Alleged violations of the Charter can also be raised by States in the Security Council. The Security Council could then adopt resolutions under Chapter VI of the Charter of the United Nations recommending the “peaceful settlement of disputes”. These resolutions are not binding under international law, although they generally express the Council`s convictions. On rare occasions, the Security Council may adopt resolutions under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations on “threats to the peace, breach of the peace, and acts of aggression” that are legally binding under international law and may be followed by economic sanctions, military action and similar use of force by the United Nations. In disputes concerning the exact meaning and application of national legislation, it is for the courts to decide on the meaning of the law. Under international law, interpretation falls within the competence of the States concerned, but may also, by virtue of treaty provisions or with the consent of the parties, be delegated to judicial bodies such as the International Court of Justice. Thus, while it is generally the responsibility of States to interpret the law themselves, diplomatic processes and the availability of supranational judicial bodies regularly provide assistance to that end. The Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) is widely regarded as the most founding figure in international law and was one of the first scholars to articulate an international order consisting of a “society of states” governed not by force or war, but by laws, mutual agreements and real customs.  Grotius secularized international law and organized it into a global system; His 1625 work, De Jure Belli ac Pacis (On the Law of War and Peace), established a system of principles of natural law that bound all nations independently of local customs or laws. He also highlighted the freedom of the high seas, which is not only relevant to the growing number of European states exploring and colonizing the world, but is still a cornerstone of international law today. Although modern study of international law did not begin until the early 19th century, the 16th-century scholars Gentili, Vitoria and Grotius laid the foundations and are widely regarded as the “fathers of international law”.  In both theories, i.e.
realistic and fictitious, they adopted their views without regard to other issues of international law. But functional theory tends to satisfy both extremist theories. According to this theory, neither nation-states nor individuals are the only subjects of international law. Even nation-states and individuals are subjects of international law, but other entities have also been given international personality and status and have been considered subjects of international law. The different issues contained in international law play different roles in establishing good relations and better cooperation among nations. The three main theories contained in international law are a realist theory, a fictitious theory and a functional theory. And these three issues have a different strategy and role in international law. In the European Middle Ages, international law was primarily concerned with the purpose and legitimacy of war, seeking to determine what constituted a “just war.” For example, the armistice theory states that the nation that provoked an unjustified war could not enjoy the right to receive or win trophies that were legitimate at the time.  The Greco-Roman concept of natural law was combined with religious principles by the Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides (1135-1204) and the Christian theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) to create the new discipline of “international law,” which, unlike its eponymous Roman predecessor, applied natural law to relations between states. A similar framework was developed in Islam, in which international law derived in part from the principles and rules set forth in treaties with non-Muslims.
 The reference to states and similar political entities, organizations and individuals does not exhaust the number of entities operating on the international scene. Capital companies, whether private or public, often carry on an economic activity in one or more States other than the State of law of which they were incorporated or in which they have their economic residence. The resources available to each company may be greater than those of small states, and they may benefit from strong diplomatic support from their home governments. These companies can and do enter into agreements. 122), including concession agreements with foreign governments.38 In this context, some have argued in particular that relations between States and foreign companies should be treated as such at the international level and not as an aspect of the normal rules governing the position of aliens and their assets in the territory of a State.39 In principle, However, companies do not have international legal personality.