The research hypothesis can be that in the course of the feasibility of the two Schools of the new Natural law and the legal positivism, the gradual overcome to inference of the legal rules governing international relations leads toward which school. As contemporary Public International Law recognizes rights and duties to the individuals (as evidenced by the international instruments of human rights), one cannot deny them international personality, without which that recognition could not take place. Also in the American continent, in the XXth century, even before the adoption of the American and Universal Declarations of Human Rights of 1948, doctrinal manifestations flourished in favour of the international juridical personality of the individuals. Then the evidence denotes that the” Natural Law” overcome the legal positivism, and this is an undeniable fact in the 21st Century. Fortunately, the natural law are irrefrangible linked to new jus gentium. This had led to the emergence of new rules based on the new jus gentium, to international relations. Because the jus gentium recognizes individuals as direct subjects of international relations, and furthermore, beyond the "will" of stats, governs the universal norms and rules are on the individuals. This hypothesis, regardless of the threat or use of force in the framework of “ the new Jus Gentium” "Humans" deployed the transition of individuals relations instead of states in the human global community. Therefore, the natural law and jus gentium are well able to govern global public order in the worldwide.