Herein lies the internal contradiction which, I believe, renders the entire encyclical moot.
"(r)egulated by law." To regulate some one or some thing, a law must necessarily be exercised by a higher authority or at least a higher power. Since the posited "world political authority" would have:
"to be vested with the effective power..." And
"to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties.."
Who, or what, then, would be the higher authority or power that would enforce "the LAW" and make " Such an authority" observe any principals at all, much less those desired by this encyclical?
DG
Crickets.
I may be going way out on a limb here but somehow I can't bring myself to believe that the very people angling to control a world government feel themselves constrained by any principle at all, much less one where the government that governs best governs least.
Cordially,