel orders coincided and conflicted with each other? This spatial issue seems to be one of the premises that has not been addressed sufficiently. This study suggests that for the positivistic tenet of the principle of intertemporal law to stand, the interspatial aspects of international law are relevant in the discourse on issues of historical justice, especially in the context of East Asian civilizations. International legal discourse should take into account the social space of law or interspatial law. This study does not attempt to deconstruct the validity of current international law or demand reparation for historical wrongs. Instead, it suggests that interspatial law may contribute to the international legal system on two counts. First, interspatial law may supplement the agonistic, positivistic application of intertemporal law to historical cases. Second, the recognition of the spatiality of law may promote the idea that differences can be accepted while avoiding the monopolization of the so‐called “universal international law.”