International Law Notes (Revised)

INTERNATIONAL LAW
NOTES FOR CSS EXAMINATION

International Law Notes by Aamir Mahar
Aamir Khan Mahar

Author is not responsible for any fact/information mentioned in this booklet. This is
a complied work. All contents had taken from different Internet sources.
2
PART I
ANALYSIS OF PAST PAPERS
2000-2016
3
INTERNATIONAL LAW (ANALYSIS OF PAST PAPERS)

INTERNATIONAL LAW 2015 What is relationship between positive
2001 Explain in detail the object, purpose and law theory, natural law theory and
basis of international law. international law? How these theories
2005 Define International Law. Do you agree contributed in the evolution of International
with John Austin’s concept “International Law?
Law is not a true law, but a positive 2015 Explain the sources of International Law
international morality”? Elaborate your in the light of Article 38 (1) of the Statue of
answer with appropriate arguments. International Court of Justice.
2005 What are the sources of International 2016 Define International Law. Discuss its
Law? Discuss any two of them in detail. nature and scope. To what extent it is relevant
2006 “International Law is a Law regulating and effective in the modern times?
the rights and duties of states and creating no 2016 What are the material sources of
rights and imposing no duties on individuals”. International Law? Discuss any two of them
Do you agree with this statement? Why or in detail with necessary examples.
why not? Argue.
2008 John Austin says “International Law is SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
not a real Law, but a positive International 2005 What does Subjects of international law
Morality.” Do you agree with him? Give mean? Discuss individuals as subjects of
arguments in support of your answer. International Law. Elaborate your answer
2010 Give such a definition of International with the appropriate examples.
Law which could cover all the modern trends 2008 Briefly and precisely define Subjects
in it? international law. Do you agree that
2011 "International Law is primarily individuals can be considered as subjects of
concerned with the rights, duties and interests International Law? Give appropriate
of states." Examine this statement with examples in this regard.
reference to the place of individuals and non- 2010 What is meant by 'Subjects of
state entities are International Law. International Law'? Justify Individuals as the
2013 International law is a product of subject of International Law by giving
centuries - elaborate the statement in view of appropriate examples.
the scientific development and codification of 2013 States continue to be the principal
the law. subjects of international legal relations but
Re-Exam 2013 As a law based on common non-state entities too exert a great deal of
consent of states, international law should influence on the legal system. Examine the
have more binding authority and less moral statement with reference to rights and duties
considerations. Discuss. of international organizations under law.
2014 "When all has been said it will be found 2015 Explain the rules which govern how an
that consent remains firmly the basis of insurgency movement can became a subject of
international law, and there are as many, and International Law.
only as many, sources of international law as
there are ways whereby the consent of states NATIONALITY
can be expressed"? Discuss 2000 Short Notes: Nationality
4
2001 Define Nationality. What are neutral Argue in affirmative this statement with
and neutralized states? particular reference to Constitutive Theory of
2002 Explain the various modes of acquiring Recognition.
and losing nationality. What is double 2013 Define Recognition and explain its
Nationality and Statelessness? kinds. Also point out the difference between
2003, 2012 Short Notes: Double nationality recognition of states and governments.
2007 Explain the various modes of acquiring 2015 What is the role of state recognition in
and losing nationality. What is double the commencement of existence of a state?
nationality and statelessness? What are the rules that govern the issues that
arise out of a state ceasing to exits?
RECOGNITION OF STATES 2016 What is Recognition? Discuss Dejure and
2000 What do you understand by Defacto recognitions. Also explain the
'Recognition of States' and 'Recognition of constitutive and declaratory theories of
Governments’? Explain fully the distinction recognition. Discuss the disabilities of
between ‘Recognition Dejure’ and unrecognized states.
‘Recognition Defacto’.
2003 Short Notes: De facto recognition INTERNATIONAL RIVERS
2003 Describe the legal nature of recognition 2001 Write a comprehensive note on
of states, with particular reference to international rivers and international canal.
difference between Defacto and Dejure 2003 Describe international rivers. State the
recognition. principles of law, regulating the use of water
2006 What is the duty of other states in case and navigation in international rivers.
of internal revolt in an independent state? Can
they help the rebels? Under what HIGH SEAS
circumstances recognition may be accorded to 2000 Short Notes: High Seas
the rebels? 2006 Discuss the extent to which a state can
2007 What is meant by recognition of states as claim jurisdiction over the high seas in war
a member of family of nations? State the and peace. Is an appropriation by a state of
different modes of such recognition. the underwater soil allowed in International
2008 Discuss Recognition. Differentiate Law?
between Dejure and Defacto recognition. What 2008 Define High Seas. Explain the concept
are the disabilities of an unrecognized state? of Freedom of High Seas along-with
2010 Define Recognition. Differentiate restrictions over it.
between Defacto and Dejure Recognition. 2016 What is meant by “Freedom of High
2011 "The Subject of Recognition is one of the Sea”? Discuss certain restrictions on it by
most difficult branches of international law, International Law, including right of Hot
not merely from the points of view of Pursuit by the ships of a costal state on the
exposition of principles, but also intrinsically High Seas.
by reason of many difficulties which arise in
practice." Discuss INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
2012 “Non-recognition of a government can 2000 Write a detailed note on the
be amounted to denying the recognition of the International-court of Justice with particular
state itself as it is the governments that do reference to its powers to exercise jurisdiction
international business on behalf of the states.” over disputant states.
5
2001 The jurisdiction of international court of Substantiate your answer by arguing from
justice depends on the consent of the parties Article 51 and Paragraph 4 of the Article 2 of
concerned. Discuss. the UN Charter and other recent examples in
2009 How far has the United Nation this regard.
succeeded in developing a comprehensive 2013 Keeping in view the UN Millennium
system of Human Rights protection? Can Development Goals (MDGs): What can be a
emphasis on social justice and Human rights reform agenda in your opinion for making the
lead to a stable International Order? UN more effective?
2013 Explain the structure and powers of the Re-Exam 2013 Keeping in view the powers of
International Court of Justice and assess the the Security Council, what suggestions can
importance of the principles laid down in you give for improving its structure as a
judicial decisions of leading cases as dominant body within UN.
precedents for states.
NEUTRALIZATION
UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION 2003 Short Notes: Neutrality
2000 Critically examine the powers and the 2005 Differentiate between Neutralized and
voting procedure of the U.N. Security Neutral States. Discuss the rights and duties
Council. of a neutral state.
2009 How far has the United Nation 2010 Discuss the concept of Neutralization.
succeeded in developing a comprehensive How is it done? Explain the Rights, Duties
system of Human Rights protection? Can and Guarantees given to a Neutralized state.
emphasis on social justice and Human rights Re-Exam 2013 Define the term
lead to a stable International Order? NEUTRALITY and explain the rights and
2009 Keeping in view the objectives of the duties of a neutral state.
charter seeking to establish a mechanism of 2016 Discuss the concept of Neutrality. How
peace and security how far has United a neutral state differs from a neutralized State.
Nations succeeded in confronting changes in Explain the rights and duties of neutral and
Global society? the belligerent states during war.
2011 "The Practice of United Nations
Organization Show that whiles the principle INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES
of Self-Determination is agreed upon, neither 2001 Discuss Kashmir dispute in the light of
the scope of its application nor the method of Right of self determination
decolonization has been settled." Discuss 2001 UN Security Council resolution
2011, 2014 "All the major issues on voting in 2001 Non interference in internal affairs
the Secretary Council are now satisfactorily 2001 Legal status of election in Kashmir
resolved. The real problem today is about the 2001 Simla Agreement
composition of the Security Council." Discuss 2002 What are amicable means of settlement
2011 Elucidate and justify: "The United of international disputes?
Nations inspite of its imperfections is the only 2004 Describe various methods of peaceful
organizations that can save humanity from and amicable settlement of international
disaster and complete annihilation." disputes.
2012 Does the customary international law 2005, 2008, 2010 Discuss amicable means for
grant the right to use force to a state in the settlement of international disputes.
response to a terrorist attack on it?
6
DIPLOMACY & IMMUNITY 2000 Short Notes: Chorzow Factory case,

2002 “State immunity has become a mere Germany V. Poland (1928), P.C.I.J. Rep. Ser.
fiction which the law can do with out. The A, No.17
principle is gradually withering away, a 2000 Explain the rules which govern the
process already under way and constantly application of International Law by
gaining momentum. Do you agree? Give Municipal Courts. Give your answer in the
reasons in support of your answer light of the court practice with special
2003 State the various kinds and classes of reference to the British and American Courts.
diplomatic agents and mention their privileges 2002, 2012 Short Notes: Prize courts
and immunities. 2004 Enumerate the principles of
2006 A Pakistani citizen working in the International Law involved in the decision of
embassy of a foreign country in Islamabad, Corfu Channel Case. Assess the impact that
has committed an offence against another decision on the growth and development of
Pakistani citizen. The Pakistani police want to International Law.
arrest such person. However, the ambassador 2005 Short Notes: Scotia Case
is refusing to handover the accused to the 2006 Describe the functions of a Prize Court.
police with the plea that the accused has a What law does it administer?
diplomatic immunity. Do you agree with the
pleas of the ambassador? Why or why not? TREATY
2009 Describe Importance of diplomacy in 2000 Define a ‘Treaty’. State how are they
interstate relations and discuss the concept of concluded and terminated? Explain it in the
diplomacy and immunity? light of Vienna Convention on the Law of
2011 Define Diplomatic Envoy. Give a short Treaties 1969.
account of the functions, privileges and 2002 Coercion against a state renders a treaty
immunities of the diplomatic envoys invalid. Discuss main features of the principle.
accredited to other states. Also elaborate two other methods of
2014 "The office of the Secretary General of rendering invalid the consent of a state to be
the United Nations is certainly the most bound by a treaty.
important and visible post in intentional 2003 State and discuss in brief the various
multilateral diplomacy but it has been called steps mentioned by strake in the creation of
the most impossible job in the world because legal obligation by a treaty.
the faces complex and contradictory pressures 2009 How far do you think that International
in the performance of his duties" Discuss Law is based on common consent of States?
2015 What is difference between immunities Evaluate importance of customary law and
and privileges of diplomats? What is its place treaty law as binding in this regard
in International Law? How it effect the 2012 What are the various kinds of treaties in
functions and responsibilities of the international law? Explain the laws about
diplomats? formation, interpretation and termination of
treaties.
COURTS AND CASES Re-Exam 2013 What is state succession?
2000 Short Notes: Corfu Channel Case, What is the scope of treaty continuity or
U.K.V. Albania (1948), I.C.J. Rep. 1949. treaty obligations in case of extinction of a
state?
7
2015 ‘Treaties are known by a variety of order to prevent alleged crimes against
differing names, ranging from Conventions, humanity or to uphold human rights norms.”
international Agreements, Pacts, General Discuss.
Acts, and Charters Through to Statues, 2012 Explain with reference to the relevant
Declarations and conventions’. Discuss it in articles of the UN Charter that whether the
the light of laws of its formation, world body is authorized to intervene in the
interpretation and termination. domestic jurisdiction of its member states.
EXTRADITION VETO
2003, 2012 Short Notes: Extradition 2003 What is veto? How, when and by whom
2005 Discuss the concept of extradition. is used?
Explain main principles of extradition. 2012 What is Veto? How, when and by whom
Discuss also the crimes exempted from it is used? What consequences Pakistan had to
extradition. face in the past because of its use by a former
2008 Give precise definition of Extradition. superpower?
Write a comprehensive essay on extradition
by covering all its aspects. SOVEREIGN STATE
2004 Fully explain the duties of a Sovereign
STATE JURISDICTION State with special reference to:
2003 Discuss the term “State jurisdiction” a) Not to interfere in the domestic affairs of
with reference to: another state
1. Maritime belt b) To refrain from use of threat of use force
2. Port against another state
3. Foreigners 2010 Discuss various modes of Acquisition of
4. Floating island Territorial Sovereignty by the states
2009 Define State jurisdiction and explain acknowledged in International Law.
how domestic jurisdiction can be limited by 2012 Lord Curzon once said, “Frontiers are
and reduced by principles of International indeed the razor’s edge on which hang
Law? suspended the modern issues of war or peace,
2016 What is meant by State Jurisdiction? of life or death to nations.” Explain in this
Discuss different types of state jurisdiction light the various modes of acquisition of
under International Law. territory by a state.
INTERVENTIONS HIJACKING
2000 Short Notes: Intervention 2000 Short Notes: High jacking
2004 The frequent ‘Interventions’ have 2004 Explain how the problem of Hijacking
challenged the validity of some of has been dealt with under the International
fundamental principles of International Law. Law?
What are those principles? Discuss in the light
of interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq by TERRORISM
the super-powers. Re-Exam 2013 Terrorism has become an
2006 “Whatever the morality of intervention, international phenomenon - how far are you
states have no right under International Law satisfied with international legal controls of
to intervene on the territory of other states in such criminal conduct.
8
BLOCKADE a) The ambassador of the Republic of

2000 Short Notes: Blockade Brondasia in Islamabad murders a
2004 Define Blockade. What are the essentials Pakistani out of sudden provocation.
of real and binding Blockade? What does it b) The wife of the Brondasian ambassador
terminate? Refer to leading cases. bought cosmetics worth Rs.1000,000 from
a local departmental store, refused to pay
PRISONERS OF WAR and went away to her embassy.
2004 How are ‘Prisoners of war’ to be treated c) A Pakistani friend of the Brondasian
under International Law? Explain with ambassador has murdered a Brondasian
reference to various conventions. employee of the embassy.
2005 Short Notes: Rights of Prisoners of War 2006 What is the duty of other states in case
of internal revolt in an independent state? Can
LAW OF SEA they help the rebels? Under what
2001 Write short notes on any three of the circumstances recognition may be accorded to
following in the light of convention on the law the rebels?
of sea 1982 and our maritime zone act of 2008 Differentiate between Territorial and
1976. You must discuss the nature of Extra-Territorial Asylum. Under which
jurisdiction, right and duties. circumstances an Embassy or Consulate can
a) Internal Waters offer asylum to a fugitive/offender of the
b) Continental Shelf territorial State?
c) Territorial Waters 2009 Define International personality and
d) Land-locked State discuss various entities as International Legal
e) EEZ person.
2002 Short Notes: Territorial waters 2009 Territory is undoubtedly the basic
2005, 2012 Short Notes: Continental Shelf character of a state as well as widely accepted
2013 Why is the third UN convention on the elaborate with reference to exclusive rights of
law of sea (UNCLOS-III) considered a vast states on Land and Air territory.
diplomatic and legal undertaking and what 2010 Give an account of the efforts of
has made it different to the earlier efforts on international community to protect the
the subject? civilian population from the effects of war.
2011 "As the basis of the Law of Nations is
MISCELLANEOUS the common consent of the member states of
2001 Enumerates with short explanation the the Family of Nations, it is evident there must
main principles discussed in any two of the exist as many sources of international law as
following cases. there are facts through which such common
a) Lotus case consent can possibly come into existence."
b) Clarence Thomas and Anita hill case (Oppenheim). Discuss
c) American diplomat case 2013 While customs form the major part of
2002 What do you understand by International law it is conventions that make
international institutions? Discuss their status it more authentic and applicable. Discuss.
and functions as subject of international law. Re-Exam 2013 Territory is essential part of a
2006 Discuss the liability of the following: state - examine the statement in view of
modes of acquisition and loss of state
territory.
9
Re-Exam 2013 Considering the practice of 2007 Extradition

leading states how far is it true to say that 2012 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
international Law and municipal law are two 2015 Corfu
distinct but coordinate legal systems. 2015 The Rainbow Warrior Case
2014 "The case law of the international court 2015 The Nottebohm Case
of justice and the practice of United Nations 2016 Lotus Case
show that while the principle of self- 2016 Territorial and Extra- Territorial Asylum
determination is agreed upon, neither the
scope of its application nor the method of AREA OF FOCUS
decolonisation has been settled." Discuss  Various definitions of International Law
2014 "What ever be the generally accepted  International Law is positive International
rules governing the outer limit of the Morality. (John Austin)
territorial limit of the territorial sea this issue,  Object, purpose and basis of international law
and others like it, will be settled in many cases  Sources of International law
 Subjects of International Law
on the basis of the principles of acquiescence
 Recognition and its types.
and opposability". Discuss
 Jurisdiction and limitations
2014 The assumption that the "genuine link"  Nationality, Double Nationality
formula, invented for dealing with people, is  Rights and Duties of a sovereign state
capable of immediate application to ships...  Neutral and Neutralized states
smacks of a disappointing naiveté  Importance of diplomatic relations
 Immunity of a diplomat
SHORT NOTES  Extradition
2000, 2007 Human Rights  High seas, International Waters – Claims and
2000 Chorzow Factory case, Germany V. Jurisdiction
Poland (1928), P.C.I.J. Rep. Ser. A, No.17  Landlocked zones
2000 Exclusive Economic Zone  Law/regulations governing International
Waters
2000 Calvo Clause
 Ways of resolving International disputes.
1928, 2002 Kellogg Briand Pact  Blockade
1929, 2002 The Geneva Convention  Intervention
2002 Pacta Sunt Servanda  Right of self determination
2002, 2012 Protectorate  UN Security Council resolution
2002 State servitude  Non interference in internal affairs
2002 Monroe’s doctrine  Legal status of election in Kashmir
2002 Equality of states  Simla agreement
 International Institutions – History, Role
2002 Doctrine of Postliminium
 United Nations (UNSC, VETO)
2002 Continuous voyage  Treaty – Its legal binding, validity
2002, 2012 Prize courts  ‘Prisoners of War’- Their status and treatment
2003, 2007 International boundaries  Kashmir dispute – Legal status, history,
2003, 2012 Double nationality conventions, solutions.
2003, 2007 Neutrality  Lotus Case
2003 De facto recognition  Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill Case
 American Diplomat Case
2005, 2012 Continental Shelf
 Corfu Channel Case
2005, 2016 Scotia Case
 Scotia Case
2007 International court of justice
10
PART II
SHORT NOTES OF
INTERNATIONAL LAW
11
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES

CHAPTER 2: THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
CHAPTER 3: THE UNITED NATIONS
CHAPTER 4: THE CONCEPT OF THE STATE
CHAPTER 5: RECOGNITION
CHAPTER 6: THE RIGHT OF EXISTENCE AND SELF-DEFENSE
CHAPTER 7: THE RIGHT OF INDEPENDENCE
CHAPTER 8: THE RIGHT OF EQUALITY
CHAPTER 9: TERRITORY
CHAPTER 10: JURISDICTION
12
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES

(NATURE AND SCOPE)
Public International Law – It is the body of rules and principles that are recognized as legally
binding and which govern the relations of states and other entities invested with international legal
personality. Formerly, known as “law of nations” coined by Jeremy Bentham in 1789.
THREE MAJOR PARTS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

 Laws of Peace – normal relations between states in the absence of war.
 Laws of War – relations between hostile or belligerent states during wartime.
 Laws of Neutrality – relations between a non-participant state and a participant state during
wartime. This also refers to the relations among non-participating states.
SOURCES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

 International conventions
 International custom
 The general principles of law recognized by civilized nations. (e.g. prescription, pacta sunt
servanda, and estoppel).
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW IN RELATION TO MUNICIPAL LAW

In the paquete Habana, Justice Gray said: “The law of nations, although not specially adopted by
the Constitution or any municipal act, is essentially a part of the law of the land.”
Doctrine of Incorporation – the rules of international law form part of the law of the land and no
further legislative action is needed to make such rules applicable in the domestic sphere. (Sec. of
Justice v. Lantion GRN 139465, Jan. 18, 2000)
This doctrine is followed in the Philippines as embodied in Art. II, Sec. 2 of the 1987 Constitution
which provides that: “The Philippines…adopts the generally accepted principles of international law
as part of the law of the land…” However, no primacy is implied.
It should be presumed that municipal law is always enacted by each state with due regard for and
never in defiance of the generally accepted principles of international law.
(Co Kim Chan v. Valdez Tan Keh)
It is a settled principle of international law that a sovereign cannot be permitted to set up his own
municipal law as a bar to a claim by foreign sovereign for a wrong done to the latter's subject. (US v
Guatemala).
DISTINCTION OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW WITH MUNICIPAL LAW

Municipal Law
1. Issued by a political superior for observance by those under its authority;
2. Consists mainly of enactments from the law-making authority of each state;
3. Regulates the relations of individuals among themselves or with their own states;
4. Violations are redressed through local administrative and judicial processes; and,
5. Breaches generally entail only individual responsibility.
Public International Law
1. Not imposed upon but simply adopted by states as a common rule of action among themselves;
2. derived not from any particular legislation but from such sources as international customs,
international conventions and the general principles of law;
3. Applies to the relations inter se of states and other international persons;
13
4. Questions are resolved through state-to-state transactions ranging from peaceful methods like
negotiation and arbitration to the hostile arbitrament of force like reprisals and even war; and,
5. Responsibility of infractions is usually collective in the sense that it attaches directly to the state
and not to its nationals.
CONSTITUTION V. TREATY
Generally, the treaty is rejected in the local forum but is upheld by international tribunals as
ademandable obligation of the signatories under the principle of pacta sunt servanda.
Pacta Sunt Servanda – international agreements must be performed in Good Faith. A treaty
engagement is not a mere moral obligation but creates a legally binding obligation on the parties. A
state which has contracted a valid international obligation is bound to make in its legislation such
modifications as may be necessary to ensure the fulfillment of the obligations undertaken.
The Philippine Constitution however contains provisions empowering the judiciary to annul
treaties thereby establishing the primacy of the local law over the international agreement.
Art. X, Sec. 2(2) provides that “all cases involving the constitutionality of any treaty, executive
agreement or law shall be heard and decided by the Supreme Court en banc, and no treaty, executive
agreement or law may be declared unconstitutional without the concurence of ten justices.”
The Constitution authorizes the nullification of a treaty not only when it conflicts with the
Constitution but also when it runs counter to an act of Congress. (Gonzales v. Hechanova).
BASIS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Three theories on this matter:
 The Naturalist – under this theory, there is a natural and universal principle of right and wrong,
independent of any mutual intercource or compact, which is supposed to be discovered and
recognized by every individual through the use of his reason and his conscience.
 The Positivist – under this theory, the binding force of international law is derived from the
agreement of sovereign states to be bound by it. It is not a law of subordination but of coordination.
 The Eclectics or Groatians – this theory offers both the law of nature and the consent of states
as the basis of international law. It contends that the system of international law is based on the
“dictate of right reason” as well as “the practice of states.”
SANCTIONS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Sanctions – the compulsive force of reciprocal advantage and fear of retaliation.
 The inherent reasonableness of international law that its observance will redound to the welfare
of the whole society of nations;
 The normal habits of obedience ingrained in the nature of man as a social being;
 To project an agreeable public image in order to maintain the goodwill and favorable regard of
the rest of the family of nations;
 The constant and reasonable fear that violations of international law might visit upon the culprit
the retaliation of other states; and,
 The machinery of the United Nations which proves to be an effective deterrent to international
disputes caused by disregard of the law of nations.
ENFORCEMENT OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

States are able to enforce international law among each other through international organizations or
regional groups such as the United Nations and the Organization of American States. These bodies
may adopt measures as may be necessary to compel compliance with international obligations or
vindicate the wrong committed.
14
FUNCTIONS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

 To establish peace and order in the community of nations and to prevent the employment of
force, including war, in all international relations;
 To promote world friendship by levelling the barriers, as of color or creed;
 To encourage and ensure greater international cooperation in the solution of certain common
problems of a political, economic, cultural or humanitarian character; and,
 To provide for the orderly management of the relations of states on the basis of the substantive
rules they have agreed to observe as members of the international community.
DISTINCTIONS WITH OTHER CONCEPTS

International morality or ethics – embodies those principles which govern the relations of states
from the higher standpoint of conscience, morality, justice and humanity.
International diplomacy – relates to the objects of national or international policy and the conduct
of foreign affairs or international relations.
International administrative law – that body of laws and regulations created by the action of
international conferences or commissions which regulate the relations and activities of national and
international agencies with respect to those material and intellectual interests which have received
an authoritative universal recognition.
15
CHAPTER 2: THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

International Community – the body of juridical entities which are governed by the law of nations.
COMPOSITION OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

 State
 United Nations
 the Vatican City
 Colonies and dependencies
 Mandates and trust territories
 International administrative bodies
 Belligerent communities
 Individuals
1. STATES– a group of people living together in a definite territory under an independent

government organized for political ends and capable of entering into international relations.
Some writers no loner recognized the distinction between state and nation, pointing out that these
two terms are now used in an identical sense. Nevertheless, a respectable number of jurists still hold
that the state is a legal concept; the nation is only a racial or ethnic concept.
ELEMENTS OF A STATE
 People
 Territory
 Government
 Sovereignty
A. People – the inhabitants of the State. People must be numerous enough to be self-sufficing and
to defend themselves, and small enough to be easily administered and sustained. They are aggregate
of individuals of both sexes who live together as a community despite racial or cultural differences.
 Groups of people which cannot comprise a State:
 Amazons – not of both sexes; cannot perpetuate themselves
 Pirates – considered as outside the pale of law, treated as an enemy of all mankind; “hostis
humani generis”
B. Territory – the fixed portion of the surface of the earth inhabited by the people of the State.
The size is irrelevant. (San Marino v. China). But, practically, must not be too big as to be difficult
to administer and defend; but must not be too small as to unable to provide for people’s needs.
C. Government – the agency or instrumentality through which the will of the State is formulated,
expressed and realized.
D. Sovereignty – the power to direct its own external affairs without interference or dictation from
other states.
CLASSIFICATION OF STATES
 Independent states – having full international personality.
 Sovereignty – connotes freedom in the direction by the state in its own internal and external
affairs.
 However international law is concerned only with this freedom in so far as it relates to external
affairs; hence, a state which is not subject to dictation from others in this respect is known as an
independent state.
 Dependent states – exemplified by the suzerainty and the protectorate and are so called because
they do not have full control of their external relations.
 Dependent states fall into two general categories: the protectorate and the suzerainty.
However, there is no unanimity as to their basic distinctions in terms of measure of control over its
external affairs.
16
 Neutralized states – an independent state, whether it be simple or composite, may be

neutralized through agreement with other states by virtue of which the latter will guarantee its
integrity and independence provided it refrains from taking any act that will involve it in war or
other hostile activity except for defensive purposes.
CLASSIFICATION OR TYPES OF AN INDEPENDENT STATE

 Simple state – one which is placed under a single and centralized government exercising power
over both its internal and external affairs (e.g. Philippines and Holland).
 Composite state – one which consists two or more states, each with its own separate
government but bound under central authority exercising, to a greater or less degree, control over
their external relations.
KINDS OR CATEGORIES OF COMPOSITE STATES:

 Real Union – created when two or more states are merged under a unified authority so that they
form a single international person through which they act as one entity (e.g. Norway and Sweden
from 18154 to 1905).
 Federal Union (or a federation) – is a combination of two or more sovereign states which upon
merger cease to be states, resulting in the creation of a new state with full international personality to
represent them in their external relations as well as a certain degree of power over the domestic
affairs and their inhabitants (e.g. German Empire under the Constitution of 1871).
 Confederation – an organization of states which retain their internal sovereignty and, to some
degree, their external sovereignty, while delegating to the collective body power to represent them as
a whole for certain limited and specified purposes (e.g. German states in 1866 until they eventually
developed into a more closely-knit federation).
 Personal Union – comes into being when two or more independent states are brought together
under the rule of the same monarch, who nevertheless does not constitute one international person
for the purpose of representing any or all of them. Strictly speaking therefore, the personal union is
not a composite state because no new international person is created to represent it in international
relations (e.g. Belgium and the Former Congo Free State from 1885 to 1905).
2. THE UNITED NATIONS

Although the United Nations is not a state or a super-state but a mere organization of states, it is
regarded as an international person for certain purposes.
 It enjoys certain privileges and immunities, such as non-suability, inviolability of its premises
and archives, and exemption from taxation.
 It can assert a diplomatic claim on behalf of its officials, and treaties may also be concluded
by it through the General Assembly, the Security Council, and the Economic and Social Council.
 Trust territories are supposed to be under its residual sovereignty.
3. THE VATICAN CITY

In 1928, Italy and the Vatican concluded the Lateran Treaty “for the purpose of assuring to the Holy
See absolute and visible independence and of guaranteeing to it absolute and indisputable
sovereignty in the field of international relations.”
4. COLONIES AND DEPENDENCIES

From the viewpoint of international law, a colony or a dependency is part and parcel of the parent
state, through which all its external relations are transacted with other states.
Nevertheless, such entities have been allowed on occasion to participate in their own right in
international undertakings and granted practically the status of a sovereign state. It is when acting
in this capacity that colonies and dependencies are considered international persons.
17
5. MANDATES AND TRUST TERRITORIES

The system of mandates was established after the First World War in order to avoid outright
annexation of the underdeveloped territories taken from the defeated powers and to place their
administration under some form of international supervision.
THREE KINDS OF TRUST TERRITORIES

 Those held under mandate under the League of Nations;
 Those territories detached from the defeated states after World War II; and,
 Those voluntarily placed under the system of the states responsible for their administration.
These territories enjoy certain rights directly available to them under the United Nations Charter
that vest them with a degree of international personality. They are not however sovereign.
6. BELLIGERENT COMMUNITIES
When a portion of the population rises up in arms against the legitimate government of the state,
and such conflict widens and aggravates, it may become necessary to accord the rebels recognition
of belligerency.
For purposes of the conflict, and pending determination of whether or not the belligerent community
should be fully recognized as a state, it is treated as an international person and becomes directly
subject to the laws of war and neutrality.
7. INTERNATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES

Certain administrative bodies created by agreement among states may be vested with international
personality (e.g. International Labor Organization, World Health Organization).
Two Requisites for International Administrative Bodies to be vested with International
Personality:
 Their purposes are mainly non-political; and that
 They are autonomous, i.e. not subject to the control of any state.
8. INDIVIDUALS
Traditional concept regards the individual only as an object of international law who can act only
through the instrumentality of his own state in matters involving other states.
Of late, however, the view has grown among many writers that the individual is not merely an object
but a subject of international law. One argument is that the individual is the basic unit of society,
national and international, and must therefore ultimately governed by the laws of this society.
18
CHAPTER 3: THE UNITED NATIONS

The United Nations emerged out of the travail of World War II as symbol of man's undismayed
determination to establish for all nations a rule of law that would forever banish the terrible
holocaust of war in the so9lution of international disputes.
The first formal step toward the creation of the United Nations was the Moscow Declaration,
signed by the representatives of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United
States.
THE U.N. CHARTER

The United Nations Charter – a lengthy document consisting of 111 articles besides the preamble
and the concluding provisions. It also includes the Statute of the International Court of Justice
which is annexed to and made an integral part of it.
In one sense, the Charter maybe considered a treaty because it derives its binding force from
the agreement of the parties to it. In another sense, it may be regarded as a constitution in so far as
it provides for the organization and operations of the different organs of the United Nations and for
the adoption of any change in its provisions through formal process of amendment.
The Charter is intended to apply not only to the members of the Organization but also to non-
member states so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
Amendments to the Charter shall come into force by a vote of two-thirds of the members of the
General Assembly and ratified in accordance with their respective constitutional processes by two-
thirds of the Members of the United Nations.
THE PREAMBLE TO THE CHARTER

The preamble introduces the Charter and sets the common intentions that moved the original
members to unite their will and efforts to achieve their common purposes.
PURPOSES
The purposes of the Charter are expressed in Article 1 as follows:
 Maintain international peace and security;
 Develop friendly relations among nations;
 Achieve international cooperation in solving international problems;
 Be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
PRINCIPLES
The Seven Cardinal Principles (as enumerated in Article 2):
 The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members;
 All Members shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the
present Charter;
 All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means;
 All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against
the territorial integrity or political independence of any state;
 All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance
with the present Charter;
 The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in
accordance with these Principles; and,
 Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in
matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.
MEMBERSHIP
Two kinds of members in the United Nations
 Original – those which, having participated in the United Nations Conference on International
Organization at San Francisco or having previously signed the Declaration by the United Nations of
19
January 1, 1942, signed and ratified the Charter of the United Nations. Interestingly, the Philippines
was included as original member although it was not yet a state at the time.
 Elective: In addition to the original members, other members may be admitted to the United
Nations by decision of the General Assembly upon the favorable recommendation of the Security
Council.
Membership Qualifications to the United Nations

 It must be a state;
 It must be peace-loving;
 It must accept the obligations of the Charter;
 It must be able to carry out these obligations; and,
 It must be willing to carry out these obligations;
SUSPENSION OF MEMBERS
As in the case of admission, suspension is effected by two-thirds of those present and voting in
General Assembly upon the favorable recommendation of at least nine members of the Security
Council, including all its permanent members.
The suspension may be lifted alone by the Security Council, also by a qualified majority vote.
Nationals of the suspended member may, however, continue serving in the Secretariat and the
International Court of Justice as they are regarded as international officials or civil servants acting
for the Organization itself.
Since suspension affects only its rights and privileges, the member is still subject to the discharge
of its obligations under the Charter.
EXPULSION OF MEMBERS
A member which has persistently violated the principles contained in the Charter may be expelled by
two-thirds of those present and voting in the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the
Security Council by a qualified majority vote.
WITHDRAWAL OF MEMBERS
No provision on withdrawal of membership was included in the Charter because of the fear that it
might encourage successive withdrawals that would weaken the Organization.
ORGANS OF THE UNITED NATIONS

 The General Assembly
 The Security Council
 The Economic and Social Council
 The Trusteeship Council
 The International Court of Justice
 The Secretariat
A. The General Assembly: It consists of all the members of the Organization, each of which is
entitled to send not more than five representatives and five alternates as well as such technical staff
as it may need.
Functions of the General Assembly
 Deliberative - such as initiating studies and making recommendations;
 Supervisory – such as receiving and considering annual and special reports from the other
organs;
 Financial – such as consideration and approval of budget of the Organization;
 Elective – such as the election of non-permanent members of the Security Council;
 Constituent – such as the admission of members and the amendment of the Charter.
20
B. The Security Council: The key organ of the United Nations of international peace and security
is the Security Council. It consists of five permanent members and ten elective members. The
elective members are elected for two-year terms.
C. The Economic and Social Council: The responsibility for the promotion of international
economic and social cooperation is vested in the General Assembly, and under its authority, the
Economic and Social Council. Specifically these organs should exert efforts toward:
 higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and
development;
 solutions of international economic, social, health and related problems, and international,
cultural and educational cooperation; and,
 universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to
race, sex, language or religion.
D. The Trusteeship Council: It is the organ charged with the duty of assisting the Security Council
and the General Assembly in the administration of the international trusteeship system.
E. The International Court of Justice: It functions in accordance with the Statute. All members of
the Organization are ipso facto parties to the Statute. A non-member may become a party on
conditions to be determined in each case by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the
Security Council.
The principal functions of the Court are:

 to decide contentious cases; and,
 render advisory opinions.
The jurisdiction of the Court is based on the consent of the parties as manifested under the “optional
jurisdiction clause” in Article 36 of the Statute.
Advisory opinions may be given by the Court upon request of the General Assembly or the
Security Council, as well as other organs of the United Nations, when authorized by the General
Assembly, on legal questions arising within the scope of their activities.
F. The Secretariat
It is the chief administrative organ of the United Nations which is headed by the Secretary-General.
The Secretary-General is chosen by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security
Council. His term is fixed at five years by resolution of the general Assembly, and he may be re-
elected.
The Secretary-General is the highest representative of the United Nations and is authorized to
act in its behalf. When acting in this capacity, he is entitled to full diplomatic immunities and
privileges which only the Security Council may waive.
The Secretary-General also acts as secretary in all meetings of the General Assembly, the
Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and the Trusteeship Council and performs such
other functions as may be assigned to him by these organs.
In addition, he prepares the budget of the United Nations for submission to the General Assembly,
provides technical facilities to the different organs of the Organization, and in general coordinates its
vast administrative machinery.
21
CHAPTER 4: THE CONCEPT OF THE STATE

As the basic unit of the international community, the state is the principal subject of international
law.
CREATION OF THE STATE
Four Essential Elements of the State
 People
 Territory
 Government
 Sovereignty
Methods by which Status of a State is Acquired
 Revolution
 Unification
 Secession
 Assertion of independence
 Agreements attainment of civilization
THE PRINCIPLE OF STATE CONTINUITY

From the moment of its creation, the state continues as a juristic being notwithstanding changes in
its circumstances provided only that they do not result in loss of any of its essential elements.
EXTINCTION OF THE STATE

Nevertheless, it is error to suppose that a state is immortal. There are instances when a radical
impairment or actual loss of one or more of the essential elements of the state will result in its
extinction.
SUCCESSION OF STATES
State succession takes place when one state assumes the rights and some of the obligations of
another because of certain changes in the condition of the latter.
Universal Succession – when a state is annexed to another state or is totally dismembered or merges
with another state to form a new state.
Partial Succession – when a portion of the territory of a state secedes or is ceded to another or when
an independent state becomes a protectorate or suzerainty or when a dependent state acquires full
sovereignty.
CONSEQUENCES OF STATE SUCCESSION
 The allegiance of the inhabitants of the predecessor state in the territory affected is transferred to
the successor state.
 The political laws of the former sovereign are automatically abrogated and may be restored only
by a positive act on the part of the new sovereign.
 Treaties of a political and even commercial nature are also discontinued, but the successor state
is bound by treaties dealing with local rights and duties.
 All rights of the predecessor state are inherited by the successor state but this is not so where the
liabilities are concerned.
SUCCESSION OF GOVERNMENTS
One government replaces another either peacefully or by violent methods. In both instances, the
integrity of the state is not affected; the state continues as the same international person except only
that its lawful representative is changed.
The rule is that where the new government was organized by virtue of a constitutional reform,
the obligations of the replaced government are also completely assumed by the former.
Conversely, where the new government was established through violence, it may lawfully reject
the purely personal or political obligations of the predecessor government but not those contracted
by it in the ordinary course of official business.
22
CHAPTER 5: RECOGNITION
Even if an entity has already acquired the elements of international personality, it is not for this
reason alone automatically entitled to membership in the family of nations. Its admission thereto is
dependent on:
 as reflective of the majority theory, the acknowledgment of its status by those already within the
fold and their willingness to enter into relations with it as a subject of international law
(declaratory);
 as reflective of the minority theory, the acknowledgment is mandatory and legal and may be
demanded as a matter of right by any entity that can establish its possession of the four essential
elements of a state (constitutive).
OBJECTS OF RECOGNITION
Recognition may be extended to:
a. State, which is generally held to be irrevocable and imports the recognition of its government;
b. Government, which may be withdrawn and does not necessarily signify the existence of a state as
the government may be that of a mere colony; and,
c. Belligerency, which does not produce the same effects as the recognition of states and
governments because the rebels are accorded international personality only in connection with the
hostilities they are waging.
KINDS OF RECOGNITION
 Express recognition – may be verbal or in writing;
 Implied recognition – when the recognizing state enters into official intercourse with the new
member by exchanging diplomatic representatives with it, etc.
The Act of Recognition is Indicative of the Following Intentions

 To treat with the new state as such;
 To accept the new government as having authority to represent the state;
 To recognize in the case of insurgents that they are entitled to exercise belligerent rights.
RECOGNITION OF STATE
The recognition of a new state is the free act by which one or more states acknowledge the existence
on a definite territoryof a human society politically organized, independent of any other existing
state, and capable of observing the obligations of international law, and by which they manifest
therefore their intention to consider it a member of the international community.
RECOGNITION OF GOVERNMENTS
The recognition of the new government of a state which has been already recognized is the free act
by which one or several states acknowledge that a person or a group of persons are capable of
binding the state which they claim to represent and witness their intention to enter into relations
with them.
Two Kinds of Governments

 De Jure
 De facto
Three Kinds of De Facto Government

 That which is established by the inhabitants who rise in revolt against and depose the legitimate
regime;
 That which is established in the course of war by the invading forces of one belligerent in the
territory of other belligerent, the government of which is also displaced; and,
23
 That which is established by the inhabitants of a state who secede there from without
overthrowing its government.
Tobar or Wilson Principle – recognition shall not be extended to any government established by
revolution, civil war, coup d'etat or other forms of internal violence until the freely elected
representatives of the people have organized a constitutional government.
In any event, the practice of most states now is to extend recognition to a new government only if it
is shown that it has control of the administrative machinery of the state with popular acquiescence
and that it is willing to comply with its international obligations.
DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THE TWO KINDS OF RECOGNITION

DE JURE
 Relatively permanent;
 Vests title in the government to its properties abroad;
 Brings about full diplomatic relations.
DE FACTO
 Provisional;
 Does not;
 Limited to certain juridical relations.
EFFECTS OF RECOGNITION OF STATE AND GOVERNMENTS

 Full diplomatic relations are established except where the government recognized is de facto;
 The recognized state or government acquired right to sue in the courts of the recognizing state.
It is error, however, to suppose that non-suability of the foreign state or government is also an effect
of recognition, as this is an attribute it can claim whether or not it has been recognized by the local
state. The applicable rule is the doctrine of state immunity. It has been held that to cite “a foreign
sovereign in the municipal courts of another state” would be “an insult which he is entitled to
resent” and would certainly “vex the peace of nations.”
 The recognized state or government has a right to the possession of the properties of its
predecessor in the territory of the recognizing state.
 All acts of the recognized state or government are validated retroactively, preventing the
recognizing state from passing upon their legality in its own courts.
RECOGNITION OF BELLIGERENCY
A belligerency exists when the inhabitants of a state rise up in arms for the purpose of overthrowing
the legitimate government.
Conditions for a Belligerent Community to be Recognized

 There must be an organized civil government directing the rebel forces;
 The rebels must occupy a substantial portion of the territory of the state;
 The conflict between the legitimate government and the rebels must be serious, making the
outcome uncertain; and,
 The rebels must be willing and able to observe the laws of war.
CONSEQUENCES OF RECOGNITION OF BELLIGERENCY

Upon recognition by the parents state, the belligerent community is considered a separate state for
purposes of the conflict it is waging against the legitimate government. Their relations with each
other will, thenceforth and for the duration of the hostilities, be governed by the laws of war, and
their relations with other states will be subject to the laws of neutrality.
24
CHAPTER 6: THE RIGHT OF EXISTENCE AND SELF-DEFENSE

Once a state comes into being, it is invested with certain rights described as fundamental.
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF A STATE

 The right to national existence and national defense;
 The right of sovereignty and independence;
 The right of equality;
 The right of property and jurisdiction; and,
 The right of legation or diplomatic intercourse.
The most important of these rights is the right of existence and self-defense, because all other
rights are supposed to flow or be derived from it. By virtue of this right, the state may take
measures, including the use of force, as may be necessary to counteract any danger to its existence.
REQUISITES OF RIGHT: In Art. 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, it is provided that -
“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective
self-defense if any armed attack occurs against a member of the United Nations, until the
Security Council has taken the measures necessary for the maintenance of international
peace and security. xxx”
The presence of an “armed attack” to justify the exercise of the right of the self-defense under this
article suggests that forcible measures may be taken by a state only in the face of “necessity of self-
defense, instant, overwhelming and leaving no choice of means and no moment for deliberation.”
REGIONAL ARRANGEMENTS: Collective self-defense is recognized not only in Article 51 of

the Charter of the United Nations but also in Art. VII on Regional Arrangements “... provided that
such arrangements or agencies and their activities are consistent with the Purposes and Principles of
the United Nations (Art. 52, Sec. 1 of the Charter of the United Nations).”
THE BALANCE OF POWER: One reason for the organization of regional arrangements is to
provide for the balance of power, which Vattel described as “an arrangement of affairs so that no
state shall be in position to have absolute mastery and dominion over others.”
The maintenance of this balance of power has in a very real way contributed to international peace
although, being an “armed peace,” it is far from the ideal sought in the articles of faith of the United
Nations.
AGGRESSION DEFINED: Definition of agression as adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on

December 14, 1974:
Article 1: (Aggression) – is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial
integrity or political independence of another state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the
Charter of the United Nations.
Article 3: Any of the following acts qualify as an act of aggression

a. The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a state of the territory of another state;
b. Bombardment by the armed forces of a state against the territory of another state;
c. The blockade of the ports or coasts of a state by the armed forces of another state;
d. An attack by the armed forces on land, sea or air forces, or marine or air fleets of another state;
e. The use of armed forces of one state in the territory of another state with the agreement of the
receiving state, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of
their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement;
f. The action of the state in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another state,
to be used by that other state perpetrating an act of aggression against a third state; and,
g. The sending by or on behalf of a state of armed force against another state of such gravity as to
amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein.
25
CHAPTER 7: THE RIGHT OF INDEPENDENCE

Sovereignty is the supreme, uncontrollable power inherent in a state by which that state is governed.
It is “the supreme power of the State to command and enforce obedience, the power to which,
legally speaking, all interests are practically subject and all wills subordinate.
TWO ASPECTS OF SOVEREIGNTY

 Internal Sovereignty – refers to the power of the state to direct its domestic affairs, as when it
establishes its government, enacts laws for observance within its territory.
 External Sovereignty – signifies the freedom of the state to control its own foreign affairs, as
when it concludes treaties, makes war or peace, and maintains diplomatic and commercial relations.
It is often refered as independence.
NATURE OF INDEPENDENCE
Independence cannot be regarded as importing absolute freedom. It only means freedom from
control by any other state or group of states and not freedom from restrictions that are binding on all
states forming the family of nations.
Thus, a state may not employ force or even the threat of force in its relations with other states
because this is prohibited by Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations. It may adhere to the
maxim of Pacta Sunt Servanda. The principle of mare liberum will prevent it from arrogating to
itself the exclusive use of the open seas to the detriment of other states. Under the laws of neutrality,
it must acquiesce in the exercise of certain belligerent rights even if this might impair its own
interests or those of its nationals.
Pacta Sunt Servanda – the observance of a state to treaties with other state in good faith.
INTERVENTION: In addition, the state must abstain from intervention. Even as it expects its
independence to be respected by other states, so too must it be prepared to respect their own
independence.
Intervention – an act by which a state interferes with the domestic or foreign affairs of another state
or states through the employment of force or the threat of force.
The use of force is only allowed under the Charter of the United Nations when it is exercised as an
act of self-defense, or when it is decreed by the Security Council as a preventive or enforcement
action for the maintenance of international peace and security.
THE DRAGO DOCTRINE: This doctrine was embodied in the Hague Convention of 1907
through the provision that “ the Contracting Powers agree not to have recourse to armed force for
the recovery of contract debts claimed from the government by the government of another country
as being due to its nationals.
This rule was, however, dissipated by the Porter Resolution.

Porter Resolution – intervention was permitted if the debtor state refused an offer to arbitrate,
prevented agreement on the compromis, or having agreed thereto, refused to abide by the award of
the arbitrator.
26
CHAPTER 8: THE RIGHT OF EQUALITY
In Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations, it is announced that “The Organization is based on
the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.”
In the provision of the Montevideo Convention of 1933, “States are juridical equal, enjoy the
same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise.”
ESSENCE OF EQUALITY
In international law, equality among states does not signify parity in physical power, political
influence or economic status or prestige.
The Principle of Equality – all the rights of state, regardless of their number, must be observed or
respected by the international community in the same manner as rights of other states are observed
and respected.
Accordingly, all members of the United Nations have each one vote in the General Assembly, all
votes having equal weight, and are generally eligible for positions in the various organs of the United
Nations. Every state has the right to the protection of its nationals, to make use of the open seas, or
to acquire or dispose territory.
Under the rule of par in parem, non habet imperium, even the strongest state cannot assume
jurisdiction over another state, no matter how weak.
LEGAL EQUALITY V. FACTUAL INEQUALITY

But even from the viewpoint of strictly legal rules, it is apparent that absolute equality among states
is still a distant and well nigh impossible aspiration. Under the Charter of the United Nations, for
example, non-procedural questions are decided by the Security Council only with the concurrence of
the Big Five, any of which may defeat a proposal through the exercise of the veto. This is true also
with respect to the ratification of any proposal to amend the Charter.
But this rule of equality itself sometime poses serious questions of inequality. This is so because it
does not take into account the realities of international life, including the greater stakes of the more
populous states in the decision of questions involving the entire community of nations. Such
decisions may affect the interests, not of individual states as such, but of the whole of humanity itself
without distinctions as to color, nationality or creed.
27
CHAPTER 9: TERRITORY
Territory – the fixed portion of the surface of the earth inhabited by the people of the state.
As previously observed, the territory must be big enough to provide for the needs of the population
but should not be so extensive as to be difficult to administer or defend from external aggression.
ACQUISITION AND LOSS OF TERRITORY

Mode in the Acquisition of Territory
 by discovery and occupation
 by prescription
 by cession
 by subjugation and
 by accretion
Mode of Losing Territory

 by abandonment or dereliction
 by cession
 by subjugation
 by revolution and
 by natural causes
DISCOVERY AND OCCUPATION: Discovery and occupation is an original mode of acquisition

by which territory not belonging to any state, or terra nullius, is placed under the sovereignty of the
discovering state. The territory need not be uninhabited provided it can be established that the
natives are not sufficiently civilized and can be considered as possessing not rights of sovereignty
but only rights of habitation. Like the open seas, outer space is res communis and not susceptible to
discovery and occupation.
REQUISITES OF VALID DISCOVERY AND OCCUPATION

 Possession, and
 Administration
Mere possession will not suffice, as only an inchoate title of discovery is acquired by the claimant
state pending compliance with the second requirement, which is the administration of the territory.
Otherwise, the title will lapse and the territory will become res nullius again.
 “Discovery alone, without any subsequent act, cannot at the present time suffice to prove
sovereignty over the Island of Palmas....” (Island of Palmas Case)
 “Besides the animus occupandi, the actual and not the nominal taking of possession is necessary
condition of occupation. This taking of possession consists... steps to exercise exclusive authority
there.” (Clipperton Island Case)
DERELICTION
Requisites of Valid Dereliction
 act of withdrawal, and
 the intention to abandon
Hence, where the forces of the state are driven away from the territory by the natives, title is not
thereby necessarily forfeited, as it may be that they intend to to return with the necessary
reinforcements to suppress the resistance.
If such intention is not present, the territory itself becomes res nullius or terra nullius, becoming
open once again to the territorial ambitions of other states.
PRESCRIPTION: There is as yet no rule in international law fixing the period of possession
necessary to transfer title to the territory from the former to the subsequent sovereign.
28
CESSION– is a method by which territory is transferred by one state to another by voluntary

agreement between them. Cession may be in the form of sale, donation, barter or exchange, and
even by testamentary disposition.
SUBJUGATION– is when, having been previously conquered or occupied in the course of war by
the enemy, it is formally annexed to it at the end of the war.
Requisites of Valid Subjugation
 conquest
 annexation
ACCRETION– is a mode of acquiring territory based on the principle of accessio cedat principali. It is
accomplished through both or natural or artificial processes.
COMPONENTS OF TERRITORY
Territory of the State Consists of the Following:
 Terrestrial Domain
 Maritime and Fluvial Domain
 Aerial Domain
A. THE TERRESTRIAL DOMAIN

Terrestrial Domain – refers to the land mass which may integrate, or dismembered, or partly
bounded by water, or consists of one whole island. It may also be composed of several islands, like
the Philippines and Indonesia, which are known as mid-ocean archipelagoes, as distinguished from
the coastal archipelagoes like Greece.
B. THE MARITIME AND FLUVIAL DOMAIN

Maritime and Fluvial Domain – consists off the bodies of water within the land mass and the
waters adjacent to the coasts of the state up to a specified limit.
 Rivers may be classified into:

National – situated completely in the territory of one state,
Multi-national – that flow through the territories of several states,
International – that is navigable from the open sea and is open to the use of vessels from all states,
and Boundary – divides the territories of riparian states.
Thalweg Doctrine – the boundary line is laid on the river, that is, on the center, not of the river
itself, but of its main channel. Where the boundary river changes its course by a gradual and normal
process, such as accretion or erosion, the dividing line follows the new course; but if the deviation is
violent is abrupt, as by avulsion, the boundary line will continue to be laid on the old bed of the
river, in the absence of contrary agreement.
As for the dividing line on a bridge across a boundary river, the same is laid on the middle of
the bridge regardless of the location of the channel underneath, unless otherwise provided by the
riparian state.
 Bays– is a well-marked indentation whose penetration is in such proportion to the width of its
mouth as to contain land-locked waters and constitute more than a curvature of the coasts. An
indentation shall not, however, be regarded as a bay unless its area is as large as or larger than that
of a semi-circle whose diameter is a line drawn across the mouth of that indentation.
The above rules do not apply to the so-called historic bays.
 The Territorial Sea– described as the belt of waters adjacent to the coasts of the state, excluding
the internal waters in bays and gulfs, over which the state claims sovereignty and jurisdiction.
Traditionally, the breadth of the territorial sea is reckoned at three nautical miles, or a marine
29
league, from the low-water mark. However, many states have since extended their territorial seas, so
that no uniform rule can be regarded as established at present in this regard.
 The UN Conferences of the Law of the Sea: Three international conferences had been called so
far to formulate a new law of the sea. The first was held in 1958 at Geneva, Switzerland, and
resulted in the adoption of the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, the
Convention of the High Seas, and the Convention on Fishing and the Living Resources of the High
Seas, and the Convention on the Continental Shelf. It failed however to define the breadth of the
territorial sea. The Philippines did not ratify it because of the absence of provisions recognizing the
archipelago doctrine it was advocating. The second conference, which was held in 1960, also at
Geneva, likewise left unresolved the question on the breadth of the territorial sea. The third
conference, called in 1970 by the United Nations is still in progress.
 The Philippine Territorial Sea

The claim of the Philippines to its territorial sea is based on historic right or title or as it is often
called the treaty limits theory.
 The Archipelago Doctrine
The Philippine position on the definition of its internal waters is commonly known as the
archipelago doctrine. This is articulated in the second sentence of Article I of the 1987 Constitution,
which follows:
“The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced
therein, and all the other territories belonging to the Philippines by historic right or legal title...”
Our position is that all these islands should be considered one integrated whole instead of being
fragmented into separate units each with its own territorial sea. Otherwise, the water outside each of
these territorial seas will be regarded as high seas and thus be open to all foreign vessels to the
prejudice of our economy and national security.
An archipelago is a group of islands, including parts of islands, interconnecting waters and other
natural features which are so closely interrelated that such islands, waters and other natural features
form an intrinsic geographical, economic, and political entity, or which historically have been
regarded as such.
Hence, in defining the internal waters of the archipelago, straight baselines should be drawn to
connect appropriate points of the outermost islands without departing radically from the general direction
of the coast so that the entire archipelago shall be encompassed as one whole territory. The waters inside
these baselines shall be considered internal and thus not subject to entry by foreign vessels without
the consent of the local state.
 Basis of the Article I of the 1987 Constitution

Article I of the 1987 Constitution was based on R.A. 3046 as amended by R.A. No. 5446 declaring
the Philippine territorial sea.
 Methods of defining the Territorial Sea

Normal baseline method – the territorial sea is simply drawn from the low-water mark of the coast,
to the breadth claimed, following its sinusitis and curvatures but excluding the internal waters in
bays and gulfs.
Straight baseline method – straight lines are made to connect appropriate points on the coast
without departing radically from its general direction.
C. THE AERIAL DOMAIN

The aerial domain – the airspace above the terrestrial domain and the maritime and fluvial domain
of the state, to an unlimited altitude but not including the outer space.
30
CHAPTER 10: JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction is the authority exercised by the state over persons and things within or sometimes
outside its territory, subject to certain exceptions.
GENERAL CLASSIFICATIONS OF JURISDICTION

 Personal Jurisdiction
 Territorial Jurisdiction
SUBJECTS OF STATE JURISDICTION

 its nationals
 the terrestrial domain
 the maritime and fluvial domain
 the continental shelf
 the open seas
 the aerial domain
 outer space
 other territories
PERSONAL JURISDICTION– is the power exercised by the state over its nationals. It is based on
the theory that a national is entitled to the protection of his state wherever he may be and is,
therefore, bound to it by a duty of obedience and allegiance.
 Article 15 of the Civil Code: “laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status,
condition and legal capacity of persons, are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though
living abroad.”
 Under Article 16 of the Civil Code: “intestate and testamentary succession, both with respect to
the other of succession and to the amount of succession rights and to the intrinsic validity of
testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose succession is
under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country
wherein said property may be found.”
 Jurisdiction to tax our citizens, even if not residing in the Philippines, is also provided for in our
Internal Revenue Code for income received by them “from all sources.” Indeed, even an alien may
be held subject to the laws of a state whose national interest he has violated, and notwithstanding
that the offense was committed outside its territory.
 Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code, for instance, punishes any person who, whether in or
outside our territory, should forge or counterfeit Philippine currency, utter such spurious securities
or commit any crime against our national security or the law of the nations.
TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
General rule: A state has jurisdiction over all persons and property within its territory.
The jurisdiction of the nation within its own territory is necessary, exclusive and absolute. It is
susceptible of no limitation not imposed by itself. (The Schooner Exchange v McFaddon).
Exceptions:
 Foreign states, heads of states, diplomatic representatives, and consuls to a certain degree;
 Foreign states and their heads are exempt because of the sovereign equality of states and on the
theory that a contrary rule would disturb the peace of nations. Diplomats and consuls enjoy the
exemption in order that they may have full freedom in the discharge of their official functions.
 Foreign state property engaged in non-commercial activities;
 By fiction of law, public vessels are regarded as extensions of the territory of the foreign state.
31
 Acts of state;
 Every sovereign state is bound to respect the independence of every other sovereign state, and
the courts of one country will not sit in judgment on the acts of the government of another, done
within its own territory.
 Foreign merchant vessels exercising the rights of innocent passage or arrival under stress;
Innocent passage – navigation through the territorial sea of the state for the purpose of traversing
that sea without entering internal waters, or of proceeding to internal waters, as long as it is not
prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state.
Arrival under stress – entrance to another state due to lack of provisions, unseawothiness of the
vessel, inclement weather, or other force majeure, like pursuit by pirates.
 Foreign armies passing through or stationed in its territory with its permission;
 Such other persons or property over which it may, by agreement, waive jurisdiction.
LAND JURISDICTION
Everything found within the territorial domain of the state is under its jurisdiction. Nationals and
aliens, including non-residents, are bound by its laws, and no process from a foreign government can
take effect for or against them within the territory of the local state without its permission. Also, as
against all other states, the local state has exclusive title to all property within its territory which it
may own in its own corporate capacity or regulate when under private ownership through its police
power for forcibly acquire through the power of eminent domain. Such property is also subject to its
taxing power.
MARITIME AND FLUVIAL JURISDICTION
General rule: the internal waters of a state are assimilated to the land mass and subjected to the
same degree of jurisdiction exercised over the terrestrial domain.
 Civil, criminal and administrative jurisdiction is exercised by the flag state over its public vessels
wherever they may be, provided they are not engaged in commerce.
 Foreign merchant vessels docked in a local port or bay, jurisdiction is exercised over them by the
coastal state in civil matters.
 Criminal jurisdiction is determined according to either the English rule or the French Rule.
1. English rule – the coastal state shall have jurisdiction over all offenses committed on board,
except only where they do not compromise the peace of the port.
2. French rule – the flag state shall have jurisdiction over all offenses committed on board such
vessel, except only where they compromise the peace of the port.
THE CONTIGUOUS ZONE– a protective jurisdiction extending beyond the territorial sea, but not
more than 12 miles from the coast of the state. It is necessary to:
 prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary regulations within its
territory or territorial sea; and,
 punish infringement of the above regulations within its territory or territorial sea.
THE CONTINENTAL SHELF– refers to a) the seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas adjacent
to the coast but outside the area of the territorial sea, to a depth of 200 meters, or beyond that limit,
to where the depth of superjacent waters admits the of the exploitation of the natural resources of the
said areas; and, b) to the seabed and subsoil of similar areas adjacent to the coasts of islands.
The coastal state has the sovereign right to explore the continental shelf and to exploit its natural
resources and for this purpose it may erect on it such installations and equipment as may be
necessary.
32
But this right shall not affect the legal nature of the superjacent waters as open seas or of the airspace
above such waters and their use as such by other states shall not be impaired or disturbed.
THE PATRIMONIAL SEA

The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) or Patrimonial Sea – extends 200 nautical miles from the
coast or the baselines. All living and non-living resources found therein are claimed to belong
exclusively to the coastal state. However, it has not yet been recognized as a rule of international
law.
THE OPEN SEAS

General rule: The open seas or the high seas are res communis and available to the use of all states
for purposes of navigation, flying over them, laying submarine cables or fishing.
Exceptions:
 Over its vessels. The flag state has jurisdiction over its public vessels at all times, whether they
may be in its own territory, in the territory of other states or on the open seas. Merchant vessels, on
the other hand, are under its jurisdiction when they are within its territory, when jurisdiction is
waived or cannot be exercised by the territorial sovereign, or when such vessels are on the open seas.
 Over pirates. Pirates are enemies of all mankind and may be captured on the open seas by the
vessels of any state, to whose territory they may be brought for trial and punishment. Where a pirate
vessel attempts to escape into territorial waters of another state, the pursuing vessel may continue the
chase but is under the obligation of turning over the pirates, when captured, to the authorities of the
coastal state.
 In the exercise of the right of visit and search. Under the laws of neutrality, the public vessels
or aircraft of a belligerent state may visit and search any neutral merchant vessel on the open seas
and capture it or its cargo if it is found or suspected to be engaged or to have engaged in activities
favorable to the other belligerent.
 Under the doctrine of hot pursuit. If an offense is committed by a foreign merchant vessel
within the territorial waters of the coastal state, its own vessels may pursue the offending vessel into
the open seas and upon capture bring it back to its territory. The pursuit must be continuous or
unabated; otherwise, it will be deemed to have “cooled” and can no longer be resumed.
AERIAL JURISDICTION
There are no traditional rules in international law regarding the rights of the subjacent state to its
aerial domain. Nonetheless, it may be said that the consensus appears to be that the local state has
jurisdiction over the airspace above it to an unlimited height, or at the most up to where outer space
begins. Accordingly, and as a corollary to this rule, no foreign aircraft, civil or military, may pass
through the aerial domain of a state without its consent.
General rule: Under the Convention on Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board
Aircraft, it is the state of registration of the aircraft that has jurisdiction over offenses and acts
committed on board while it is in flight or over the high seas or any other area outside the territory
of any state.
Exceptions: Other state may exercise jurisdiction when---

 The offense has effect on the territory of such state;
 The offense has been committed by or against a national or permanent resident of such state;
 The offense is against the security of such state;
 The offense consists of a breach of any rules or regulations relating to the flight or maneuver of
aircraft in force in such state; and,
 The exercise of jurisdiction is necessary to ensure the observance of any obligation of such state
under a multilateral intenational agreement.
33
PART III
NOTES IN BRIEF
(INTERNATIONAL LAW)
34
CONTENTS
Topic 1: Brief History of International Law

Topic 2. Nature and Development of International Law
Topic 3. International Law as Inter-State Law
Topic 4. Why do we need a system of International Law?
Topic 5. Is it really Law?
Topic 6. Subjects of International Law
Topic 7. Sources of International Law
Topic 8. Responsibility & State Responsibility
Topic 9. Peaceful Settlements
Topic 10. The Structure of the International Law System
Topic 11. Judicial Body- International Court of Justice
Topic 12. International Criminal Law
Topic 13. Disarmament
Topic 14. What Are Human Rights? Human Rights Defined
Topic 15. Law of Treaties
Topic 16. Law of the Sea
Topic 17. Customary International Law
Topic 18. International Law and Municipal law
Topic 19. Title to Territory -Mode of Acquisition
Topic 20. Immunity from Jurisdiction
Topic 21. Legal Regulation of the Use of Force by States
35
BRIEF HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

- Modern international law generally recognised as having its genesis in the Middle Ages in Western
Europe - where, at the time, process of decentralisation leading away from Roman Catholic Church
and Holy Roman Empire towards the Reformation and rise of Nation-States
- Thirty Years of War (1618-1948) came to an end with Treaty of Westphalia (significant event for
international law) - treaty based on recognition of community of independent and equal "sovereign"
entities.
- "Natural law", given universalist empire and Church, initially theological (including divine
revelation as one of its sources) - however by time of Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) natural law adopting
a rationalist approach, being seen to derive from universal reason
- Independence and equality of States translated into need for consent - clear tension between natural
law and notion of consent
- "Positivism" challenged natural law in 18-19C - means complete preoccupation with practice and
thus consent of States in law creation
(a) State only bound by rules it consents to
(b) If international law did not prohibit conduct, State free to act
- Majority judgment in Lotus was strongly positivist
FRANCE V TURKEY "THE LOTUS CASE" (PCIJ, 1927)

Facts:
- Collision between a French and a Turkish ship on the high seas - 8 Turks died
- French officer, Demons, was prosecuted and sentenced to 80 days in prison and fined
$22
- France claimed Turkey had impermissibly exercised jurisdiction over Demons
Held:
- Turkey had not violated international law
- Unless a rule prohibited certain conduct, then Turkey was free to do so
"The rules of law binding upon States therefore emanate from their own free will as expressed in
conventions or by usages generally accepted as expressing principles of law and established in order
to regulate the relations between these co-existing independent communities or with a view to the
achievement of common aims. Restrictions upon the independence of States cannot therefore be
presumed"
FIRST WORLD WAR AND AFTERMATH

- Treaty of Westphalia did not outlaw use of force - commitment to co-existence was therefore
qualified
- After WWI States created League of Nations in 1920 - renounced war as instrument of national
policy in 1928: Kellogg-Briand Pact, Art 1
- Treaty of Versailles established International Labour Organisation (ILO) and PCIJ
- League failed to censure Italy and Japan for acts of aggression against Ethiopia and China
respectively
AFTER SECOND WORLD WAR

50 States signed UN Charter on 26 June 1945
Art 2(4) prohibits use of force; unless authorised by SC
Charter refers to human rights and fundamental freedoms: Arts 1, 55, 56, 62, 68 and 76
COLD WAR
Political and ideological rivalry between East and West had significant effect on content and
application of international law
Sustained process of decolonisation - increased size and diversity of international community
36
Since end of cold war - seen rise of power of non-governmental entities and reduction of freedom of
States to set national policy
NATURE AND DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
SOVEREIGNTY
Art 2(1) states UN "...is based on the principle of sovereign equality of all its members"
Art 2(7) - nothing in charter authorises UN to intervene in "domestic jurisdiction" of a
State - subject to SC's power under Chapter VII
"Sovereignty" can be "unpacked" (Prof. Henkin):

1. Independence
2. Equality - equal in status, person-hood, legal capacity, rights, duties and responsibilities (although
can agree to give some States preferred status, e.g. permanent SC members)
3. Autonomy
4. States as persons
5. Territorial integrity and authority
6. Impermeability
INTERNATIONAL LAW AS INTER-STATE LAW

Previously accepted that States were the sole and exclusive subjects of international law:
Oppenheim 1905
State to be distinguished from a government
"International law... is a construct of norms, standards, principles, institutions and procedures. The
purposes of international law, like those of. [municipal law], are to establish and maintain order and
enhance reliable expectations, to protect "persons", their property and other interests, to further other
values": Prof. Louis Henkin
WHY DO WE NEED A SYSTEM OF INTERNATIONAL LAW?

regulates conduct
acceptance by States (if law is codified it poses the fact that States will conform to
"binding rules")
produces actions which are "unlawful/illegal" rather than "immoral" - more objective
than subjective
encourages co-operation among States
facilitates joint responses to illegal actions
influences options taken by States for action
allows for imposition of "western value"? - certain standards in Human Rights that are
universal norms.
INADEQUACIES OF TRADITIONAL DEFINITION

International organisations now subjects and not just objects
"States and the principal subjects of international law": Oppenheim 1992
Third Restatement: international law concerned with "the conduct of States and of international
organisations, and with their relations inter se, as well as some of their relations with person,
whether natural or juridical" §101 - possible supplemented by noting international law also
concerns relations between natural/juridical persons
IS IT REALLY LAW?
Some argue it is not law, just international morality - e.g. John Austin (19C English lawyer); not
positive law - duties imposed are enforced my moral sanctions: "by fear on the part of nations... of
37
provoking general hostility, and incurring probable evils, in case they shall violate maxims generally
received and respected" Prof. Hart - primitive legal system, lacking secondary rules (rules of
recognition, change and adjudication)
SUBJECTS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

From the Peace of Westphalia (1648) till the creation of the United Nations system, it was
considered that the 'State' was the sole subject of international law: that international law only
applied as between States. States, as the subjects of international law had international personality
which meant that they had the right to have their claims respected internationally. The International
Court of Justice, in its 1949 Reparations of Injuries Advisory Opinion, confirmed that other entities
could be subjects of international law. Though it made plain that while States possess all the rights
and duties on the international plane, that other entities such as Inter-Governmental Organizations,
as well as the Individual, and Multi-National Corporations, might posses rights and duties which
States would ascribe to them.
THE STATE
Reference is ordinarily made to Article 1 of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the

Rights and Duties of States as being indicative of the criteria required to be established as a State in
international law:
The state as a subject of international law should possess the following qualifications:
a) a permanent population;
b) a defined territory;
c) government; and
d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
38
39
THE INDIVIDUAL
As a subject of international law, the individual has both rights and obligations. Rights are manifest
in International Human Rights Law, while obligations are generally encompassed within
International Criminal Law.
SUBJECTS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW -DETAILED READING
Personality, Statehood and Recognition

Capacity implies personality, but always it is capacity to do those particular acts.
Therefore "personality" as a term is only short-hand for the proposition that an entity is endowed by
international law with legal capacity.
Subjects of International Law

'Subject' is entity recognised as having rights and obligations
Traditionally only States were seen as subjects, other entities were merely 'objects' - e.g. a claim for
diplomatic protection of a national could only be brought by a State - however they still remain the
principal subjects and have full complement of rights and obligations
What is a State?
Art 1 Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States (1933) (regional American treaty; 16
parties): '[t]he State as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:
(a) a permanent population;
(b) a defined territory;
(c) government; and
(d) capacity to enter relations with other States [i.e. not subordinated to another State, e.g. Japanese
controlled Manchukuo in 1930s]."
Generally recognised that this definition is codification of customary law: Harris Might be possible
to add further criteria:
(a) Non-use of illegal force

US Secretary of State said in 1932 that they would not recognise any situation resulting from an
unlawful use of force, e.g. Manchukuo (although State practice during League of Nations mixed,
e.g. UK recognised Italian control of Ethiopia in 1930s)
Turkey invaded northern Cyprus in 1974 (following a coup) and in 1983 declared
Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus - UN SC called on States not to recognise
(b) Denial of self-determination
40
White minority government in British colony of Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) declared
independence - UN SC called on States not to recognise "this illegal, racist, minority regime"; none
did
1970-80s South Africa, implementing apartheid, created and recognised 4 independent entities
("homelands") - GA resolution rejected independence and declared it invalid
INDEPENDENCE
Independence as a requirement of statehood means, to some extent, factual, as well as legal,
independence from other states. Although it is accepted that states may influence the policies and
conduct of another state, there may come a point, where factual dependence by one state upon
another is so great that it is really no more than a "puppet" state and will not be treated as meeting
the requirement of independence.
AUSTRO-GERMAN CUSTOMS UNION CASE (PCIJ, 1931) - ADVISORY OPINION

Held: the conception of independence, regarded as the normal characteristic of States as subjects of
international law, cannot be better defined than by comparing it with the exceptional and, to some
extent, abnormal class of States known as dependent States". These are State subject to the authority
of one or more States.... It follows that the legal conception of independence has nothing to do with
a State's subordination to international law or with the numerous and constantly increasing states of
de facto dependence which characterize the relation of one country to other countries.
NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES CASE (PCIJ, 1910)

Held: rejected a US submission in the following terms: "...to hold that the US, the grantee of the
fishing right, has a voice under the treaty granting the right in reparation of fishing legislation,
involves recognition of a right in that country to participate in the internal legislation of GB and her
colonies and to that extent would reduce these countries to a state of dependence..."
SELF-DETERMINATION
Has a long history in international relations as a reason for the cession of territory from one state to
another for the use of plebiscites to establish the wishes of the inhabitants in this connection.
Declaration on the Granting of independence to Colonial territories and People 1960 this resolution
"solemnly proclaims the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all
its forms and manifestations."
2. All persons have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their
political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a
pretext for delaying independence.
4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease
in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and
the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.
5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories
which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories,
without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire,
without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete
independence and freedom.
WESTERN SAHARA CASE (ICJ, 1975)

Held: the principle of self-determination as a right of peoples and its application for the
purpose of bringing all colonial situations to a speedy end, were enunciated in the declaration
(above)... the above provisions, in particular art 2, thus confirm and emphasize that the application
41
of the tight of self-determination requires a free and genuine expression of the will of the peoples
concerned.
RELEVANCE OF RECOGNITION
Distinction between recognition of government and recognition of a State
Can confer certain benefits under foreign municipal law - e.g. immunity from suit (in
Australia see Foreign States Immunities Act 1985 (Cth)), diplomatic representatives protected from
action etc
Different levels of recognition exist - de facto and then de jure (according to law)
Territorial claims can also be recognised (e.g. Australia's de jure recognition of
Indonesia's annexation of East Timor)
Even if entities, such as Taiwan, are not States, they still has certain rights/obligations - e.g. Taiwan
has entered treaties
RECOGNITION AND STATEHOOD

1. "Constitutive theory" (defunct) - recognition necessary to establish statehood
Not supported by State practice or judicial decisions
Difficulty if divided recognition; also need to acknowledge that political considerations largely
determine whether an entity is recognised
Collective Recognition: If an entity is admitted into the UN there is little debate as to the entity's
status (Art 4 Charter membership open to "peace-loving State"; requires recommendation from SC
and 2/3 vote from current members of the UN)
European collective recognition following break up of Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia based on
certain criteria - significant in establishing statehood of Slovenia, Croatia,
Bosnia and Macedonia
2. "Declarative theory" - mere acknowledgment entity meets criteria
INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS AS SUBJECTS

International organisations can and do have limited legal personality - in certain circumstances they
can enter treaties and make claims, their employees may receive diplomatic privileges
REPARATIONS FOR INJURIES SUFFERED IN THE SERVICE OF THE UN

- ADVISORY OPINION (ICJ, 1949)
Facts:
Concerned a claim proposed to be made by the UN against Israel (who was not at that time a
member) for death of Count Bernadotte (Swedish) who was UN truce negotiator in Israel in 1948
Held:
Court, having regard to the purposes of the UN, accepted that the UN could claim against non-UN
member for direct injury to itself, and for injury suffered by its agents
Member-States responsible for clothing organisation with international legal personality -
community of States had power to create an entity that had "objective international personality"
Rights and duties not the same as a State, rather were dependant upon its "purposes and functions as
specified in its constituent documents and developed practice"
Court did not rule on possibility of Sweden making a claim on behalf of injured national
UN could make a claim on behalf of employee's family (because otherwise an employee might not
act contrary to interests of his State of nationality) - a right of "functional protection"
Difficult question as to whether an organisation has legal personality where it has been constituted
by a small number of States - For example, the EU has 15 members; Art 210
Treaty of Rome declares that it has legal personality; Observer status in the GA, participates in
conferences and is party to treaties with non-EU States - however according to Harris, it does not
have international legal personality
42
HUMAN BEINGS
Diplomatic protection - allow State to protect, by international claim, its nationals and corporations
injured by the internationally wrongful acts of another State
Two typical situations:

Injury at hands of non-governmental entities (e.g. revolutionaries - State could be liable
for not stopping violence or for a denial of justice)
Direct governmental conduct (natural resources and nationalisation, e.g. former colonial
States in the 1960s arguing against international minimum standard)
Traditionally conceived as a right of the State of nationality of the victim
States can only protect their own nationals (effective link doctrine applies: Nottebohm
Decision) - this is difficult in human rights cases, because the offending State is usually the State of
nationality (argument that human rights are obligations erga omnes:
Barcelona Traction; Case Concerning East Timor
Injured national must exhaust local remedies, but not ones that are "obviously ineffective":
(Ambatielos Arbitration); for example the rule does not apply if you have to overturn a finding of
fact where the local law would not allow that (Finnish Shipowners case), or where there has been
excessive delays - but if statute of limitations has expired then the rule would preclude a claim
AMBATIELOS ARBITRATION
Facts: Greece brought claim against UK in relation to a contractual claim against Greek national
who had agreed to buy ships from the UK
Greek national did not call key witness at trial and on appeal leave was not granted to admit the
evidence of the witness; the appeal was discontinued
Held: It was the failure to call the witness at trial that rendered the remedy ineffective - claim
dismissed
Local remedies rule only applies to diplomatic protection.
43
SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
What are the sources of international law? That is: how is international law created?
Typically, one would point to Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, as
Judge, and current President of the International Court of Justice, Rosalyn Higgins does below.
Article 38(1)(c) -- General Principles- As a Source of I.L "the general principles of law recognized
by civilized nations;"
Article 38(1)(b) -- As subsidiary means: judicial decisions and scholarship- As a Source of I.L
"judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as
subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law. "
Sources of International Law – Further Reading

Art 38 Statute of ICJ
1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are
submitted to it, shall apply:
44
(a) international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognised
by the contesting states;
(b) international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
(c) the general principles of law recognised by civilised [word is a remnant of PCIJ statute, now
redundant] nations;
(d) subject to the provisions of Article 59 [decisions only binding on parties], judicial decisions and
the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for
the determination of rules of law.
This provision shall not prejudice the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the
parties agree thereon.
- There is no hierarchy of the sources (with the possible exception of (d)) - hierarchy rejected when
original PCIJ statute was drafted
Treaties
- 1648-1919 (231 volumes); League of Nations, 27 years (205 volumes); UNTS (2003 volumes by
1998)
- ILC drafted 2 treaties on treaties: Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT)
and Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International
Organizations or between International Organisations (not yet in force)
- "Treaty" define in VCLT as: "an international agreement concluded between States in written form
and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more
related instruments whatever its particular designation" (Art 2)
Can also be oral - but not covered by VCLT Process of binding yourself to the treaty is determined
by the parties (usually bilateral only signature; multilateral 2 step process)
- Only parties to a treaty can derive obligations or rights under it: Arts 34-38 VCLT
- The exception is "objective" regimes and border treaties: Aaland Island case (expert commission) -
Finland held bound by a treaty between Russia, Great Britain and France (signed after the Crimean
War) - Russia had agreed to demilitarise Aaland Island in the Baltic; Finland who later acquired
sovereignty held to be bound
- Treaty can affect the development of customary international law
- States can agree to modify customary rule by entering into a treaty - but cannot alter rule of ius
cogens, otherwise is void (Arts 53, 64 VCLT; Art 53 defines as "... a norm accepted and recognised
by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is
permitted")
45
STATE RESPONSIBILITY- DETAILED READING
46
2) THE CONDUCT MUST CONSTITUTE A BREACH OF AN INTERNATIONAL

LEGAL OBLIGATION
Art 12 DA: A State is in breach of its obligation when any act of the State does not conform to its
obligation.
47
48
49
50
51
relationship between the WTO and International law.
THE STRUCTURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAW SYSTEM
Institutional structures and powers
Legislative Structures
General Assembly
Art 17 (UN Charter) - approve budget for organisation (majority vote)
Arts 10, 16 - power to discuss and recommend
Art 18 - majority vote
IMF, World Bank, WTO, ILO, WHO - do not operate on 50% + 1 basis, respect wishes of
dissenting States
European Parliament (EU)
International Law Commission (ILC) - created in 1946 (GA) - made up of international experts -
codify and progressively develop international law
International legislation - closest thing is universal/near universal adherence to treaty
Executive
UN SC - 15 States, 5 permanent (US, UK, France, Russia and China) and 10 elected to serve for 2
years (Art 23: regard must be had to equitable geographical distribution)
Art 27 non-procedural votes require majority of 9 and no veto
SC can authorise use of force against States: Chapter VII - power appears to be linked to existence of
a threat to peace, breach of the peace or an act of aggression (Art 39) (although ICJ has ruled that it
has no power to overturn or quash decisions of the SC, although possibly it can review the legality
the decision)
Art 25: members agree to accept and carry out decisions of SC
Art 24(2): SC to act in accordance with purposes and principles of UN
UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
Examines certain economic, social, cultural, health issues - particularly human rights
Cannot make binding decisions
54 States, elected for 3 years by GA
9 functional commissions (notably, Commission on Human Rights and Commission on
Sustainable Development) and 5 regional commissions
Coordinates activities of UN specialised agencies (WHO, FAO, UNESCO, ILO etc)
Developed consultative arrangements with over 1,600 NGOs
Secretary General and UN Secretariat
SG is "chief administrative officer" (Art 97) - can bring matters to the attention of the SC
(Art 99); secure negotiated solutions to conflict ("good offices" role)
SG appointed for 5 year renewable term on recommendation of SC
Regional Executives
EU Council
European Commission
JUDICIAL BODY- INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Operates in Hague, Kingdom of the Netherlands, in the "Peace Palace"

15 (plus possible 2 ad hoc) judges sitting in individual capacity; nine year term; no more than one
national: Art 3; nominated by Permanent Court of Arbitration, SC and GA then vote
UN Charter - see Chapter XIV (Arts 92-96); Art 36(3)
Art 92: principal judicial organ of UN
Functions in accordance with statute
52
Members undertake to comply with decisions to with they are a party: Art 94(1); Also Art 59 Statute
- "[t]he decisions of the Court has no binding force except between the parties and in respect of that
particular case"
Judgements can be enforced by SC: Art 94(2)

Power to issue advisory opinions
Power to hear contentious cases only relates to disputes between States: Art 34(1) Statute
GA and SC can request advisory opinions (e.g. SC obtained in South West Africa case
(ICJ, 1976) when South Africa refused to hand over control of Namibia to UN)
15 specialised agencies can seek opinions on legal questions "arising within the scope of [their]
activities": Art 96(2) - WHO not entitled to opinion on legality of nuclear weapons because not
within activities (ICJ Rep 1996, 66) (GA however later received one: Legality of the Threat or Use
of Nuclear Weapons Case (ICJ, 1996))
Contentious jurisdiction depends on consent
(a) Art 36(1) - particular dispute, or particular type of dispute, referred to the court (by
compromis, clause in treaty etc)
For example:
Optional Protocol to Vienna Convention on Consular Relations - 1998-9 US executed
Paraguayan and German nationals notwithstanding ICJ decided it was competent to determine the
disputes arising under the Protocol cf. FRY's unsuccessful attempt to argue Art IX of Genocide
Convention gave ICJ jurisdiction to hear claim against US during 1999 NATO bombing campaign -
US had made reservation to Art IX at time of ratification
(b) Art 36(2) - "Optional Clause" - agree in advance to submit to jurisdiction of court (about 60/190
States have accepted) - can be conditional
Portugal used against Australia in relation to Australia's entry into Timor Gap Treaty with
Indonesia: East Timor Case (ICJ, 1995)
Court will not allow a claim that will necessarily involve determination of the conduct of a non-
consenting third party: "Monetary Gold principle": Monetary Gold Removed from
Rome (ICJ, 1954)
Australia relied on this successfully in East Timor case because Indonesia had not accepted
jurisdiction
Argument rejected in Case Concerning Certain Phosphate Lands in Nauru (ICJ, 1992) because
claims against Australia could be separated from those against NZ and UK (case subsequently
settled for $107m)
Other International Judicial Bodies

SC created ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals in Rwanda and former Yugoslavia - jurisdiction
limited geographically and temporally
European Court of Justice (of the EU)
European Court of Human Rights (of the Council of Europe) - individuals can bring claims
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW
53
54
DISARMAMENT
What role does international law play in issues of disarmament? Consider the following video clips
of eminent persons in the field, discussing issues of weapons of mass destruction, and the
international organizations which seek to limit their numbers and use.
55
WHAT ARE HUMAN RIGHTS? HUMAN RIGHTS DEFINED

While some dictionaries define the word right as “a privilege,” when used in the context of “human
rights,” we are talking about something more basic.
Every person is entitled to certain fundamental rights, simply by the fact of being human. These are
called “human rights” rather than a privilege (which can be taken away at someone’s whim).
They are “rights” because they are things you are allowed to be, to do or to have. These rights are
there for your protection against people who might want to harm or hurt you.
They are also there to help us get along with each other and live in peace.
Many people know something about their rights. Generally they know they have the right to food
and a safe place to stay. They know they have a right to be paid for the work they do. But there are
many other rights.
When human rights are not well known by people, abuses such as discrimination, intolerance,
injustice, oppression and slavery can arise.
Born out of the atrocities and enormous loss of life during World War II, the United
Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights was signed in 1948 to provide a common
understanding of what everyone’s rights are. It forms the basis for a world built on freedom, justice
and peace.
UNITED NATIONS-UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Simplified Version
This simplified version of the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has
been created especially for young people.
1. We Are All Born Free & Equal. We are all born free. We all have our own thoughts and
ideas. We should all be treated in the same way.
2. Don’t Discriminate. These rights belong to everybody, whatever our differences.
3. The Right to Life. We all have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety.
4. No Slavery. Nobody has any right to make us a slave. We cannot make anyone our slave.
5. No Torture. Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us.
6. You Have Rights No Matter Where You Go. I am a person just like you!
56
7. We’re All Equal before the Law. The law is the same for everyone. It must treat us all
fairly.
8. Your Human Rights Are Protected by Law. We can all ask for the law to help us when
we are not treated fairly.
9. No Unfair Detainment. Nobody has the right to put us in prison without good reason
and keep us there, or to send us away from our country.
10. The Right to Trial. If we are put on trial this should be in public. The people who try us
should not let anyone tell them what to do.
11. We’re Always Innocent Till Proven Guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing
something until it is proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to show
it is not true.
12. The Right to Privacy. Nobody should try to harm our good name. Nobody has the right
to come into our home, open our letters, or bother us or our family without a good reason.
13. Freedom to Move. We all have the right to go where we want in our own country and
to travel as we wish.
14. The Right to Seek a Safe Place to Live. If we are frightened of being badly treated in
our own country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be safe.
15. Right to a Nationality. We all have the right to belong to a country.
16. Marriage and Family. Every grown-up has the right to marry and have a family if they
want to. Men and women have the same rights when they are married, and when they are
separated.
17. The Right to Your Own Things. Everyone has the right to own things or share them.
Nobody should take our things from us without a good reason.
18. Freedom of Thought. We all have the right to believe in what we want to believe, to
have a religion, or to change it if we want.
19. Freedom of Expression. We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what
we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people.
20. The Right to Public Assembly. We all have the right to meet our friends and to work
together in peace to defend our rights. Nobody can make us join a group if we don’t want
to.
21. The Right to Democracy. We all have the right to take part in the government of our
country. Every grown-up should be allowed to choose their own leaders.
22. Social Security. We all have the right to affordable housing, medicine, education, and
childcare, enough money to live on and medical help if we are ill or old.
23. Workers’ Rights. Every grown-up has the right to do a job, to a fair wage for their
work, and to join a trade union.
24. The Right to Play. We all have the right to rest from work and to relax.
25. Food and Shelter for All. We all have the right to a good life. Mothers and children,
people who are old, unemployed or disabled, and all people have the right to be cared for.
26. The Right to Education. Education is a right. Primary school should be free. We should
learn about the United Nations and how to get on with others. Our parents can choose what
we learn.
27. Copyright. Copyright is a special law that protects one’s own artistic creations and
writings; others cannot make copies without permission. We all have the right to our own
way of life and to enjoy the good things that art, science and learning bring.
28. A Fair and Free World. There must be proper order so we can all enjoy rights and
freedoms in our own country and all over the world.
57
29. Responsibility. We have a duty to other people, and we should protect their rights and
freedoms.
30. No One Can Take Away Your Human Rights
LAW OF TREATIES
Art. 38(1) (a) ICJ Statute: In deciding disputes regarding international law, the court shall
refer to international covenants [treaties]…
Definition of treaty
Refer Art. 2 of VCLT
“Treaty' means an international agreement concluded between States in written form
and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or
more related instruments and whatever its particular designation; “
ELEMENTS TO MAKE A VALID TREATY (ART 2 OF VCLT):

1) Treaty must have international character
The treaty is to be concluded by an international legal person who has capacity to enter into
treaty.
Who is an international legal person who can conclude treaties?
a) States (Art 6 VCLT), which includes Head of States, Head of Gov, and Minister of
Foreign Affairs (refer to Art 7 VCLT)
b) International organization (in Anglo-Iranian Oil Company case, ICJ held that contract
between the company and Iranian government was not a treaty because there is no privity of
contract.
2) In written form
Oral form of agreement is also acceptable (Eastern Greenland case)
3) Governed by international law
International law governs all treaties whether or not they are within the scope of VCLT
4) Embodied in single or 2 instruments
Treaties may be several forms:
a) Conventions
b) Agreements
c) Protocols
d) Charter
e) Exchange of notes
There are less formal agreements such as exchange of notes (letters). States may send letters
to each other and agree on certain things. If the letters intended to be a treaty, it is
customary to expressly state that it shall constitute an agreement between our Governments.
In the case of Qatar and Bahrain, exchange of notes that was done by parties conferred
jurisdiction to ICJ to hear the dispute.
5) There is an intention to create legal relation
This element is not expressly mentioned in Art 2 VCLT. But, it is very important because
without intention, an instrument will not be a treaty.
WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF UNILATERAL STATEMENTS (ONLY 1 PARTY

ENTER INTO TREATY)?
If the state made such declaration with intention to be bound, a state may be bound by such
unilateral statement.
58
In Legal Status of Eastern Greenland case, Norway made unilateral statement that it won’t
create difficulties in respect of Danish‟s claim over Eastern Greenland. ICJ held that
Norway is bound by this unilateral statement.
This was confirmed again by ICJ in Nuclear Test cases.

Once the text is adopted, THE NEGOTIATING PARTIES MUST GIVE CONSENT TO
BE BOUND BY A TREATY
The methods of giving consent are provided under Art 11 – 16 VCLT
WHAT IF A STATE MAKES RESERVATION TO ONE OF TERMS IN THE

TREATY?
Refer to Art 19 – 23 VCLT.
If the Treaty allows reservation, then can reserve. But, if do not allow, cannot.
Art 120 Rome Statute: No reservation may be made to the statute of ICC.
WHAT IF THERE ARE NO PROVISIONS STATING ABOUT RESERVATION IN

THAT TREATY? ARE STATES NOT
ALLOWED TO MAKE RESERVATION?
ICJ in the case of Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide answered this question. If there are no provisions stating about
reservation, it does not automatically mean that you cannot reserve. But, you need to look
at the purpose of the Treaty. Your reservation cannot defeat the purpose and object of the
Treaty, otherwise, you are not a party to the Treaty.
ENTRY INTO FORCE

A treaty does not enter into force until certain number of States ratified it. For example,
Art 308 of UNCLOS provides:
“This convention shall enter into force 12 months after the date of deposit of the 16th
ratification”
REGISTRATION AND PUBLICATION OF TREATY

Every treaty needs to be registered with UN, ~refer to Art 102 UN Charter & Art 80
VCLT
APPLICATION OF A TREATY
A) Upon its Parties
Art 26 VCLT: every treaty in force is binding upon its parties and must be performed in
good faith
Art 27 VCLT: a party may not invoke the provision of internal law as justification for its
failure to perform a treaty
B) Successive Treaties on the same subject matter
Art 30 VLCT: If there are 2 same treaties concluded on the same matter, the one concluded
later will prevail.
However, if the provision of an ordinary treaty is in conflict with UN Charter, Art 30
VCLT & Art 103 UN Charter provides that UN Charter prevails.
C) Application of a Treaty upon 3rd States
Art 34 VCLT: 3rd party states are not bound by the Treaty without its consent.
59
However, Art 35-38 VCLT states that there are exceptions where 3rd party states may be
bound.
INVALIDATION OF TREATIES
There are several grounds which a Treaty may be invalid:
a) Violation of fundamental domestic law (Art 46 VCLT)

A state may invoke Art 46 if:
1. The violated internal law was related to competence to conclude Treaty
(The person who ratified the Treaty was not capable of doing it.)
1. The violation was manifest and other party must be aware of it
2. The violation concerned a rule of fundamental importance
b) Error (Art 48 VCLT)

That State may have erred in entering the Treaty due to some misunderstanding.
However, error does not make the Treaty automatically void. The mistaken party may
invoke the error as invalidating its consent.
c) Fraud Art 49 VCLT

d) Corruption Art 50 VCLT
e) Coercion Art 51 VCLT
f) Coercion by threat or use of force Art 52
Art 2 (4) UN Charter provides use of force is prohibited. Force means “military force”.
g) Treaty conflicting with jus cogens, e.g.

1. A treaty allowing an unlawful use of force
2. A treaty which allow parties to commit crimes under International law
3. A treaty which allows genocide, piracy or slavery
TERMINATION OF TREATY
~refer to Art 54-60 VCLT
A Treaty may be terminated automatically by 3 ways:

a) Art 61 VCLT –supervening impossibility of performance
b) Art 62 VCLT – there is a fundamental change of circumstances
c) Art 64 VCLT – emergence of a new jus cogens.
CONSEQUENCES OF INVALIDITY OR TERMINATION OF TREATY

Refer Art 69 – 71 VCLT
LEGAL REGULATION OF THE USE OF FORCE BY STATES

The League Covenant in the year 1919, standing against the customary law, appeared to
provide qualifications on the right to resort to war which were exceptional. The general
presumption was that war was still a right of sovereign states although signatories to the
Covenant were bound by that instrument to submit to certain procedures of peaceful
settlement. Resort to war in violation of the Covenant was illegal but the content of the
60
illegality was prima facie the violation of a treaty obligation. Moreover, the Covenant was a
legal instrument with a special character: it was concerned with the machinery of and
procedures for peaceful settlement of disputes.
Use of Force
General Treaty for the Renunciation of War 1928
Art1 parties condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and
renounce it as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another.
Art 2 settlement or solution of all disputes of any nature or of any origin, which may arise,
shall never be sought except by pacific means.
UN Charter
Art 2(4) All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of
force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state or in any other
manner inconsistent with the purpose of the UN.
Although "members" - customary rule applying to all states Nicaragua (Merits) case (ICJ,
1986)
Prohibits armed force, not political pressure
Nicaragua (merits) Case (ICJ, 1986)

Held: the concept of an armed attack includes the despatch by one State of armed bands
into the territory of another State, the supply of arms and other support to such bands
cannot be equated with armed attack. Nevertheless, such activities may well constitute a
breach of the principle of the non-use of force and intervention in the internal affairs of a
State, that is, a form of conduct which is certainly wrongful, but is of lesser gravity than an
armed attack.
Assisting, with supply of arms and training is direct violation of CIL, but funding is not.
Intervention
Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the
Protection of their Independence and Sovereignty 1965
No state has a right to intervene directly or indirectly, in the internal or external affairs of
any other state. Art 1
No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures
to coerce another state. Art 2
The use of force to deprive national identity is a violation of inalienable rights and of the
principle of non-intervention. Art 3
Every state has an inalienable right to choose its political, economic and cultural systems
without interference. Art 5
RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENCE
The Caroline Case: Anticipatory self-defence: must be shown that admonition or

remonstrance to the person was impracticable, or would have been unavailing that day-light
61
could not be waited for there could be no attempt at discrimination between the innocent
and guilty it would not have been enough to seize and detain the vessel but there was
necessity, present and inevitable, for attacking in the darkness of the night.
Proportionality:
Legitimate defence implies the adoption of measures proportionate to the seriousness of the
attack and justified by the seriousness of the danger - League of Nations 1927
Art 51 UN Charter - right to self-defence
Armed Attack
Not every such use of force is "armed force" and does not include "assistance to rebels in
the form of provision of weapons or logistical or other support" - Nicaragua (Merits)
Case
Collective self-defence
Before collective self-defence is allowed, one State must declare itself a victim of an armed
attack and ask for assistance from another State, but the second state does not need a threat
to its national security for it to act - Nicaragua (Merits) Case
Security Council
Self-defence is temporary - until the Security Council acts.
Collective Mechanisms of the UN
Security Council
Under chapter 7 of the UN Charter - actual threat
SC may act for maintaining international peace and security Art 34
Recommends appropriate procedures or methods Art 36 in Art 33
Make own recommendations for the settlement of disputes in accordance with Arts 37 ,
38
use of Art 43 forces
measures not involving the use of force Art 41
provisional measures
measure to maintain/restore peace and security (no IL breach needed)
General Assembly
Secondary responsibility of peace and security
Regional organisations (eg NATO)
Peace keeping forces
62
PART IV
HOT POINTS
(MCQS CAPSULE 2000-16)
63
 In international law, a ‘state’ is a from the Security Council under the

recognised and independent country or United Nations Charter.
nation.  Non-governmental Organisations
 The father of International Law is (NGOs): Organisations such as Amnesty
considered to be: Hugo Grotius International and Greenpeace are known
 The modern system of international law as ‘NGOs’ (non-governmental
developed in Europe from the 17th organisations). They do not have
century onwards and is now accepted by international legal personality, but are
all countries around the world. involved in international political activity,
 A ‘legal person’ is an entity on which a and on some occasions have taken part in
legal system confers rights and imposes international activities as members of a
duties. It includes a natural person and an State delegation.
artificial or statutory body, such as a  Harmonisation: Neither monism nor
company. dualism can adequately explain the
 Ad hoc means ‘for a particular purpose’ relationship between international and
or ‘as needed’. domestic law, and alternative theories
 Domestic (municipal or national) law, the have developed which regard
law within a State, is concerned with the international law as having harmonisation
rights and duties of legal persons within role. If there is a confict, domestic law is
the State. applied within the domestic legal system,
 There is no supreme law-making body in leaving the State responsible at the
international law. Treaties are negotiated international level for any breach of its
between States on an ad hoc basis and international law obligations.
only bind States which are parties to a  The Vienna convention on Diplomatic
treaty. Relations was adopted in: 1961
 The General Assembly of the United  Dualism: This theory holds that
Nations is not a law-making body, and so international law and domestic law are
its resolutions are not legally binding. separate bodies of law, operating
However, UN Security Council independently of each other. Under
resolutions to take action with respect to dualism, rules and principles of
threats to peace, breaches of the peace, international law cannot operate directly
and acts of aggression, are binding on the in domestic law, and must be transformed
192 member States. or incorporated into domestic law before
 In Australia, domestic law is made by they can affect individual rights and
legislation passed by the parliaments of obligations. The main differences between
the Commonwealth, states and territories, international and domestic law are
and by common law principles developed thought to be the sources of law, its
by the courts. subjects, and subject matter. International
 In 1990–91 when Iraq invaded and law derives from the collective will of
occupied Kuwait the international States, its subjects are the States
community used armed force to enforce themselves, and its subject matter is the
international law (resolutions of the relations between States. Domestic law
Security Council). Subsequent derives from the will of the sovereign or
controversy about the use of armed force the State, its subjects are the individuals
against Iraq highlights how difficult it can within the State, and its subject matter is
be to obtain the necessary authorisation
64
the relations of individuals with each principles and rules that may not be
other and with government. altered or broken. Such principles
 National liberation movements: The currently include the prohibitions against
Palestine Liberation Organisation and slavery and torture, genocide, the use of
Polisario (representing the people of armed force, and piracy on the high seas;
Western Sahara, occupied by Morocco) and more positively, the principle of
are examples of organisations having a racial non-discrimination; and, the right
limited international personality through to self-determination. These principles of
recognition by some States, or the United international law are known as jus
Nations, as representatives of their cogens. In Latin this means ‘compelling
peoples. law’ and refers to so-called ‘peremptory
 The International court of justice was norms’ of general international law. In
established: 1945 time, new principles may become part of
 A state has the right to use force in case of: the jus cogens. Not every principle of
Armed attack international law has the status of jus
 A treaty is a written legal document cogens.
(instrument) agreed between states and  ILO (International Labour
governed by international law. It may be Organisation) formulates policies and
in the form of a single instrument, or two programs to improve working conditions
or more related instruments. Although and employment opportunities, and sets
often used interchangeably, the term labour standards used by countries
‘convention’ is usually reserved for around the world.
multilateral agreements, such as the  FAO (Food and Agriculture
hague, geneva and Vienna conventions. Organisation) works to improve
Treaties can also be called agreements, agricultural productivity and food
protocols or instruments. security, and to improve living standards
 The Vienna Convention on the Law of of rural populations.
Treaties came into force on 27 January  UNESCO (UN Educational, Scientifc
1980. and Cultural Organisation) promotes
 Entry into force – the terms of a treaty education for all, cultural development,
will usually specify how and when it protection of the world’s natural and
comes into force. Many multilateral cultural heritage, international
treaties require that a specified number of cooperation in science, press freedom and
States consent to be bound before the communication.
treaty can enter into force. An example is  WHO (World Health Organisation)
the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention, coordinates programs aimed at solving
which required 60 ratifications before it health problems and the attainment by all
came into force in 1994. people of the highest possible level of
 Treaties are binding – the principle of health. It works in areas such as
pacta sunt servanda (from Latin, meaning immunisation, health education and the
‘agreements are to be kept’ or ‘treaties are provision of essential drugs.
binding’).  World Bank group – Provides loans and
 Jus cogens: There are some principles of technical assistance to developing
international law, however, that have countries to reduce poverty and advance
become so widely accepted that they are sustainable economic growth.
now considered to be fundamental
65
 IMF (International Monetary Fund)  UNIDO (UN Industrial Development

facilitates international monetary co- Organisation) promotes the industrial
operation and fnancial stability and advancement of development countries
provides a permanent forum for through technical assistance, advisory
consultation, advice and assistance on services and training.
fnancial issues.  UNDP (UN Development Program)
 ICAO (International Civil Aviation works to generate and implement aid
Organisation) sets international effectively, including working with States
standards for the safety, security and to improve their capacity to meet global
effciency of air transport and co-ordinates and national development challenges.
international co-operation in all areas of  IAEA (International Atomic Energy
civil aviation. Agency): An autonomous
 UPU (Universal Postal Union) intergovernmental organisation under
establishes international regulations for the umbrella of the UN, works for the safe
postal services, provides technical and peaceful uses of atomic energy. The
assistance and promotes co-operation in IAEA reports annually to the UN General
postal matters. Assembly and, when appropriate, to the
 ITU (International Telecommunication Security Council regarding non-
Union) fosters international co-operation compliance by States with their
to improve telecommunications of all safeguards obligations as well as on
kinds, co-ordinates usage of radio and TV matters relating to international peace
frequencies, promotes safety measures and security.
and conducts research.  World Trade Organisation (WTO) – The
 WMO (World Meteorological WTO replaced the General Agreement of
Organisation) promotes scientifc research Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1995. The
on the Earth’s atmosphere and on climate central principle of GATT was that
change and facilitates the global exchange countries should not discriminate between
of meteorological data. imported and locally produced goods.
 IMO (International Maritime The WTO administers the Technical
Organisation) works to improve Barriers to Trade Agreement and the
international shipping procedures, raise Code of Good Practice for
standards in marine safety and reduce Standardisation, which are intended to
marine pollution by ships. ensure that countries do not impose
 WIPO (World Intellectual Property technical regulations and standards that
Organisation) promotes international would be obstacles to trade.
protection of intellectual property and  In 1989, APEC was formed by Australia
fosters co-operation on copyright, and Japan. There are now 21 members,
trademarks, industrial designs and including the USA, China, Japan,
patents. Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico and Russia.
 IFAD (International Fund for  One of the principal functions of the law
Agricultural Development) mobilises of the sea is to balance the competing
financial resources to raise food interests arising from different uses of the
production and nutrition levels among the sea, such as navigation, fishing, scientific
poor in developing countries. research and waste disposal.
 First UN Conference on the Law of the
Sea was held in 1958, and the UN
66
Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982  The headquarters of The United Nations is
(UNCLOS), which entered into force in located at: New York
1994.  The permanent Court of International
Justice has its headquarter at: The Hague
 ‘Prorogue’ means to terminate a session
 The headquarters of ICAO are located at:
of parliament, which places it in recess Montreal
and causes all unfinished business before  An agreement between a State and a
it to lapse. It differs from dissolving a multinational corporation: Not a treaty
parliament in that a prorogued parliament  A member of the International Law
may be called back. Commission is: Elected by the general
 Foreign warships have: The right of assembly
 The term of a member of the International
innocent passage in the Territorial waters.
Law Commission is: 5 Years
 A state has the right to exploit in the  A candidate for the International court of
continental shelf: Both Living and non- justice is nominated by: The National
Living resources Government.
 The principle of rebus sic stantibus means:  A Judge of the ICJ is elected by:
Fundamental change of circumstances Both the general assembly and the Security
council
 A diplomatic agent is immuned from local
 The Security council consists of:
jurisdiction: in all cases. 15 members
 The doctrine, which accepted the "Law of  An ad-hoc judge of the ICJ is: Appointed by
Nature" as an independent source of rules of the State
the law of nations, was propounded by:  Tobar doctrine is related to: The recognition
Grotius of a Government
 The Vienna convention of consular relations
 The permanent court of arbitration was
was adopted in: 1961
established by: The Hague Conferences of  The territorial waters of State may extend
1899 and 1907 up to: 200 miles
 "International Law is not true Law but  A land-locked State: cannot fly its own flag
positive international morality only". Who  The definition of aggression was adopted in:
said it? Austin 1974
 "Treates are the supreme law of the land".  The baseline is line from which the limits of:
Maritime zones are measured
Where is it laid down? Statute of the ICJ
 The theory of absolute territorial
 When was Monroe Doctrine originally sovereignty: Advocates for exclusive right of
announced? 1823 the territorial State over water resources of
 A Vasal State is: One which is completely an international river.
under the suzerainty of another State  The doctrine of “inter-temporal law" means
 A Condominium is: A particular territory that the principle of natural justice takes
over which joint dominion is exercised by precedence over other rules.
 The Eastern Greenland case rose between:
two or more external powers. Norway and Denmark
 ANZUS stands for: Association for security  WIPO: World Intellectual Property
purpose of Australia, New Zealand and the Organization
United States.  ICAO: International Civil Aviation
 IAEA is used for: International Atomic Organization
energy Agency  IBRD: International Bank of
 What is Contraband? Goods which may Reconstruction for Development
 Provisions of Municipal Law are
assist an enemy in the conduct of war.
enforceable in international -relations if they
 The principle of exhaustion of local are not in conflict with international law.
remedies is related to: State responsibility
67
 Foreign diplomatic envoys enjoy absolute  The General Assembly is: The Principle
immunity from local jurisdiction in; both Organ of UNO
civil and criminal matters.  League of Nations was not joined by:
 The Right of innocent passage is available USA
to: Foreign ships.  Judges of the ICJ are: Elected by the
 Non-permanent members of the U.N. General Assembly and the Security Council
Security Council are elected for a period’  Under the Convention of the Law of the
of: two years. Sea, the breadth of the Territorial Sea is: 12
 A successor state is legally bound to: nautical miles
only selected obligations.  A state can use force: In its own defence
 A lower riparian state: Has right to share  Diplomatic relations are established by:
water on an equitable basis. Mutual agreement
 The Charter of the U.N. was drawn up by:  Rights of hand-locked states are governed
San Francisco Conference 1945. by Convention on the Law of Sea
 Universal Declaration on Human Rights  Vienna Congress took place in: 1815
was adopted in: 1948  Universal Declaration of Human Rights was
 The judges of the I.C.J. are elected by: signed in: 1948
the U.N. Security Council & the U.N.  The United Nation is: A creation of
General Assembly Member States
 Territorial Waters are: Waters within the  Territorial asylum is: An exercise of
territorial limits of a state. territorial sovereignty
 A state is admitted to the membership of  A state is not bound to do so
the’ U.N. by: the General Assembly  Minquires and Ecrehos case was decided by
 Advisory opinion from the I.C.J. can be ICJ (1950)
sought by: the U.N. & the States  The eruption of war termination: Only
 A state is exempted from the jurisdiction of political treaties
the local courts in another state: by virtue of  International Law can: provide moral
its sovereign status support to an issue in dispute
 The offence of piracy is subject to the  The concept of State immunity is: An
jurisdiction of: all the states. attitude of territorial sovereignty
 A Continental Shelf is situated beneath the  The Continuity of states us International
sea level at the approximate depth of: 200 Legal Persons is: Not affected by change of
meters government
 Foreign sovereign ships sailing/anchoring  Harmon Doctrine is: was renounced before
in the coastal waters of another state it could take roots in International Law
are: subject to the law of both states.  Vital change of circumstances renders a
 In case an alien is injured in a foreign state, treaty invalid
it is the right of the: state of the nationality  In Pakistan the limit of the territorial waters
of the injured alien. is: 12
 Extradition is the process of: handing over a  A diplomatic agent is immune from local
person accused or convict of a crime by a jurisdiction: In all cases
state to the demanding state.  Contiguous Zone in Pakistan is adjacent to
 The Economic and Social Council is: an and beyond the territorial waters and
organ of the U.N. extending seawards to a time 24.
 Subject of International Law are: States &  The width of the partition belt is generally
Individuals recognized to be 3 miles
68
 The Estrada Doctrine relates to:  According to the “Floating island Theory”,
Recognition of a government a floating island is: A ship bearing the
 The term of judges of the International national flag of a State
Court of Justice is: 9 years  In procedural matters the decisions of the
 Extradition is normally granted: In criminal Security Council are made by an affirmative
cases votes of any: 9 members
 Foreign ships have the right of innocent  Extradition is normally granted: In criminal
passage in the Territorial Waters cases
 A State has the right to use force for Armed  What is Contrabands? Goods which may
attack assist an enemy in the conduct of war
 International Court of Justice was  Diplomatic Asylum means: Asylum
established in: 1945 provided by a diplomatic mission
 The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic  The International Law Commission is a
Relations was adopted in: 1961 body to Codify International Law
 A State has complete immunity from the  The width of the maritime belt is generally
jurisdiction of foreign courts in: All cases recognize to be 3 miles
 International Law Commission is a body to:  The term of judges of International Court of
Codify International Law Justice is nine years
 The first case taken up by the International  Tobar Doctrine is related to the recognition
Court of Justice was: Corfu Channel of a government
 A state can nationalize foreign property  Conference of Bogota was held in 1948.
after paying compensation  Vienna Conference of 1961 is related to:
 Diplomatic Asylum means Asylum Diplomatic inter course and immunities
provided by a diplomatic mission  Who is called ‘the father of International
 Minister Resident are lower in rank than Law’? Hago Grotius
that of the Minister Plenipotentiary  A landlocked state is: Surrounded by land
 A State has the right to exploit in the from all sides
Continental Shelf: Both living and non-  The Alabama Claims Arbitration case was
living resources decided in 1872.
 The principle of rebus sie steatibus means  The Convention for the protection of the
Fundamental change of circumstances Ozone Layer was done on March 22, 1985
 The Schooner Exchange case dealt with the  Culvo Clause means: A state can intervene
principle of a State’s Courts have to accept on behalf of its nationals.
the validity of a foreign State’s acts.  Diplomatic relations are established by
 Hague Convention of 1970 dealt in properly Mutual consent
with the crimes relating to: Hijacking  Eruption of war terminates: Only political
 De facto Recognition is Circumstantial treaties
Recognition  Foreign ships sailing and anchoring in the
 The limit of the Territorial Waters of coastal waters of another state are: Subject
Pakistan is: 12 nautical miles to the law of both the States
 Continental Shelf of Pakistan may extend  Piracy is an offense within the jurisdiction
upto a distance of 200 nautical miles of the: All the States
 Exclusive Economic Zone of Pakistan is an  Territorial Waters are waters Adjacent to
area beyond and adjacent to the territorial the contiguous Zone
waters the limit of which is 200 nautical  Non-Permanent members of the Security
miles Council are elected for a period of 2 years
69
 The Montreal Convention for the safety of exert a strong moral influence in the
Civil Aviation was signed in 1971 settlement of the conflict.
 Diplomatic staff enjoys complete immunity  Embargo- detention by the state seeking
from: Civil Jurisdiction & Criminal redress of the vessels of the offending
Jurisdiction state or its nationals, whether such vessels
 Number of Judges of International Court of are formed in the territory of the former or
Justice is: Fifteen the high seas.
 Permanent Court of International Justice  UNITING FOR PEACE RESOLUTION
was established under League of Nations (1950)- it provides that if the Security
 Pacta Sunt Servanda means: Treaties Council, because of lack of unanimity of the
between states are to be respected permanent members, fails to exercise its
 Headquarters of International Court of primary responsibility for the maintenance
Justice is in Hague of peace and security in any case where
 Principles Jes Soli means: Grant of there appears to be threat to the peace,
nationality on the basis of place birth breach of peace, or act of aggression, the
 Much of international law is derived General Assembly shall consider the
through analogy from Roman law matter immediately.
 Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties was  Principal of “double criminality” means that
signed in 1969. the offence for which a person is extradited
 Truce mean: A temporary arrangement must be an offence in both the states.
between the belligerent parties for cessation  One of the modes of acquiring state territory
of hostilities is: occupation.
 Declaration is a treaty between the  The name of the present secretary general of
contracting parties which is not needed to the UN is: Ban ke Mon
be ratified.  The term Men of War signifies:A warship
 Kellog Briand Pact or Paris Peace Treaty  Albama claim arbritation determines the
was signed in 1928. principles of: Neutrality
 Recognition of new States is a matter of  Decision of arbritation is: Binding on parties
Policy of the State  Indo-Pakistan conflict in 1965 was a: War
 To get asylum in a foreign state by an  Nationality of a women as a result of
individual is his basic right marriage with a foreigner is changed
 Diplomatic envoys in the receiving state are  Tashkent declaration between india and
given immunity from both criminal and civil Pakistan in 1966 by USSR was a: Mediation
jurisdiction  Geneva convention for POWs was signed
 Territorial sea of a State is under its total in: 1949 (Also called 3rd Geneva)
control  Armed attack on enemy fall under:
 Bynkershock principle is related to: Intervention
Measurement of maritime belt.  Briand-Kellog pact was signed in Paris in:
 Inquiry – an investigation of the points 1928 (27 August 1928)
in question, on the theory that their  Universal declaration of Human rights was
elucidation will contribute to the solution passed by:UN General Assembly in 1948
of the differences between the parties.  Concept of state will was first time given by:
The findings of the party making the Hegel
inquiry are not conclusive upon the  Primary responsibility for Human Rights
disputing states but they nevertheless may question is given by the UN Charter to:
ECOSOC
70
PART V
Detailed Notes
(Important Topics)
71
THE EUROPEAN UNION

I. ORIGIN AND FOUNDING OF THE EU
The European Union (E.U) was established by the Treaty of Maastricht (known as the Treaty on
the European Union) signed on February 7, 1992, and came into force on November 1, 1993. This
establishment was a new step, but not the last, in a long process initiated in 1951 to create an ever
closer union among the peoples of Europe.
The initial step toward European integration took place in 1951. On April 18, 1951, the Treaty of
Paris established the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). The Treaty provided for: (a) the
elimination of tariffs and quotas on trade within the community in iron ore, coal, and steel; (b)
common external tariffs on imports relating to the coal and steel industries from other countries; and
(c) controls on production and sales. To supervise the operation of the ECSC, the Treaty established
several supranational institutions.
On March 25, 1957, the Treaty of Rome established the Economic European Community (EEC)
[It was referred to as the European Common Market], and the European Community of Atomic
Energy (Euratom). The EEC Treaty provided for: (a) the gradual elimination of import duties and
quotas on all trade between Member States and for the institution of a common external tariff; (b)
the implementation of common policies regarding transportation, agriculture, and social insurance;
and (c) the free movement of peoples and funds within the boundaries of the Community. Both the
EEC and the Euratom treaties created separate high commissions to oversee their operations.
In July 1967, the three Communities, the EEC, the ECSC and Euratom, fully merged as the
European Community (EC). In February 1986, the EC Member States signed the Single European
Act (SEA), a package of amendments and additions to the existing EC treaties. On February 7,
1992, the Treaty of Maastricht was signed amending the treaties of EC and linking the three
communities of the EC together by a common organizational structure, and consequently
establishing the European Union (EU) built around the existing Communities. The Treaty of
Maastricht was intended to expand political, economic and social integration among the Member
States, and furthermore, to establish Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) among them.
The Treaty of Maastricht was amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam which was signed on
October 2, 1997 and came into force in 1999 (the Treaty of Amsterdam also amended the Treaty
Establishing the European Community). The Treaty of Amsterdam called for more cooperation
between the EU Member States, provided for the removal of barriers to travel and immigration
among the EU Member States, and permitted the possibility of admitting Eastern European
countries to the EU.
In May 1998, the EU agreed to adopt a single European currency, the Euro, and to establish the
European Central Bank (ECB) to oversee the new currency and to take charge of the monetary
policies of the EU. On January 1, 1999, the Euro was officially put in circulation. In 2002, the
currency of countries that adopted the Euro ceased to exist (the United Kingdom decided not to
adopt the Euro).
On February 26, 2001, the Treaty of Nice was signed; it was entered into force on February 1,
2003. The Treaty of Nice was concluded to amend the Treaty on the European Union, the Treaty
Establishing the European Community, and certain related acts. It dealt mostly with reforming the
EU institutions so that the Union could function efficiently after its enlargement to 25 Member
72
States. The Treaty of Nice and the former Treaties of the EU have been merged into one
consolidated version.
II. STATUS AND MEMBERSHIP OF THE EU
The EU is an international regional organization within the framework of Chapter VIII of the
Charter of the United Nations. It is an organization of European countries dedicated to increasing
economic integration and strengthening cooperation among its members. Nevertheless, it is a
unique organization; it is not a federation like the United States, nor is it simply an organization for
cooperation between governments, like the United Nations. The countries that make up the EU
remain independent sovereign nations but they pool their sovereignty in order to gain a strength and
world influence none of them could have on their own. Pooling sovereignty means, in practice, that
the member states delegate some of their decision-making powers to shared institutions they have
created, so that decisions on specific matters of joint interest can be made at European level.
The European Union headquarters is located in Brussels, Belgium. Today the Union embraces
27 Member States. Between January 1995 and May 2004, the Union composed of 15 members. The
15 Member States of the Union were: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany,
Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United
Kingdom.
In May 2004, ten new members joined the Union, bringing its members to 25; these states were
eight countries of central and eastern Europe, namely the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, and two other countries, namely Cyprus and
Malta. In January 2007, two new members, namely Bulgaria and Romania joined the Union,
bringing the members to 27.
III. PRINCIPLES OF THE EU

The Union is founded on the principle of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and
fundamental freedom, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member
States. Moreover, the Union respects the national identities of the Member States.
IV. OBJECTIVES OF THE EU

The Treaty of the European Union sets the following objectives as the objectives of the Union:
a. To promote economic and social progress and a high level of employment and to achieve
balanced and sustainable development, in particular through the creation of an area without
frontiers;
b. To assert its identity on the international scene, in particular through the implementation of
common foreign and security policy including a common defense policy;
c. To strengthen the protection of the rights and interests of the nationals of its Member States
through the introduction of a citizenship of the Union;
d. To maintain and develop the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice.
V. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE EU

The major governing institutions of the E.U are: the European Commission, the Council of the
European Union, the European Parliament, the European Court of Justice, the European Court of
Auditors, and the European Central Bank. Alongside, there are a number of other bodies that play
specialized roles such as the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the
Regions, the European Investment Bank, and the European Ombudsman. In addition, specialized
agencies have been set up to handle certain technical, scientific or management tasks.
73
1) European Commission
The European Commission is the highest administrative body of the Union. It is independent of
national governments. Its job is to represent and uphold the interests of the EU as a whole. It
consists of 27 members (commissioners) who are appointed by the Council, acting by qualified
majority, for a period of five years, renewable. The Council acts on the common accord of the
member governments (each Member State has to nominate one commissioner) based on the grounds
of their (commissioners) general competence and whose independence is beyond any doubt. The
appointed members must be approved by the European Parliament; one of them will be the
President of the Commission. The members of the Commission must, in the interest of the Union,
be completely independent in the performance of their duties, and must not seek or take instructions
from any government or from any other body.
The Commission is EU executive arm. It is responsible for managing the day-to-day business of
the European Union: (a) proposing legislation to Parliament and the Council; (b) implementing its
policies and running its programmes; (c) managing its budget; (d) enforcing its law; and (e)
representing it on the international stage, for example by negotiating agreements between the EU
and other countries.
The Commission works under the political guidance of its President. It meets regularly, and acts
by the majority of its members. It is politically accountable to Parliament, which has the power to
dismiss the whole Commission by adopting a motion of censure. Individual members of the
Commission must resign if asked to do so by the President, provided the other commissioners
approve.
The Commission attends all the sessions of Parliament, where it must clarify and justify its
policies. It also replies regularly to written and oral questions posed by members of the Parliament.
The day-to-day running of the Commission is done by its administrative officials, experts,
translators, interpreters and secretarial staff. The ‘seat’ of the Commission is in Brussels (Belgium),
but it also has offices in Luxembourg, representations in all EU countries and delegations in many
capital cities around the world.
2) Council of the European Union

The Council of the EU is the primary decision-making body of the EU, and the most important
and powerful one. It represents the governments of the Member States. It consists of 27
government ministers, one from each Member States. Its meetings are attended by ministers
concerned with the subjects on the agenda. Each minister in the Council is empowered to commit
his or her government, i.e., the minister’s signature is the signature of the whole
government. Moreover, each minister in the Council is answerable to his or her national parliament
and to the citizens that parliament represents; this ensures the democratic legitimacy of the Council’s
decisions.
The office of the Council’s President rotates every six month. The Council meets when convened
by its President on his own initiative or at the request of one of its members or the Commission. The
Presidency is assisted by the General Secretariat, which prepares and ensures the smooth functioning
of the Council's work at all levels. The Council acts by a simple majority vote of its members on a
few minor issues, or by a qualified majority vote (QMV) on important issues. In QMV, each
Member State has an indivisible bloc of votes roughly proportional to its population; the bigger the
country’s population, the more votes it has.
74
The primary responsibility of the Council is to ensure the attainment of the objectives of the
Union through decisions and coordination of the general policies of the Member states. In this
regard it has been entrusted with the following six key responsibilities:
1. To pass European laws, jointly with the European Parliament in many policy areas.
2. To co-ordinate the broad economic policies of the member states.
3. To conclude international agreements between the EU and other countries or international
organizations.
4. To approve the EU budget, jointly with the European Parliament.
5. To develop the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) based on guidelines set by
the European Council.
6. To co-ordinate co-operation between the national courts and police forces in criminal matters.
3) European Parliament (EP)

The European Parliament (EP) consists of representatives of the peoples of the States, members
of the Union. Its members (EMPs) are directly elected by the citizens of the European Union to
represent their interests, for a term of five years. Direct elections to the EP were implemented in
1979; before this time, members were appointed by the legislatures of the member States. Elections
are held every five years, and every EU citizen who is on an electoral roll is entitled to
vote. Parliament thus expresses the democratic will of the Union's citizens (more than 490 million
people), and represents their interests in discussions with the other EU institutions.
The number of the representatives elected by each Member States is in a proportion roughly
appropriate to its population. The present parliament has 785 members from all 27 EU
countries. Nearly one third of them are women. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) do
not sit in national blocks, but in seven Europe-wide political groups, among them, there are those
presenting all views on European integration, from the strongly pro-federalist to the openly
Eurocentric.
The E.P holds an annual session on the second Tuesday in March, and may meet in
extraordinary session at the request of a majority of its members or the request of the Council or the
Commission. It elects its President and its officers from among its members. It acts by an absolute
majority, save as otherwise provided in the Treaty on the Union.
The European Parliament has three places of work: Brussels (Belgium), Luxembourg and
Strasbourg (France). Luxembourg is home to the administrative offices (the General
Secretariat). Meetings of the whole Parliament, known as “plenary sessions”, take place in
Strasbourg and sometimes in Brussels. Committee meetings are also held in Brussels.
The EP was originally designed merely as an advisory body; however, its right to participate in
EU decision making process was granted to it by later treaties. Nowadays, the EP has the following
responsibilities:
1. Passing European laws, jointly with the Council in many policy areas.
2. Exercising democratic supervision over the other EU institutions, and in particular the
Commission. It discusses the annual general report submitted to it by the Commission. It has the
power to approve or reject the nomination of commissioners, and the right to censure the
Commission as a whole or any of its members.
75
3. Influencing the EU budget. Parliament shares with the Council authority over the EU budget
and can therefore influence EU spending. At the end of the procedure, it adopts or rejects the
budget in its entirety.
4. Vetoing the accession of a new member to the Union.
Notably, the influence of the E.P is essentially negative. It can block but rarely initiate
legislation. Its consultative opinions can be ignored. It has no power over the Council of the EU.
4) The European Court of Justice (ECJ)

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is the judicial arm of the EU. It is based in Luxembourg. It
is composed of one judge per Member State, so that all 27 of the EU national legal systems are
represented. For the sake of efficiency, however, the Court rarely sits as the full court. It usually sits
as a “Grand Chamber” of just 13 judges or in chambers of five or three judges. Judgments of the
Court are decided by a majority vote and pronounced at a public hearing. Dissenting opinions are
not expressed. Decisions are published on the day of delivery.
The ECJ is responsible for the implementation of the treaties of the Union and the laws that the
EU establishes for itself and for its Member States: it ensures that the other EU institutions and the
Member States conform with the provisions of the EU treaties and legislations, and ensures that
the EU treaties and legislations are interpreted and applied in the same way in all EU countries, so
that the law is equal for everyone. The Court also has the power to settle legal disputes between EU
Member States, EU institutions, businesses and individuals.
Notably, the ECJ has no direct link with the national courts and no control over how they apply
and interpret national law, but it has established that the EU laws supersede national law.
The ECJ is assisted by eight “Advocates General”. The role of the Advocates General is to
present reasoned opinions on the cases brought before the Court; they must do so publicly and
impartially.
5) The European Court of Auditors

The European Court of Auditors consists of 27 members; one member from each EU states,
appointed by the Council for a renewable term of six years. The members elect one of them as
President for a renewable term of three years.
The Court of Auditors is based in Luxembourg. Its job is to check that EU funds, which come
from the taxpayers, are properly collected and that they are spent legally, economically and for the
intended purpose; its aim is to ensure that the taxpayers get maximum value for their money. The
Court of Auditors gives its opinion on proposals for EU financial legislation and for EU action to
fight fraud. Furthermore, it has the right to audit any person or organization handling EU funds.
6) The European Central Bank

The European Central Bank (ECB) was set up in 1998, under the Treaty on European Union,
and it is based in Frankfurt (Germany). Its job is to manage the euro, the EU single currency. The
ECB is also responsible for framing and implementing the EU economic and monetary policy.
To carry out its role, the ECB works with the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) which
covers all 27 EU Member States. However, only 13 of these members have so far adopted the
euro. The 13 members collectively make up the “euro area” and their central banks, together with
the ECB, make up what is called the “Eurosystem”. The ECB, working closely with the national
central banks, prepares and implements the decisions taken by the Eurosystem decision-making
bodies: the Governing Council, the Executive Board and the General Council.
76
The ECB works in complete independence. Neither the ECB, the national central banks of the
Eurosystem, nor any member of their decision-making bodies can ask for or accept instructions from
any other body. The EU institutions and member state governments must respect this principle and
must not seek to influence the ECB or the national central banks.
VI. ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE EU

The European unity has come a long way since the first initial step of 1951, from a mere
economic cooperation between few European states, in specific areas, to a comprehensive
cooperation between a large number of European states, in almost all fields. The European Union
(EU) is the keystone for such comprehensive cooperation. It is the organization which provides the
framework for cooperation in economic and monetary, foreign and security, and justice and home
affairs between its Members, the 27 European States.
Since its establishment in 1992, the EU has been working hard for greater integration and
consolidation among its Member States. The membership of the EU has grown from 15 to 27
states. The EU has succeeded in establishing its supranational institutions and their supranational
functions. It has succeeded in developing a common body of law, common policies and practices,
and a great deal of cooperation among its members. Particularly, it has formalized common
policies in combating crime, especially drug trafficking, and in visa issues, immigration, external
border controls and asylum. It has adopted the single European currency, the Euro. It has greatly
succeeded in developing a culture of collaboration between its Members.
Regarding the major objective of the EU to have a common foreign policy, to speak with one
voice and to have a single policy position on world issues, the EU has succeeded in achieving
common economics and trade policy with states outside the Union. Bilateral and multilateral trade
agreements have been signed between the EU and most developing countries. Common political
positions, however, have been adopted in certain situations, not in all situations facing the Union;
this has been due to conflicts between national interests of the Member States. EU ambassadors in
foreign capitals and at the United Nations collaborate closely, and EU member states develop
common foreign policy statements.
In conclusion, it is not an exaggeration to say that the EU has become a fact of life on the
international stage. It has succeeded in occupying an essential and central place in Europe and in
the World.
77
RECOGNITION AND ITS TYPES

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEFACTO AND DEJURE
International community is a living entity in the sense that it is changeable. The identity and
number of States are by no means fixed and invariable. History produces many changes. Old States
disappear or unite with other States to form a new State, or disintegrate and split into several new
States. Former colonies attain statehood. Even in the case of existing State, a revolution or
unconstitutional event may occur and the status of new government becomes a matter of concern to
other States, which formerly had relations with the displaced government. These instances raise
several problems for the international community. The most important problem is the question of
recognition of the new State or the new government. Each State has to decide whether to recognize
the new State or the new government.
Recognition involves legal consequences both internally and internationally. If an entity is
recognized as a State, it will be entitled to rights and subjected to duties that would not be relevant
otherwise, and it will enjoy privileges and immunities of a foreign State, before the national courts,
which would not be allowed to other entities.
What is recognition? Why and how is it granted? What are the types and forms of
recognition? What are the legal consequences generated from recognition?
The answers to all these questions are dealt with in the following sections.
SECTION 1: DEFINITION AND NATURE OF RECOGNITION
Recognition is a discretionary unilateral act exercised by the government of a State officially

acknowledging the existence of another State or government or belligerency. It is one of the most
difficult subjects of International Law. It is a complicating mixture of politics and laws both
national and international. It is difficult mainly for the following three reasons.
(1) Recognition is, as the practice of States shows, much more a question of politics than of law.
The act of the recognizing State is conditioned principally by the necessity of protecting its own
national interests, which lie in maintaining proper relations with the new State or the new
government. However, there is an irresistible tendency of the recognizing State to use legal
principles as a convenient camouflage for political decisions. For this reason, recognition is
considered to be a political act with legal consequences.
(2) In form and in substance, recognition remains primarily a unilateral diplomatic act on the
part of the recognizing State. No collective procedure for granting recognition based on established
legal principles has yet been evolved by the international community.
(3) There are several distinct categories of recognition. There are the recognition of a new State,
a new government and belligerency. In addition there are de jure, de facto, conditional, implied and
express recognition. Although the same principles may be applicable to some of these types, it is still
that each of them is subject to different legal principles and entails different legal consequences.
Basically, there are two theories as to the nature, functions and effects of recognition, the
constitutive theory and the declaratory theory. The constitutive theory considers that the act of
78
recognition by other States creates a new State and grants it the international legal personality. This
implies that the new State is established as an international person by virtue of the will and consent
of already existing States. In case of a new government, it is the recognition that grants it the status
at the international level.
The Constitutive theory is opposed by the declaratory theory. According to the declaratory
theory, recognition has no legal effects; statehood or the status of a new government exists as such
prior to and independently of recognition. The existence of a State or a new government is a
question of pure fact. The act of recognition is merely a formal acknowledgement of established
facts. When an entity satisfies the requirements of a State objectively, it is a State with all
international rights and duties, and other States must treat it as such.
Historically, the constitutive theory has its merits. During the Nineteenth Century, International
Law was regarded as applying mainly between States with European civilization. Other countries
were admitted as States to this community only if they were recognized by those member States.
Even today, recognition can sometimes have a constitutive effect, although State practice is not
always consistent. When the establishment of a new State or government is in violation of
International Law, this State or government is often regarded as having no legal existence until it is
recognized.
However, the prevailing view today is that recognition is declaratory and does not create a State.
This view was laid down in the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States of
1933. Article 3 of this Convention provides that “The political existence of the state is independent
of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its
integrity and independence”.
Actually, the two theories are of little assistance in explaining recognition or determining the
status of non-recognized entities in practice. In addition, the practical differences between these two
theories are not significant. Under the declaratory theory, the decision whether an entity satisfies the
criteria of statehood is left to other States, and the granting formal recognition to another State,
which is a unilateral act, is left to the political discretion of States. On the other hand, the
significance of the constitutive theory has diminished because of the obligation imposed on States to
treat an entity that satisfies the criteria of statehood as a state. Moreover, the States practice
regarding recognition shows that States follow a middle position between these two theories.
SECTION 2: TYPES AND FORMS OF RECOGNITION

There are several distinct categories of recognition. There are recognition of a new State,
recognition of a new government and recognition of belligerency. In addition there are different
entities to be recognized. Recognition itself may take different forms. Recognition may be de
jure or de facto. Recognition may be express or implied. It may be conditional.
(A) Recognition of a State and of a Government

When a new State comes into existence, other States are confronted with the question whether or
not to recognize it. Recognition implies a willingness of the recognizing State to deal with the new
state as a member of the international community. To grant recognition to a new entity, the entity
must satisfy the basic requirements of statehood, which have been discussed in the previous
chapter. The first example of State recognition in the history of nations was the recognition in 1648
by Spain of the United Netherlands
Recognition of a State defines its membership in the world community, and consequently
supports its claim as an international person. It allows the recognized State to exercise the rights and
79
duties of a State under International Law. Recognition of a new State automatically involves
recognition of its government, although the latter may be recognized only de facto.
Recognition of a new government is quite different from the recognition of a new State, although
in principle most of the considerations whether legal or political apply equally to both types of
recognition. As far as a State is concerned, the satisfaction of basic requirements of statehood is
examined by the recognizing State before granting its recognition to the new State. Recognition of a
new government requires its satisfaction of certain conditions such as effectiveness and
independence. Notably, the existence of an effective and independent government is the essence of
statehood. By recognizing a government, the recognizing State accepts to deal with this government
as the governing authority of the State and grant it the legal consequences of such status in terms of
privileges and immunities within its domestic legal system. In both these types of recognition, we
should not forget the great role played by political considerations in the decision whether or not to
grant recognition.
The granting or refusal of recognition of a government has no effect on the recognition of a State
itself. Recognition of a State affects its legal personality, whether creating or acknowledging it,
while recognition of a government affects its status as the governing authority, not the State. A
subsequent government may not be recognized, even though the recognition of a State is permanent
as regard to its existence and its status as a legal person under International Law. If the government
of a State is changed in accordance to constitutional processes, no problem of recognition arises as
long as the new government is firmly in power and secures stability in the country. In this case,
recognition by other States is purely a matter of formality. The problem of recognition of a new
government arises in cases when changes occur as a result of an unconstitutional practice or a
revolution. The recognition of the revolutionary government is a serious problem and the decision
thereon is made with great care. On this matter, no definite legal principles are established and the
practice of States is inconsistent and confused. However, certain rules have been recognized to
cover recognition of illegal changes in government. Such rules imply the acceptance of the realities
of the transfer of power and suggest that once a new government effectively controls the country and
that this seemed likely to continue, recognition should not be withheld.
(B) Recognition of Belligerency

Belligerency exists when a portion of the State’s territory and population is under the de
facto control of insurgents seeking either to establish a separate State or to overthrow the existing
government. To be recognized as belligerents, the insurgents must have a political organization able
to exercise such control and maintain some degree of popular support, and conduct themselves
according to the laws of war. Accordingly, recognition of belligerency is a formal acknowledgement
by third-party States of the existence of a state of war between the State’s central government and a
portion of that State. This implies that the recognizing State recognizes that a revolt within another
State has attained such a magnitude as to constitute in fact a state of war, entitling the revolutionists
or insurgents to the benefit, and imposing upon them the obligations, of the laws of war. Two
conditions should exist before a third-party State grant belligerent recognition, the insurgency has
progressed to a state of general war and the effects of this war have gone beyond the borders of the
State to affect other States. By this recognition, the insurrectionary movement is elevated to the
status of a quasi-international person having certain rights and duties under International Law. This
sort of international personality is both nonpermanent and particular. It is nonpermanent, because
the insurrection may fail. It is particular, because it exists only for the recognizing States.
80
Recognition of belligerency was accorded during most of civil wars of the Nineteenth Century,
such as the revolts of the Spanish-American colonies and the American Civil War, and during most
of the wars of independence of the Twentieth Century.
To grant recognition of belligerency, the recognizing State is always dictated by the primary
motive, which is to protect and promote its national interests. The recognizing State may intend
either to get the status of neutrality between the belligerent parties or to support the legitimacy of the
insurrection.
(C) De Jure and De Facto Recognition

The practice of States draws a distinction between de jure and de facto recognition. This distinction
usually arises in the case of governments since States can normally be recognized only de jure,
although there have been few cases of recognizing States de facto. For example, Indonesia was
recognized de facto by several States while it was fighting for independence against Netherlands
during 1945-1949.
De jure recognition means that according to the recognizing State the recognized State or
government fulfils the requirements laid down by International Law. De facto recognition means that
in the opinion of the recognizing State, with all due reservations for the future, the recognized State
or government provisionally and temporarily fulfils the above requirements in fact. As such, de facto
recognition is provisional and temporary and could be withdrawn at any future date, although it is
usually followed by de jure recognition. Notably, the terms de jure and de facto describe the
government, not the act of recognition. Choosing the type of recognition to be granted, the
recognizing State is always occupied by political realities and considerations as well as its national
interests.
De facto recognition of a government implies that there is a doubt as to the permanence and
viability of the concerned government. De facto recognition involves a hesitant position by the
recognizing State, an attitude of wait and see, which is usually followed by de jure recognition when
the recognizing State accepts that the effective control exerted by the government in question is
permanent and firmly established and there is no legal basis for withholding the de jure recognition.
De facto recognition may be a preface stage to the de jure recognition, particularly in cases of
governments coming into power by unconstitutional processes. In such a case, de facto recognition is
a non-committal act whereby the recognizing State acknowledges that there is a de facto government
possessing in fact the powers of sovereignty, but such possession may be illegal, unstable or
nonpermanent. At a later stage when the need for reservations no longer exists because the
permanence of the de facto government is completely assured, de jure recognition is formally
granted. For example, United Kingdom recognized the Soviet government first de facto in 1921 and
later de jure in 1924.
During the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939), United Kingdom granted recognition to the two rival
parties, de jure recognition to the Republican government and de facto recognition to General
Franco’s government that gradually took over the country and its recognition turned into de jure.
During 1988-1991, most States recognized the two rival governments in Lebanon de facto until the
ending of the insurrection led by General Aoun, and then the government of Salim Al Huss was
accorded de jure recognition.
When recognition is granted by an express statement, it should always be regarded as de
jure recognition, unless the recognizing State provides otherwise. When recognition is implied, there
81
will often be uncertainty as to the intention of the recognizing State whether granting de jure or de
facto recognition.
Choosing the type of recognition to be granted, the recognizing State is occupied mostly with
political realities and considerations as well as own national interests, and to a lesser degree with
legal considerations. A statement that a government is recognized as de factomay, on one hand,
involve a purely political judgment, involving either a reluctant or cautious acceptance of an
effective government, lawfully established according to International Law, or an unwarranted
acceptance of it as a de jure government. It may, on the other hand, be intended to be or to include a
legal determination of the existence of an effective government, but with reservations as to its
viability and permanence. It may, of course, happen that the legal and political considerations for
caution coincide. The distinction between these two types of recognition is insubstantial, since it is a
question of intention, not of a legal matter. However, it is considered that de jure recognition is
irrevocable while de facto recognition can be withdrawn. Actually, in the political sense recognition
of either type can always be withdrawn, while in the legal sense it cannot be unless a change of
circumstances warrants such withdrawal.
Whatever the basis for the distinction between de jure and de facto recognition, the effects of the
two types are mostly the same. Nevertheless, there are certain important differences between these
two types, which are:
(a) Only the de jure recognized State or government can claim to receive property locally situated
in the territory of the recognizing State.
(b) Only the de jure recognized State or government can represent the old State for the purposes
of State succession or with regard of espousing any claim of its national for injury done by the
recognizing State in breach of International Law.
(c) The representatives of the de facto recognized state or government may not be entitled to full
diplomatic immunities and privileges.
Whatever the type of recognition, once given may in certain circumstances be

withdrawn. Actually, this is more easily done with regard to de facto recognition than to de
jure recognition, because of the nature of the former one, which is temporary. De factorecognition is
intended to be a preliminary acceptance of political realities and may be withdrawn in accordance
with a change in political conditions. When a de facto government loses its effective control over the
country, the reason for recognition disappears and it may be withdrawn. De jure recognition, on the
other hand, because it is intended to be generally a definitive act, it is more difficult to be
withdrawn. When a government recognized de jure is overthrown, a new situation arises and the
question of recognizing a new government will have to be faced. In such instance, the withdrawal of
recognition of the overthrown government is assumed; it does not have to be expressed. Withdrawal
of recognition of one government without recognizing a successor is a possibility. This approach,
for example, was adopted by the United Kingdom and France with regard to Colombia in 1979.
Withdrawal of recognition remains possible in other circumstances. The loss of one of the
required criteria of statehood will result in the withdrawal of recognition of a State. Recognition of
belligerency will naturally terminate with the end of the state of belligerency.
Because recognition is essentially a political act, no matter how circumscribed or conditioned by
the law, a State has a discretionary power to determine whether a particular situation justifies a
withdrawal of recognition and to take such action if it serves its national interests.
Notably, we must not confuse the withdrawal of recognition with the rupture in the diplomatic
relations. In the practice of States, the usual method of expressing disapproval with the actions of
82
other governments is to break diplomatic relations, since this method does not entail the legal
consequences and the problems that the withdrawal of recognition would produce.
(D) Express and Implied Recognition

Recognition is essentially a matter of intention. It is founded upon the will and intention of a
State. It may be express or implied. The mode by which recognition is accomplished is of no special
significance. It is essential, however, that the act constituting recognition must give a clear
indication of the intention either to deal with the new State as such, or to accept the new
government as the effective government of the State and to maintain relation with it, or to recognize
in case of insurgents that they are entitled to belligerent rights.
Express recognition indicates the acknowledgment of the recognized State by a formal
declaration. In the practice of States, this formal declaration may happen by either a formal
announcement of recognition, a personal message from the head of a State or the minister of foreign
affairs, a diplomatic note, or a treaty of recognition.
Recognition needs not to be express. It may be implied in certain circumstances. There are
circumstances in which it may be possible to declare that in acting in a certain manner, one State
does by implication recognize another State or government. However, because of this possibility,
States may make an express declaration to the effect that a particular action involving another State
is by no means to be regarded as inferring any recognition. This position, for example, was
maintained by Arab States with regard to Israel.
Implied recognition is recognition of a State or a government through actions other than official
declarations or actions intended to grant recognition. The required actions for implied recognition
must be unequivocal, leaving no doubt of the intention of the State performing them to recognize the
State or government and to deal with it as such. There is a variety of actions undertaken by a State
in regard to an unrecognized State or government. Some actions are conclusively regarded implying
recognition, while others are not. Included in the first category are the official congratulatory
statements upon independence, the formal establishment of diplomatic relations and the conclusion
of a bilateral treaty. The actions that do not conclusively imply recognition are the participation in
multilateral treaty, the membership in international institutions, the common participation in
international conference, the maintenance of informal and unofficial contacts, the initiation of
negotiations with an unrecognized state, and the making of claims against an unrecognized State.
(E) Conditional Recognition
The political character of recognition is manifested in what is termed conditional
recognition. Sometimes States are recognized subject to certain conditions, generally the fulfillment
of certain obligations. Examples of such conditions are: the respect and the guarantee of the rights
of ethnics, national groups and minorities; the respect of religious freedoms; and the respect of the
rule of law, democracy and human rights.
The failure to fulfill the obligations does not annul the recognition, as once given it cannot be
withdrawn. The status obtained by the recognized State from the act of recognition cannot be
withdrawn. The recognized State will be guilty of a breach of International Law, and this will allow
the recognizing State to severe diplomatic relations as a form of sanction. However, the conditional
recognition of a State or government in process of emerging is probably revocable.
SECTION 3: LEGAL EFFECTS OF RECOGNITION

Although recognition is essentially a political act, it is one that entails important legal
consequences. Recognition involves legal effects both in the international level and in the domestic
83
level. If an entity is recognized as a State, it will be entitled to rights and subjected to duties that
would not be relevant otherwise, and it will enjoy privileges and immunities of a foreign State before
the national courts of other States, which would not be allowed to other entities.
What are the effects of recognition? Are there effects for non-recognition? The Answers to these
two questions are dealt with in the following sub-sections.
(A) International effects of recognition

Apart of all the theoretical arguments involving the constitutive and declaratory theories, it is
accepted that recognition of a State or government is a legal acknowledgement of factual
situations. Recognition entails the recognized State the enjoyment of rights and the subjecting to
duties prescribed in International Law for States (these rights and duties are discussed in the
previous chapter).
Recognition of a State by another State does not lead to any obligation to establish diplomatic
relations or any other specific links between them. Nor does the termination of diplomatic relations
automatically lead to withdrawal of recognition. These remain a matter of political discretion.
It should not be assumed that non-recognition of a State or government would deprive that entity
rights and duties under International law. It is well established in International Law that the
political existence of a State is independent of recognition by other States, and thus an unrecognized
State must be deemed subject to the rules of International Law. Unrecognized State is entitled to
enjoy certain rights and be subject to many duties. It has the rights to defend its integrity and
independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity and consequently to organize itself as it
sees fit. The exercise of these rights by unrecognized State has no other limitation than the exercise
of the rights of other States according to International Law. Moreover, unrecognized State is subject
to most of the rules of International Law, such as those related to the law of wars, and is bound by
its agreements.
Non-recognition, with its consequent absence of diplomatic relations, may affect the
unrecognized State in asserting its rights against unrecognizing States, or before their national
courts. However, non-recognition will not affect the existence of such rights, nor its duties, under
International Law.
(B) Internal Effects of Recognition

Recognition entails the recognized State the rights to enjoy privileges and immunities of a foreign
State before the national courts, which would not be allowed to other entities. However, because
recognition is essentially a political act reserved to the executive branch of government, the judiciary
branch must accept the discretion of the executive branch and give effect to its decisions. The
national courts can only accept and enforce the legal consequences that flow from the act of
recognition. They can accept the rights of a foreign government to sue, to be granted immunities or
to claim other rights of a governmental nature. They can give effect to the legislative and executive
acts of the recognized State. In the case of non-recognition, national courts will not accept such
rights. In this context, recognition is constitutive, because the act of recognition itself creates the
legal effects within the domestic jurisdiction of a State.
84
SOURCES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

The term “Sources of Public International Law” is used to mean two things: first, the actual
materials determining the rules applicable to a given international situation (the material sources),
and second, the legal methods creating rules of general application (the formal sources). However,
because it is difficult to maintain this distinction, the two meanings are used interchangeably.
Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) states the following:
1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as
are submitted to it, shall apply,
a- international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly
recognized by the contesting states;
b- international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
c- the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
d- subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and teaching of the most highly
qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of
law.
2. This provision shall not prejudice the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the
parties agree thereto.
This Article lists the traditional sources of Public International Law, the actual legal materials
that the ICJ has to apply to international disputes. According to this Article, these sources are of
two types: the primary sources that are represented by the international conventions, international
custom and general principles of law; and the subsidiary sources that are represented by the
decisions of courts and the opinions of legal scholars. Moreover, this Article lists
“ex aequo et bono” (equity) as an alternative source of Public International Law applied by the Court
if the parties agree thereto. However, in addition to these traditional sources, there are
contemporary sources, such as the acts of the international organizations.
Thus, the sources of the contemporary Public International Law can be classified into seven:
1- International customs;
2- Treaties;
3- General principles of law;
4- Judicial decisions;
5- Opinions of legal scholars;
6- Ex aequo et bono (Equity);
7- Acts of international organizations.
In the following sections, these sources are discussed.
1. International Customs
Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ refers to an international custom as evidence of a general
practice accepted as law. This definition comprises of two elements: a general practice and its
acceptance as law. These two elements are necessary for the formation of customary international
law. The first element, the behavioral or objective element, requires a recurring consistent action or
lack of action by States, which is indicated by such activities as official statements or conducts,
legislative or administrative action, court decisions and diplomatic behaviors or correspondence.
85
The second element (the psychological or subjective element) entails the conviction that in similar
case such a practice is required or permitted by international law. In this sense, international
customs may be defined as practices or usages which have been observed by a large number of States
over a lengthy period of time and considered by them to be legally obligatory, i.e., being a law.
Notably, the terms “custom” and “usage” are often used interchangeably. Strictly speaking, there
is a clear technical distinction between the two. Usage is an international habit of action that has not
received full attestation and does not reflect a legal obligation; an example of a usage is the salute at
sea. Usages may be conflicting; custom must be unified and consistent. A usage to become a
customary rule of law, it must fulfill two conditions: acceptance or recognition by a large number of
States and repetition over a lengthy period of time. A custom has a definite obligation attached to
it. Failure to follow custom results in State responsibility, and consequently entails the possibility of
punishment (sanction) or of retaliation against that State.
International custom, as Article 38 indicates, is one of the primary sources of International Law
which the ICJ shall apply. In fact, international customs constituted the bulk of the rules of
International Law. Historically, custom had played a great role in the formation of the rules of
International Law. However, since the beginning of the Twentieth Century, this role has been
decreased in favor of the law-making treaties.
2. Treaties
The term “treaty” is used as a generic term embracing all kinds of international agreements which
are known by a variety of different names such as, conventions, pacts, general acts, charters,
statutes, declarations, covenants, protocol, as well as, the name agreements itself. A treaty may be
defined as an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by
International Law.
Article 38 of the Statute of ICJ indicates that international conventions (treaties), whether general
or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states should be applied by the
Court to the disputes submitted to it. Although this Article divided treaties into two kinds, general
treaties and particular treaties; it is only the first kind, the general treaties or the so called the law-
making treaties, which intended to have a universal and general application, constitute a primary
source of International Law.
The particular treaties or the so called treaty-contracts are not directly a source of International
Law since their application is limited only to the contracting parties which are two or small number
of States, and they deal with limited affairs . This kind of treaties does not create new rules of
Public International Law, but at best, only new rules of particular or regional application. However,
as a substantial number of States accept and recognize such new rules formulated in this kind of
treaties as obligatory, these rules will become part of the Public International Law. Examples of
such treaties are bilateral treaties on commercial, and friendship relations.
The law-making treaties constitute a primary source of International Law. Since the middle of the
Nineteenth Century, there has been an astonishing development of law-making treaties. The rapid
expansion of this kind of treaties has been due to the inadequacy of customs in meeting the urgent
demands arose from the changes which have been transforming the whole structure of international
life. Law-making treaties have been concluded to regulate almost every aspect concerning the
international community. Examples of important treaties are: the Charter of the United Nations,
the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, the
86
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966 and the Convention on the Law of the
Sea of 1982.
In contrast with the process of creating law through custom, treaties are a more modern, more
deliberate and speedy method. They are of growing importance in International Law. Their role in
the formation of new rules of International Law increases day after day. Today, the law-making
treaties are considered the most important primary source of Public International Law.
3. General Principles of Law

Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ refers to “the general principles of law recognized by civilized
nations” (all nations are now considered as civilized) as a primary source of International Law. This
source is listed the third after international conventions and international customs. The Court shall
apply the general principles of law in cases where treaties and customs provide no rules to be
applied.
Notably, there is no agreement on what the term “general principles of law” means. Some say it
means general principles of international law; others say it means general principles of national
law. Actually, there is no reason why it should not mean both; the greater expansion in the meaning
of this term, the greater chance of finding rules to fill the gaps in treaty law and customary
law. Indeed, international tribunals had applied general principles of law in both senses for many
years before the Permanent Court of International Justice was established in 1920.
Nevertheless, there are various opinions as to the origin of the general principles of law. Some
regard them as being originated from the Natural Law which underlies the system of International
Law and constitutes the criteria for testing the validity of the positive rules. Others regard them as
stemmed from the national legal systems (Positive Law) and have been transplanted to the
international level by recognition.
Whatever the meaning of the term “general principles of law” and the origin of these principles,
these principles are considered to be at the foundation of any legal system, including International
Law. Actually, there is an agreement that the general principles of law do constitute a separate
source of International Law. Examples of general principles of law are the principles of consent,
equality, administration of justice, good faith, reciprocity, forbidding abuse of right
and res judicata.
4. Judicial Decisions
Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ directs the Court to apply judicial decisions as subsidiary
means for the determination of rules of law. This direction is made subject to the provisions of
Article 59, which states that “the decision of the Court has no binding force except between the
parties and in respect of that particular case.” The provision of Article 59 of the Statute of the ICJ is
understood to mean that the Court is not obliged to follow previous decisions. So while, as Article
59 ascertained, the doctrine of precedent as it is known in the Common Law, whereby the decisions
of certain courts must be followed by other courts, does not exist in International Law, it is still that
the decisions of the international courts (PCIJ and ICJ) are quoted as authoritative decisions, and
international courts have always strived to follow their previous decisions to insert certainty and
uniformity within their judicial process, or at least, they have had to take previous decisions into
account.
The judge of the ICJ sometimes does a little more than merely determine a law; he may establish
a law. This has occurred in many instances: the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries case of 1951, which stated
87
the criteria for the recognition of baseline from which to measure the territorial sea; and
the Reparations case of 1949, which established the legal personality of international organizations.
The PCIJ, during its existence, gave a large number of decisions and advisory opinions on
matters of international concern, thereby developing International Law. The ICJ, the successor of
the PCIJ, has been doing the same.
As the term “judicial decisions” referred to by Article 38 also encompasses decisions (awards) of
international arbitral courts (tribunals) and the decisions of national courts, these decisions have
been playing a role in the development of International Law.
There have been many international arbitral tribunals, such as the Permanent Court of
Arbitration and the various mixed-claimed tribunals, including the British-American Mixed Claims
Tribunal and the Iran-US claims Tribunal. Although these tribunals differ from the international
courts in some ways, many of their decisions have been extremely significant in the development of
International Law.
The decisions of national courts of various nations have played a role the development of
International Law, particularly the international customary law. These Decisions help to form
international customs. They show what the national courts have accepted as international law and
how the International Law, in the given case, is understood in that country. Examples of such rules
of law developed by, or derived from the uniform decisions of national courts are certain rules of
extradition law, the rules related to State recognition, and the rules of diplomatic immunity.
One may finally say that judicial decisions, whether international or national, have played an
important part in the development of International Law. The international customary law has
largely developed from case to case, and a large number of cases have been submitted to
international as well as national courts of various nations.
5. Writings of legal scholars

Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ includes as a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of
law, “the teachings of the most qualified publicists of the various nations”. The term “teachings of
publicists” means “writings”, “opinions” or “works” of legal scholars, jurists or writers.
This Article emphasizes the evidentiary value of writings of the legal scholars. The primary
function of these writings is to provide reliable evidence of the law. Writers on International Law
cannot make the law; their works are to elucidate and ascertain the principles and rules of
International Law. To be binding, the rules and principles must have received the consent, whether
express or implied of States, who are to be bound by it.
Historically, the writers on International Law such as Gentili, Grotius, Pufendorf and Vattel were
a primary factor in the evolution of the modern International Law; they were the supreme legal
authorities of the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries. They determined the scope, form and content of
International Law. However, the importance of legal writings began to decline as a result of the
emphasis on the state sovereignty; treaties and customs assumed the dominant position in the
exposition and development of International Law.
Nevertheless, like judicial decisions, the opinions of legal scholars can provide evidence of the
existence of customary law and can help in developing new rules of law.
The opinions of legal scholars are used widely. Arbitral tribunals and national courts make
extensive use of the writings of jurists. However, the International Court of Justice makes little use
of jurisprudence, and judgments contain few references; this is, primarily, because of the willingness
88
of the Court to avoid a somewhat undesirable selection of citations. However, many references to
writers are found in the pleadings before the Court.
6. Ex aequo et bono (Equity)

Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ lists ex aequo et bono as an alternative basis for a decision by the
Court in place of the normally employed legal rules. The Court can decide a case submitted to
it ex aequo et bono (in justice and fairness) only if the parties agree thereto. Ex aequo et bono is
somewhat analogous to but not exactly the same as the Common Law concept of equity. It is
broader than equity and gives the Court greater power than the latter. It allows the Court to decide a
case on considerations other than legal rules, or even in contrary to these rules, if it sensed that
justice can be served thereby . Thus the term “ex aequo et bono” means “justice and fairness” or
“equity”.
Neither the International Court of Justice nor its predecessor, the Permanent Court of
International Justice, has been called upon to decide a case ex aequo et bono, although principles of
equity have been applied by these courts in some cases. The ICJ in the North Sea Continental cases
(1969) directed the delimination between the parties (West Germany, Holland and Denmark) “in
accordance with equitable principles”. The PCIJ in the Diversion of Water from the Meuse River case
(1937) applied principles of equity after considering them as part of the International Law which it
should apply.Moreover, international arbitral tribunals have resorted to the principles of equity in
several cases.
Despite the application of the principle of equity by international courts, the existence
of “equity” as a separate and distinct source of law is highly controversial. Some regard equity as a
source of International Law, and apply it as distinguished from law; however, they often appeal to
natural law in order to strengthen their arguments. Thus to them the three terms “equity”, “justice”
and “natural law” tend to merge into one another. During the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries
natural law was a major source of International Law. In the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries
arbitrators have often been authorized to apply justice and equity as well as International Law; such
authorization were more common before 1920 than they are today.
Other scholars do not recognize equity as a separate and distinct source of law; they regard the
principles of equity as part of the general principles of law that are common to all national legal
systems.
Whatever the position may be, it is doubtful whether equity form a source of international law. It
cannot be assumed that a judge uses equity as a source of law every time he describes a rule as
equitable or just. Strictly, “equity” cannot be a source of law; yet it may play an important role in
supplementing the law or may appear as a part of judicial reasoning. A judge or arbitrator can
always use equity to interpret or fill gaps in the law, even when he has not been expressly authorized
to do so. But he may not give a decision ex aequo etbono unless he has been expressly authorized to
do so.
7. Acts of International Organizations

The growth of international organizations since the First World War has been accompanied by
suggestions that the acts of these organizations should be recognized as a source of International
Law.The question involved hereto is whether the decisions of the organs of these organizations can
be regarded as a separate source of International Law.
Decisions of the organs of international organizations may be binding or non-binding. An organ
may be authorized to take decisions which are binding on member states; only these binding
89
decisions are regarded as a source of the International Law. The only clear example of binding
decisions is the resolutions which the Security Council of the United Nations are authorized to take
under Chapter Seven (VII) of the Charter of the United Nations dealing with actions related to
threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression.
However, there is a controversy concerns the non-binding decisions of the organs of the
international organizations. Since almost all the organs of the international organizations are
composed of representatives of member states and their acts are merely the acts of the states
represented in these organs, they would probably constitute an evidence of customary law because
they reflect the views of the state voting for them.
The obvious examples of such type of acts are the resolutions and declarations of the General
Assembly of the United Nations. When the vast majority of States, in the General Assembly,
consistently vote for resolutions and declarations on a certain topic, a State practice will be
established and a binding rule of customary International Law will emerge. Thus, these resolutions
and declarations will constitute an evidence of the existence of customary International
Law. Examples of such resolutions and declarations regarded as examples of State Practice which
have led to binding rules of customary International Law are: “the Resolution on Prohibition of the
Use of Nuclear Weapons for War Purposes”, “the Declaration on Granting of Independence to
Colonial Countries and Peoples”, “the Declaration on Permanent Sovereignty over Natural
Resources” and “the Declaration of Legal Principles Governing Activities of States in the
Exploration and Use of Outer Space”.
Resolutions and declarations of the General Assembly may also provide a basis for the
progressive development of the International Law and the speedy adaptation of customary law to
the conditions of modern life. Moreover, in some instances, a resolution or declaration may have
direct legal effects as an authoritative interpretation and application of the principles stated in the
Charter of the United Nations.
90
THE COLD WAR

The Cold War was the conflict between the United States and its NATO allies - loosely described as
the West - and the former Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies - loosely described as the Eastern
Bloc. A full-scale "east versus west" war never actually broke out, hence the metaphor of a "cold"
war, rather than a "hot" shooting war. Instead, the conflict was fought primarily on economic,
philosophic, cultural, social, and political levels. It continued from the end of World War II until the
breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Except for the Korean War, Vietnam War and the
conflict in Afghanistan, the aggression between those two parts of the world never shaped in an
armed conflict, but was conducted by or against surrogates and through spies and traitors which
were working undercover. In each of those conflicts, at least one of the major powers operated
mainly by arming or funding surrogates. Because of that, the population of the major powers was
rarely directly impacted by this "war".
In the war between the U.S.S.R. and U.S.A. a major arena was the strategy of technology. This cold
war also involved covert conflict, through acts of espionage. Beyond the actual fighting and killing
that went on through intelligence services, the Cold War was heavily manifest in the concerns about
nuclear weapons and the wars which could be fought with them, as well as in the propaganda wars
between the United States and the USSR. It was far from clear, going through these times, that
global nuclear war would not result from the smaller arenas of conflict, giving each of them an
added degree of concern. These pressures impacted many aspects of life throughout the world, much
more so than the actual fighting going on between intelligence services.
One major hot spot of conflict was Germany, particularly Berlin. Arguably, the most vivid symbol of
the Cold War was the Berlin Wall, isolating West Berlin (the portion controlled by West Germany
and allied with France, England and the United States) from East Germany, which completely
surrounded it. Many East Germans risked death attempting to cross the defenses surrounding the
wall to reach freedom in West Berlin, and many were killed in the attempt. President Ronald
Reagan's challenge "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" in 1988 seemed mere grandstanding, yet
the wall was torn down within two years -- not by Premier Gorbachev's order, but by the citizens of
East and West Berlin.
CAUSES OF THE COLD WAR:

A major difference of opinion between the two sides was over the merits of the political philosophy
of communism. The West, which opposed communism, called itself the "Free World" - arguably a
misnomer, as many of the nations on the Western side of the conflict were dictatorships. In some
cases, the United States overthrew democratic governments and replaced them with dictatorships
friendly to its interests, such as Guatemala in 1954 and Chile in 1973.
The cold war was waged through attempts to gain influence over intermediary countries, with
popular conception making much of spies and traitors working undercover. The Korean War, the
Vietnam War and the conflicts in Afghanistan, Grenada, Chad, Angola, Cuba and of course the
Middle East were aspects of the Cold War. The war was also fought by intelligence organizations
like the CIA (United States), MI6 (United Kingdom), Mossad (Israel), BND (West Germany),
STASI (East Germany) and the KGB (USSR).
91
THE END OF THE COLD WAR:

Enormous defense spending by America (the implications of which were first hinted at by President
Eisenhower's speech on the Military-industrial complex) under President Ronald Reagan is often
seen as a major factor in the end of the war. According to this theory, the robust Western economies
could absorb the expenses of programs such as the Star Wars missile defense but the Eastern bloc
countries crippled themselves trying to match them. However, Reagan's policy towards the Soviet
Union defined Eastern bloc governments as "totalitarian", under a doctrine which denied that such
regimes could ever undergo internal transformation towards democracy. Thus Reagan's foreign
policy was never intended to bring about the changes which actually occurred in Eastern Europe and
the Soviet Union.
Corrupt governments and citizens' desire for greater personal freedom and greater individual wealth
were also major factors in the collapse of the Soviet Union and its satellite countries.
Others argue that the Soviet Union's collapse was already inevitable. There is certainly evidence that
the CIA played up Soviet military power through the 1980s.
THE EFFECTS OF THE COLD WAR:

The United States believed that the Soviet Union's expansion threatened the developing nations of
the world. So, in 1949 President Truman and Congress approved nearly $400 million for technical
development programs in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. The goal of this Point Four Program was
to modernize and strengthen developing nations and discourage the growth of communism.
Gorbachev's policy of Glasnost eliminated the strict censorship practiced for hundreds of years.
Glasnost stands for openness, and Soviet citizens were now allowed to speak openly about their
country's problems. Perestroika, or "restructuring," was Gorbachev's attempt to end the inefficiency
and corruption in government.
The United States and other Western nations decided to form alliances against possible Soviet
attempts to extend their sphere of influence. In April 1949 the United States signed the North
Atlantic Treaty. Members agreed that an attack on one of them would be considered an attack on all
of them. The Soviets later formed an opposing alliance known as The Warsaw Pact. Because of the
arms race many countries in the world now own nuclear weapons.
TIMELINE OF THE COLD WAR:
1940s
1945: February 4-11-- Yalta Conference Cold War Begins
1945: August 6 -- United States first used atomic bomb in war (A bomb was dropped on Hiroshima
+ Nagasaki)
1945: August 8 -- Russia enters war against Japan
1945: August 14 -- Japanese surrender End of World War II
1946: March -- Winston Churchill delivers "Iron Curtain" Speech
1947: March -- Truman declares active role in Greek Civil War
1947: June -- Marshall Plan is announced
1948: February -- Communist takeover in Czechoslovakia
92
1948: June 24 -- Berlin Blockade begins

1949: July -- NATO ratified
1949: May 12 -- Berlin Blockade ends
1949: September -- Mao Zedong, a Communist, takes control of China
1949: September -- Soviets explode first atomic bomb
1950s
1950: February -- Joe McCarthy begins Communist witch hunt
1950: June -- Korean War begin
1951: January 12 -- Federal Civil Defense Administration established
1953: June 19 -- Rosenberg executions
1953: July -- Korean War ends
1954: March -- KGB established
1954 -- CIA helps overthrow unfriendly regimes in Iran and Guatemala
1954: July -- Vietnam split at 17th parallel
1955: May -- Warsaw Pact formed
1956: October - November -- Rebellion put down in Communist Hungary. Egypt took control of
Suez Canal; U.S. refused to help take it back.
1957: October 4 -- Sputnik launched into orbit
1958: November -- Khrushchev demands withdrawal of troops from Berlin
1959: January -- Cuba taken over by Fidel Castro
1959: September -- Khrushchev visits United States; denied access to Disneyland
1960s
1960: May -- Soviet Union reveals that U.S. spy plane was shot down over Soviet territory
1960: November -- John F. Kennedy elected President
1961: April -- Bay of Pigs invasion
1961: July -- Kennedy requests 25% spending increase for military
1961: August 13 -- Berlin border closed
1961: August 17 -- Construction of Berlin Wall begins
1962: -- U.S. involvement in Vietnam increased
1962: October -- Cuban Missile Crisis
1963: July -- Nuclear Test Ban Treaty ratified
1963: November -- President Kennedy assassinated in Dallas, Texas
1964: August -- Gulf of Tonkin incident
1965: April -- U.S. Marines sent to Dominican Republic to fight Communism
1965: July -- Announcement of dispatching of 150,000 U.S. troops to Vietnam
1968: January -- North Korea captured U.S.S. Pueblo
1968: August -- Soviet troops crush Czechoslovakian revolt
1969: July 20 -- Apollo 11 lands on the moon
1970s
1970: April -- President Nixon extends Vietnam War to Cambodia
1972: July -- SALT I signed
1973: January -- Cease fire in Vietnam between North Vietnam and United States
1973: September -- United States helps overthrow Chile government
93
1973: October -- Egypt and Syria attack Israel; Egypt requests Soviet aid
1974: August -- President Nixon resigns
1975: April 17 -- North Vietnam defeats South Vietnam
1979: July -- SALT II signed
1979: November -- Shah of Iran overthrown; Iranian Hostage Crisis
1980s
1983: -- President Reagan proposes Strategic Defense Initiative
1983: October -- U.S. troops overthrow regime in Grenada
1985: -- Iran-Contra Affair (arms sold to Iran, profits used to support contras in Nicaragua)
1985: -- Mikhail Gorbachev ascends to power in Soviet Union
1986: -- Gorbachev ends economic aid to Soviet satellites
1986: October -- Reagan and Gorbachev resolve to remove all intermediate nuclear missiles from
Europe
1986: November -- Iran-Contra Affair revealed to public
1987: October -- Reagan and Gorbachev agree to remove all medium and short-range nuclear
missiles by signing treaty
1989: January -- Soviet troops withdraw from Afghanistan
1989: June -- China puts down protests for democracy; Poland becomes independent
1989: September -- Hungary becomes independent
1989: November -- Berlin Wall falls
1989: December -- Communist governments fall in Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and Rumania; Soviet
empire ends
1990s
1990: March -- Lithuania becomes independent
1990: May 29 -- Boris Yeltsin elected to presidency of Russia
1990: October 3 -- Germany reunited
1991: April -- Warsaw Pact ends
1991: August -- End of Soviet Union, Cold War Ends
94
A STATE AS A SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

In general, a subject (a person) of law is an entity to whom the law provides rights and assigns
obligations. The requirements to be met for an entity to be considered a subject of International Law
are the ability to have rights and obligations under International Law, the capacity to enter into
relations with other subjects and to stand before international courts. States are, in this sense, clearly
subjects of International Law since they fulfill all of these requirements.
A State is the primary legal subject (person) in International Law. A State, by evidencing a
separate legal and corporate personality, fulfills the basic requirement for the entrance into the
community of nations. For an entity to be a State, it should be free from political control of another
State and be free to enter into relations with other States.
What is a State? What are the criteria of statehood? What are the rights and duties of a
State? The answers to these questions are dealt with in the following sections.
SECTION 1: DEFINITION AND REQUIREMENTS OF STATEHOOD
There is no exact definition of the term “State” in International Law. However in this law, the
essential criteria for statehood are well settled. Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention on the
Rights and Duties of States of 1933 provides the following:
The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:
a. a permanent population;
b. a defined territory;
c. government; and
d. capacity to enter into relations with other States.
According to this article an entity to be a person of International Law, it should fulfill the
enumerated qualifications which are regarded as the essential requirements or characteristics of
statehood. However, these requirements are not exhaustive; other requirements may be relevant
including sovereignty, independence, self-determination and recognition; these requirements are
considered in correlation of the essential requirements. All these requirements are considered below.
(a) A Permanent Population

The existence of a permanent population is naturally required as an initial evidence of the
existence of a State. This requirement suggests a stable community. Evidentially it is important,
since in the absence of the physical basis for an organized community, it will be difficult to establish
the existence of a State. The size of the population, however, is not relevant since International Law
does not specify the minimum number of inhabitants as a requirement of statehood. Nevertheless,
an acceptable minimum number of inhabitants is required with regard to self-determination
criterion.
(b) A Defined Territory

The requirement of a permanent population is intended to be used in association with that of
territory. What is required by a defined territory is that there must be a certain portion of land
inhabited by a stable community. A defined territory does not suggests that the territory must be
95
fixed and the boundaries be settled since these are not essential to the existence of a State, although
in fact all modern States are contained within territorial limits or boundaries.
The past practice shows that the existence of fully defined boundaries is not required and that
what matters is the existence of an effective political authority having control over a particular
portion of land. In 1913, Albania was recognized as a State by a number of States even though it
lacked settled boundaries, and Israel was admitted to the United Nations as a State in spite of
disputes over its existence and territorial delineation.
The existence of a particular territory over which a political authority operates is essential for the
existence of a State. For this reason, the “State of Palestine” declared in November 1988 at the
conference of Algiers was not legally regarded as a valid State since the Palestine Liberation
Organization had have no control over any part of the territory it was claiming.
The size of the territory of a State and alterations to its extent, whether by increase or decrease,
do not of themselves change the identity of that State.
A State continues to exist as long as a portion of land is retained.
(c) A Government
For a stable community to function reasonably effectively, it needs some sort of political
organization. It is required that an effective government be created, and this political authority
must be strong enough to assert itself throughout the territory of the State without a foreign
assistance. The existence of an effective government, with some sort of centralized administrative
and legislative organs, assures the internal stability of the State, and of its ability to fulfill its
international obligations.
However, the requirement related to the existence of an effective government having control
throughout its territory although strictly applied in the past practice, it has been subjected to certain
modification in modern practice. In certain cases, the requirement of an effective government was
not regarded as precondition for recognition as an independent State. The State of Croatia and the
State of Bosnia and Herzegovina were recognized as independent States by the member States of the
European Community, and admitted to membership of the United Nations at a time when
substantial areas of the territories of each of them, because of the civil war situations, were outside
the control of each government. In other cases, the requirement of an organized government was
unnecessary or insufficient to support statehood. Some States had arisen before government was
very well organized, as for example, Burundi and Rwanda which were admitted as States to the
membership of the United Nations in 1961.
Moreover, a State does not cease to exist when it is temporarily deprived of an effective
government because of civil war or similar upheavals. The long period of de facto partition of
Lebanon did not hamper its continuance as a State. The lack of a government in Somalia did not
abolish the international personality of the country. Even when all the territory of a State is
occupied by the enemy in wartime, it continues to exist as in the cases of the occupation of
European States by Germany in the Second World War and the occupation of Germany and Japan
by the Allied powers after that war.
Nevertheless, the requirement of effective government remains strictly applied in case when part
of the population of a State tries to break away to form a new State.
(d) A Capacity to Enter into Relations with Other States

The capacity to enter into relations with other States is an attribute of the existence of an
international legal personality. A State must have recognized capacity to maintain external relations
96
with other States. Such capacity is essential for a sovereign State; lack of such capacity will avert the
entity from being an independent State. Capacity distinguishes States from lesser entities such as
members of federation or protectorates, which do not manage their own foreign affairs, and are not
recognized by other States as full-members of the international community.
(e) Other Requirements

Independence, sovereignty, self-determination and recognition are other requirements of
statehood used either as separate criteria or in association with the above requirements. The concept
of independence means that the State is subject to no other State. Many jurists stress on
independence as the decisive criterion of statehood.[ Some consider independence the essence of a
capacity to enter into relations with other States, and represented by this capacity. Others consider it
in association with the requirement of effective government; to them, if an entity has its own
executive and other organs, and conducts its foreign relations through its own organs, then it is
independent, and this is a prima facie evidence of statehood.
Some jurists consider sovereignty as an important criterion of statehood; even some of them use
the term sovereignty as a synonym for independence. The concept of sovereignty denotes, internally,
the supreme undivided authority possessed by a State to enact and enforce its law with respect to all
persons, property and events within its borders, and externally, the capacity of a State to enter into
relations with other States, such as sending and receiving diplomats and engaging in treaty making,
and the enjoyment of certain immunities and privileges from the jurisdiction of other States.
Sovereignty, in this regard, is the indication of the international personality of an entity seeking a
status of a State in the community of nations. Lack of sovereignty suggests that an entity is not
independent and has no international legal personality, and consequently, not a State. However,
some others reject sovereignty as a criterion of statehood on the considerations that Germany after
1945, although lost considerable extent of its sovereignty, it continued to exist as a State.
In the practice of States, the principle of self-determination has been used as a criterion modifying
the requirement of effective government. The evolution of the right of self-determination has
affected the level of effectiveness a concerned government required to exercise in order to fulfill such
requirement of statehood. Therefore, a lower level of effectiveness has been accepted; this occurred
particularly in decolonization situations where colonies were seeking their independence and the
creation of their States. Moreover, the principle of self-determination has been used as an additional
criterion of statehood in certain circumstances, such as, in the case of Rhodesia when it unilaterally
declared independence on November 11, 1965, and in the cases of the successor States of the former
Yugoslavia. This additional criterion may be required in the future in cases of certain national
minorities seeking independence and the creation of their States.
In the context of the constitutive theory of recognition, recognition has been required as an
additional criterion of statehood. The constitutive theory considers that the act of recognition
constitutes or creates the new State, i.e., that the existence of a State begins with its recognition by
other States. Accordingly, it is only through recognition that a State comes into being under
International Law. The practice of States has required recognition as an additional criterion of
statehood in certain instances, such as in the case of Rhodesia in 1965. At that time, although
Rhodesia might have been regarded as a State by virtue of satisfaction of all the requirements of
97
statehood (the factual requirements) enumerated in the Montevideo Convention of 1933, its status as
a State was denied because no State did recognize it.
SECTION 2: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF A STATE

Rights and duties of a State have been the primary concern of International Law. The
formulation of a list of the so-called fundamental or basic rights and duties of a State has been a
persistent preoccupation of international conferences and bodies. The Montevideo Convention of
1933 on the Rights and Duties of States was the first attempt in the process of such formulation. This
attempt was followed by the preparation of the International Law Commission of the United Nation
“the Draft Declaration on the Rights and Duties of States of 1949”, and the adoption of the General
Assembly of the United Nations the Resolution 2625 of 1970 entitled the “Declaration on Principles
of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance
with the Charter of the United Nations.” The above instruments, together with the Charter of the
United Nations, provide references for fundamental rights and duties of States.
Accordingly, under International Law States are entitled to enjoy certain fundamental rights and
bound by certain duties.
A. Rights of a State
The rights of a State are those inherent rights which a State is entitled to under International
law. These rights exist by virtue of the international legal order, which is able to define the rights of
its subjects.
Among the fundamental rights of a state are the following:
(1) The Right of Independence

Apart of being a requirement of statehood as mentioned previously, independence is an
outstanding fundamental right of a State. Independence as defined by the Draft Declaration on the
Rights and Duties of States of 1949 is the capacity of a State to provide for its own well-being and
development free from the domination of other states.
However, any political or economic dependence that may in reality exist does not affect the legal
independence of the State, unless that State is formally compelled to submit to the demands of a
superior State, in such a case a dependent Status is involved.
The right of independence in International Law includes a number of rights, such as, the right of
territorial integrity, and the right to have an exclusive control over own domestic affairs.
(2) The Right of Sovereignty

The right of sovereignty is a fundamental right of a State. All States must enjoy such
right. Sovereignty has twofold meaning. Firstly, sovereignty means that a State has the supreme
undivided authority over its territory--this concept of sovereignty is known as territorial
sovereignty. Secondly, sovereignty means the capacity of a State to enter into relations with other
States, such as sending and receiving diplomats and engaging in treaty making, and the enjoyment
of certain immunities and privileges from the jurisdiction of other States--this concept is connected
with the concept of international personality.
Sovereignty has a much more restrictive meaning today than in the 18th and 19th Centuries when,
with the emergence of powerful national States, few limits on State sovereignty were accepted. At
the present time there is hardly a State has not accepted, in the interest of international community,
restrictions and limitations on its freedom of action. Actually, the exercise of sovereignty today is
98
not absolute. A State has subjected its sovereign powers to several limitations by virtue of treaties or
decisions of international organizations of which it is a member, or by virtue of its consent.
(3) The Right of Territorial Jurisdiction

The Right of Territorial Jurisdiction is derived from the right of sovereignty. This right entitles a
State to have the absolute and exclusive authority over all persons, property and events within the
limits of its national territory. This authority implies jurisdiction of the State to enact the law, to
enforce the law and to adjudicate persons and events within its territorial land, its internal and
territorial water, and national air space.
(4) The Right of Sovereign Equality

Sovereign equality means that all State have equal rights and duties, have the same juridical
capacities and functions, and are equal members of the international community, notwithstanding
differences of an economic, social, political or other nature. Sovereign equality is mentioned in the
Charter of the United Nations as the principle on which this Organization is based.
(5) The Right of Self-Defense

The right of self-defense to which a State is entitled is recognized by Customary International
Law as well as Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. However, this right cannot be
exercised by a State unless an armed attack occurs against it and until the Security Council has taken
the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. In invoking this right, the State
must comply with the requirements of Customary Law, which are the use of peaceful procedures—if
they are available, necessity and proportionality.
B. Duties of a State
In correlation to the rights of the States, there are duties binding the States. All States are bound
to observe their duties under International Law. Non-compliance of a State with its duties
constitutes a violation of International Law for which it is responsible under this Law. Among the
duties of a State are the following.
(1) The Duty to Refrain from the Threat or Use of Force

A State is under a duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force
against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State. This duty includes within its
scope certain recognized duties, such as, the duty to refrain from propaganda for wars and
aggression, the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or
armed bands for incursion into the territory of another state, the duty to refrain from organizing,
assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist act in another State and the duty to refrain
from forcible action which derives peoples from their rights to self-determination, freedom and
independence.
However, the use of force is accepted and considered lawful under International Law only if it is
exercised in case of self-defense and in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United
Nations.
99
(2) The Duty to Settle International Disputes by Peaceful Means

A State is under a duty to settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in
such a manner that international peace, security, and justice are not endangered. The Charter of the
United Nations, in Chapter 6, provided the machinery for the fulfillment of this duty by the States.
Accordingly, States must seek a just settlement of its international dispute by any of the peaceful
means stated in the Charter or by any peaceful means agreed upon by them. In case of their failure
to reach a peaceful settlement by themselves, they are under a duty to comply with the actions taken
by the United Nations.
(3) The Duty not to Intervene in the Affairs of Other States

A State is under a duty not to intervene, directly or indirectly, for whatever reason, in the
internal or external affairs of any other State. It constitutes a violation of International Law any
use, encourage the use or threat to use of military, economic, political or any other form of
intervention against a State or against its political, economic and cultural elements.
(4) The Duty to Co-Operate with One Another

A State is under a duty to co-operate with other States, irrespective of the differences in their
political, economic and social systems, in various spheres of international relations, in accordance
with the Charter of the United Nations. Accordingly, a State should co-operate with other States in
the economic, social, cultural, educational and scientific fields, as well as, in the fields of peace and
security, and human rights and freedoms.
(5) The Duty of a State to Fulfill Its Obligations in Good Faith

A State is under a duty to fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by it under the Charter of
the United Nations and the International Law, including international treaties. The concept of good
faith implies that a State should perform its assumed obligations honestly, without malice and
defraud, and without seeking unconscionable advantage.
100
STATE RESPONSIBILITY
State responsibility is one of the fundamental principles of International Law. It arises out of the
international legal system and the principles of State sovereignty and equality of States. It implies
that if a State commits an internationally wrongful (unlawful) act against another State, it will be
internationally responsible for reparation.
The subject of State responsibility has been the most difficult question of the codification work of
the International Law Commission (ILC). The ILC has been working extensively on this subject.
In 1975, the ILC initiated its work on the draft articles concerning State responsibility. The Articles
on the State Responsibility was finally adopted by the ILC on August 9, 2001. The General
Assembly adopted the resolution 83/56 of December 12, 2001, taking note of “the International
Law Commission’s Articles on the State Responsibility” and recommending it to the member States
of the United Nations. The ILC Articles, in addition to the State practice and the decisions of
international tribunals (the case law) on the subject, constitute the international law of State
responsibility.
The law of State responsibility is concerned with the nature of the State responsibility, the legal
consequences resulted from, and the implementation of such responsibility.
SECTION 1: THE BASIS AND NATURE OF STATE RESPONSIBILITY

State responsibility is founded on three basic elements. The first element is the existence of an
international legal obligation in force between the concerned States. The second is the occurrence of
a wrongful act or the omission of an act in violation of such an obligation, which is imputable to the
State. The third is that loss or damage has resulted from such wrongful act or omission. These three
elements are the requirements of establishing the responsibility of the State, which have been made
in a number of leading international legal cases and reiterated by the ILC “Articles”.
The “Articles” provides that every internationally wrongful act (a delict) of a State entails
responsibility. It defines internationally wrongful act as a conduct consisting of an action or
omission attributable to the State under International Law and constitutes a breach of an
international obligation of the State. A breach of an international obligation is defined as an act
which is not in conformity with what is required of the State by that obligation, regardless of its
origin or character.
Responsibility is the necessary corollary of a right. All rights of an international character involve
international responsibility.
International Law does not distinguish between contractual (conventional) and tortious
responsibility. International responsibility relates both to breaches of treaty and to other breaches of
legal duty.Any violation by a State of any obligation of whatever origin or character gives rise to
State responsibility and consequently to the duty of reparation. Reparation therefore is the
indispensable complement of a failure of a State to apply any of its obligations.
State responsibility only arises when the act or omission which constitutes a breach of legal
obligation is imputable (attributable) to a State. It may be founded on “fault” or “no fault” concept.
101
Notably, it is important to mention here that a State is responsible for wrongful acts which
constitute international delicts, not international crimes. Because of the controversy concerning
State responsibility for international crimes, the ILC Articles does not mention international crimes.
However, the ILC Draft Articles made a distinction between international crimes and international
delicts. The Draft Articles provided that an international wrongful act resulting from the breach of
an international obligation which was essential for the protection of fundamental interests of the
international community and which was recognized as a crime by that community constituted an
international crime; examples of such international crimes were aggression, colonial domination,
slavery, genocide, apartheid and massive pollution of the atmosphere. All other international
wrongful acts constituted international delicts.
While it is apparent that a State is responsible for international delicts, it is not clear that it is
responsible for international crimes. The question of State criminal responsibility has been highly
controversial. Some have argued that the concept is of no legal value and cannot be justified. Others
have argued that since 1945 the attitude towards certain crimes committed by State has altered so as
to bring them within the scope of International Law. They have pointed to three specific changes
that have occurred since 1945 to justify States responsibility for international crimes.
The first change has been the development of the concept of peremptory norms of International Law
(jus cogens) as a set of principles from which no derogation is allowed.
The second change is the establishment of individual criminal responsibility directly under
International Law. Finally, the Charter of the United Nations and its provisions concerning the
enforcement action which may be taken against a State in case of committing a threat to or breaches
of the peace or act of aggression. In the light of these changes, the ILC, in its Draft Articles, adopted
the approach of including international crimes by States within the scope of International Law.
However, because of the controversy concerning this question, the ILC omitted any mention of
international crimes of States in its Articles as finally approved. The “Articles” provides that States
are under a duty to co-operate to bring an end, through lawful means, any serious breach by a State
of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of International law and not to recognize as lawful
any such situation.
A. The Question of “Immutability”

A State is responsible (liable) only for its own acts or omissions. A State is identified with its
“government” which includes the executive, the legislature and the judiciary, and includes central
authorities as well as local authorities.
It is established by the case law that a State is liable for the conducts of any of its organs. This
established rule is reiterated by the ILC “Articles”. The ILC “Articles” provides that the conduct of
any State organ (including any person or entity) having that status under the internal law of that
State, whether that organ belongs to the constituent, legislative, executive, judicial or other
authority, whether its functions are of an international or an internal character, and whether it holds
a superior or a subordinate position in the organization of the State, shall be considered as an act of
the State concerned under International Law, provided that organ was acting in that capacity in the
case in question.
102
The conduct of an organ of a territorial governmental entity within a State shall also be considered
as an act of that State under International law, provided that organ was acting in that capacity in the
case in question. The conduct of an organ of an entity which is not part of the formal structure of the
State or the territorial governmental entity, but which is empowered by the internal law of that state
to exercise elements of governmental authorities, shall also be considered as an act of the State under
International Law, provided that organ was acting in that capacity in the case in question.
It is also established that a State is liable for the acts of its officials if those acts are imputable
(attributable) to the State. This rule depends on the link that exists between the State and the person
or persons committing the wrongful act or omission. The State as a moral legal entity, in reality acts
through authorized officials. It is not liable under International Law for all acts of its officials; it is
liable only for acts of its officials that are imputable to it. Imputability is a legal notion which
assimilates the acts or omissions of the State officials to the State itself and which renders the State
liable for damages to persons or properties resulting from such acts.
The question of “immutability”, however, creates problems when officials exceed or disobey their
instructions. Because the evading of liability by a State in such a case will be unjust, it is established
that a State is liable for the acts of its officials, even when they exceed or disobey their instructions, if
those officials are acting with “apparent authority” or if they are abusing “powers” or “facilities”
placed at their disposal by the State. The ILC “Articles” reiterates such a rule by providing that the
conduct of any organ of a State, having acted in that capacity, shall be considered as an act of the
State under International Law even if such organ exceeded its competence according to internal law
or disobeyed instructions concerning its authority.
With regard of wrongful acts committed by private persons, in principle, a State is not responsible
for such acts. However, it is established by case law and reaffirmed by the ILC Articles that a State
is responsible for acts of private persons if those persons are acting on behalf of that state, on its
instructions, under its control, or exercising elements of governmental authority in the absence of
governmental officials and under circumstances which justify them in assuming such authority. It is
also responsible for acts of private persons if such acts are accompanied by some act or omission on
part of the State, for which it is liable. Such act or omission by the State may take one of the
following forms: encouraging the person to perform such act, failing to take reasonable care to
prevent the person from performing such act, failure to punish the person, obtaining some benefit
from the act of the person, or express ratification of the person’s act.
With regard of actions of rioters or rebels causing loss or damage to a foreign State or its
nationals, the general principle is that the State is not liable for such actions if it has acted in good
faith and without negligence. However, in such a case, the State is under a duty to show due
diligence. Nevertheless, when the rebellion movement succeeds in establishing the new government
of a State or a new State in part of the territory of the pre-existing State, it will be held responsible for
its activities prior to its assumption of authority; this rule is reaffirmed by the ILC Articles.
B. The Question of “Fault”

There are two theories used as foundations for State responsibility: the “risk” theory and the
“fault” theory. The “risk” theory is based upon the principle of objective responsibility which
103
maintains that the liability of the State is strict. Once a wrongful act causing damage has been
committed by a State official or organ, that State will be responsible under International Law to the
injured State irrespective of its intention. In contrast, the “fault” theory is based upon the principle
of subjective responsibility which requires the establishment of an element of intention, fault or
negligence on the part of the State official or organ before rendering the State liable for any damage.
There is no agreement in the International Law on the question of the basis of State
responsibility. The relevant cases and the opinions of legal scholars are divided on this question.
However, the majority of cases and opinions tend towards the “risk” theory of responsibility.
SECTION 2: LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF STATE RESPONSIBILITY

A State is responsible for its international wrongful act. This responsibility entails certain legal
consequences on that State. The first consequence is the cessation of the wrongful act, and the
second is
A. Cessation of the Wrongful Act

The first legal consequence of State responsibility under International law is that the wrongdoing
State is obliged to cease the wrongful act, if it is continuing, and to offer appropriate assurances and
guarantees on non- repetition.
B. Reparation
The second legal consequence resulting from State responsibility for international wrongful act is
that the wrongdoing state is under a duty to remedy its acts. The injured State is entitled for full
reparation in form of restitution in kind, compensation and satisfaction, either singly or in
combination. The wrongdoing State cannot employ its internal law to avoid providing full
reparation.
Restitution in kind means that the wrong doing. State has to re-establish the situation that existed
before the committing of the wrongful act. It can be provided if it is not materially impossible, not
involving breach of an obligation arising from a peremptory norm of general International Law, not
involving a burden out of all proportion to the benefit which the injured State would gain from
obtaining restitution in kind instead of compensation, or not seriously jeopardize the political
independence or economic stability of the wrongdoing state.
If restitution in kind is not available, compensation for the damage caused must be paid.
Monetary compensation covers any financially assessable damage suffered by the injured state, and
may include interest, and may include, in certain circumstances, loss of profits. It may be paid for
both material and non-material (moral) damage.
Satisfaction is the third form of reparation. It is a remedy which is appropriate in cases of moral
damage and non-monetary compensation. It may take the forms of an official apology, a nominal
damage, the punishment of the guilty officials or the acknowledgement of the wrongful character of
an act.
SECTION 3: THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STATE RESPONSIBILITY

A State is entitled to invoke the responsibility of another State if the obligation breached is owed
to it individually or to a group of States, including it, or to the international community as a whole
.A State other than an injured State may invoke the responsibility of another State if either the
104
obligation is owned to a group of States including it, and is established for the protection of a
collective interest of the group, or the obligation breached is owed to the international community as
a whole. In such cases, a State may demand the cessation of the wrongful act, assurances and
guarantees of non-repetition, satisfaction, as well as reparation. These doctrines are reaffirmed in
the ILC Articles.
Where several States are injured by the same wrongful act, each State may separately invoke
responsibility. Where several states are responsible, the responsibility of each may be invoked.
However, responsibility can not be invoked if the injured State has validly waived the claim, or it has
caused, by reason of its conducts, in the lapse of the claim. Any waiver needs to be explicit and
clear.
An injured State may seek to settle its claim peacefully through any of the peaceful means, or it
may take countermeasures against the wrongdoing State. In a case of an injury affecting its national,
the State may provide him with diplomatic protection.
A State may present an international claim against the wrongdoing State before an international
tribunal. However, a State has to establish its qualifications for bringing the claim and the validity of
the claim itself before the merits of the claim can be addressed. Where a claim is brought before an
international tribunal, objections may be raised against its admissibility. The first is an objection to
the jurisdiction of the tribunal; if successful, it will stop all proceedings in the case. Other objections
are the nationality of the claimant, the non-exhaustion of local remedies, and the undue delay in
presenting the claim.
A. Diplomatic Protection and Nationality of Claims

The doctrine of state responsibility with regard to injuries to nationals is based upon the
attribution to one State of the wrongful act or the omission and the capacity of the other State to
adopt the claim of its injured national. Nationality is the link between the individual and his State as
regards particular benefits and obligations. It is also the link between the individual and the benefits
of International law. Although International Law is now tending to grant certain rights to
individuals apart of the intervention of the State, the basic rule remains that in a State-oriented
world, it is only through the State the individual may obtain the full range of benefits available under
International Law, and nationality is the key.
Although a State is under a duty to protect its nationals, it is not under a duty to provide them
with diplomatic protection. A State may provide diplomatic protection to its nationals. Diplomatic
protection consists of resorting to diplomatic action or other means of peaceful settlement by a State
adopting in its own rights the cause of its nationals in respect of an injury to any of its national
arising from an internationally wrongful act of another State. Such diplomatic protection is not a
right of the national concerned, but a right of the State which may or may not choose to exercise.
The diplomatic protection is the result of the historical reluctance to permit individuals the right
in International Law to bring claims against foreign States, for reasons related to the principles of
state sovereignty and non-intervention in domestic affairs of a State. The exercise of diplomatic
protection is not regarded as intervention contrary to International Law. A State may take up the
claim of its national against another state before an international tribunal. Once a State does this,
105
the claim then becomes that of the state, not of the injured individuals. Thus, the State may waive
its claim, but the individual cannot.
In International law, the normal and important function of nationality is to establish the legal
interest of a State when its national suffers injury or loss caused by another State. The subject matter
of the claim is the individual and his property, and the claim is that of the State. If the plaintiff State
cannot establish the nationality of the claim, the claim will be inadmissible because of the absence of
the legal interest of the claimant. The “nationality of the claim” principle is well established in
customary International Law. However, there are certain exceptions to the principle of the
nationality of the claim. Examples of such exceptions are the right of protection of an alien seaman
on a ship flying the flag of the protecting State, an alien in the service of the armed forces of a
claimant State, and stateless person or refuge who at the dates of the injury and presentation of the
claim is lawfully and habitually resident in that state.
The nationality must exist at the date of the injury, and should continue until at least the date of
the formal presentation of the claim. Where an individual possesses dual or multiple nationalities,
any State of which he is a national may adopt his claim against a third State. Where a case involves
more than one State of nationality, the State with which he has the more effective connection may
adopt his claim against the other State. As far as a moral legal person (such as a corporation) is
concerned, there must be some tangible link between it and the State adopting its claim.
B. The Exhaustion of Local Remedies

It is established in the customary International Law that before international proceedings are
instituted or claims or representations made, the remedies provided by the local State should have
been exhausted. This rule implies that an injured individual must exhaust remedies in the courts of
the defendant State before an international claim can be brought on his behalf. It is a rule which is
justified by political and practical considerations, not by any logical necessity deriving from the
International Law.
Among the political and practical considerations suggested to justify such rule are the avoidance of
resorting to diplomatic protection in small and insignificant claims, and the greater suitability and
convenience of local courts as forums for claims of individuals. This rule is reaffirmed in the ILC
Articles which provides that the responsibility of a State may not be invoked if the claim is one to
which the rule of exhaustion of local remedies applies and any available and effective local remedy
has not been exhausted.
The exhaustion of local remedies rule does not apply where one State has been guilty of a direct
breach of International Law causing direct injury to another State. It applies to cases of diplomatic
protection where a State claims injury to its nationals, and when effective remedies are available in
the wrongdoing State. A claim will not be admissible in the International Law unless the natural or
legal foreign person concerned has exhausted the legal effective remedies available to him locally in
the defendant State.
C. Unreasonable Delay and Improper Activities of the Injured National

A claim by a State against another State will not be admissible if it is presented after an
unreasonable delay by the claimant State. It may be inadmissible if the injured national has suffered
106
injury as a result of his improper activities. However, in such a case, the injury suffered by the
national must be roughly proportional to his improper activities.
D. Resorting to Countermeasures
An injured State may seek to settle its claim peacefully through any of the peaceful means, or
it may take countermeasures against the wrongdoing State. Countermeasures are acts of retaliation
which are traditionally known as “reprisal”. They may be in a form non-compliance of the injured
State with its legal obligations towards the wrongdoing State, or unilateral coercive actions taken by
the injured State against the wrongdoing State. Such measures are a type of self help utilized in
order to induce the wrongdoing State to discontinue its wrongful act and to provide reparation.
Today, there are certain legal limits to countermeasures. The most important limit is the
prohibition of the armed retaliations because of the general prohibition of the use of force provided
in Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations. Countermeasures have to be proportional to the
wrongful act. They must not violate basic human rights or the peremptory norms of International
Law.
107
IS INTERNATIONAL LAW A TRUE LAW?

Is International Law a true law: There is one theory that International Law does not qualify as
true law but it is just a moral force.
Austin’s view: Austin and Thomes Hobbes insist that law is the command of a determinate superior
and that constantly no law can exist where there is no supreme lawgiver and no coercive
enforcement. If there is no sovereign authority then the rules could not be legal rules but rules of
moral or ethical validity.
Positive morality: Austin and his subscribers say that it is not true law but positive international
morality or rules of conduct of moral force only, for there is not supreme lawgiver and no coercive
enforcement in it. In that time Austin was rigid. International Law is not a true law but in this time
International Law is part of our law, and must be administrated by the courts of justice of
appropriate jurisdiction.
REPLY TO AUSTIN’S VIEW: The reply to Austin’s view is as follows:

1. Choice to a penal statute: As Hert points out that the Austin’s theory of law approximates closer
to a penal statute enacted by the legislature of a modern state than to any other variety of law.
2. System of law, without a formal legislature: Modern historical jurisprudence has discounted the
force of his general theory of law. It has been shown that in many communities, system of law as in
force and being observed, without a formal legislative authority. Such law did not differ in its
binding force from the law of any state with a true legislative authority.
3. Questions of International Law: Questions of International Law are always treated as legal
questions by those who conduct international business and are regularly stated in legal terms and
interpreted by legal methods.
Almost from the early stages of the development of the science of the Law of Nations the question
whether International Law is law in true sense has been a subject of much speculation. Has it
binding force opinion sharply been divided on this vexed (disturbed) question?
A constantly evolving body of norms: International Law is a constantly evolving body of norms
that are commonly observed by the members of international community in their relations with each
other for providing an orderly management of international relations.
Whether International Law qualifies as law or not - choice of the definition of law: Whether or
not one wishes to attribute a legal character to the norms of International Law depends largely upon
the definition of law he chooses to accept.
This question has been matter of discussion since long whether it is law? Some writers object the use
of word “law”. They say that states are free from external pressure. If they consent to follow the
principles of International Law, it does not mean they are debarred from their sovereign powers. It
does not affect their sovereign powers. In the opinion of some writers law is the name of rule which
every superior issues for inferior.
This rule binds the people to prepare its structure. Its compliance would be compulsory and its
violation will result in punishment. There is no such compulsion in International Law. In
108
International Law there is not sovereign power that issues orders. If there is any sovereign power in
International Law, the sovereign power of the states will be lost.
There is no binding force behind it. It is not doubtful, that states observe the rules and regulations in
the compliance of international contracts with the feeling of betterment and ethics. These rules and
regulations are decided in their limits and are liable to revoke. There is no law force, which can stop
them in doing such act.
International Court of Justice is a forum where states bring their disputes for settlement but states are
no more bound to accept them and may refuse. It all depends upon them. There is no forum for its
explanation or interpretation. There is no concept of legislature in International Law for the
enactment and enforcement.
In the opinion of different writers International Law is not real law. According to Austin it has status
of positive international morality. It is a collection of emotions of people and common opinions.
MERITS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW: Presently an International Law is very important for

every state. In past there were some problems between states but at present it is very important and
all states feel that it should remain there.
1. Protection of states’ interests: It is doubtless that International Law has protected the interests of
the states. It helps those states, which have no such power to protect their interests. It also protects
states from suffering of loss. It provides them rules and regulations for which states are bound to
follow. It relates with the boundaries, society, morality, ethics, and religious matters. Kuwait was
protected by International Law.
2. Welfare of human being: In fact International Law plays an important role in the welfare of
human being. Submission of these rules brings prosperity for humankind. It has different institution,
which perform its functions.
3. Equality: International Law gives importance to equality. It gives the same status of equality to
small state as the big state. In international relations all are equal. One state has no superiority over
other one. In international matters, every state plays its role.
4. Individuality: International Law also gives individual importance to each state. All the other
states also recognize it. International Law has covered almost all the world and formed a society and
promoted brotherhood. Individuality has importance in it.
5. Unity and strength: This law has created the environment of the unity and strength among the
different states. It has taken all the states in a line. No one state can separate her from others. Every
state has become the need of other one and plays an important role in unity and strength.
6. Development of social values: This law has also played an important role in the development of
social values. International Law has tried best to promote the social values.
DEMERITS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW: It has also some demerits as well as merits, which
make it weaker. These demerits are as follows:
1. Limited scope: In the present circumstances it seems ambiguous and of limited scope. There is no
solid organ of International Law, which can resolve the matters of states equitably. It could not
devolve person into state.
2. Ambiguous law: Some of its rules and regulations are not only uncertain but also ambiguous.
Pace of its development and promotion is deadly slow. It cannot combat with changing environment
109
of the society.
3. No apparent authority: There is not executive class who can enforce the laws. It lacks the force of
law, which enforces the law, and gets exercised. Only International Court of Justice exists. There is
not existence of special courts that can decide the particular disputes. International Court of Justice
cannot settle certain matters. States do not allow International Court of Justice in the settlement of
disputes. After the decision is given, there is no such power that may get it enforced.
4. No administration power: There is no administrative power behind it that can get its decisions
enforced.
5. Little enactment: It has little room of enactment. Mostly matters such as excise, intercourse
between two or more states, taxes, and market etc. are excluded from its scope.
6. Non interference: International Law does not intervene in the matters, which takes place in any
member state.
7. Uncertainty about facts: There may be a genuine uncertainty about the facts. For instance, before
one who decide whether United States participation in the Vietnam fighting is legal or illegal, has to
decide whether the National Liberation Front (Viet-cong) in South Vietnam represents spontaneous
internal revolt or whether it represents subversion from North Vietnam.
8. Uncertainty about law: There may be a genuine uncertainty about the law. For instance, some
states think it is lawful to nationalize foreign property without compensation, others disagree. When
dispute arises between a state in the first group and a state in the second group, each will be
convinced that it is in the right, and it is impossible to predict how an international Court would
decide the case.
9. Internal disintegration: Sometimes international dispute may cause internal disintegration such
as demand for the increase of wages in employment. However wages are fixed by the contract of
employment and contracts can be altered by mutual agreement.
10. Unfriendly legal act: International Law does not prevent a state increasing its tariffs on goods
coming from another state, even though the result may be to cause severe unemployment in the
other state.
11. Dualism: Dualism can easily be observed in the solution of the international disputes. Dispute of
North Tamour has been solved whereas dispute of Kashmir stands unresolved. Terrorism in Israel
has not been condemned while liberation struggle of Palestine is condemned.
It is weaker law in the eyes of J. G. Starke. Another writer says that it is not only a weaker law but it
contains mostly on customary law.
Despite the existence of International Court of Justice many hurdles came in its development. This
law does not resolve the disputes.
How it can grow: Following are the some suggestions, which can determine its pace:
1. Rules and regulations of this law should be revised and taken into writing.
2. It should be given the form and shape as the ordinary law of the state.
3. It should be formed globally.
4. It should be developed through courts.
Many activities are being taken place in this regard. Conferences and other important treaties are
playing an important role in its growth. Changing political environment and expertise are trying in
changing the International Law. Also courts are playing important role for its development.
110
Present day International Law: Austin’s views however rigid for his time are not true of present day
International Law. In 20th century a great mass of “international legislation” has come into
existence as a result of law making treaties and conventions.
Procedure for formulating rules: The procedure for formulating the rules of international legislation
is practically as settled if not as sufficient as any state legislative procedure.
Conclusion: International Law is law but a weak one, the cumulative evidence against the position
taken by Austin and his followers should not bind us to the fact that International Law is a weak
law.
Its enforcement devices: It is obvious that there are gaps and ambiguities in the law, that its
enforcement devices are often inadequate and it has not succeeded in eliminating the use of force in
international relations.
There is no world legislature, no international police, and no international Court with compulsory
jurisdiction.
HISTORIC BACKGROUND OF INTERNATIONAL LAW: It has not certain period of its

beginning. It is explored that it came into existence right from the commencement of human life on
earth. States had established mutual relationship and played an important role in social life.
International Law has been developing time to time and its form has been changing with the passage
of time.
In thirteenth century B. C. a contract took place between Egyptian King Pharaoh and Syrian King
after a war. It was consisted on the conditions of peace and co-operation and land acquisition. It was
written on a silver plate. It reveals that no doubt this system was available since long before and
states were made treaties as the same now is. In old time there was neither travelling arrangements
nor concept of states, but agreements were made. There was also diplomatic representation.
Disputes were settled with arbitration. There was tradition of asylum in that age.
Greek period: Greek nation was reluctant to maintain relationship with non-Greeks. They were
habitant to make slaves others. They had thought that only Greeks are born to be rulers. In words of
Aristotle, “nature has created non-Greeks only for to be slaves.” States either democratic or imperial
had mutual relationship and rules and regulations among them. Mostly matters were decided with
arbitration. They were not remain civilized but became cruel during war. War was not started
without declaration. Religious places were not destroyed. Killed/deceased people were buried.
Prisoners of War were exchanged. They had formed Greek union of nations. In that age treaties
were made. Such like states may enjoy peace and prosperity.
Roman period: Till 753 B. C. states were not too big. International Law was clarified till 3rd century
B. C. after the evaluation of big state founded. Relations were developed with Persia while making
the treaties with others. Roman were taken into consideration the principles set out by that former
states and they provided the legal protection. They made a treaty for common defence of states.
Non-member states could not enjoy such facility. War was formerly declared. Treaties were taken
into consideration without which existence was impossible. Principles they had formed played an
important role in International Law even today.
111
Jews’ period: Jews were considered superior themselves than others. They had superior standard
than others. They had treated other inferiors. That’s why they did not contributed in the
development of International Law. They were severe enemy of many nations. During the peacetime
they had not good moral character. They had bad treatment for others during warfare. They were
killed children and aged people. They had good relationship with alien friends. They had respect for
diplomatic representatives. Their national law was applied in the territory of subjugated (beaten)
country. Agreements were made at the end of war.
Indian period: Historic period of India begins since thousand years’ back. Age of Raja Geet is
supposed with Alexander the Great. Brahmans, Khashtari, Waish, and Jain were also Hindus. They
had mutual co-operation. They had good relations among themselves. Agreements were made in
that age.
THREE STAGES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW: Development of

International Law is observed into three ages. Its roots are found in the beginning of history of
human life. But its clear form is 400 years old. A writer has divided its development in three stages.
First period: First period of International Law is started right from the beginning of human history
and ends at formation of Roman empire. In this period there was respect of same race and same
religion. For the achievement of peace, ambassadors were sent. They had certain immunities. They
were not treated enemy but friend and had better relations. Romans applied rules relating with peace
and war. War was ceased upon the peace and friendship. Tradition of internationalism became
ceased after the fall of Roman Empire. Geographic boundaries were not defined. They were united
upon common race. Kings were the rulers over certain territories. Same principles of International
Law had been developed in this age.
Second period: In this age religious movements came into force. They left certain effects. They
emphasized on the importance of International Law.
Roman Empire: Second era was started with the creation of Roman state. It was spreaded over the
large part of the world. Need for the importance of International Law became end. Off and on any
incident took place which showed the importance of International Law. According to the law of
Rome, agreements were made and protected. In the failure to become friend, they were made slaves.
Christian influence: Christian religion gone to Italy. It became official religion of Italy State. This
era eliminated the question of International Law. Continuous crusades were started. They treated
Muslims their great enemy. Their revenge passions grown up after the concurrence over Bait-ul-
Maqdas of Muslims. Christian priests declared all the agreements prohibited with Muslims from
religious point of view. The crusades were remaining in operation till long. Despite of the fact,
agreements were made. In that age, there was also trend toward International Law.
Islamic influence: After the dawn of Islam, complete change took place. Infidels started harassment
to HazratMuhammad . In these circumstances they migrated from Makka to Madina. They founded
state, which became first Islamic State over the global map (Atlas). They fought many wars.
Muslims were martyred and concurred. Moral values were taken into consideration. Killing of
112
women, children, and aged people, if they remain peaceful, transgression of limits, devastation of
crops, destruction of buildings and houses, ruin of gardens, killing of animals, and arson of public
places became prohibited. Weaker people were remitted. Muslims were spreaded over from east to
west.
Hazrat Muhammad said in his Tradition, “O people you are followers of one Allah and are progeny
of Adam. The best among you is who refrains from evils”. All the Muslims are brothers. An Islamic
state act upon the light of Quran. They do not discriminate, the matters of the world and hereafter.
Islam has made all the principles. Islam is code of life and teaches us in all spheres of life. Islam has
also clarified the International Law. Western writers have negated the importance of Islam in the
development of International Law. The period of Muslims was so brilliant.
Third period: There was a long war between king and church. German king created a big state. In
an agreement Pope took over the matters of religion and secular matter left for king. Despite of this
agreement the war period remains continue. In fifteenth century Pope became weaker. In
seventeenth century many small states came into existence that made mutual treaties. Despite of war
many contracts and peace pacts took place.
INTERNATIONAL LAW: International Law is the law, which governs the relations among states
and other international legal persons. The sources of International Law are customs grown up
among states and lawmaking treaties concluded by them. International Law regulates relations
between states.
International Law is a law not above but between sovereign states and it therefore a weaker law.
Municipal law: Municipal law is the law of a state, which governs the domestic affairs of the state.
The sources of Municipal Law are customs grown up within the boundaries of the state concerned
and statutes enacted by the law giving authority.
Municipal Law regulates relations between the individuals under the sway (influence) of a state and
the relations between the state and the individual.
Municipal Law is a law of a sovereign over individuals subjected to his sway.
Relationship between International Law and municipal law: There are certain questions which
come before international lawyer whether what are nice considerations between international and
municipal law. The most important practical problem of more immediate concern to municipal
courts are as to what extent may courts give effect International Law in municipal courts both where
such rules are, and where they are not in conflict with municipal law. It is a practical problem,
which requires consideration of the practice of states.
It is the practice of national courts that the relationship of international law to municipal law is of
fundamental importance which means that to what extent they are interrelated with each other, or
where they conflicts which will be preferred or the system are to oppose or to coordinate with each
other.
113
Theories in this respect: There are two theories as to relation between International Law and
municipal law, i.e., dualism and monism.
DUALISM: In nineteenth and twentieth centuries philosophers emphasized on the sovereignty of

the state-will and the complete system of legislation in a state. It has developed that trend toward the
duelist view. According to dualistic both international and municipal law are distinct systems. There
are two basic differences between the two systems:
1. Subject of law: In state law subjects are individuals whereas states are solely and exclusively
subjects of International Law.
2. Juridical origin: In state source of law is will of the individuals for which they are concerned
while in international source of law is common will of the states concerned.
Distinct legal systems: According to dualism, these two systems are entirely distinct legal system,
international law having an internally different character from that of state law.
Chief exponents of the theory: The chief exponents of dualism have been the modern positivist
writers Triepal and Anzilotti.
Anzilotti’s view: Anzilotti distinguished international law and state law according to the
fundamental principle by which each system is conditioned in his view.
State law is conditioned by the fundamental principle or rule that state legislation has to obey, while
International Law is conditioned by the principle “pactasuntservanda”. It means that agreements
between states are to be respected.
International Law binds individuals and entities other than states. B section is something misleading
to the extent of the superior state in International Law. Superior has definitely dominant role in
International Law despite the common will of the states.
State law is based upon the principle and norm, which sates legislation, has to be obeyed. In
International Law main principle is agreements between states that are to be respected. Thus the two
systems are entirely different. This theory not only has received support from positivists but non-
positivists writers and jurists. State law mainly is consisted on judge made law and the statutes
passed by legislature whereas International Law is comprised on the customary rules and treaties
among the states.
Monism: This is strictly scientific analysis. It is single unity composed of binding legal rules whether
those rules are obligatory on states, on individuals, and on entities other than states.
If it is generally accepted that International Law is a true law then there is no doubt to deny that the
two systems constitute part of that unity.
Kelson’s view: In the view of Kelson and other monist writers, there cannot be any escape from the
position that the two systems, because they are both systems of legal rules, are interrelated parts of
one legal structure.
STATE’S RESPONSIBILITY TO ENFORCE INTERNATIONAL LAW: It is the duty of state to

enforce the International Law as the state law in its jurisdiction.
114
MORTENSON V PETERS: In this case High Court of Scotland gave effect to a municipal law
against the International Law but the state was under obligation to conform the International Law,
therefore, the executive in fact demolished the judgement in order to make Britain’s behavior
conform with her international obligation.
QUESTION OF PRIORITY: Monists are somewhat divided on this point whereas dualists assert
that the two systems are not to supersede, but to coordinate with each other, therefore, there arises
no conflict between the two.
Practice as to priority - case before International Tribunal: When the case in which conflict arises
between International Law and municipal law before an International Tribunal, the practice is to
prefer the International Law over the municipal law.
Practice as to priority - case before Municipal Court: Where conflict arises in a case before a
municipal Court (except where the state has adopted the International Law to supersede, by
constitution or law), the municipal law is preferred.
115
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW

International Criminal Law is a body of international rules which, on one hand, prescribes
international crimes and imposes upon States the obligation to prosecute and punish at least some of
these crimes, and, on the other hand, regulates international proceedings for prosecuting and trying
persons accused of such crimes. It is a relatively new branch of Public International Law. Its rules
have come into being by gradual accretion. It consists of two parts, “substantive criminal law” and
“procedural criminal law”.
“Substantive criminal law” is the set of rules indicating what acts constitute international crimes,
as well as on what conditions States may and must, under International Law, prosecute or bring to
trail persons accused of one of these crimes. “Procedural criminal law” is the set of rules regulating
the various stages of international trials for the prosecution of accused criminals.
The substantive and procedural rules of International Criminal Law are found, mainly, in the
various treaties of the International Humanitarian Law, and in various statutes of international
criminal tribunals.
Examples of the relevant treaties of International Humanitarian Law are:

the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions, the four 1949 Geneva Conventions,
the two 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions,
the various treaties prohibiting the use of certain weapons, and the various treaties related to certain
international crimes such as the 1948 Convention on Genocide,
the 1984 Convention against Torture,
and the various treaties on terrorism.
Examples of the statutes of various international criminal tribunals are: the 1945 Statute of the
International Military Tribunal for the Major War Criminals at Nuremberg (IMT),
the 1946 Statute of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE),
the 1993 Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the 1994
Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), and the 1998 Statute of the
International Criminal Court (ICC).
International Criminal Law has established individual responsibility, with criminal sanctions,
for non-observance of the rules of International Humanitarian Law. This responsibility applies to
each individual, who must answer for his conduct, even when acting on orders from a superior. A
superior is liable to criminal prosecution. The Head of State may have to answer for his actions.
The rules of the International Criminal Law will be the subject of the following sections: The
first section will deal with international crimes; and the second section will deal with the prosecution
and punishment of international crimes by national courts as well as by international tribunals.
SECTION 1: INTERNATIONAL CRIMES

International crimes are breaches of international rules entailing the personal criminal liability of
individuals concerned. They are crimes of concern to international community as a whole. The list
of international crimes, acts which are prohibited under International Law and which makes their
authors criminally liable, has come into being by gradual accretion.
116
Traditionally, in the Seventeenth to the Nineteenth Centuries, piracy was considered an

international crime. Apart of this traditional crime, initially, in late Nineteenth Century only war
crimes were considered international crimes and were punishable. It is only since the Second World
War that new categories of international crimes have developed.
The 1945 Statute of the International Military Tribunal for the Major War Criminals at Nuremberg
(IMT) and the 1946 Statutes of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) added
new classes of international crimes to “war crimes”, namely “crimes against humanity” and “crimes
against peace”. “Crime of genocide”, which was considered as a special subcategory of crimes
against humanity, became an autonomous class of crime in 1948, when the General Assembly of the
United Nations adopted the Genocide Convention.
“Wars of aggression”, which were one of the subcategories of the broad category of “crimes against
peace”, themselves became a category of international crimes replacing what was known as “crimes
against peace” when the G.A adopted its Resolution on the Definition of Aggression in
1974. Recently, acts of international terrorism have been added as a distinct international crime.
The contemporary list of international crimes is formulated in the 1998 Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court (ICC). Article 5 of the Statute lists the international crimes over which
the Court has a jurisdiction as the following:
(1) The crime of genocide;
(2) Crimes against humanity;
(3) War crimes; and
(4) The Crime of aggression.
1. The Crime of Genocide

“Genocide” is the intentional killing, destruction, or extermination of groups or members of a
group as such. The ICC Statute defines “genocide” to mean any of the following acts committed
with intend to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group:
(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent birth within the group; and
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
2. Crimes against Humanity

“Crimes against humanity” are odious offenses that constitute a serious attack on human dignity
or a grave humiliation or degradation of one or more human beings, committed as part of either of a
governmental policy, or of a widespread or systematic practice of atrocities tolerated, condoned, or
acquiesced in by a government or a de facto authority. The acts which constitute such crimes are
prohibited and punishable, whether they are committed in time of war or peace. The victims of such
crimes may be civilians or enemy combatants.
117
The ICC defines “crime against humanity” to mean any of the following acts when committed as
part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of
the attack:
(a) Murder;
(b) Extermination;
(c) Enslavement;
(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules
of International law;
(f) Torture;
(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any
other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic,
cultural, religious, gender, or other grounds;
(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;
(j) The crimes of apartheid; and
(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious
injury to body or to mental or physical health.
3. War Crimes
War crimes are serious violations of customary or treaty rules belonging to International
Humanitarian Law or the Law of War (the body of substantive rules comprising “the Law of the
Hague” and “the law of Geneva”). They may be committed in the course of either international or
internal armed conflicts. They may be committed by military personnel against enemy servicemen or
civilians, or by civilians against members of the enemy armed forces or enemy civilians.
The ICC Statute provides that the Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in
particular when committed as a part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of
such crimes. According to this Statute, “War crimes” means:
(a) Grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, namely any of the acts against protected
persons or property such as willful killing, torture or inhumane treatment, unlawful deportation or
transfer or unlawful confinement, taking hostages, and extensive destruction and appropriation of
property not justified by military necessary.
(b) Serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflicts or in
armed conflicts not of international character, within the established framework of International
Law, namely such as acts committed against the life and dignity of persons; intentionally directing
attacks against civilians, civilian population, civilian objects, or against personnel, installations,
material, units or vehicles involved in humanitarian assistance; killing or wounded a surrendering
combatant; or employing prohibited weapons.
4. Crimes of Aggression
The 1974 General Assembly Resolution on the Definition of Aggression provides that aggression
is the use of force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of
118
another state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations.
Accordingly, “war of aggression” is a crime against International Law which gives rise to
international responsibility. Crimes of aggression comprise the following:
(a) The invasion of or the attack by the armed forces of a State on the territory of another State,
any military occupation, or any annexation by force of the territory or part of the territory of another
State;
(b) Bombardment, or use of any weapon , by the armed forces of a State, against the territory of
another State;
(c) Blockade of the ports or coast of a State by the armed forces of another State;
(d) Attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea, or air forces of another State;
(e) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, group, irregulars, or mercenaries,
which carry out acts of armed force against another States.
SECTION 2: PROSECUTION OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMES

The Prosecution of individuals committing international crimes has undergone a significant
development throughout History; prosecution exclusively by national courts to possible prosecution
by international courts, whether ad hoc or permanent.
A. Prosecution by National Courts to Prosecution by Ad Hoc International Tribunals
Traditionally, individuals have been subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the State on whose
territory they live. Their Violations of international rules were prosecuted and punished by the
competent authority of the State where the acts of violations had been committed. However, such
prosecution and punishment were not possible unless the State was authorized to do so under its
own national law, and it was willing to proceed. If no prosecution and punishment had happened,
then the State, victim of the violation or of which the victim had its nationality, was entitled to
international claim against the delinquent State, which had either to punish the perpetrators or pay
compensation.
In such case, what was involved was the responsibility of the State. State responsibility was founded
on its failure to prosecute and punish the perpetrators. Notably, it is necessary to mention that if a
wrongful act had been committed by a State official in his official capacity, he was entitled abroad to
immunity form jurisdiction (prosecution and punishment).
However, few exceptions to the above tradition existed. One of the exceptions was “piracy”, a
practice which was widespread in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. “Piracy” was
considered an international crime. “Pirates” were regarded as enemies of humanity because they
hampered the freedom of the high sea and infringed private property. So all States were empowered
to search for, prosecute and punish pirates, regardless of the nationality of the victims and of
whether the prosecuting State had been affected by piracy.
Another exception was “war crimes”, which gradually emerged as international crimes in the
second half of the Nineteenth Century. Traditionally such crimes were defined as violations of the
laws of warfare committed by combatants in wars (international armed conflicts). Individuals acting
as State officials, chiefly low-ranking members of the armed forces, could be prosecuted and
punished for violations of the laws of warfare. They could be prosecuted and punished, not only by
their own States, but also by the enemy State.
119
Actually, the exceptional character of war warranted this deviation from the traditional rule, namely
the immunity of State’s officials from the jurisdiction of foreign States. For many years adversary
States prosecuted and punished the alleged perpetrators of war crimes on the basis of the principle of
“passive nationality” (the nationality of the victim), which entitles a State to exercise jurisdiction
over crimes committed against its nationals.
After the First World War, the Allied Powers prosecuted and punished those guilty of war crimes
either on the basis of the principle of territoriality that entitles the State to exercise jurisdiction over
crimes committed on its territory, or on the basis of passive nationality; in this later basis it was
sufficient for the victim to have the nationality of any of the Allied Powers.
The creation of the International Military Tribunal for the Major War Criminals (IMT) and the
International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) in 1945 and 1946 respectively, and the
subsequent trails at Nuremburg and Tokyo of the German and Japanese war criminals, marked a
crucial turning point with regard to international crimes.
Two new categories of international crimes were emerged: crimes against peace and crimes against
humanity. State senior officials, high ranking military officers, politicians and high ranking
administrators, who were until 1945 protected by State sovereignty, became personally responsible
for their wrongdoings. They could be prosecuted by international tribunals as well as by foreign
States who could also punish them.
With the adoption of the Geneva Conventions in 1949, further important advances occurred as
regards international criminal law.New groups of war crimes were added, namely “grave breaches of
the Geneva Conventions”. An advanced system for repressing violations by States was set up. The
principle of universality of jurisdiction was laid down, according to which a contracting State could
prosecute an accused person held in its custody regardless of his nationality, of the nationality of the
victim, and of the place where the alleged violations had been committed.
With the adoption of the Protocol II Additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions in 1977, and the
creation of the two ad hocinternational tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in 1993 and 1994
respectively, a significant evolution of International Criminal Law took place. The notion of war
crimes was extended to include serious violations of international humanitarian rules governing
internal armed conflicts. Violators of these rules could be prosecuted by international tribunals.
A further significant evolution of International Criminal Law finally took place with the adoption
of the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998. The ICC was established as the
permanent international court for international criminal justice, and complementary to national
courts. An almost comprehensive list of international crimes was formulated.
The apparent feature of International Criminal Law today is the possibility of prosecution of
international crimes by national courts as well as by international tribunals, whether ad hoc tribunals
or the International Criminal Court (ICC). In the following subsection, we will deal with the
prosecution by the ICC.
B. Prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC)
The attempts to establish a permanent international criminal court for the prosecution of
individuals committing international crimes succeeded when on 17 July 1998 the Statute of the
International Criminal Court (ICC) was signed at Rome. The ICC is established as a judicial organ
120
of universal jurisdictional reach; thus, it is potentially able to respond to violations occurring

anywhere. Its seat is established at The Hague in the Netherlands.Its relationship with the United
Nations shall be governed by the agreement approved by the Assembly of States Parties to its Statute
and thereafter concluded by the president of the ICC on its behalf. Its jurisdiction and functioning
are governed by the provisions of its Statute.
The Statute of the ICC provides that the Court shall have international legal personality, and that
it shall also have such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the
fulfillment of its purposes. The court may exercise its functions and powers, as provided in its
statute, on the territory of any state party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other
State.
According to the Statute of the ICC, the Court is a permanent criminal court that has the power
to exercise jurisdiction over persons committing the most serious crimes of concern to the
international community as a whole, namely
(a) The crimes of genocide;

(b) Crimes against humanity;
(c) War crimes; and
(d) The crime of aggression.
The ICC is complementary to the national criminal jurisdictions. National courts enjoy priority in
the exercise of jurisdiction over persons committing international crimes except under special
circumstances, when the ICC is entitled to take over and assert its jurisdiction. The ICC is barred
from exercising its jurisdiction over crimes whenever a national court assets its jurisdiction over the
same crime and
(1) under its national law the State has jurisdiction,

(2) the case is being duly investigated or prosecuted by its authorities or these authorities decided, in
a proper manner, not to prosecute the person concerned, and
(3) the case is not of sufficient gravity to justify action by the ICC.
In addition, the ICC may not prosecute a person whom already been convicted of or acquitted for
the same crimes, if the trail was fair and proper.
Nevertheless, the ICC is authorized to exercise its jurisdiction over a crime even if a case concerning
that crime is pending before national authorities, and thus to override national criminal jurisdiction,
whenever:
(1) the State is unable or unwilling to carry out the investigation or prosecution the person
concerned, and
(2) the case is of sufficient gravity to justify the exercise of the ICC jurisdiction. A State is “unable”
when, because of a total or partial collapse of its judicial system, it is not in a position to detain the
accused person, or to carry out criminal proceedings.
A State may be considered as “unwilling” when:

(1) in fact the national authorities have undertaken proceedings for the purpose of shielding the
concerned person from criminal responsibility,
(2) there has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings showing that in fact the authorities do not
intend to bring the concerned person to justice, or
121
(3) the proceedings are not being conducted independently or impartially or in any case in a manner
showing the intend to bring the person to justice.
The ICC may exercise its jurisdiction with respect of any international crimes if such a crime is
referred to the Prosecutor of the ICC by a State Party to the Statute, or by the security Council acting
under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, or if the Prosecutor has initiated an
investigation in respect of such a crime.
A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the
jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the
situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged
with the commission of such crimes. The Prosecutor may initiate investigation based on information
on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court.
According to the Statute of the ICC, the Court has a jurisdiction over natural persons who
commit crimes within its jurisdiction. A person shall be criminally responsible and liable for
punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: commits such a crime;
orders, solicits or induce the commission of such a crime; facilitating the commission of such a
crime; contributing in any way to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime; or
attempts to commit such a crime.
Criminal responsibility and liability under the Statute of the ICC shall be applied to all persons
without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State
or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representatives or a
government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under the Statute,
nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. Immunities or special
procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or
International Law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person.
According to its Statute, the ICC may impose the following penalties:
(a) Imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; or
(b) A term of life imprisonment.
In addition to imprisonment, the Court may order: (a) A fine; or (b) A forfeiture of proceeds,
property and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime.
122
EXTRADITION & INTERVENTION

EXTRADITION DEFINED BY LAWRANCE: Lawrance defines extradition as “the surrender by
one state to another of an individual who is found within the territory of the former and is accused of
having committed a crime within the territory of the latter.
L. Oppenheim: “Extradition” is the delivery of an accused or a convicted individual to the state on

whose territory he is alleged to have committed, to have been convicted of, a crime, by the state on
whose territory the alleged criminal happen to be for the time being.
J. G. Starke: The term “extradition” denotes the process whereby one state surrenders to another
state at its request a person accused or convicted of a criminal offence committed against the laws of
the requesting state, such requesting state being confined to try the alleged offender.
A criminal may take refuge in a state which has no jurisdiction to try him, or in a state which is
unable or unwilling to try him because all the evidence and witnesses are abroad. To meet this
problem, International Law has evolved the practice of extradition, individuals are extradited, i.e.,
handed over, by one state to another state, in order that they may be tried in the latter state for
offences against its laws. Extradition also includes the surrender of convicted criminals who have
escaped before completing their punishment.
Object of extradition: Since extradition is the delivery of an accused or convicted individual to the
state on whose territory he is alleged to have committed, or to have been convicted of, a crime, by
the state on whose territory he happens for the time to be. The object of extradition can be any
individual, whether he is a subject of the prosecuting state, or of the state which is required to
extradite him, or of a third state.
Extradition in the absence of an extradition treaty: Following rules govern extradition in the
absence of extradition treaty:
Reciprocity or courtesy: In the absence of a treaty or statute, the grant of extradition depended
purely on reciprocity or courtesy. No government is understood to be bound by positive law of
nations to deliver up criminals and fugitives from justice who have sought an asylum within its
limits.
COMMON RULES: Following are the common rules, which govern the extradition in absence of
an extradition treaty:
1. Extraditable persons: There is uniformity of state practice to the effect that the requesting state
may obtain the surrender of its own nationals or nationals of a third state. But most states usually
refuse the extradition of their own nationals who have taken refuge in their territory, although as
between states who observe absolute reciprocity of treatment in this regard, requests for surrender
are sometimes acceded to.
2. Extraditable crimes: Serious crimes generally, states extraditing only for serious crimes, and there
is an obvious advantage in thus limiting the list of extradition crime since the procedure is so
123
cumbrous (huge, heavy) and expensive.

3. Special principle: This means that an extradited person cannot be tried for a crime other than that
for which he was extradited, until he has been given a chance to leave the country to which he was
extradited.
4. Definition of extraditable offences: Extradition is usually confined to serious crimes, which must
also be crimes under the law of both of the states concerned (double criminality principle). This
object can be met in one of two ways. First, the treaty may apply to all crimes, which are punishable
in both countries by so many months or years of imprisonment. Alternatively, the treaty may list the
extraditable offences by name.
Exempted offences: As a general rule, the following offences are not subject to extradition
proceedings:
(1) Political crimes.
(2) Military offences, for example, desertion (escape).
(3) Religious offences.
5. Principle of specialty: This principle means that the requesting state is under a duty not to punish
the offender for any other offence than that for which he was extradited. This principle is approved
by the Supreme Court of the United States. In Great Britain its application is a little uncertain.
6. Rule of double criminality: As regards the character of the crime, most states follow the rule of
“double criminality”, i.e., that it is a condition of extradition that the crime is punishable according
to the law both of the states of asylum and of the requesting state.
7. Reasonable prima facie evidence: There must be reasonable prima facie evidence of the guilt of
the accused.
INTERVENTION - DEFINED BY OPPENHEIM: “Intervention” is dictatorial interference by a

state in the affairs of another state for the purpose of maintaining or altering the actual condition of
things.
Lawrance: “Intervention” is an interference with the proceedings of a sovereign state by another

state or group of states. The interfering state endeavors to compel it to do something which, if left to
itself, it would not do, or refrain from doing something which, if left to itself, it would do.
J. G. Starke: “Intervention” means something more than mere interference and much stronger
than mediation (reflection) or diplomatic suggestion. To fall within the terms of their prohibition, it
must be dictatorial interference, in opposition to the will of the particular state affected.
Quincy Wright: Quincy Wright’s view is that “intervention” may be diplomatic as well as military.
A diplomatic community of threatening tone, implying possible use of military measures may
constitute intervention.
Kinds of intervention: There are three different kinds of intervention, which are as follows:
1. Internal intervention: It is the interference by one state between disputing sections of the
community in another state either for protection of the legitimate government or the insurgents
(rebel).
2. External intervention: It is the intervention by one state in the relations generally of the hostile
124
relations of other states. It is, in other words, an intervention in the foreign affairs of another state.
3. Punitive intervention: It is a punitive measures falling short of war and it in the nature of a
reprisal (revenge) for an injury suffered at the hands of another state.
When intervention can be permitted - general rule: General rule is that intervention is not allowed
under International Law. Use of force by one state against another state, is always unlawful.
Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations clearly condemns intervention when it provides that
all members shall refrain in their relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of any state.
Exceptional cases: There are, however, exceptional cases in which a state has at International Law a
legitimate right of intervention.
Grounds of intervention: The intervention can be permitted upon following grounds:

1. Self-protection: The supreme interest of the state overrides law. A state has a right to interfere in
the affairs of another state where the security and immediate interests of the former are
compromised.
2. Enforcement of Treaty Rights: A state is justified in interfering in the affairs of another state if
the provisions of any treaty oblige the former to preserve the independence or neutralists of the
latter.
3. Invitational intervention: As regards invitation by the lawful government of the state to intervene
in its international affair, the matter is not free from difficult. It is again highly controversial whether
the invitation from the government could be legitimately regarded as from the lawful government in
such cases.
4. Grounds of humanity: Another justification for intervention is based on the ground of humanity.
Lawrance observes that in the opinion of many writers such interventions are legal, but they can not
be brought within the ordinary rules of International Law.
5. Balance of power: Preservation of the balance of power has been as undoubted maxim of
European diplomacy from the middle of the seventeenth century. But the intervention on this
ground has been condemned by jurists of all ages.
6. Protection of persons and property: Protections of the persons, property and interests of its
nationals may provide justification for intervention. The necessity for protection may arise due to
gross injustice or due to injury caused by unfair discriminations.
7. Intervention in civil war: With the establishment of the United Nations there is not justification
for intervention by individual states in the civil wars of other states.
8. Protector’s affairs: A state has at International Law a legitimate right of intervention in the
affairs of a protectorate (colonial state) under its dominion.
9. Removal of international nuisance: An intervening state may justify its intervention on the
ground of removal of international nuisance.
10. Collective intervention: Collective intervention at the present time is in pursuance of the
provisions of the United Nations that is the enforcement action under the authority of the United
Nations Organization.
State servitude (slavery) - J. G. Starke: Stake defines an international servitude as “an exceptional
restriction imposed by treaty on the territorial sovereignty of a particular state whereby the territory
125
of that state is put under conditions or restrictions serving the interest of another state.”
M. P. Tandon: It is a right whereby the territory of one state is made liable to permanent use by
another state for some specified purpose. For example, by agreement a state may be obliged to allow
the passage of troops of a neighboring state or may be prevented to fortify its frontiers in the interest
of the neighboring state.
L. Oppenheim: International servitude is that exceptional restrictions through which a state may
exercise certain rights over the territory of another state. State servitudes are those exceptional
restrictions made by treaty on the territorial supremacy of a states by which a part or the whole of its
territory is in a limited way made perpetually to serve a certain purpose or interest of another state.
Rights in rem: The right arising out of servitude is one in rem. It follows that the servitude remains
in force whatever happens to the territory of the state bound by the servitude, for example, if it be
annexed or merged in another state.
Object of state servitude: The object of state servitude is always the whole or a part of the territory
of the state the territorial supremacy of which is restricted by any such servitude.
Subjects of state servitude: Subjects of the state servitude are states only and exclusively, since state
servitude can exist between states only.
Kinds of servitude: Oppenheim mentions four kinds of servitude, which are as follows:
1. Military servitude: Military servitude is a servitude acquired for military purposes, such as, the
right to keep troops in foreign territory or to send an armed forces through foreign territory.
2. Economic servitude: Economic servitude is a servitude which is acquired for the purpose of
commercial interests, traffic, and intercourse in general, such as the right of fisheries in foreign
territorial waters, or to enjoy the advantages of a free zone for custom purpose, to built a railway-line
on foreign territory.
3. Positive servitude: Positive servitude means that a state has to perform certain acts on the
territory of another state. For example,
(1) Building and operating a railway in a certain territory.
(2) Construction of a customhouse.
(3) Having fishery rights in the territorial waters of another state.
(4) Lay down telegraph cable through foreign territory and such like.
Positive servitude is also termed as “active or affirmative” servitude.
4. Negative servitude: Negative servitude connotes that the state is bound by the servitude must
refrain from doing something on that territory or abstain from exercising its territorial rights in some
ways. For instance, it may permit a state to demand that a neighboring state shall not fortify its
frontiers or increase its naval on land armament beyond a certain limit.
126
INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

The rules of “Law of War”, dealt with in the previous chapter, which govern the resort to force in
international relations (ius ad bellum), are intended to prohibit, or at least to restrict, the resort to war
(armed force) in international relations. However, because it is not possible to fully prevent war (the
use of armed force), attempts have been made to regulate the conducts of war in order to mitigate its
extent. The attempts have succeeded in establishing rules to govern the actual conducts of war (ius
in bello). These rules, to some legal scholars, are part of the Law of War, thus they are referred to as
rules related to “Law of War”. However, to others they form a separate law known as
“International Humanitarian Law”.
Because the prevailing view considers “International Humanitarian Law” to be a separate law, it
is reasonable to deal with this law in a separate chapter. Thus, the present chapter is endeavored to
the study of “International Humanitarian Law” (called also “Law of Armed Conflicts”).
As it has been apparent that prevention of war has not been possible, it has been apparent that the
rules formulated in “International Humanitarian Law” would not be effective without attaching
responsibilities in cases of their violations, and without having a mechanism to prosecute violators.
Thus, “International Criminal Law” has come into existence, as a derivative of “International
Humanitarian Law”.
“International Humanitarian Law” (called also “Law of Armed Conflicts”) is that branch of
International Law which regulates the conduct of armed conflicts (war).
It is inspired by a feeling for humanity and is centered on the protection of human being in time of
war (armed conflicts). It seeks to mitigate the effects of armed conflicts by limiting the choice of
means and methods of conducting military operations and providing protections to persons and
civilian objects during armed conflicts.
International Humanitarian Law compiles those rules of International Law which aim to protect
persons, victims of the evils of armed conflicts, as well as, by extension, objects not directly serving
military purposes. In this sense, it is apparent that there is a relation between International
Humanitarian Law and the Law of Human Rights because both laws aim to guarantee to persons
the enjoyment of rights and freedom and to protect them from evils.
However, there is an essential difference between these two laws since International Humanitarian
Law applies only in time of armed conflicts, while Law of Humanitarian rights applies in all time.
How does “International Humanitarian Law” emerge and develop? What are its sources, scope and
content? How is it executed? These are the questions, which are answered in the following.
SECTION 1:
THE CODIFICATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW
To protect man against the evils of war and cruel treatments is not a new idea. It goes back to the
dawn of history. In a distant past, some military leaders used to order their troops to spare the lives
of enemy prisoners (soldiers and civilians) and to treat them well. Often upon the termination of
war, the belligerent parties used to agree to exchange the prisoners in their hands. Throughout the
history, such practices and likewise gradually evolved into a body of customary rules regulating the
conduct of war.
Because the scope and content of the customary rules related to the conduct of war were
somewhat vague and uncertain, a movement was initiated during the Nineteenth Century to
127
embody such rules in binding international instruments.
In 1864, mainly as a result of the pioneering effort of the Swiss businessman Henry Dunant, a
diplomatic conference convened in Geneva by invitation of the Swiss Government for the purpose of
codifying certain rules which would guarantee a better treatment of the wounded and facilitate the
work of the medical personnel in the field of land-war. On August 22, 1864, the conference adopted
the “Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded in Armies in the Field”.
The most important principles introduced by the 1864 Geneva Convention were: The neutrality
of ambulances and military hospitals, as such, they are protected and respected by the belligerents as
long as they accommodate wounded and sick; hospitals, ambulances and evacuation parties would
be distinguished by a uniform flag or armlet bearing “a red cross on a white ground”; the exemption
of hospital and ambulance personnel from being captured or being the target of fire; wounded and
sick combatants should be collected and cared for; and civilians coming to the assistance of the
wounded should be respected. This Convention was accepted by all the then independent States.
The 1864 Geneva Convention was the first modest step in the process of codifying rules of
International Humanitarian Law. This step was followed by many other steps, before the
“International Humanitarian Law” reached its present scope and content.
In 1868, the “Declaration of St Petersburg” came to prohibit the use of explosive or flammable
bullets. This Declaration, in fact, added strength to the principle of the Law of War concerning the
obligation of the belligerents to limit the use of force in meeting a legitimate military objective.
At the Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907, a series of conventions were adopted,
codifying the law of war. The Conventions were intended to set legal limits to means and methods
of land and naval warfare; such legal limits still form the basis of the existing rules. The
Conventions emphasized that belligerents remained subject to the “Law of Nations.” They
contained rules concerning the treatment of prisoners of war; the conduct of military operations,
particularly in regard of means of injuring the enemy, sieges and bombardments, and occupied
territory; and the rights and duties of neutral States. Moreover, One of these Conventions, namely
the “1907 Hague Convention for the Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of the Principles of Geneva
Convention” (the Tenth 1907 Hague Convention) expanded the protection of the 1906 Geneva
Convention to the victims of war at sea.
The 1864 Geneva Convention was revised twice, before and after the First World War, in order
to adapt its provisions to new realities. The first revision took place in 1906. The major achievement
of the “1906 Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in
Armies in the Field” was the development of the provisions for application of the principles
formulated in the 1864 Convention, taking into account the changes in the world, particularly the
growing development of the means of destruction, in order to make such principles more effective.
The second revision was made in 1929, taking into account the experiences of the First World War,
particularly those related to the treatment of the wounded, the sick, and the prisoners of war. Two
Conventions were concluded in 1929: the “1929 Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the
Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field”; and the “1929 Geneva Convention
Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War”.
The two Conventions made important improvements to the old provisions of the Law of
Geneva. They formulated a clear and complete set of rules and principles on capture and captivity
of prisoners of war, and on the treatment of the wounded and the sick. They introduced the ban on
128
reprisals against the prisoners of war, and the principle that application of the rules of the
Convention would be open to international scrutiny. Notably, in this 1929 Diplomatic Conference,
the “red crescent” was recognized as the symbol of Muslim countries in place of the “red cross”.
The atrocities of the Second World War provided the incentive for major revision and further
development of the law of Geneva. In 1949 a diplomatic conference was convened in Geneva at the
instigation of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and by invitation of the Swiss
Government for such purposes. The 1949 Geneva Conference led to the conclusion of four
Conventions; three Conventions substituting the three Conventions in force, namely the Tenth 1907
Hague Convention and the two 1929 Geneva Conventions; and the Convention on the protection of
civilian persons in time of war, which was the innovation of this Conference.
The four 1949 Geneva Conventions deal respectively with the amelioration of the condition of the
wounded and sick members of the armed forces in the field, the amelioration of the condition of the
wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of the armed forces at sea, the treatment of prisoners of
war, and the protection of civilian persons in time of war.
In 1977, two Additional Protocols to the 1949 Conventions were adopted at the closing of the
1974-1977 “Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law
Applicable in Armed Conflicts” which was held in Geneva at the invitation of the Swiss
Government.
Protocol I deals with the protection of victims of international armed conflicts. It develops in
detail the rules of Geneva Conventions and The Hague Conventions concerning the methods and
means of warfare. Protocol II deals with the protection of victims of internal armed victims. It
develops and supplements the rules of the 1949 Geneva Conventions concerning the non-
international armed conflicts.
In addition to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Additional Protocols, several
conventions related to the protection of persons and objects in time of war, and related to the
prohibition of certain weapons, were adopted in the years after 1949.
Among these conventions are: The 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the
Event of Armed Conflict; the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production
and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and Their destruction; the 1980
Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which
May be Deemed to Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects; and the Chemical
Weapons Treaty of 1993.
SECTION 2:
SOURCES, SCOPE AND CONTENT OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW
A. The Sources and Composition of International Humanitarian Law

All the conventions mentioned above could constitute the sources of the International
Humanitarian law. The codification of the rules of International Humanitarian Law shows that this
law consists of two branches: the Law of Geneva and the Law of The Hague. While the Law of
Geneva has a precisely defined subject area, which is the protection of persons against abuse of
force, the Law of The Hague covers all the other problems of the law of war.
129
(1) The Law of The Hague

The Law of The Hague consists of the several Conventions adopted at the Hague Peace
Conferences of 1899 and 1907. The Hague Conventions regulates various aspects of the laws of war
and neutrality. Almost all these conventions are still in force, although many of their provision have
been overtaken by the modern conditions of warfare. The conventions regulates matters such as the
opening of hostilities, the laws and customs of war on land, the rights and duties of neutral powers
and persons in case of war on land, the status of enemy merchant ships at the outbreak of hostilities,
the conversions of merchant ships into warships, the laying of automatic submarine contact mines,
bombardment by naval force in time of war, capture in naval war, and rights and duties of neutral
powers in naval war.
(2) The Law of Geneva

The Law of Geneva consists of four conventions of 1949 and two additional protocols of
1977. The conventions are:
- The First Geneva Convention of 1949: Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the
Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field.
- The Second Geneva Convention of 1949: Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the
Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea.
- The Third Geneva Convention of 1949: Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War.
- The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949: Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of
Civilian Persons in Time of War.
The additional protocols to the Geneva conventions are:
- Protocol I: Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Related
to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts.
- Protocol II: Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Related
to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts.
B. The General Scope of International Humanitarian Law

All The Hague Conventions and the 1906 Geneva Convention include the general participation
clause (clause siomnes) which states that the provisions of the Conventions shall be binding on the
contracting parties only in case of hostilities between two or more of them and that those provisions
shall cease to be binding if one of the belligerent powers is not a signatory to the Convention. Such a
clause was generally accepted before the First World War.
However, the four 1949 Geneva Conventions specifically rejected such a clause. They state that
the conventions shall be respected in all circumstances, and shall apply to all cases of declared war
or any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the contracting parties, and
that even if one of the powers in conflict is not a party to the Conventions, the powers who are
parties to the Conventions shall remain bound by them in their mutual relations, and they shall
furthermore be bound by the Conventions in relation to the said power, if the latter accepts and
applies the provisions thereof. Furthermore, they provide that neutral powers shall apply by analogy
the provisions of the Conventions to the concerned persons received or interned in their territory.
The Geneva Conventions expands their application to cases not involving armed conflict and
cases of non-international armed conflict. They state that they apply to all cases of partial and total
occupation of the territory of the contracting party even if the said occupation meets with no armed
resistance. They also apply to cases of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in
130
the territory of one of the contracting parties; in such cases, each party to the conflict shall be bound
to apply, as a minimum the specified provisions of the Conventions which guarantee to the victims
of this type of armed conflict at least the minimum protection. This position of the Geneva
Conventions regarding the non-international armed conflict occurring in the territory of a
contracting party constitutes derogation from the traditional principle of International Law
concerning the application of a convention only between the contracting parties (sovereign States);
such a position is reaffirmed in the 1977 Protocol II.
Protocol II provides that it apply to armed conflicts not covered by Protocol I, and to armed
conflicts taken place in the territory of a contracting party between its armed forces and dissident
armed forces or other organized armed groups which, under responsible command, exercise such
control over a part of its territory as to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military
operations and to implement this Protocol. In this sense, Protocol II does not apply to situations of
internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence and other acts
of similar nature, as not being armed conflicts.
The 1977 Protocol I extends the application of the 1949 Geneva Conventions to include wars of
national liberation. It provides that it apply to cases of armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting
against colonial domination, alien domination and racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self
determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the 1970 “Declaration on
Principles of International Law….” It is thus apparent from the above developments that the scope
of International Humanitarian Law was gradually enlarged. Today this Law applies to all
circumstances: in cases of armed conflicts involving contracting parties as well as non-contracting
parties; in cases involving States as well as certain entities other than States; in cases of international
armed conflicts and wars of national liberation as well as non-international armed conflicts (internal
armed conflicts). This trend can be interpreted as modifying certain traditional concepts of
International Law, particularly those related to the subjects of the Law.
Notably, International Humanitarian Law recognizes two different categories of armed conflicts,
international armed conflicts and non-internal armed conflicts. International armed conflicts
(known as Wars) are those involve two or more States; wars of national liberation are considered
international armed conflicts. Non-international (internal) armed conflicts (usually known as civil
wars) are those warlike hostilities which occur in the territory of a single State
C. The Persons Protected under International Humanitarian Law

The main aim of International Humanitarian Law is to protect persons, victims of the evils of
armed conflicts. To this end, this Law formulates a set of protections to be provided to certain
categories of persons who are called “protected persons”. Protected persons are those who, at a
given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation,
in the hands of a party to the conflict or occupation power of which they are not nationals. The
protected persons to whom the protections of International Humanitarian Law apply are the
following:
1. The Wounded and the Sick
Wounded and sick are persons, whether military or civilian, who because of trauma, disease or
other physical or mental disorder or disability, are in need of medical assistance or care and who
refrain from any act of hostility. They also include maternity cases, newborn babies and other
persons who may be in need of immediate medical assistance or care, such as expectant mothers,
and who refrain from any act of hostility.
131
2. Shipwrecked
Shipwrecked are persons, whether military or civilian, who are in peril at sea or in other waters as a
result of misfortune affecting them or the vessel or aircraft carrying them and who refrain from any
act of hostility.
3. Medical Personal
Medical personal are those persons, whether military or civilian, assigned, whether permanently
or temporary, by a party to the conflict, exclusively to the medical purposes or to the administration
of medical units or the operation or administration of medical transports. Medical purposes include
the search for, the collection, transport and treatment of the wounded and sick.
Medical personnel also include: the medical personnel of national Red Cross (Red Crescent)
societies and other national voluntary aid societies duly organized and authorized by a party to a
conflict; the medical personnel of a neutral or of other State which is not a party to that conflict, or
of a recognized and authorized aid society of such a State; and the medical personnel of an impartial
international humanitarian organization.[
“Medical units” means establishments and other units, whether military or civilian, organized
for medical purposes, namely the search for, collection, transportation, diagnosis or treatments of
the wounded, sick and shipwrecked or for the prevention of disease. This term includes hospitals
and the likes, and various medical centers.
“Medical transports” means any means of transportation, such as vehicles, ships and aircrafts,
whether military or civilian, permanent or temporary, assigned exclusively to medical transportation
and under the control of a competent authority of a party to the conflict.
4. Religious Personnel
Religious personnel are military or civilian persons, such as chaplains, who are exclusively engaged
in the work of their ministry and attached to the armed forces, medical units, medical transports, or
civil defense organization of a party to the conflict. They also include: those assigned by a neutral
or other State which are not a party to that conflict, or by a recognized and authorized aid society of
such a State; and those assigned by an impartial international humanitarian organization.
5. Prisoners of War
Prisoners of war are combatants who have fallen into the hands of the enemy, the adverse party
to the conflict. Combatants are members of the armed forces of a party to a conflict other than
medical and religious personnel. The armed forces of a party to a conflict consist of all organized
armed forces, groups and units (militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces) which
are under a command responsible to that party for the conduct of its subordinates. Combatants also
include members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of
organized resistance movements, belonging to a party to the conflicts and operating in or outside
their own territory, provided that such groups fulfill the conditions specified in the Third Geneva
Convention, which are:
1) They are commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
2) They have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
3) They carry arms openly; and
4) They conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
6. Civilians and Civilian Population
Civilians mean persons who are not members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict, and not
members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, referred to them as
combatants. The civilian population comprises all persons who are civilians.
132
Among civilians, women and children (under fifteen years of age) are granted special status in
International Humanitarian Law, and consequently special protections.
7. Other Protected Persons
There are certain categories of persons who have not appeared in situations of armed conflicts until
quite recently. Although they are included within the meaning of civilians, they need special
attention because they are exposed, in case of armed conflict, to extreme danger. These persons are
the personnel of civilian defense organizations, and the journalists; Protocol I includes them within
the protection of the International Humanitarian Law.
D. Objects Protected under International Humanitarian Law The aim of International

Humanitarian Law is not limited to the protection of persons only, but it is, by extension, aim to
protect objects not directly serving military purposes. The objects to which, the protections of this
Law apply are the following.
1) Objects Serving Medical Purposes

All objects serving medical purposes, whether civilian or military, are protected under International
Humanitarian Law. These objects include: fixed or mobile medical establishments such as hospitals,
the likes, centers and units; and medical transports such as vehicles, trains, ships and aircraft
2. Civilian Objects Civilian objects are those which are not used for any military purposes or
objectives. In addition, they are objects not used for medical purposes; otherwise, they will be
included within the meaning of medical objects. Civilian objects include:
- Objects which are indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs,
crops, livestock, and drinking water installations and supplies.
- Civilian houses, schools and places of work.
- Undefended localities.
- Objects which constitute the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples, such as historic
monuments, works of arts, and places of worship.
- Works or installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical
generating stations.
- Natural environment.
- Neutral and demilitarized zones.
E. The Fundamental Protections of International Humanitarian Law

The aim of International Humanitarian Law is to protect the human being and safeguard his
dignity in time of armed conflicts. To this end, a multitude of rules regulating the conduct of States
in armed conflicts, and which constitute the protections and guarantees to persons in time of armed
conflicts, are formulated in this Law. These rules are of two types: injunctions, requiring the parties
to the dispute thereto to act, and prohibitions, requiring the parties to abstain from acting.
The rules formulated in International Humanitarian Law do not come from a vacuum; they are
inspired by other principles and rules expressly stated in other instruments of International Law or
clearly implied from thereof, or are derived from the customary international law. The principles of
the Law of Human Rights, such as the principle of inviolability, the principle of non-discrimination
and the principle of security, inspire many rules and principles formulated in International
Humanitarian Law.
The principles of Human Law corollary to the Law of War, such as the principle of military
133
necessity and the principles of limitation are also behind the rules and principles of International
Humanitarian Law. The principle of neutrality provides the inspiration to the rules of International
Humanitarian Law, particularly those related to the immunity and protection of the medical
personnel and facilities.
The most important fundamental rules and principles formulated in International Humanitarian
Law, which constitute protections and guarantees to persons under this Law, are the following:
1. Persons taking no active part in hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid
down their arms and those placed hors de combat (out of combat) by sickness, wound, detention, or
any other cause, shall in all circumstances be protected and treated humanely, without any adverse
distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith, sex, wealth, or any other similar criteria. Their
lives, and their physical and moral integrity shall be respected. Women shall be especially protected
against any attack on their honour, in particular against rape, enforced prostitution, or any form of
indecent assaults.
2. The wounded, sick and shipwrecked shall be collected, cared for, and protected by the party to
the conflict who has them in its power.
3. Medical personnel, establishments, transports and materials are protected. The emblems of
the Red Cross and the Red Crescent are the signs of such protection and must be respected.
4. It is forbidden to kill or injure an enemy who surrenders or who is out of combat. Captured
combatants and civilians under the authority of an adverse party are entitled to respect for their lives,
dignity, personal rights and convictions. They shall at all times be humanely treated. They shall be
protected against all acts of violence and reprisals. They shall have the rights to correspond with
their families and receive relief.
5. Every person shall be entitled to benefit from the fundamental judicial guarantees. No one
shall be responsible for an act he has not committed. No one shall be subjected to physical or mental
torture, corporal punishment or cruel or degrading treatment.
6. Individual or mass forcible transfer, as well as deportations of persons from occupied territory
to other territory are prohibited regardless of their motive.
7. Civilians and civilian population shall enjoy general protection against dangers from military
operations. They shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence to spread terror among
the civilian population are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Reprisals are
prohibited.
8. Civilian objects shall not be the object of attack or reprisals.
9. Parties to a conflict and members of their armed forces do not have an unlimited choice of
methods and means of warfare. They are prohibited from employing weapons or methods of warfare
of the nature to cause unnecessary losses or excessive suffering.
10. Parties to a conflict shall at all times distinguish between combatants and civilian population in
order to spare the civilian population. Attacks shall be directed solely against military objectives.
SECTION 3: EXECUTION OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

The rules of International Humanitarian Law, like any of other laws, are meaningless if they are
not executed. Since these rules constitute obligations imposed upon sovereign States, States have to
execute its obligations. In executing its obligations, the State will be fulfilling its obligations under
International Law, and consequently serving its own interests. Any breach of its obligations under
International Law, the State will subject itself to sanctions. Sanctions will be applied against the
134
State and individuals. The subject of individual criminal responsibility under International Law will
not be dealt with in the present chapter, but in the next chapter.
International Humanitarian Law requires each State to execute its obligations under it in all
circumstances, in time of peace and in the event of armed conflict. In addition, it attributes to the
protecting powers (States) and substitute organizations such as the Red Cross societies, the authority
to aid and assist in the execution of its rules.
A. Execution by States
In all the Conventions and Protocols of International Humanitarian Law, States undertake to
respect and ensure respect for them in all circumstances. States shall, therefore, take without delay
all the necessary measures for the execution of their obligations under them. They also shall give
orders and instruction to ensure observance of them, and shall supervise their execution.
States undertake, in time of peace as in time of war, to disseminate the Texts of the conventions
as widely as possible in their respective countries.They undertake to include the study thereof in
their military programmes and civil instructions, so that the principles thereof may become known to
the entire population, in particular to the armed fighting forces, the medical personnel and the
chaplains.
States undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons
committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the Conventions defined
thereof. Each State is under the obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to
have ordered to be committed, such breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their
nationality, before its own courts. It may also, if it prefers, and in accordance with the provisions of
its own legislation, hand such persons over for trail to another State concerned, provided such State
has made out a prima facie case.
Each State is under the obligation to take measures necessary for the suppression of all acts
contrary to the provisions of the Conventions other than the grave breaches defined thereof.
B. Protecting Powers
During an armed conflict, the execution of the provisions of the Conventions and the Additional
Protocols should be ensured, to a certain extent, with the aid of the protecting powers entrusted to
safeguard the interests of the parties to the conflict. The first obligation of a party to the conflict after
the outbreak of armed conflict is to appoint a protecting power.
“Protecting power” means a neutral or other State not a party to the conflict which has been
designed by a party to the dispute and accepted by the adverse party and has agreed to carry out the
humanitarian functions assigned to a protecting power under the Conventions and the Additional
Protocols which aim to ensure protection and assistance to the victims of armed conflicts. In
performing their functions, the protecting powers also help in the implementation of International
Humanitarian Law.
C. Red Cross Societies
The protecting powers may be substituted by the International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC) or other impartial humanitarian organizations which offer all guarantees of impartiality and
efficacy. In addition to the humanitarian functions which the ICRC can perform in place of the
protecting powers, it is granted a sort of right of initiative in humanitarian activities. Among the
numerous functions which the ICRC can perform are the rights to visit all places where prisoners of
war or civilian internees are kept, and to interview these protected persons without witnesses,
personally or through an interpreter. Humanitarian functions can also be carried out by National
Red Cross or Red Crescent Societies, and by other duly recognized and authorized charitable
associations.
135
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

“International Environmental Law” is a branch of “International Law” which consists of rules
relevant to the environment. It aims at protection of environment and attainment of sustainable
development. It is the newest or the youngest branch of International Law; it emerged in the mid-
1960s.
The increasing recognition of the need to protect the global environment by laying down new
principles and rules to govern its various issues has required that International Law be developed in
order to establish such new principles and rules. Thus, International Environmental Law emerged
as the result of such development of International Law.
Actually, the concerns for environment have been reflected for a long time in the various
branches of International Law, namely the Law of the Sea, Space Law, State responsibility, and the
legal regime of Antarctica. However, these branches do not specifically focus on solving
environmental problems. International Environmental Law has emerged specifically to resolve
environmental problems and issues. It is different from the other branches of International Law;
nevertheless, it overlaps and interacts with them.
In the following sections, we will deal with the codification and development of International
Environmental Law, and its contents and its main emergent legal principles.
SECTION 1:
THE CODIFICATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
Since the mid-1960s, the need to protect the environment resulting from the increase in the level
of understanding of the dangers facing the earth’s environment has instigated an effort, by
governments and by the United Nations as well as by non-governmental organizations, to invoke
legal protection of the environment both at domestic and international levels.
At the domestic level, most countries have promulgated environmental legislation to that end. At
the international level, the United Nations initiated in 1972 the long international process for the
codification and development of international environmental law as a separate new branch of
International Law.
Although the United Nations had convened some conferences addressing environmental issue
before 1972. For instance, the 1949 “United Nations Scientific Conference on the Conservation and
Utilization of Resources” which focused on exchanging experience in resources use and
conservation techniques, and the 1968 “UNESCO Conference of Experts on the Scientific Basis for
Rational Use and Conservation of the Resources of the Biosphere” which addressed the issues with
respect to the life-support systems of plants and animals. In this latter Conference, the United
Nations addressed for the first time a range of ecological issues and recognized Man’s relationship to
nature at the international level.
By the early 1970s, environmental issues were appearing on the agenda of various United
Nations organs and its specialized agencies as well as other organizations and agencies. In 1972, the
United Nations convened its “Conference on the Human Environment” (UNCHE) in
Stockholm; this Conference constituted the first major step in a process of codifying and developing
International Environmental Law as a separate but integral part of International Law.
This Conference focused mainly on protecting “the human environment.” It resulted in the
136
adoption of four major initiatives concerning the normative, institutional, programmatic, and
financial aspects of the environment at the international level. The first initiative was the adoption
of “the Stockholm Declaration”, which intended to inspire and guide the peoples of the world in the
preservation and enhancement of the human environment. The second initiative was the agreement
to establish a new institution within the United Nations, which is “the United Nations
Environmental Programme” (UNEP). The third initiative was the adoption of “the Action Plan”
for the development of environmental policy which to be administered by the UNEP.
Since 1972 Stockholm Conference, there has been a remarkable proliferation of international
instruments concerning various environmental problems. These involve air pollution, marine
pollution, global warming and ozone depletion, the dangers of nuclear and other extra-hazardous
substances, Antarctica, and threatened wildlife species.
In the same year after the 1972 Stockholm Conference, the United Nations General Assembly
established “the United Nations Environmental Programme” (UNEP) as a subsidiary organ to deal
with environmental issues. The UNEP is based in Nairobi, Kenya, and consists of a Governing
Council of fifty-eight members elected by the G.A. This organ has contributed extensively to the
development of International Environmental Law.
It has been behind the conclusion of a number of conventions, such as “the 1985 Vienna Convention
for the Protection of the Ozone Layer” which imposes on States a few concrete obligations related
to the protection of human health and the environment, and “the 1987 Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer”which aims at reducing and eventually eliminating
consumption and production of a range of ozone-depleting substances.
In 1989, “the Basel Convention on the Control of the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous
Wastes and their Disposal” was concluded. In 1991 “the Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary Contest”, was concluded. In 1992 “the Helsinki Convention on the
Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and Lakes” and “the Helsinki Convention on
the Transboundary Effect of Industrial Accidents” were conclude. Moreover, after the 1972, the
General Assembly of the United Nations has adopted a number of resolutions concerning the
environment.
The process of the development of International Environmental Law was culminated in “the
United Nations Conference on Environmental and Development” (UNCED) which was held in Rio
de Janeiro in June 1992. The Conference was held to reconcile worldwide economic development
with protection of the environment. The Earth Summit, as this Conference is known, was the
largest gathering of world leaders in history, with 117 heads of state and representatives of 178
nations in all attending. By means of treaties and other documents signed at the conference, most of
the world's nations nominally committed themselves to the pursuit of economic development in
ways that would protect the Earth's environment and non-renewable resources.
This Conference adopted five instruments:
(1) “The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development”:

A universal statement of general rights and obligations of States affecting the environments
formulated in twenty-seven non-binding principles.
(2) Agenda 21: A programme of action consisting of forty chapters covering many issues, ranging
from alleviation of poverty to strengthening national and international society’s ability to protect the
atmosphere, oceans, and other waters, mountains, and areas vulnerable to desertification. This
137
Programme recognizes more explicitly than “the Stockholm Action Plan” the interrelations between
economic, environment, poverty and development issues. Agenda 21 outlines global strategies for
cleaning up the environment and encouraging environmentally sound development.
(3) “The Framework Convention on Climate Change” (known as “Global Warming
Convention”): An international treaty creating a regulatory regime to deal with the effects of
energy use at the Climate. It aims to stabilize the greenhouse gas emissions at a level that would
prevent dangerous anthropogenic (chiefly of pollution, originating from human activities)
interference with the climate system. It requires States to reduce their emission of carbon dioxide,
methane, and other “greenhouse” gases thought to be responsible for global warming. It contains a
set of principles that the parties shall be guided by in their efforts to achieve the objective of the
Convention, and a set of principles constituting commitments to be undertaken by the parties under
the Convention.
(4) “The Convention on Biological Diversity”: An international treaty creating a regulatory
regime to deal with the large-scale natural resources depletion. It aims at the conservation and
sustainable use of biological diversity, the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from its use, and
the regulation of biotechnology. It requires States to take inventories of their plants and wild
animals and protect their endangered species.
(5) “The Non-legally Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus
on the Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of all Types of Forests”: As
the title of this instrument suggests it is not a treaty, but a statement of principles with no binding
force.
This Statement of Principles aims at preserving the world's rapidly vanishing tropical rainforests. It
recommends that nations monitor and assess the impact of development on their forest resources
and take steps to limit the damage done to them.
In addition, the Rio de Janeiro Conference of 1992 established “the Inter- Agency Committee on
Sustainable Development” in order to improve co-operation between the various United Nations
organs and agencies concerned with this issue. In the same year, “the Commission on Sustainable
Development” (CSD) was established by the General Assembly and “the Economic and Social
Council of the United Nations” in order to follow up the 1992 Rio de Janeiro Conference, and to
keep under review the implementation of its instruments.
Since the 1992 Rio de Janeiro Conference, several international instruments, whether universal or
regional, dealing with various environmental issues have been adopted.The instruments deal with
issues such as trans-boundary pollution, marine environment and pollution, nuclear safety and
damage, desertification, Hazardous wastes, and watercourses, rivers and lakes. Among these
instruments, there is “the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change”.
It is important to mention that in 1994 the Global Environmental Facility, which was established
earlier, was transformed into a permanent financial mechanism to award grants and funds to
developing countries for global environmental protection projects. The Facility focuses upon climate
change, the destruction of biological diversity, the pollution of international waters and ozone
depletion.
138
SECTION 2:
THE MAJOR EMERGENT PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
The emergent principles and rules of International Environmental Law are laid down in the various
environmental instruments, conventions as well as non-binding statements, declarations and
resolutions, which have been adopted in the last thirty-three years. These principles and rules
accords rights and obligations to individuals, peoples and States with respect to global environment
and sustainable development. Although not all these principles and rules are binding, the non-
binding ones may constitute an evidence of the tendency of international community with regard to
such subjects. The most significant emergent principles and rules of environment and sustainable
development are the following:
(1) The Human Environmental Right: This principle accords all persons the right to a secure,
healthy and ecologically sound environment. It provides that every person has the fundamental right
to freedom, equality and adequate conditions of life, in an environment of a quality that permits a
life of dignity and well-being.
(2) The Principle of Sustainable Development: This principle considers human beings to be at
the center of concerns for sustainable development. It provides that the right to development must be
fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future
generations.
(3) The Right to Development: This principle accords each State the right to development, and
the sovereign right to exploit its own resources pursuant to its own environment and developmental
policies. It provides that environmental protection should not outweigh the need of a State for
economic development. It also provides that economic and social development is essential for
ensuring a favorable living and working environment for human being and for creating conditions
on earth that are necessary for the improvement of the quality of life.
(4) The Principle of Integration of Environmental Protection and Development: This principle
provides that environmental protection should constitute an integral part of the development process
and cannot be considered in isolation from it.
(5) The Principle of Environment Protection and Precaution: This principle requires all states
to take all the precautionary measures according to their capabilities in order to protect the
environment. States should take precautionary measures to prevent or minimize environmental
degradation. They should minimize in an economically efficient manner harmful environmental
impacts. They should endeavor to limit and, as far as possible, gradually reduce and prevent air
pollution, including long-range trans-boundary air pollution.
(6) The Principle of Co-operation: This principle provides that international matters concerning
the protection and improvement of the environment should be handled in a co-operative spirit. It
requires States to co-operate in a spirit of global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the
health and integrity of the Earth’s ecosystem; and to develop policies and strategies by means of
exchanges of information and consultation and to exchange information to combat generally the
discharge of air pollution.
139
(7) The Principle of State Responsibility for Damages to the Environment: This principle
imposes upon the States the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control
do not cause damage to the environment of other States or areas beyond the limits of national
jurisdiction. States are liable for any damage caused by their breach of their obligations. Such
liability is absolute; States are liable for any adverse effects irrespective of fault.
(8) The Polluter-Pays Principle (the Civil Liability Principle): This principle entails that the
polluter should, in principle, bear the costs of pollution.
(9) The Principle of Notification and Consultation: This principle requires a State immediately
to notify other States of any natural disasters or other emergencies that likely to produce sudden
harmful effects on the environment of those States. States should provide prior and timely
notification and relevant information to potentially affected States on activities that may have a
significant adverse transboundary environmental effect and shall consult with those States at an
early stage and in good faith.
(10) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Principle: This principle involves a procedure for
evaluation the likely impact of a proposed activity on the environment. The object of the assessment
is to provide decision-makers with information about possible environmental effects when deciding
whether to authorize the activity to proceed. Under this principle States are required to establish an
environmental assessment procedure that permits public participation and the preparation of
environmental impact assessment documentations.
(11) Environmental Monitoring Principle: This principle involves a process whereby States
observe, measure, evaluate and analyze, by recognized scientific methods, the risks or effects of
pollution or environmental harm. Unlike EIA, monitoring is generally undertaken after the project
has begun; its object is to check initial EIA prediction and determine whether measures are needed
in order to abate or avoid pollution or environmental harm.
140
THE LAW OF TREATIES

A treaty is a written international agreement concluded between States or other persons of
International Law and governed by International Law, whether embodied in a single instrument or
in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation. In English, the term
‘treaty” is used as a generic term embracing all kinds of international agreements in written form. In
addition to the term “treaty”, many other terms are used, such as “accord”, “act”, “arrangement”,
“charter”, “covenant”, “convention”, “declaration”, “general act”, “pact”, “protocol”, “statute”, as
well as the term “agreement” itself. Whatever the appellation of the agreement, it does not affect its
validity under International Law.
Treaties can be traced back as far as the early-recorded history of Mankind. Evidence for their
existence has been found throughout the history. Treaties have been the major legal instruments for
regulating relations between States. States concluded treaties in every conceivable subject. Ten of
thousands treaties have been registered with the United Nations since 1946. Until 1980, treaties had
been governed by international customary law. In 1969, the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties was signed, codifying and developing existing customary rules; it came into force in 1980.
The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties defines “treaty” as “an international
agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by International Law, whether
embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular
designation.” It further provides that it “does not apply to international agreements concluded
between States and other subjects of international law or between such other subjects of international
law, or to international agreements not in written form”. These provisions exclude agreements
between states which are governed by other than International Law, agreements between States and
international organizations or between international organizations, and oral agreements.
The reason for the exclusion of these types of international agreements is to avoid complication and
complexity if they are included in a single convention with written agreements between States, since
the rules governing them differ in certain aspects from the rules governing written agreements
between States. A special convention applicable to agreements between states and international
organizations, or between international organizations, namely “the Convention on the Law of
Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations”,
was signed in 1986. However, this Convention has not yet entered into force.
The following sections are devoted to the rules applicable to the written agreements between
States as provided by the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. However, the rules
provided by this Convention are not inclusive; other rules existed under customary international law
continue to govern questions not regulated by the Convention.
SECTION 1: CONCLUSION OF TREATIES

Treaties may be concluded by States in any manner they wish. There are no obligatory
prescribed forms or procedures to be followed. Negotiating, formulating, signing and adopting a
treaty are subject to the intention and consent of the contracting States. However, the 1969
Convention on the Law of Treaties provides general rules applicable to the conclusion of treaties,
rules regarding the capacity and the competent persons to conclude treaties, the adoption and
authentication of the text of treaties, and the adoption of treaties.
141
A. The Capacity to Conclude Treaties
Under the Convention, every State possesses capacity to conclude treaties. Since States are
represented by persons, the Convention provides rules to ensure that persons representing States
have the power to adopt or authenticate the text of a treaty, or to express the consent of the State
bound by a treaty. Such persons must produce what is known as “full powers”. “Full powers”
refers to the document issued by the competent authority of the concerned State certifying that the
persons represent it. This requirement is necessary to ensure the States parties to the treaty that they
are dealing with the competent persons. However, there are certain persons who need not to
produce the “full powers”. These persons are:
(1) Heads of States, heads of governments and the ministers for foreign affairs, for the purpose of
performing all acts related to the conclusion of a treaty;
(2) Heads of diplomatic missions, for the purpose of adopting the text of a treaty between their
States;
(3) Representatives accredited by States to an international conference or to international
organization or one of its organs, for the purpose of adopting the text of a treaty in that conference,
organization or organ.
B. Adoption and Authentication of the Text of Treaties
Once a draft of a treaty has been agreed upon by the competent persons, several stages need to be
followed before it becomes legally binding. First, the text of the treaty has to be adopted. The
adoption of the text of a treaty implies that the form and content of the text of the proposed treaty
are settled. It takes place by the consent of all the States participating in its drawing up, except the
adoption at an international conference, which takes place by the vote of two-third of the States
present and voting, unless by the same majority they decide to apply a different rule. The adoption
of the text of a treaty does not mean that the participating States have expressed consent to be bound
by the treaty, or that the treaty has been adopted.
Second, the text of a treaty has to be authenticated. Authentication is a procedural step whereby
the text of the treaty is established as correct and genuine, and not subject to alteration. It is
necessary to enable the States parties to the treaty to know definitively its content so that there will
be no confusion as to its exact terms. The authentication of the text of a treaty takes place according
to the procedure provided in the text or agreed upon by the States participating in its drawing
up. Failing such procedure, authentication may take place by the signature, signature ad
referendum or initiating by the representatives of the participating States.
C. The Adoption of Treaties

A treaty has to be adopted by the participating States to become binding upon them. States adopt
a treaty by giving their consent to it. The consent of the States parties to a treaty is an essential
factor because States are bound only by their consent. The consent may be expressed by signature,
exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or by
any other means if so agreed.
(1) Consent by signature

A State may be regarded as consented to a treaty by signature when the treaty provides that
signature shall have that effect, when it is established that the negotiating States were agreed that
142
signature should have that effect, or when the intention of the State to give that effect to the
signature appears from the full powers of its representatives or was expressed during the
negotiation. Signing the treaty means officially affixing the names of the representatives of the
contracting States.
The act of signature is usually a formal event. Often in important treaties, heads of States
formally affix their signatures in a ceremony. Usually in multilateral conventions, the representatives
of the participating States sign the treaties during a special closing session held for that reason.
(2) Consent by exchange of instruments constituting a treaty

A State may be regarded as consented to a treaty by an exchange of instruments constituting a
treaty when the treaty provides that the exchange of such instrument has that effect, or when it is
established that the States were agreed that the exchange of the instrument should have that
effect. Nowadays, often each State signs an instrument constituting a treaty and sends it to the other
State (or States) for its signature.
(3) Consent by ratification, acceptance or approval

The signing of the treaty by the representative of a State is either a means of expressing the final
consent of the State to be bound by the treaty, or an expression of provisional consent subject to
ratification, acceptance or approval. The effect of signature depends upon the terms of the treaty,
the agreement of the negotiating States or their intention. If the treaty is subject to ratification
(acceptance or approval), then it does not become binding until it is ratified by competent authority
of contracting State, namely the head of the State. Ratification by the competent authority of the
contracting State is a step well established historically to ensure that the representative of the State
did not exceed his powers or instructions with regard to the conclusion of the treaty. It allows a
State to examine the provisions of a treaty before undertaking formal obligations. Moreover, it
enables a State, in the period between signature and ratification, to pass the required legislation or to
obtain the required approval. The question of how a state ratifies treaties is a matter for its internal
law alone. The rules related to ratification vary from State to State.
The consent of a state to be bound by a treaty is expressed by ratification (acceptance or approval)
when the treaty provides for such consent to be expressed by means of ratification, when it is
established that the negotiating states were agreed that ratification should be required, when the
representatives of the State has signed the treaty subject to ratification, or when the intention of the
States to sign the treaty subject to ratification appears from the full powers of its representative or
was expressed during the negotiation.
Ratification occurs when instruments of ratification are exchanged between the contracting
States, or are deposited with the depositary. In the case of multilateral treaty, it usually provides that
the instruments of ratification should be deposited with the State or the international organization
that is appointed by the treaty to act as the depositary.
(4) Consent by accession

In addition to signature and ratification, a State may become a party bound by a treaty by
accession. Accession is a formal acceptance of a treaty by a State which did not participate in
negotiating and signing it. It is possible if the treaty provides that consent to it may be expressed by
accession, if it is established that the negotiating States were agreed that consent may be expressed
by accession, or if all the States parties to the treaty have subsequently agreed that consent may be
expressed by accession. Accession has the same effects as signature and ratification combined. It is
143
the practice in the modern times that certain treaties remain open for accession by particular States
for some periods.
D. Reservation to a Treaty
It is well established in the practice of States that a State has a capacity, when becoming a party to
a treaty, to accept most of the provisions of a treaty or to object, for whatever reasons, to particular
provisions of a treaty. This capacity is reiterated by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
which states that a State may, when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty,
formulate a reservation unless the reservation is either prohibited by the treaty or incompatible with
its object and purpose, or the treaty permits only specified reservations. A reservation is defined by
this Convention as “a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, by a State, when signing,
ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or modify the
legal effects of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that
State”.
The effect of a reservation depends on whether it is accepted or rejected by the other parties to a
treaty, and this matter differs whether a treaty is bilateral or multilateral one. A reservation to a
bilateral treaty presents no problem since it constitutes a counteroffer which may reopen the
negotiation between the two parties concerning the terms of the treaty; and unless the reservation is
accepted by the other party, no treaty will be concluded. However, a reservation to a multilateral
treaty causes a problem because it may be accepted by some parties and rejected by others. In such a
case, the Convention on the Law of Treaties provides that a reservation expressly authorized by a
treaty does not require any subsequent acceptance by the other contracting States unless the treaty so
provides, and that when it appears from the limited number of the negotiating States and the object
and purpose of a treaty that the application of the treaty in its entirety between all the parties is an
essential condition of the consent of each one to be bound by the treaty, a reservation requires
acceptance by all the parties.
The Convention requires that a reservation, an express acceptance of a reservation and an
objection to a treaty be formulated in writing and communicated to the contracting States and other
States entitled to become parties to the treaty. However, an acceptance of a reservation by a State
may be implied if it has raised no objection to the reservation by the end of a period of twelve
months after it was notified of the reservation or by the date on which it expressed its consent to be
bound by the treaty, whichever is later. An objection by another contracting State to a reservation
does not preclude the entry into force of the treaty as between the objecting and reserving States,
unless a contrary intention is definitely expressed by the objecting State.
Unless the treaty provides otherwise, a reservation or an objection to a reservation may be
withdrawn at any time. In case of the withdrawal of a reservation the consent of a State which has
accepted the reservation is not required for its withdrawal. It is required that the withdrawal of a
reservation or of an objection to a reservation be formulated in writing. Unless the treaty provides
otherwise, or it is agreed otherwise, the withdrawal of a reservation or of an objection to a
reservation becomes operative only when notice of it has been received by the concerned State.
A reservation established with regard to another party modifies for the reserving State in its
relations with that other party the provisions of the treaty to which the reservation relates to the
extent of the reservation, and modifies those provisions to the same extent for that other party in its
relations with the reserving State. However, the reservation does not modify the provisions of the
treaty for the other parties to the treaty inter se, i.e. in their relations with each other.
144
SECTION 2: ENTRY INTO FORCE, REGISTRATION AND DEPOSITARY OF TREATIES

The Convention provides rules applicable to the entry into force of treaties as well as rules
applicable to registration and depositary of treaties.
A. Entry into Force of Treaties

According to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a treaty enters into force in such a
manner and upon such date as it may provide or as the negotiating States may agree. In the absence
of any such provisions or agreement, a treaty enters into force as soon as consent to be bound by that
treaty has been established for all the negotiating States. When the consent of a State to be bound by
a treaty is established on a date after the treaty has come into force, the treaty enters into force for
that State on that date, unless the treaty provides otherwise.
Normally, treaties specify that they will enter into force upon a certain fixed date or after a
determined period following the last ratification. Multilateral treaties, usually, provide for entry into
force upon ratification by a specified number of States. However, even when the minimum required
number of ratifications is reached, the treaty enters into force only between those States that have
ratified it; it does not enter into force for other States until they have also ratified it. The Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties, for example, provides that it will come into force on the thirtieth
day following the date of deposit of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or accession.
Moreover, it provides that for each State ratifying or acceding to the Convention after the deposit of
the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or accession, the Convention shall enter into force on the
thirtieth day after deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification or accession.
Nevertheless, a treaty or a part of it may be applied provisionally pending its entry into force if
the treaty itself so provides, or the negotiating States have in some other manner so agreed. But,
unless the treaty provides otherwise or the negotiating States have agreed otherwise, the provisional
application of a treaty or a part of it with respect to a State shall be terminated if that State notifies
the other States between which the treaty is being applied provisionally of its intention not to
become a party to the treaty.
B. Registration and Depositary of Treaties

After the entry of a treaty into force, the Vienna Convention requires that the treaty to be
transmitted to the Secretariat of the United Nations for registration or filling and recording, as the
case may be, and for publication. This requirement follows the one provided for by the Charter of
the United Nations. Article 102 of the Charter provides that every treaty and every international
agreement entered into by any Member of the United Nations must, as soon as possible, be
registered with the Secretariat and published by it. Under this article, non-registered treaty or
agreement remains valid but the parties to it may not invoke it before any organ of the United
Nations, including the International Court of Justice. This requirement is intended to prevent States
from entering into secret treaties and in general to ensure publicity for treaties.
Treaties, nowadays, are registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations which then
publishes them in the United Nations Treaty Series (UNTS). The UNTS provides a useful source of
reference for the conclusion and contents of treaties.
In addition, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties requires the designation of depositary
of a treaty. This designation may be made by the negotiating States, either in the treaty itself or in
some other manner. The depositary may be one State or more States, an international organization
or the chief administrative officer of the organization. The depositary has functions of considerable
importance relating to: keeping custody of the original text of the treaty, any instruments,
145
notifications and communications related to the treaty; giving certified copies of the treaty and
transmitting them to the concerned States; receiving any signatures, instruments, notifications and
communications related to the treaty; and informing the States parties to the treaty about the entry
into force of the treaty. Notably, the United Nations Secretariat plays a significant role as depositary
of multilateral treaties.
SECTION 3: OBSERVANCE AND APPLICATION OF TREATIES

Once treaties enter into force, they must be observed and applied by the parties. Observance and
application of treaties are subject to certain established principles and rules.
A. Observance of Treaties
The Latin principle “Pacta Sunt Servanda”, which means that treaties shall be observed, is the
fundamental principle of the customary law of treaties and the very foundation of International
Law. This principle is included in the Preamble and Article 26 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, which states that “[e]very treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and
must be performed by them in good faith.” Another long-standing principle of customary
international law included in Article 27 of the Convention is that “[a] party may not invoke the
provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.”
According to these two principles, the parties to a treaty are under a duty to observe the treaty in
good faith, and a duty not to invoke its internal law as justification for failure to perform the treaty.
B. Application of Treaties
Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the application of treaties is subject to the
following rules:
(1) Non-Retroactivity of Treaties ]

The Vienna Convention provides that the provisions of a treaty, unless a different intention
appears from the treaty or is otherwise established, do not bind a party to it in relation to any act or
fact which took place or any situation which ceased to exist before the date of the entry into force of
the treaty with regard to that party. The general rule here is that a treaty does not operate
retroactively; any fact, action or situation must be assessed in the light of the rules of law that are
contemporary with it, not of the provisions of the subsequent treaty, unless a contrary agreement so
provides.
(2) Territorial Scope of Treaties
The Vienna Convention provides that unless a different intention appears from the treaty or is
otherwise established, a treaty is binding upon each party in respect to its entire territory. This is a
general rule, but it is possible for a State to stipulate that the treaty will apply only to part of its
territory.
(3) Application of Successive Treaties Related to the Same Subject Matter
Sometimes, it happens that a party to a treaty subsequently enters into another treaty related to
the same subject matter, and that the provisions of the two treaties are inconsistent; or it happens
that the other party or parties to the second treaty may or may not also be parties to the first
treaty. These situations raise certain problems which need to be resolved. Article 30 of the Vienna
Convention lays down the rules which constitute the general guide to be followed in resolving such
problems. It is still possible, however, for the parties themselves to resolve the raised problems by
their mutual agreement.
146
Under Article 30, the rights and obligations of States parties to successive treaties related to the
same subject-matter shall be determined in accordance with the following rules:
a. When a treaty specifies that it is subject to, or that it is not to be considered as incompatible
with, an earlier or later treaty, the provisions of that other treaty prevail.
b. When all the parties to the earlier treaty are parties also to the later treaty but the earlier treaty
is not terminated or suspended in operation, the earlier treaty applies only to the extent that its
provisions are compatible with those of the later treaty.
c. When the parties to the later treaty do not include all the parties to the earlier one:
i. as between States parties to both treaties, the earlier treaty applies only to the extent
that its provisions are compatible with those of the later treaty;
ii. as between a State party to both treaties and a State party to only one of the treaties, the
treaty to which both States are parties governs their mutual rights and obligations.
In case of treaties concerning the same subject-matter and having incompatible provisions, the
presumption is that the later treaty prevails over the earlier treaty. A treaty may provide expressly
that it is to prevail over subsequent incompatible treaties; this is the case of Article 103 of the Charter
of the United Nations which stipulates that “[i]n the event of a conflict between the obligations of
the Members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their obligations under any other
international agreement, their obligations under the present Charter shall prevail.” Furthermore, a
particular treaty prevails over other treaties if it includes peremptory norms of general international
law (jus cogens), i.e. norms accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a
whole as norms from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by
subsequent norms of general international law having the same character.
(4) Treaties and Third States
The Latin principle “pactatertiisnecnocentnecprosunt”, which means that a treaty creates neither
right nor obligation for third States (not parties to the treaty) without their consent, is a general
principle which constitutes part of the customary international law.The reasons for this principle can
be found in the fundamental principles of the sovereignty and independence of States, which
contemplate that States must consent to rules before they can be bound by them. This principle is
codified in article 34 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties as a general rule
corollary of the principle of consent and of the sovereignty and independence of States. However,
this Convention states certain exceptions to this general rule.
First, the Convention provides that an obligation may arise for a third State from a provision of a
treaty if the parties to the treaty intend the provisions of the treaty to be the means of establishing the
obligation, and the third State expressly accepts that obligation in writing. In such a case, the
obligation may be revoked or modified only with the consent of the parties to the treaty and of the
third States, unless it is established that they have agreed otherwise.
Second, the Convention provides that a right may arise for a third State from the provision of a
treaty if the parties to the treaty intend the provision to accord that right either to the third State, or
to a group of States to which it belongs, or to all States, and the third State assents thereto, unless the
treaty provides otherwise. In such a case, the right may not be revoked or modified by the parties to
the treaty if it is established that the right has not been intended to be revoked or modified without
the consent of the third State. In exercising such a right the third State is required to comply with
the conditions for its exercise provided for in the treaty or established in conformity with the
treaty. Third, the Convention provides that a rule of a treaty may become binding upon a third State
if it becomes a part of customary international law.
147
An example of a treaty imposes obligation upon non-party State is the 1815 agreement
concerning the neutralization of Switzerland. The apparent examples of rules which are binding
upon third States as customary international law are the rules of the 1899 and 1907 Hague
Conventions concerning land warfare, and the principles stated in Article 2 of the Charter of the
United Nations, especially those related to the peaceful settlement of disputes and the prohibition of
resorting to threat or use of force. As far as rights conferred upon third States by a treaty are
concerned, there are many treaties containing provisions in favor of third States (pactum in
favoremtertii). Examples of such treaties are the 1919 Treaty of Versailles which contains provisions
in favor of Denmark and Switzerland, and the 1888 Constantinople Convention which contains
provisions guaranteeing freedom of passage for ships through the Suez Canal.
SECTION 4: INTERPRETATION OF TREATIES

Interpretation of treaties is the most frequent focus of disputes arising with regard to
treaties. Because language is not a perfect means for expressing legal rules, ambiguities and
uncertainties in treaty-texts are common phenomena. Thus interpretation of treaties has been a
major task in International Law. Obviously the parties to a treaty have competence to interpret a
treaty, but other entities may perform such a task. The treaty itself may confer competence on an ad
hoc tribunal, an international organ, or the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The Charter of the
United Nations is interpreted by the organs of the United Nations, which may request advisory
opinions from the ICJ.
Interpretation of treaties is a rational process of clarifying and elucidating the meaning of unclear
and ambiguous treaty provisions. Its purpose is to ascertain in good faith the intention of the
parties. It is governed by numerous principles and rules developed by international tribunals,
publicists, organs of international organizations and diplomatic practice. Though, there is no
coherent and mandatory system of rules of treaty interpretation in International Law.
The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, however, lays down certain fundamental
rules and guidelines for treaty interpretation. It contains specific provisions concerning general rules
of treaty interpretation, supplementary means of interpretation, and interpretation of treaties
authenticated in two or more languages.
A. General Rules of Treaty Interpretation

The first general rule for treaty interpretation provided by the Vienna Convention is that “[a]
treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the
terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose.” This rule is the textual
approach of treaty interpretation.
The context of a treaty for the purpose of interpretation comprises, in addition to its text,
including its preamble and annexes, any agreement and instrument related to it and made in
connection with its conclusion. Together with the context of a treaty, should be taken into account
any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the
application of its provisions, any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which
establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation, and any relevant rules of
International Law applicable in relations between the parties.
The second general rule for treaty interpretation provided by the Convention is that “[a] special
meaning shall be given to a term if it is established that the parties so intended.” This is the
“intention of the parties” approach of treaty interpretation.
148
However, there are other established approaches of treaty interpretation not provided for in the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Among these approaches is “the principle of
effectiveness” which involves the interpretation of the terms of a treaty in a way that will render the
treaty most effective and useful. This principle is of particular importance in the interpretation of
multilateral treaties establishing international organizations.
B. Supplementary Means of Interpretation

The Vienna Convention provides that “recourse may be had to supplementary means of
interpretation, including the preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion”,
when the meaning resulting from the application of the above general rules needs to be confirmed,
or when the interpretation according to the said general rules leaves the meaning ambiguous or
obscure, or leads to a manifestly absurd or unreasonable result.
C. Interpretation of Treaties Authenticated in Two or More Languages

In case of a treaty authenticated in two or more languages, as often happens with multilateral
treaties, the Vienna Convention provides that when a comparison of the authentic texts discloses a
difference of meaning which the application of the provided general rules and supplementary means
of interpretation does not remove, “the meaning which best reconciles the texts, having regard to the
object and purpose of the treaty, shall be adopted.” Nevertheless, the Convention provides that the
treaty may provide or the parties may agree that, in such a case, a particular text shall prevail.
SECTION 5: AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION OF TREATIES

Although amendment and modification of treaties are two processes share a common aim which
is an alteration or revision of a treaty, they are two separate processes accomplished by different
manners and subject to different rules and conditions. Amendment relates to a formal alteration or
revision of certain treaty provisions or the treaty as a whole, affecting all the parties to that
treaty. Modification relates to an alteration or revision of certain treaty provisions as between
particular parties only. Thus the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties deals with these
two processes in separate articles.
A. Amendment of Treaties
The Vienna Convention refers to three manners to accomplish amendments to treaties. The first
manner is that a treaty may be amended by agreement between the parties. In such a manner, the
rules described by the Vienna Convention which are related to the conclusion and entry into force of
a treaty will be applied.
The second manner is that a treaty may be amended in accordance with the procedure laid down
in the treaty itself. Multilateral treaties, particularly those establishing international organizations,
normally provide detailed procedure for amendments. The Charter of the United Nations, for
example, lays down in Articles 108 and 109 the procedure for its amendments and revision. Under
these Articles such amendments or revision shall take effect when adopted and ratified by two-thirds
of the members of the United Nations, including all the permanent members of the Security Council.
The third manner is that a treaty may be amended in accordance with the basic rules of procedure
described by the Vienna Convention. The Vienna Convention specifies that any proposed
amendment must to be notified to all contracting States. All contracting States shall have the right
to participate in the decision as to the action to be taken in regard to such proposal, and in the
negotiation and conclusion of any agreement for the amendment of the treaty. Every State entitled
to become a party to the treaty is also entitled to become a party to the treaty as amended. The
149
amendment will not bind any State already a party to the original treaty which is not a party to the
amending agreement. Any State which becomes a party to the treaty after the entry into force of the
amending agreement, unless it intends otherwise, is considered as a party to the treaty as amended in
relation to parties bound by the amending agreement, and as a party to the unamended treaty in
relation to any party to the treaty not bound by the amending agreement.
B. Modification of Treaties
The Vienna Convention provides that two or more of the parties to a multilateral treaty may
conclude an agreement to modify the treaty as between themselves alone if one of two conditions is
fulfilled. The first condition, if “the possibility of such a modification is provided for by the
treaty.” The second condition, if “the modification in question is not prohibited by the treaty” and
provided it “does not affect the enjoyment by the other parties of their rights under the treaty or the
performance of their obligation, and “does not relate to a provision, derogation from which is
incompatible with the effective execution of the object and purposes of the treaty as a whole.” The
Vienna Convention requires, however, that unless in the first mentioned case or if the treaty provides
otherwise, the parties in question must notify the other parties of their intention to conclude the
agreement and of the modification to the treaty.
SECTION 6: TERMINATION AND SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF TREATIES

Despite the general rule that “every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be
performed by them in good faith,” the Vienna Convention provides that a treaty may be terminated,
denounced, withdrawn from or suspended. The Convention provides that the termination of a
treaty, its denunciation, the withdrawal of a party or the suspension of its operation “may take place
only as a result of the application of the provisions of the treaty or of the present Convention.” The
applicable rules to such instances, provided by the Convention are as such:
A. Termination of a Treaty
Termination of a treaty means the end of the operation of a treaty, resulting in depriving all the
parties of all the rights, and in releasing them from performing further obligations, under the
treaty. Under the Vienna Convention termination of a treaty or the withdrawal of a party may take
place either in conformity with the provisions of the treaty, or at any time by consent of all the
parties after consultation with the other contracting States. Actually, most of the modern treaties
contain provisions for their termination or for the withdrawal of a party. A treaty may provide that
it shall come to an end automatically after a certain time, or at the occurrence of a particular
event. A treaty may give a party a right to withdraw from it after giving a certain period of notice.
Where a treaty does not contain any provision regarding its termination and does not provide for
denunciation or withdrawal, it will not be subject to the denunciation or withdrawal, unless it is
established that the parties intended to admit such a possibility, or such a right is implied by the
nature of the treaty. In such cases, however, a party must give at least twelve months’ notice of its
intention to denounce or withdraw from the treaty.
The Convention specifies the reasons for terminating a treaty. First, a treaty may be terminated
by the conclusion of a later treaty related to the same subject-matter, if it appears that the matter is to
be governed by that treaty or the provisions of the later treaty are so far incompatible with those of
the earlier one that the two treaties are not capable of being applied at the same time. Second, a
treaty may be terminated as a consequence of its breach. A material breach of a treaty which
consists in either a repudiation of the treaty not permitted by the Vienna Convention or the violation
of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose of the treaty entitles the other
parties to terminate the treaty. Third, a treaty may be terminated by the impossibility of
150
performance resulting from the permanent disappearance or destruction of an object indispensable

for the execution of the treaty. Forth, a treaty may be terminated when a fundamental change of
circumstances occurs with regard to those existing at the time of the conclusion of that treaty. Fifth,
a treaty may be terminated by reason of the severance of diplomatic or consular relations between
parties to the treaty. However, such event does not affect the legal relations established between the
parties except in so far as the existence of diplomatic or consular relations is indispensable for the
application of the treaty. Finally, if a new peremptory norm of general international law emerges,
any existing treaty which is in conflict with that norm terminates.
As regard the consequences of termination of a treaty, the Convention provides that unless the
treaty provides otherwise or the parties agree otherwise, the termination of a treaty releases the
parties from any further obligation to perform the treaty; however, it does not affect any right,
obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its
termination.
B. Suspension of the Operation of a Treaty
Suspension of the operation of a treaty means the making of a treaty temporary inoperative in
regard to either all or a particular party. Under the Vienna Convention, suspension of the operation
of a treaty, like termination, may take place either according to the provisions of the treaty or at any
time by consent of all the parties. Two or more parties to a multilateral treaty may conclude an
agreement to suspend the operation of provisions of the treaty, temporary and as between
themselves alone if “the possibility of such a suspension is provided for by the treaty,” or “the
suspension in question is not prohibited by the treaty” and provided it “does not affect the
enjoyment by the other parties of their rights under the treaty or the performance of their
obligation,” and “is not incompatible with the object and purposes of the treaty. However, unless
the treaty provides otherwise, the parties in question must notify the other parties of their intention
to conclude the agreement and of those provisions of the treaty the operation of which they intend to
suspend. Treaties sometimes provide for the possibility of suspension of the entire treaty or some of
its provisions in particular circumstances.
Under the Convention, a treaty may be suspended by the following circumstances:

1) the conclusion of a later treaty related to the same subject matter, if it appears from the later
treaty or otherwise established that such was the intention of the parties;
2) a material breach of a treaty which consists in either a repudiation of the treaty not permitted by
the Vienna Convention or the violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object
or purpose of the treaty;
3) the temporary impossibility of performing a treaty; or 4) a fundamental change of circumstances
occurs with regard to those existing at the time of the conclusion of that treaty.
Suspension of the operation of a treaty releases the parties from any further obligation to perform
the treaty during the period of suspension; however, it does not affect any right, obligation or legal
situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its suspension.
SECTION 7: INVALIDITY OF TREATIES

Invalidity of a treaty means nullity of a treaty or its particular provisions because of the existence
or absence of certain circumstances or conditions affecting its legal status. Customary international
law does not provide clear and acceptable rules governing validity or invalidity of treaties. The 1969
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, however, provides some general rules on this
151
matter. This Convention describes rules governing invalidity of treaties in general, grounds for
invalidity of treaties, and consequences of the invalidity of treaties.
A. General Rules on Invalidity of Treaties
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties provides that “the validity of a treaty or the
consent of a State to be bound by a treaty may be impeached only through the application of the
present Convention.” Under the Convention, a ground for invalidating (as well as for terminating,
withdrawal from or suspending the operation of a treaty) may be invoked only with respect to the
whole treaty, except where the ground relates solely to particular clauses which are separable and
unessential, or relates to a material breach of a treaty by one of the parties. A State cannot invoke a
ground for invalidating (as well as for terminating, withdrawal from or suspending the operation of a
treaty) if, after becoming aware of the fact, it expressly agreed that the treaty is valid or remains in
force, or it, by reason of its conduct, may be considered as having acquiesced in the validity of the
treaty or in its continuance in force or in operation.
B. Grounds for Invalidating Treaties
The Vienna Convention specifies the following grounds for invalidating treaties:
1) Manifest violation of a provision of fundamental importance of State’s internal law regarding
competence to conclude treaties: A violation is manifest “if it would be objectively evident to any
State conducting itself in the matter in accordance with normal practice and in good faith.”
2) Lack of the State’s representative appropriate full powers.
3) Excess of authority by the representative: Such an excess will be a ground to invalidate a
treaty if the specific restriction imposed by the State upon its representative to express its consent to
be bound by the treaty was notified to the other negotiating States prior to his expressing such
consent.
4) Error: A State may invoke an error in a treaty as invalidating its consent to be bound by the
treaty if the error relates to a fact or situation mistakenly assumed by that State to exist at the time
when the treaty was concluded, and that fact or situation forms an essential basis of its consent to be
bound by the treaty. If the State in question contributed by its own conduct to the error or if it was
put on notice of a possible error, it is not allowed to invoke such an error as a ground for invalidating
its consent. An error relating only to the wording of the text of a treaty does not affect its validity.
5) Fraud: A State may invoke the fraud as invalidating its consent to be bound by the treaty if it
has been induced to conclude that treaty by the fraudulent conduct of another negotiating State.
6) Corruption of a representative of a State: A State may invoke the corruption of its
representative as invalidating its consent to be bound by the treaty if the expression of its consent has
been procured through the corruption of its representative directly or indirectly by another
negotiating State.
7) Coercion of a representative of a State: Acts or threats directed personally against a
representative of a State as an individual in order to procure the expression of a State’s consent to be
bound by a treaty render such expression of consent without any legal effect.
8) Coercion of a State by the threat or use of force: A treaty is void if its conclusion has been
procured by the threat or use of force in violation of the principles of International Law embodied in
the Charter of the United Nations.
9) Conflict of the treaty with an existing and emerging peremptory norm of general International
Law (Jus Cogens): A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory
norm of general International Law. If a new peremptory norm of general International Law
emerges, any existing treaty conflicting with that norm becomes void and terminated.
152
C. Consequences of Invalidity of Treaties

The consequences of invalidity of treaties vary according to the nature of the ground of
invalidity. The Vienna Convention makes a distinction between void and voidable treaties. In cases
of lack of full powers, coercion of a representative, coercion of a State and conflict with an existing
and emerging of peremptory norm of general international law, the treaty is void, which means that
the expression of consent of the State to be bound by the treaty is without any legal effect from the
beginning (ab initio). In cases of violation of the internal law of the State, excess authority by the
representative, error, fraud, and corruption of the representative, the treaty is probably voidable
rather than void; the treaty is valid until the State claims that it is invalid.
The State may invoke the ground to invalidate the treaty. However, this right may be lost for the
following reasons:
(a) if after becoming aware of the fact, the concerned State expressly agreed that the treaty is valid or
remains in force or it, by reason of its conduct, may be considered as having acquiesced in the
validity of the treaty or in its continuance in force or in operation; or
(b) if the concerned State contributed by its own conduct to the error or was put on notice of a
possible error.
The Convention provides that an invalid treaty is void and without any legal effect. If acts have
nevertheless been performed in reliance on such a treaty, each party may require any other party to
establish as far as possible in their mutual relations the position that would have existed if the acts
had not been performed. Acts performed in good faith before the invalidity was invoked are not
rendered unlawful by reason only of invalidity of the treaty.
SECTION 8:
PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED WITH RESPECT TO INVALIDITY, TERMINATION,
WITHDRAWAL FROM, OR SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF A TREATY
The Vienna Convention provides that a party invoking a ground to invalidate a treaty, terminate
it, withdraw from it or suspend its operation, must notify, in writing, the other parties of its claim
and give them time to make objections before it takes any action. If after the expiry of a period
which shall not be less than three months from the receipt of the notification, no objection has been
raised by any party, the party making the notification may carry out the measures it has
proposed. If, however, objection has been raised by any party, the parties must seek a solution
through the peaceful means indicated in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations.
If no solution is reached within twelve months, the dispute is to be submitted to a special
conciliation commission set up under an annex to the Convention or, in cases of dispute involving
peremptory norms of general International Law to be submitted to the International Court of Justice
(ICJ).
153
THE LAW OF SEA

The Law of the Sea is that part of Public International Law that regulates the rights and duties of
States, and possibly other subjects of International Law, with regard to the use and utilization of the
seas in time of peace. In this sense, the Law of the Sea is distinguished from the private maritime
law, which regulates the rights and obligations of private persons with regard to maritime matters,
such as the carriage of goods and maritime insurance.
Although some rules of the Law of the Sea can be traced to medieval private compilations
governing primarily maritime rights and obligations of merchants and ship-owners in the
Mediterranean, the Law of the Sea developed as part of the Law of Nations in the Seventeenth
Century with the emergence of the modern national State system. The classical publicists drew on
Roman Law and dealt with the matters of this subject in the natural law tradition. The best known
publication, among the early writings on this subject, is the 1609 Hugo Grotius’ pamphlet “Mar
Liberum” (Freedom of the Sea).
By the Nineteenth Century, as customary rules gradually produced a body of law based on State
practice and consensus, the Law of the Sea, like other areas of Public International Law, developed
into a system of customary principles and rules governing the rights and duties of States, mostly in
the territorial sea and the high seas.
During the Nineteenth Century and the period before the Second World War, several
unsuccessful attempts were made to codify the customary law of the sea. After the Second World
War, several conferences were held for the objective of codifying the various aspects of the Law of
the Sea. The first conference was the First United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS I), known as the 1958 Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea, which led to the
conclusion of four conventions:
(1) The Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone;

(2) The Convention on the High Seas;
(3) The Convention on the Continental Shelf; and
(4) The Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas.] An
Optional Protocol on the Compulsory Settlement of Dispute was signed.
The 1958 Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea constitutes the first major codification of the
Law of the Sea. Most of the provisions of the first two conventions, and some of the provisions of
the Convention on the Continental Shelf, are a codification of customary law; while the others are a
mixture of codification and progressive development of International Law as understood by the
International Law Commission. Thus, although the conventions are binding only on States parties
to them, many of their provisions can be used as evidence of customary law against States not
parties to them. All these four conventions are still in force, but for a limited number of States; the
United States of America is among those States since it has not yet ratified the 1982 Convention on
the Law of the Sea.
The 1958 Geneva Conference failed to reach agreement on some questions, particularly on the
width of the territorial sea and rights of coastal States in the areas of the high sea adjacent to their
territorial seas. To deal with such questions, the Second United Nations Conference on the Law of
the Sea (UNCLOS II), which is known as the 1960 Geneva Convention on the Law of the Sea, was
convened; but this Conference failed to achieve its objectives. This reason, in addition to the
dissatisfaction of some States with various rules laid down in the 1958 Convention and the
technological, economic and political developments since its conclusion, led to the convene of the
154
Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, 1973-1982 (UNCLOS III). This
Conference led to the conclusion of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea on
December, 1982, which entered into force on November 16, 1994.
The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea constitutes a comprehensive codification and
development of contemporary international law governing the Sea in time of peace. Some of the
provisions of the 1982 Convention codify the existing customary international law of the sea; this is
particularly true of those provisions which repeat those of the four 1958 Conventions which codified
customary law. Almost all the provisions of the four 1958 Conventions are repeated, modified or
replaced by the 1982 Convention. But many of the provisions of the 1982 Convention depart from
the existing customary law; and those provisions do not represent existing law on the Sea for States
not parties to the 1982 Convention; they, however, indicate the directions in which the law may
develop in the future. All States are prima facie bound by the customary rules, while only the parties
to a particular convention will be bound by the new rules contained therein.
The 1982 Convention prevails over the four 1958 Conventions as among the States parties to
it. It deals with most of the issues related to the Sea. Among these issues are:
(1) Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone;
(2) Straits Used for International Navigation;
(3) Archipelagic States;
(4) Exclusive Economic Zone;
(5) Continental Shelf;
(6) High Seas;
(7) Regime of Islands;
(8) Enclosed or Semi-Enclosed Seas;
(9) Rights of Access of Land-Locked States to and from the Sea and Freedom of Transit;
(10) The Area;
(11) Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment;
(12) Marine Scientific Research;
(13) Development and Transfer of Marine Technology; and
(14) Settlement of Disputes.
In the following sections, most of the questions related to the above issues as provided by the
1982 Convention are discussed.
SECTION 1: TERRITORIAL SEA

The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea declares that the sovereignty of a coastal State
extends, beyond its land territory and internal waters to an adjacent belt of sea, described as the
territorial sea. Accordingly, the territorial sea, which is also known as territorial water, is a belt of
sea adjacent to the coast of a State over which a coastal State exercises its sovereignty. The
Convention provides that this sovereignty extends also to the air space over the territorial sea as well
as to its bed and subsoil. However, the exercise by a coastal State of such sovereignty over its
territorial sea is subject to the rules and limitations provided for in the said Convention and in the
International Law.
A. Limits of the Territorial Sea

The Convention adopts the twelve-mile limit as a breadth of the territorial sea. It provides that
every State has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12
nautical miles, measured from baselines determined by a normal baseline or/and straight baselines
155
method; the coastal State may determine baselines in turn by any of these two methods to suit
different conditions. The baseline is the line from which the breadth of the territorial sea and other
coastal State zone, such as contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone or exclusive fishing zone, is
measured. The baseline forms the boundary between the internal waters on the landward side of the
coastal State and its territorial sea on its seaward side. Waters on the landward side of the baseline
of the territorial sea form part of the internal waters of the State, over which the State has an
absolute sovereignty. The outer limit of the territorial sea is the line every point of which is at a
distance from the nearest point of the baseline equal to the breadth of the territorial sea.
The normal baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea is the low-water line (the line
on the shore reached by the sea at low tide) along the coast as marked on larger-scale charts officially
recognized by the coastal State. The method of straight baselines joining appropriate points may be
employed in drawing the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured if the
coastline is deeply indented and cut into. However, this method may not be applied by a State in
such a manner as to cut off the territorial sea of another State from the high seas or an exclusive
economic zone. This method is also employed in a case of a river flowing directly into the sea or of
a bay. In a case of a river, the baseline shall be a straight line across the mouth of the river between
points on the low-water line of its banks.
In a case of a bay, if the distance between the low-water marks of the natural entrance points of a
bay does not exceed 24 nautical miles, a closing line may be drawn between these two low-marks,
and the waters enclosed thereby shall be considered as internal waters. Where the distance between
the low-water marks of the natural entrance points of a bay exceeds 24 nautical miles, a straight
baseline of 24 nautical miles shall be drawn within the bay in such a manner as to enclose the
maximum area of water that is possible with a line of that length, and the enclosed waters shall be
considered as internal water; however, this rule does not apply to so-called “historic bay”.
For the purpose of delimiting the territorial sea, the outermost permanent harbor works which
form an integral part of the harbor system are regarded as forming part of the coast; but off-shore
installations and artificial islands shall are not considered as permanent harbor works. Roadsteads
which are normally used for loading, unloading and anchoring of ships, and which are situated
wholly or partly outside the outer limit of the territorial sea, are included in the territorial sea.
Where the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to each other, neither of the two States is
entitled, failing agreement between them to the contrary, extend its territorial sea beyond the median
line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the
breadth of the territorial seas of the two States is measured. This rule, however, does not apply
where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial
seas of the two States in a different way.
B. Rights of the Coastal State over the Territorial Sea

As the 1982 Convention provides, the sovereignty of the coastal State extends to its territorial sea
as well as to the air-space over its territorial sea, its bed and subsoil. In this regard the coastal State
enjoys the following:
(1) The exclusive right to fish, and to exploit the resources of the seabed and subsoil of its
territorial sea.
(2) The exclusive right in the air-space over its territorial sea to the exclusion of other States.
Foreign aircrafts, unlike ships, have no right of innocent fly in the air-space over the territorial sea of
a State.
156
(3) The right to enact laws and regulations, in conformity with the 1982 Convention and other
rules of International Law, particularly in respect of navigation, health, customs, immigration and
preservation of the environment.
(4) The right to take the necessary steps in its territorial Sea to prevent passage which is not
innocent.
(5) The exercise of criminal jurisdiction on board of a foreign ship (arresting any person or
conducting any investigation in connection with any crime committed on board of the foreign ship)
in the following cases: if the consequences of the crime extend to it; if the crime is of a kind to
disturb the peace of the country or the good order of its territorial sea; if the assistance of the local
authorities has been requested; if the measures are necessary for the suppression of illicit traffic in
narcotic drugs; or after leaving its internal water.
(6) The exercise of civil jurisdiction in relation to a foreign ship (levy execution against or arrest
the ship for the purpose of any civil proceedings) in respect of obligations or liabilities assumed or
incurred by the ship itself in the course or for the purpose of its voyage through its waters, or in
respect of any civil proceedings against a foreign ship after leaving its internal waters.
C. The Right of Innocent Passage in the Territorial Sea

Under the 1982, the sovereignty of a coastal State over its territorial is subject to an important
limitation, which is the right of innocent passage enjoyed by ships (merchant ships, governmental
ships and warships) of all States, whether coastal or landlocked, over the territorial sea of the coastal
State. Passage means navigation through the territorial sea for the purpose of traversing that sea
without entering internal waters or calling at a roadstead or port facility outside internal waters, or
proceeding to or from internal waters or a call at such roadstead or port facility.
Passage must be continuous and expeditious; however, it may include stopping and anchoring in so
far as they are incidental to ordinary navigation or are rendered necessary by force majeure or distress
or for the purpose of rendering assistance to persons, ships or aircraft in danger or distress. Passage
must take place in conformity with the 1982 Convention and with other rules of International
Law. Passage must be innocent; it is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order
or security of the coastal State.
The right of innocent passage is also exists in internal waters where the establishment of a
baseline in accordance with the straight baselines method provided by the 1982 Convention has the
effect of enclosing as internal water areas which had not previously been considered as such.
The right of innocent passage is also enjoyed by submarines and other underwater
vehicles. However, it is required that they navigate on the surface and show their flag.
The 1982 Conventions provides that the coastal State must not hamper the innocent passage of
foreign ships through its territorial seas except in accordance with the Convention. The Coastal
State, in the application of the Convention or of any laws or regulations adopted in conformity with
it, must not impose requirements aiming at denying or impairing the right of innocent passage, or
discriminate on form or in fact against the ships of any State or against ships carrying cargoes to,
from or on behalf of any State. It must give appropriate publicity to any danger to navigation, of
which it has knowledge, within its territorial sea. It must not levy any charges upon foreign ships by
reason only of their passage through its territorial sea; charges may be levied as payment only for
specific services rendered to the ship.
The coastal State is under a duty not to exercise its criminal jurisdiction on foreign ship passing
through it territorial sea, except in the cases specified by the Convention (mentioned above). It is
157
also under a duty not to exercise civil jurisdiction in relation to a foreign ship or a person on its
board, except in the cases specified by the Convention (mentioned above). Notably, the warships
and other government ships operated for non-commercial purposes are immune from any
jurisdiction; however the coastal State, in a case of failure of any of these ships from complying with
its laws and regulations, may order it to leave its territorial Sea immediately.
Against these duties, the coastal State entitled to certain rights in respect of the right of innocent
passage granted to foreign ships. The coastal State may adopt laws and regulations, in conformity
with the provisions of the Convention and other rules of International Law,related to innocent
passage through its territorial sea, with which the foreign ships must comply. It may suspend
temporarily in specified areas of its territorial sea the innocent passage of foreign ships for security
reasons.
SECTION 2: CONTIGUOUS ZONE

Contiguous zone is a maritime zone adjacent to the territorial sea of the coastal State over which
that State, as provided by the 1982 Convention, may exercise the control necessary to prevent
infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations within its territory
or territorial sea and to punish infringement of these laws and regulations committed within its
territory and territorial sea. According to the said Convention, the contiguous zone may not extend
beyond 24 nautical miles from the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.
It follows from the provision of the 1982 Convention related to the contiguous zone that the
rights of the coastal State over the contiguous zone do not amount to sovereignty. The coastal State
may only exercise jurisdictional powers for the reasons specified by the Convention. Still other
States have rights over these zones similar to those exercisable over the high seas except as they are
qualified by the existence of jurisdictional zones. Moreover, these zones are not automatically
belonging to coastal States as in the case of territorial sea; they must be specifically claimed by the
State.
SECTION 3: STRAITS USED FOR INTERNATIONAL NAVIGATION

A strait is a narrow natural sea passage connecting two large areas of the sea. The 1982
Convention defines international straits as straits used for international navigation either between
one part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone and another part of the high seas or an
exclusive economic zone, or between a part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone and the
territorial sea of a foreign State; and it specifies a special regime of passage applicable to these
international straits. This regime of passage, however does not apply to a strait used for
international navigation if there exists through the strait a route through the high seas or through an
exclusive economic zone of similar convenience with respect to navigational and hydrographical
characteristics; in such routes, others provisions of the 1982 Convention, including those related to
the freedom of navigation and over-flight, apply.
The regime of passage specified by the Convention, as the Convention provides, does not affect
the legal status of the waters forming such straits or the exercise by the States bordering the straits of
their sovereignty or jurisdiction over such waters and their air space, bed and subsoil; however, such
sovereignty or jurisdiction of the bordering State is exercised subject to this regime and other rules of
International Law. Moreover, this regime does not affect: any area of internal waters within a strait,
except where the establishment of a baseline in accordance with the straight baselines method has
the effect of enclosing as internal waters which had not previously considered as such; the legal
status of the waters beyond the territorial seas of States bordering straits as exclusive economic zones
158
or high seas; or the legal regime of straits in which passage is regulated in whole or in part by long-
standing international convention in force specifically related to such straits (For example, the
Turkish Straits of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles which are regulated by the Montreux
Convention of 1936).
The regime of passage in international straits specified in the Convention includes the right of
transit passage and the right of innocent passage.
A. The Right of Transit Passage in International Straits

The right of transit passage is granted to all ships and aircrafts with respect of international straits
used for international navigation between one part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone
and another part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone. This right means the exercise of
the freedom of navigation and over-flight solely for the purpose of continuous and expeditious
transit of the international straits defined above. However, the requirement of continuous and
expeditious transit does not preclude passage through the strait for the purpose of entering, leaving
or returning from a State bordering the strait, subject to the conditions of entry to that
State. Moreover, any activity which is not an exercise of the right of transit passage through a strait
remains subject to the other applicable provisions of the Convention.
The Convention lists an exception to the right of transit passage through international straits
defined above. It provides that if the strait is formed by an island of a State bordering the strait and
its mainland and if there exists seaward of the island a route through the high seas or through an
exclusive economic zone of similar convenience with respect to navigational and hydrographical
characteristics, transit passage shall not apply; in such a strait, the right of innocent passage applies.
In exercising the right of transit passage, ships and aircraft must, mainly: observe the relevant
provisions of the Convention, the relevant international regulations; comply with the laws and
regulations adopted by the States bordering the straits in conformity with the Convention; refrain
from any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence
of States bordering the strait; and refrain any activities other than those incidental to their normal
modes of continuous and expeditious transit unless rendered necessary by force majeure or by
distress. During transit passage, foreign ships, including marine scientific research and hydrographic
survey ships must not carry out any research or survey activities without the prior authorization of
the States bordering straits.
The Convention entitles the States bordering straits the right to adopt laws and regulations related
to transit passage through straits in respect of safety of navigation and marine traffic, pollution,
fishing, and loading or unloading of commodity, currency or persons. However, such laws and
regulations must not discriminate in form or in fact among foreign ships, or hamper or impair the
right of transit passage, and must be given due publicity.
The States bordering straits are under a duty not to hamper transit passage and to give
appropriate publicity to any danger to navigation or over-flight within or over the strait of which
they have knowledge. Moreover, they must not suspend transit passage for whatever reason.
B. The Right of Innocent Passage

According to the Convention, the regime of innocent passage applies to straits used for
international navigation, particularly those excluded from the application of the regime of transit
passage (a strait formed by an island of a State bordering the strait and its mainland where there
exists seaward of the island a route through the high seas or through an exclusive economic zone of
similar convenience with respect to navigational and hydrographical characteristics), or those
159
connect a part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone and the territorial sea of a foreign
State.
The right of innocent passage granted to ships and aircraft in these straits are governed by the
provisions of the Convention related to the right of innocent passage in the territorial sea, except that
no suspension of innocent passage through such straits is permitted, for whatever reason.
SECTION 4: THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE

The 1982 Convention provides that the exclusive economic zone is an area beyond and adjacent
to the territorial sea, subject to the specific legal regime established by the Convention. The
exclusive economic zone, as the Convention provides, should not extend beyond 200 nautical miles
from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured. In this zone, the
Convention establishes sovereign rights and jurisdiction for the coastal States, as well as, rights and
freedoms for other States.
Under the Convention, the coastal State has, in the exclusive economic zone, sovereign rights for
the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the natural resources, whether
living or non-living, of the waters superjacent to the sea-bed and of the sea-bed and its subsoil, and
with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the
production of energy from the water, current and winds. The coastal State also has the jurisdiction
with regard to: the establishment and use of artificial islands, installations and structures; marine
scientific research; and the protection and preservation of the marine environment. In exercising its
rights and performing its duties under the Convention in the exclusive economic zone, the coastal
State should have due regard to the rights and duties of other States and should act in a manner
compatible with the provisions of the Convention.
All States, whether coastal or land-locked States, enjoy, subject to the relevant provisions of the
Convention, the high seas freedom of navigation, over-flight and of laying of submarine cables and
pipelines in the exclusive economic zone. In exercising their rights and performing their duties
under the Convention in the exclusive economic zone, States should have due regard to the rights
and duties of the coastal State and should comply with the laws and regulations adopted by the
coastal State in accordance with the provisions of the Convention and other compatible rules of
International Law.
The Conventions provides that in cases of conflict over rights or jurisdiction of the coastal State
or of other States within the exclusive economic zone, the conflict should be resolved on the basis of
equity and in the light of all the relevant circumstances. As regarding the delimitation of the
exclusive economic zone between States with opposite or adjacent coasts, the Convention provides
that it should be effected by agreement on the basis of International Law; if no agreement can be
reached within a reasonable period of time, the States concerned should resort to the procedures of
settlement of disputes provided for in the Convention.
SECTION 5: THE CONTINENTAL SHELF

The 1982 Convention defines the continental shelf of the coastal State as “the sea-bed and subsoil
of the submarine area that extend beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural prolongation of its
land territory to the outer edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 200 nautical miles from
the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured where the outer edge of the
continental margin does not extend to that distance”.] Where the continental margin extends beyond
200 miles, the Convention provides that the continental shelf should not extend more than 350
nautical miles from the baselines or 100 nautical miles from the 2500 meter depth. The continental
160
margin, as the Convention provides, comprises the submerged prolongation of land mass of the
coastal State, and consists of the sea-bed and subsoil of the shelf, the slope and the rise; it, however,
does not include the deep ocean floor with its oceanic ridges or the subsoil thereof.
As regarding the delimitation of the continental shelf between States with opposite or adjacent
coasts, the Convention provides that it should be effected by agreement on the basis of International
Law; if no agreement can be reached within a reasonable period of time, the States concerned
should resort to the procedures of settlement of disputes provided for in the Convention.
In the continental shelf, the Convention establishes sovereign rights for the coastal States and
rights and freedoms for other States, as well as, imposes duties on them. The coastal State may
exercise over the continental shelf sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring it and exploiting its
natural resources. Such rights are exclusive in the sense that if the coastal State does not explore the
continental shelf or exploit its natural resources, no one may undertake these activities without the
express consent of the coastal State. The coastal State has the exclusive right to construct and to
authorize and regulate the construction, operating and use of artificial islands, installations and
structures on the continental shelf, as well as, to authorize and regulate drilling on the continental
shelf for all purposes. It has the right to establish reasonable safety zones around its installations to a
limit of 500 meters, which must be respected by ships of all States.
The Convention provides that the rights of the Coastal State over the continental shelf do not
depend on occupation or any express proclamation, and do not affect the legal status of the
superjacent waters or of the air above those waters. In exercising its rights over the continental shelf,
the convention requires from the coastal State not to infringe or result in any unjustifiable
interference with navigation and other rights and freedoms of other States as provided for in the
Convention (such as the laying or maintenance of cables or pipelines). Moreover, the Convention
imposes upon the coastal State to pay to the International Sea-Bed Authority annual payments or
contributions in kind in respect of the exploitation of the nonliving resources of the continental shelf
beyond 200 miles; such payments or contributions shall be distributed by the Authority to the States
parties to the Convention, on the basis of equitable sharing criteria, taking into account the interests
and needs of developing States, particularly the least developed and the land-locked among them.
Under the Convention, all States are entitled to lay cables and pipelines on the continental shelf,
in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention.
SECTION 6: THE HIGH SEAS

The 1982 Convention defines the high seas as “all parts of the sea that are not included in the
exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the
archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State.” Under the Convention the high seas are open to all
States, whether coastal or landlocked, and that the freedom of the high seas is exercised under the
conditions laid down by the Convention and other rules of International Law. Such a freedom
comprises inter alia the freedom of navigation, over-flight, the laying of submarine cables and
pipelines, the construction of artificial islands and other installation permitted under International
Law, fishing, and the conduct of scientific research. These freedoms must be exercised by all States
with due regard for the interests of other States in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas, and
also with due regard for the rights under the Convention concerning activities in the International
Sea- Bed Area.
Moreover, the high seas shall be reserved for peaceful purposes. No State may purport to subject
any part of the high seas to its sovereignty. Every State, whether coastal or land-locked, has the right
161
to sail ships flying its flag on the high sea, to exercise its jurisdiction in civil and penal matters, and
to exercise control in administrative, technical and social matters over them.
SECTION 7: LAND-LOCKED STATES

“Land-locked State” means a State which has no sea-coast. The 1982 Convention provides that
land-locked States have the right of access to and from the sea for the purpose of exercising the rights
provided for in the Convention including those related to the freedom of the high seas and the
common heritage of mankind, the right of innocent passage in the territorial sea of coastal States, the
right of transit and innocent passage in international straits, and the right of laying submarine cables
and pipelines in the continental shelf. To this end, the land-lock States enjoy freedom of transit
through the territory of transit States by all means of transport. “Transit State” means a State, with
or without a sea-coast, situated between a land-locked State and the sea, through whose territory
traffic in transit passes.
The Convention provides that terms and modalities for exercising freedom of transit shall be
agreed between the land-locked States and transit States through bilateral, sub-regional or regional
agreements. For the convenience of traffic in transit, free zones or other customs facilities may be
provided at the ports of entry and exit in the transit States, by agreement between those States and
the land-locked States. Traffic in transit shall not be subject to any customs duties, taxes or other
charges except charges levied for specific services rendered in connection with such traffic. Transit
States shall take all appropriate measures to avoid delays or other difficulties of a technical nature in
traffic in transit. In the exercise of their full sovereignty over their territory, transit States shall have
the right to take all measures necessary to ensure that the rights and facilities provided for in the
Convention for land-locked States shall in no way infringe their legitimate interests.
SECTION 8: THE AREA AND THE AUTHORITY
The “Area” as defined by the 1982 Convention means the sea-bed and ocean floor and subsoil
thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. Under the Convention, the Area and its resources
(solid, liquid or gaseous mineral) are deemed to be the common heritage of mankind and no
sovereign or other rights may be recognized. However, minerals recovered from the Area only in
accordance with the Convention are alienable. Activities in the Area are to be carried out for the
benefit of mankind as a whole by or on behalf of “the International Seabed Authority” established
under the Convention. The Authority is to provide for the equitable sharing of such benefits.
The Area shall be open to use exclusively for peaceful purposes by all States, whether coastal or
land-locked, without discrimination and without prejudice to the provisions of the
Convention. Marine scientific research in the Area shall be carried out, by or on behave of the
Authority, exclusively for peaceful purposes and for the benefits of mankind as a whole in
accordance with the Convention.
The International Seabed Authority (the Authority) is the autonomous organization which the
States parties to the 1982 Convention have agreed to establish in order to organize and control
activities in the Area, particularly to administer the resources of the Area. All States parties to the
Convention are ipso facto members of the Authority. The Authority became fully operational in June
1996. The seat of the Authority is in Jamaica; it may establish such regional centers or offices as it
deems necessary for the exercise of its functions.
The Authority may exercise the powers and functions which are expressly conferred upon it by
the Convention, and such incidental powers, consistent with the Convention, as are implicit in and
necessary for the exercise of those powers and functions with respect to activities in the Area. It
162
consists of the principal organs, which are the Assembly, the Council and the Secretariat, the
Enterprise, and certain subsidiary organs.
SECTION 9: ENCLOSED OR SEMI-ENCLOSED SEAS

Enclosed and semi-enclosed seas as defined by the 1982 Convention means a gulf, basin or sea
surrounded by two or more States and connected to another sea or the ocean by narrow outlet or
consisting entirely or primarily of the territorial seas and exclusive economic zones of two or more
coastal States. The Convention requires the States bordering an enclosed or semi-enclosed sea to co-
operate with each other in the exercise of their rights and in the performance of their duties under
the Convention. To this end these States are required to endeavor, directly or through an
appropriate regional organization to co-ordinate: the management, conservation, exploration and
exploitation of living resources of the sea; the implementation of their rights and duties with respect
to the protection and preservation of the marine environment; their scientific research policies and
undertake where appropriate joint programmes of scientific research in the area. These States are
also required to invite, as appropriate, other interested States or international organizations to co-
operate with them.
Actually, there are more than twenty marine areas which can be regarded as enclosed or semi-
enclosed seas according to the criteria specified by the 1982 Convention. Among these areas are the
Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, the Caribbean Sea, the East China Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, the Red
Sea, the South China Sea, the Gulf of Mexico, the Gulf of Oman, and the Arabian Gulf. In
international practice, co-operation among the States bordering enclosed or semi-enclosed seas has
been taken in matters such as conservation of the living resources and marine pollution prevention
and control.
163
THE LEAGUE OF THE NATIONS

I. Origin and Founding of the League of Nations
The League of Nations was established at the initiative of the victorious Allied Powers after the
Paris Peace Conference of 1919 that ended the First World War. The need to establish an
international association for the preservation of peace had been felt during the First World
War. During the war, influential groups in the United States and Britain had urged the creation of
such a body. The U.S. President Woodrow Wilson strongly favored the idea as a means of
preventing another destructive world war. In his Fourteen Points summarizing Allied aims in the
First World War, President Wilson presented a plan for a general association of nations to guarantee
political independence and territorial integrity to all nations.
The Paris Peace Conference accepted the proposal to create the League of Nations on January
25, 1919. The Covenant of the League of Nations was drafted by a special commission on which
President Wilson was a member. President Wilson was the impetus behind the creation of the
League of Nations. His plan formed the basis of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The
Covenant was formulated as Part I of the Treaty of Versailles which ended the First World War and
which was signed on June 28, 1919; accordingly, the League of Nations was established. The
League Covenant embodied the principles of collective security (joint action by League members
against an aggressor), arbitration of international disputes, reduction of armaments, and open
diplomacy.
The League was established for major purposes which were to promote international cooperation
and to achieve international peace and security. Its establishment as an organization for
international cooperation, constituted a fundamental shift from the old philosophy of European
relations. The diplomatic philosophy behind the establishment of League came to replace the old
philosophy, growing out of the Congress of Vienna (1815), which was built on shifting alliances
among nation-states, and balance of power maintained by strong armies and secret
agreements. Under the new philosophy, the League meant to be a government of governments,
with the role of settling disputes between nations in an open and legalist forum.
II. Status and Membership of the League of Nations

The League of Nations was an intergovernmental organization established to promote
international cooperation and to achieve international peace and security. It was the first of this kind
ever established by mankind. It existed from 1920 to 1946.
The League held its first meeting in London on 10 January 1920. Its first action was to ratify
the Treaty of Versailles, officially ending the First World War. The headquarters of the League
moved to Geneva on November 1, 1920, where the first general assembly of the League was held
on November 15, 1920 with representatives from 41 nations in attendance. Its last meeting was held
on April 8, 1946; at that time the league was superseded by the United Nations (UN).
The original members of the League of Nations were those of the signatories named in the Annex
to the Covenant and also such of those other states named in the Annex as would accede without
reservation to the Covenant. Initially, the Covenant of the League of Nations was signed by 44
states, including 31 states which had taken part in the war on the side of the Allied Powers or joined
them during the war (neutral and enemy nations had been initially excluded). Despite President
Wilson's efforts to establish and promote the League, for which he was awarded the Nobel Peace
Prize in 1919, the United States neither ratified the Covenant nor joined the League due to
opposition from isolationists in the U.S. Senate.
164
Moreover, the Covenant provided that any fully self-governing State, Dominion or Colony not
named in the Annex might become a Member of the League if its admission was agreed to by two-
thirds of the Assembly, provided that it would give effective guarantees of its sincere intention to
observe its international obligations, and would accept such regulations as might be prescribed by
the League in regard to its military, naval and air forces and armaments.
The Covenant provided that any Member of the League might, after two years' notice of its intention
so to do, withdraw from the League, provided that all its international obligations and all its
obligations under this Covenant had been fulfilled at the time of its withdrawal. It also provided that
any member who had violated any provisions of the Covenant might be declared to be no longer a
member of the League by a vote of the Council concurred in by the representatives of all other
members of the League represented thereon.
The League of Nations had 42 founding members excluding United States of America which did
not join the League, although American diplomats encouraged the league's activities and attended
its meetings unofficially. 16 of founding members left or withdrew from the League; Yugoslavia was
the only founding member to leave the League and return to it later and remained until the end. In
the founding year six other states joined, only two of them remained members until the end. In later
years 15 more states joined, three of them did not stay until the end. Egypt was the last state to join
in 1937. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was expelled from the league five years after it
joined on December 14, 1939. Iraq was the only member of the League that was under its mandate;
it became a member in 1932. In conclusion, during the League’s 26 years, a total of 63 nations
joined the League; 28 were members for the entire period.
III. Purposes and Principles of the League of Nations

In the preamble of the Covenant, the contracting parties agreed on the principles through which they
could promote international cooperation and achieve international peace and security which
constituted the main purpose of the League of Nations. The agreed principles were:
1. The acceptance of obligations not to resort to war,
2. The prescription of open, just and honorable relations between nations,
3. The firm establishment of the understandings of international law as the actual rule of conduct
among Governments, and
4. The maintenance of justice and the respect for all treaty obligations in the dealings of organized
peoples with one another.
Moreover, in the articles of the Covenant, the Members elaborated on their major undertakings:
1. The Members recognized that the maintenance of peace required the reduction of national
armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety and the enforcement by common
action of international obligations. In this regard they entrusted the Council with the power to
formulate plans for such reduction. Such plans would be subject to reconsideration and revision at
least every ten years.
2. The Members undertook to respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial
integrity and existing political independence of all Members of the League. In case of any such
aggression or in case of any threat or danger of such aggression the Council should advise upon the
means by which this obligation should be fulfilled.
3. The Members agreed that any war or threat of war, whether immediately affecting any of the
Members of the League or not, should be declared a matter of concern to the whole League, and the
League should take any action that might be deemed wise and effectual to safeguard the peace of
165
nations. In case any such emergency should arise the Secretary General should on the request of any
Member of the League forthwith summon a meeting of the Council.
4. The Members agreed to submit any dispute between them either to arbitration or judicial
settlement or to enquiry by the Council, and they agreed in no case to resort to war until three
months after the award by the arbitrators or the judicial decision, or the report by the Council. In
any case the award of the arbitrators or the judicial decision required to be made within a reasonable
time, and the report of the Council shall be made within six months after the submission of the
dispute.
5. The Members agreed to carry out in full good faith any award or decision that might be
rendered, and that they would not resort to war against a Member of the League which complied
therewith. In the event of any failure to carry out such an award or decision, the Council was
required to propose what steps should be taken to give effect thereto.
In addition, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of international conventions existing
or hereafter to be agreed upon, the Members of the League undertook:
1. To secure and maintain fair and humane conditions of Labour for men, women, and children,
both in their own countries and in all countries to which their commercial and industrial relations
extend, and for that purpose would establish and maintain the necessary international organizations;
2. To secure just treatment of the native inhabitants of territories under their control;
3. To entrust the League with the general supervision over the execution of agreements with
regard to the traffic in women and children, and the traffic in opium and other dangerous drugs;
4. To entrust the League with the general supervision of the trade in arms and ammunition with
the countries in which the control of this traffic is necessary in the common interest;
5. To make provision to secure and maintain freedom of communications and of transit and
equitable treatment for the commerce of all Members of the League. In this connection, the special
necessities of the regions devastated during the war of 1914-1918 shall be borne in mind;
6. To take steps in matters of international concern for the prevention and control of disease.
IV. Organizational Structure of the League of Nations

The League consisted of three principal organs, namely the Secretariat, the Council and the
Assembly, and many agencies and commissions.
1. The Assembly
The Assembly consisted of Representatives of the Members of the League. Each member state
had one vote. The Assembly held its sessions once a year in September. The Assembly had the
authority to deal at its meetings with any matter within the sphere of action of the League or
affecting the peace of the world.
Decisions of the Assembly on important matters required the agreement of all the Members of the
League represented at the meeting. All matters of procedure at meetings of the Assembly required
to be decided by a majority of the Members of the League represented at the meeting.
2. The Council
The League Council had the authority to deal with any matter within the sphere of action of the
League or affecting the peace of the world. The Council began with four permanent members (
Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan) and four non-permanent members elected by the Assembly
every three years. The first four non-permanent members were Belgium, Brazil, Greece and Spain.
United States was meant to be the fifth permanent member, but the United States Senate voted on
166
March 19, 1920 against the ratification of the Treaty of Versailles, so the fifth permanent seat was
taken by China. Germany joined the League and became a sixth permanent member of the Council
on September 8, 1926, taking the Council to a total of fifteen members. With the departure of
Germany and Japan from the League, their places were taken by new non-permanent members.
The Council met in ordinary sessions four times a year, and in extraordinary sessions when
required. In total, 107 public sessions were held between 1920 and 1939. Decisions of the Council
on important matters required the agreement of all the Members of the Council represented at the
meeting (a unanimous vote by the Council), while decisions on matters of procedure required a
majority of the Members represented at the meeting.
3. The Secretariat
The Secretariat was the administrative organ of the League (acting as the civil service for the
League). It was located in Geneva, Switzerland. It was headed by the Secretary General. The staff
of the League's secretariat was responsible for preparing the agenda for the Council and the
Assembly and publishing reports of the meetings and other routine matters. The General Secretary
wrote annual reports on the work of the League.
Over the life of the League from 1920–1946, the three Secretaries General were: Sir James Eric
Drummond (U.K.) (1920-1933);Joseph Avenol (France) (1933-1940); Seán Lester (Ireland) (1940-
1946).
Other Bodies
The Permanent Court of International Justice and several other agencies and commissions were
created by the League of Nations to deal with pressing international problems. The agencies and
commissions were: the Disarmament Commission, the Health Organization, the International
Labour Organization, the Mandates Commission, the Permanent Central Opium Board, the
Commission for Refugees, and the Slavery Commission. While the League itself generally failed to
achieve its mission, several of its agencies and commissions succeeded in their respective missions.
Several of these institutions were transferred to the United Nations (UN) after the Second World
War. The International Labour Organization was brought into affiliation with the UN. The
Permanent Court of International Justice became a UN institution as theInternational Court of
Justice. The Health Organization was restructured as the World Health Organization.
V. Successes and Failures of the League of Nations

The League of Nations was the first intergovernmental organization for cooperation among
nations. It provided a focal point for intergovernmental organizations and also for the growing
network of nongovernmental agencies. It significant successes were the establishment of the
Permanent Court of International Justice and many international agencies and commissions dealing
with various matters of international concern.
In the field of international peace and security, the League succeeded in settling minor
international disputes, and experienced no serious challenges to its authority. Example of such
miner disputes were: the dispute between Sweden and Finland over Land Islands; the border dispute
between Albania and Yugoslavia; the dispute between Germany and Poland over Upper Silesia; the
dispute between the League and Poland over Memel; the dispute between Greece and Bulgaria; the
dispute between France and Germany over Saar; and the dispute between Iraq and Turkey over
Mosul.
167
However, the League generally failed in its mission to achieve disarmament, prevent war, settle
major disputes through diplomacy, and improve global welfare. It failed to settle the disputes over
Cieszyn (between Poland and Czechoslovakia), Vilna (between Poland and Lithuania), Ruhr
(between France and Belgium on one side and Germany on the other side), and the island of Corfu
(between Italy and Greece). It also failed to prevent the Japanese invasion of Manchurian (China)
in 1931, the Chaco War between Bolivia and Paraguay in 1932, the Italian invasion of Abyssinia in
1935, and the Spanish Civil War in 1936. Above all, it failed to prevent Axis rearmament which
constituted a major event led to the outbreak of the Second World War.
The League also worked to combat international trade in opium and sexual slavery and helped
alleviate the plight of refugees, particularly in Turkey during the 1920s.
The failure of the League of Nations in achieving its objectives was the result of the following:
(1) The League lacked an armed force of its own. It depended on the Great Powers to enforce its
resolutions, which they were reluctant to do. Its two most important members, the United Kingdom
and France, were reluctant to use sanctions, particularly to resort to military action on behalf of the
League.
(2) The economic sanctions, which were the most severe measures the League could decide short of
military actions, were difficult to enforce and had no great impact on the sanctioned state, because it
could simply trade with states outside the League.
(3) The Council of the League was required to adopt its resolutions by a unanimous vote of its nine
members (later fifteen members), so conclusive and effective action was difficult, if not impossible to
be taken. It was also slow on coming to its decisions. Some decisions also required unanimous
consent of the Assembly of the League, i.e., the agreement by all members of the League.
(4) The representation at the League was a problem. Although the League was intended to
encompass all nations, many never joined, or their time as members of the league were short. The
League was seriously weakened by the non-adherence of the United States of America; the U.S.
Congress failed to ratify the Treaty of Versailles (containing the Covenant). The League also further
weakened when the three permanent members of the Council, Germany, Italy and Japan, left in the
1930s.
(5) Most members of the League were occupied with the protection of their own national interests
rather than the fulfillment of their commitments to the League and its objectives.
With the outbreak of Second World War, it was clear that the League of Nations had failed in its
purpose which was to avoid any future world war. During the war, the League ceased its activities;
neither the League's Assembly nor Council was able or willing to meet, and its secretariat in
Geneva was reduced to a skeleton staff, with many offices moving to North America.
After the failure of the League of Nations to prevent war, nations of the world decided to create a
new body to fulfill the League's role, but to take it further. This body was to be the United
Nations (UN). At a meeting of the Assembly in 1946, the League dissolved itself and transferred its
services, mandates, and property to the UN. Many League bodies, for instance the International
Labor Organization, continued to function and eventually became affiliated with the UN.
168
DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR LAW

Rules regulating the various aspect of diplomatic relations are the result of centuries of States
practice. They constitute one of the earliest expressions of International Law. Whenever in history
there have been independent States coexisting, special customs have developed on how the
representatives of one State would be treated by other State.
Traditionally, diplomatic relations have been conducted through ambassadors and their staffs.
However, with the growth of trade and commercial transactions the office of consul was established.
Today, diplomats and consuls perform useful functions in the host states. They provide
permanent presence in host States, pursue friendly relations between their States and the host States,
and promote the various interests of their States in the host states.
Because of the important roles played by diplomats and consuls in international relations, it is
necessary to treat this subject in the following two sections. Thus, section one is devoted to
diplomatic mission, while section two is devoted to consular post.
SECTION 1: DIPLOMATIC MISSION
Today, all States are represented in foreign States by diplomatic representatives. These
diplomatic representations are of a permanent nature, although representatives are changeable.
The emergence of permanent as distinct from temporary diplomatic missions is dated back to the
th
17 Century. Rules related to rights, duties, privileges and immunities of diplomatic representatives
were developed through customs in the 18th Century. In the early 19th Century, some common
understandings on the rules were reached to at the Congress of Vienna of 1815. Developments of
diplomatic rules have continued since that date. The new and the most extensive codification of the
diplomatic law was achieved in 1961 by the conclusion of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
Relations.This Convention both codified existing rules and established others. It laid down rules
related to classes of heads of a diplomatic mission, members of a mission, appointment and
reception of the head of a mission, functions of a mission, the privileges and immunities of a mission
and its members, the duties of the members of a mission, the duties of the receiving State, and the
termination of the mission. It provided that matters not regulated by the Convention continue to be
governed by the rules of customary International Law. In the following, all these rules are dealt
with.
A. Members of a Mission and Classification of Heads of a Mission
Under the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, members of the diplomatic mission
are the following:
(1) The head of the mission: The person who is charged by the sending State with the duty of
acting in that capacity.
(2) Members of the diplomatic staff: The members who have diplomatic rank.
(3) Members of the administrative and technical staff: The members who are employed in the
administrative and technical service of the mission.
(4) Members of service staff: The members who are employed in the domestic service of the
mission.
169
The Convention divided Heads of diplomatic missions into three classes, namely:
(1) Ambassadors accredited to Heads of States.
(2) Special envoys and ministers accredited to Heads of States.
(3) Charges d’affaires accredited to Ministers for Foreign Affairs.
The class to which the head of a mission is assigned is a matter of agreement between the
concerned States. Except as concerns precedence and etiquette, there is no differentiation between
heads of a mission by reason of their class. However, heads of missions are to take precedence in
their respective classes in the order of the date and time of taking up their functions.
B. Appointment of Heads and Diplomatic Members of the Missions
Under the Convention, the appointment of a diplomatic agent (the head of the diplomatic
mission or any member of the diplomatic staff) is subject to the agreement of the receiving States
which has the right to refuse the appointment of any particular person without being obliged to give
reasons. Because of the possibility of refusing the proposed person, it is the practice of States that
the sending State usually notifies the receiving State of the name of the person proposed to be
appointed a diplomatic agent. When the receiving State gives its consent to the proposed person,
then the sending State can proceed with the formal appointment of the diplomat and accredit
him. Accreditation is done by furnishing the head of the mission or any member of the diplomatic
staff with certain official papers known as “letter of credence” or credentials. The credentials of the
head of a mission are presented to the Head of the receiving State in a ceremonial reception.
It is still, however, that the receiving state can at any time without obliged to explain its decision
to notify the sending State that a particular diplomat is persona non grata; in such case, he should be
recalled and his functions should be terminated.
C. Functions of the Diplomatic Mission

The functions of a diplomatic mission as stated by the Convention consist among other things of:
(1) representing the sending State in the receiving State;
(2) protecting in the receiving State the interests of the sending state and its nationals, within the
limits permitted by International Law;
(3) negotiating with the Government of the receiving State;
(4) ascertaining by all lawful means conditions and developments in the receiving State, and
reporting thereon to the Government of the sending State;
(5) promoting friendly relations between the sending State and the receiving State, and developing
their economic, cultural and scientific relations.
In addition to these functions, the diplomatic mission can perform consular functions since
nothing in the Convention prevents it from performing such functions.
D. Privileges and Immunities of a Diplomatic Agent
The Convention grants the head of the diplomatic mission and members of the diplomatic staff of
the mission as well as members of their families certain privileges and immunities from jurisdiction
of the receiving State. It has been the practice that an ambassador to a certain State submits to the
Ministry for Foreign Affairs of that State a list containing the names of members of the diplomatic
170
mission with their positions, ranks and functions, and the names of persons who should be granted
full or limited immunity.
The most important privileges and immunities granted to a diplomatic agent (the head of the
mission and members of diplomatic staff) are:
(1) A complete immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State;
(2) Immunity from the civil and administrative jurisdiction of the receiving state, except in the case
of:
i. a real action related to private immovable property situated in the territory of the receiving state,
unless he holds it on behalf of the sending State for the purpose of the mission.
ii. an action related to succession in which he is involved as executor, administrator, heir or legatee
as a private person and not on behalf of the sending State;
iii. an action related to any professional or commercial activity exercised by him in the receiving
State outside his official functions.
(3) The inviolability of his person.
(4) Exemption from all dues and taxes, personal or real, national, regional or municipal in the
receiving state, except indirect taxes, taxes and dues on private immovable, dues on inheritance,
dues and taxes on private income, and charges levied for specific services rendered;
(5) Freedom of communication for official purposes;
(6) The right to move freely in the territory of the receiving State.
(7) The inviolability of his private residence.
(8) The inviolability of his papers, correspondence and property
The above privileges and immunities are enjoyed by a diplomatic agent from the moment he
enters the territory of the receiving State on proceeding to take up his post or, if already in its
territory, from the moment when his appointment is notified to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. He
also enjoys such privileges and immunities when passes through or is in the territory of a third State
on proceeding to take up or to return to his post, or when returning to his own country.
The immunity from jurisdiction granted to a diplomatic agent is immunity from the jurisdiction
of the receiving State and not from liability. He is not immune from the jurisdiction of the sending
State. Moreover, he can be sued in the receiving state after a reasonable time elapses from the
ending of his mission.
The immunity of a diplomatic agent from jurisdiction of the receiving State may be waived by the
sending State. The waiver must be express. However, such waiver of immunity from jurisdiction
does not imply waiver of immunity in respect of the execution of a judgment; in such case, a
separate waiver is required. Immunity may also be waived by the diplomatic agent himself, by
submitting voluntarily to the jurisdiction of the court of the receiving State.
Members of the family of a diplomatic agent, if they are not nationals of the receiving State,
likewise enjoy the same privileges and immunities. The same privileges and immunities, with
certain exceptions, is enjoyed by members of the administrative and technical staff of the mission,
together with members of their families forming part of their respective households, if they are not
nationals or permanent residents of the receiving State. Members of the service staff who are not
nationals or permanent residents of the receiving State enjoy immunity from jurisdiction only in
respect of acts performed in the course of their official duties.
171
As regard the mission itself, the Convention makes its premises, achieves, documents,
correspondence and diplomatic bag inviolable. Moreover, it grants the premises of the mission, their
furniture and other property thereon, and the means of transport of the mission the immunity from
search, requisition, attachment or execution. The premises of the mission are also exempt from all
national, regional or municipal dues and taxes, other than such as represent payment for specific
services rendered
E. Termination of a Diplomatic Mission or of the Functions of a Diplomatic Agent
A diplomatic mission or the functions of a diplomatic agent may be terminated permanently or

temporary by various means and for various reasons, some are stated in the Convention and others
are established by States practice. Among these means and reasons are the following:
(1) Breaking off the diplomatic relations between the sending and the receiving States because of
a war or any other reason.
(2) A recall of the diplomatic agent by his sending State upon its initiative, or at the request of the
receiving State.
(3) A notification by the sending State to the receiving State that the functions of the mission or
the diplomatic agent has come to its end.
(4) A notification by the receiving State that the diplomatic agent is a persona non grata.
(5) Resignation of the diplomatic agent.
(6) Death of the diplomatic agent.
SECTION 2: CONSULAR POST
The institution of consular post is much older than that of diplomatic mission. The modern
system of consular post is dated back to the 16th Century. The 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations is the law governing consular representation. A consular officer (any person, including the
head of the consular post, entrusted with the capacity to exercise consular functions) like a
diplomatic agent, represents his State in the receiving State. However, unlike a diplomatic agent, he
is not concerned with political relations between the two States, but with a variety of administrative
functions, such as issuing visas and passports, looking after the commercial interests of his State, and
assisting the nationals of his State in distress.
In the following, the rules governing consular relations, namely members of the consular post,
classification of the head of the post, the appointment of consular officers, functions of the consular
post, privileges and immunities of consular officers, and the termination of post, are dealt with.
A. Members of the Consular Post and Classification of the Heads of the Post
The members of the consular post as stated by the 1963 Vienna Convention are:
(1) The head of the post: The person charged by the sending State with the duty of acting in that
capacity.
(2) Consular officers, other than the head of the consular post: Persons entrusted to exercise
consular functions.
(3) Consular employees: Persons employed in the administrative and technical service of a
consular post.
(4) Members of the service staff: Persons employed in the domestic service of the consular post.
172
(5) Members of the private staff: Persons employed exclusively on the private service of members
of the consular post.
The heads of a consular post are divided into four classes, namely:
(1) Consuls-General.
(2) Consuls.
(3) Vice-Consuls.
(4) Consular agents.
The class to which a head of a consular post is assigned is a matter of agreement between the
concerned states.
B. Appointment of a Head of the Consular Post
The head of a consular post is appointed by the sending State and is admitted to exercise his
functions by the receiving State. The sending State normally notify the appointment of a consul to
the receiving State which has the right either to issue an “exequatur” or refuse to issue it without
obliged to give reasons. The exequatur is a written official recognition and authorization of the
consul. If the receiving State has no objection against the appointment, the exequatur is
issued. Normally, a consul does not take his post until receiving an exequatur. If subsequently, an
objection is raised, the receiving State may notify the appointing State that the consul is no longer
acceptable. Then the appointing State must recall him, if it does not, the receiving State may
withdraw the exequatur. Furthermore, a receiving State may notify the sending State that any
member of the consular post is not acceptable.
C. Functions of a Consular Post
Consular post is different from diplomatic mission in its functions. While diplomatic mission is
concerned with political relations between the two States, the consular post exercises a variety of
administrative functions. Furthermore, while there is only one diplomatic mission in a State, there
can be more than one consulate in one State. The major functions of consular posts are:
(1) Protecting the interests of the sending State and its nationals in the receiving State.
(2) Furthering the development of commercial, economic, cultural and scientific relations
between the sending State and the receiving State.
(3) Promoting friendly relations between the sending State and the receiving State.
(4) Reporting to the sending State on the conditions and developments of the commercial,
economic, cultural and scientific life of the receiving State, and giving such information to interested
persons.
(5) Issuing passports and travel documents to nationals of the sending State, and giving visas to
persons wishing to travel to that State.
(6) Helping and assisting nationals of the sending State, safeguarding their interests in certain
cases, and representing or arranging for their representation before the courts and other authorities of
the receiving State.
(7) Transmitting judicial and extra-judicial documents to the receiving State.
(8) Exercising a supervision and inspection powers over vessels and aircrafts having the
nationality of the sending State, and over the crews of these vessels and aircrafts.
173
(9) Acting as notary and civil registrar, and performing certain functions of administrative
nature.
A consular post can perform other functions entrusted to it by the sending State which are not
prohibited by the laws and regulations of the receiving State, not objected by the receiving State, or
referred to in the international agreements in force between the sending state and the receiving State.
D. Privileges and Immunities of Consular Officers
Nowadays, many States combine its diplomatic and consular services together. Thus, a person
who acts simultaneously as a diplomatic agent and a consular officer enjoys the diplomatic privileges
and immunities under the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. If the consular
functions are exercised by the consular post, then the consular officer enjoys the consular privileges
and immunities under the 1963 Vienna Convention on the Consular Relations.
Under the 1963 Vienna Convention on the Consular Relations, consular posts, members of a
consular post (consular officers and employees), members of their families and members of their
private staff enjoy certain privileges and immunities. These privileges and immunities are less than
what diplomatic mission and diplomatic agents are entitled to. The most important privileges and
immunities are the following:
(1) A consular officer (the head of the consular post and any person entrusted to exercise
consular functions) is immune from an arrest or detention pending trial, except in the case of a grave
crime and pursuant to a decision by the competent judicial authority. He is immune from
imprisonment or any other restriction on his personal freedom save in execution of a final judicial
decision. If criminal proceedings are instituted against him, he must appear before the competent
authorities. The proceedings must be conducted in a manner that respects his official position and
does not hamper the exercise of consular functions, and with the minimum delay.
(2) A consular officer and a consular employee (any person employed in the administrative or
technical service of the consular post) are immune from the jurisdiction of the judicial or
administrative authorities of the receiving State only in respect of acts performed in exercise of
consular functions. However, they do not enjoy such immunity in respect of a civil action either:
i. Arising out of a contract concluded by them not as agents of the sending State; or
ii. Brought by third party for damages arising from an accident in the receiving State caused by
vehicle, vessels or aircraft.
(3) A consular officer and a consular employee and members of their families forming part of
their households are exempt from all dues and taxes, except on certain specified cases.
(4) A member of the consular post (the head of the post, any person entrusted to exercise
consular functions, any person employed in administrative or technical service of the post and in the
domestic service of the post) is under no obligation to give evidence concerning matters connected
with the exercise of his functions or to produce official correspondence and documents related
thereto. He is also entitled to decline to give evidence as expert witness with regard to the law of the
sending state.
(5) A member of the consular post enjoys the freedom of communication for official purposes.
(6) A member of the consular post enjoys the right to move freely in the territory of the
receiving State.
174
(7) The archives, documents, official correspondence and consular bag are inviolable at any
time and whenever they may be.
(8) The premises of the consular post and the private residences of members of the consular
post are inviolable. They are, also, exempt from all taxes and dues other than such as represent
payment for specific services.
The above privileges and immunities are enjoyed by the member of the consular post from the
moment he enters the territory of the receiving State on proceeding to take up his post or, if already
in its territory, from the moment when he enters on his duties. The same privileges and immunities
are enjoyed by members of the families of the members of the consular post.
The privileges and immunities of the consular post may be waived by the sending State. The
waiver must be express and be communicated to the receiving State in writing. However, the waiver
of immunity from jurisdiction for the purposes of civil or administrative proceedings does not imply
waiver of immunity from the execution of a judicial decisions; in such case, a separate waiver is
required. Immunity may also be waived by the member of the consular post himself, by submitting
voluntarily to the jurisdiction of the court of the receiving State.
E. Termination of a Consular Functions
The consular functions may be terminated by various ways and reasons. Among these ways and
reasons are the following:
(1) A recall of the member of the consular post by his appointing State upon its initiative, or at the
request of the receiving State.
(2) A notification by the appointing State to the receiving State that the functions of the post or
any of its members are terminated.
(3) The withdrawal of the exequatur by the receiving State.
(4) Resignation of the member of the consular post.
(5) Death of the member of the consular post.
(6) The breaking off relations between the sending and receiving States, such as in case of a war.
175
PART VI
INTERNATIONAL LAW (SIXTH EDITION)

AUTHOR: MALCOLM N. SHAW
DOWNLOAD: http://www.mediafire.com/?61zjavv1jiqd252
Malcolm Shaw’s engaging and authoritative International Law has becomethe definitive textbook
for instructors and students alike, in this increasingly popular field of academic study. The
hallmark writing style provides a stimulating account, motivating students to explore the subject
more fully, while maintaining detail and academic rigour. The analysis integrated in the textbook
challenges students to develop critical thinking skills. The sixth edition is comprehensively
updated throughout and is carefully constructed to reflect current teaching trends and course
coverage. The International Court of Justice is now examined in a separate dedicated chapter and
there is a new chapter on international criminal law. The detailed references and reliable,
consistent commentary which distinguished previous editions remain, making this essential
reading for all students of international law whether they be at undergraduate level, postgraduate
level or professional lawyers.
THIS BOOK COVERS: Nature, Origin and Basis of International Law; Relation between
International Law and State Law; State in General and Recognition; Law of Treaties; International
Humanitarian Law; The Settlement of International Disputes; The Use of Force; International
Institutions; State Territorial Sovereignty; State Responsibility; State Jurisdiction; Succession to
Rights and Obligations; The State and the Individual; War, Armed Conflicts and other Hostilities.
176
PART VII
SOME USEFUL
INTERNATIONAL LAW
WEBSITES
177
HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm
TREATIES
http://untreaty.un.org/
www.virtual-institute.de/en/wcd/wcd.cfm
www.jura.uni-duesseldorf.de/rave/e/englhome.asp
SOURCES AND EVIDENCE OF CUSTOM/STATE

PRACTICE/DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
www.un.org/law/ilc/
www.uncitral.org/en-index.htm
www.gksoft.com/govt/en/
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND MUNICIPAL LAW
www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/index.html
www.hmso.gov.uk/stat.htm
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/world/index.htm
NATIONAL CASES
www.courtserve2.net/index.htm
www.bailii.org
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/index.php
LAW OF THE SEA
www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm
www.oceanlaw.org/
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
www.uia.org/extlinks/pub.php
178

International Law Notes (Revised)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Law Notes (Revised)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Law Notes (Revised)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERNATIONAL LAW

NOTES FOR CSS EXAMINATION

Aamir Khan Mahar

INTERNATIONAL LAW (ANALYSIS OF PAST PAPERS)

DIPLOMACY & IMMUNITY 2000 Short Notes: Chorzow Factory case,

BLOCKADE a) The ambassador of the Republic of

Re-Exam 2013 Considering the practice of 2007 Extradition

CHAPTER 1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES

CHAPTER 1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES

THREE MAJOR PARTS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

SOURCES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW IN RELATION TO MUNICIPAL LAW

DISTINCTION OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW WITH MUNICIPAL LAW

BASIS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

SANCTIONS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

ENFORCEMENT OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

FUNCTIONS OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

DISTINCTIONS WITH OTHER CONCEPTS

CHAPTER 2: THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

COMPOSITION OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

1. STATES– a group of people living together in a definite territory under an independent

 Neutralized states – an independent state, whether it be simple or composite, may be

CLASSIFICATION OR TYPES OF AN INDEPENDENT STATE

KINDS OR CATEGORIES OF COMPOSITE STATES:

2. THE UNITED NATIONS

3. THE VATICAN CITY

4. COLONIES AND DEPENDENCIES

5. MANDATES AND TRUST TERRITORIES

THREE KINDS OF TRUST TERRITORIES

7. INTERNATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES

CHAPTER 3: THE UNITED NATIONS

THE U.N. CHARTER

THE PREAMBLE TO THE CHARTER

Membership Qualifications to the United Nations

ORGANS OF THE UNITED NATIONS

The principal functions of the Court are:

CHAPTER 4: THE CONCEPT OF THE STATE

THE PRINCIPLE OF STATE CONTINUITY

EXTINCTION OF THE STATE

The Act of Recognition is Indicative of the Following Intentions

Two Kinds of Governments

Three Kinds of De Facto Government

DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THE TWO KINDS OF RECOGNITION

EFFECTS OF RECOGNITION OF STATE AND GOVERNMENTS

Conditions for a Belligerent Community to be Recognized

CONSEQUENCES OF RECOGNITION OF BELLIGERENCY

CHAPTER 6: THE RIGHT OF EXISTENCE AND SELF-DEFENSE

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF A STATE

REGIONAL ARRANGEMENTS: Collective self-defense is recognized not only in Article 51 of

AGGRESSION DEFINED: Definition of agression as adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on

Article 3: Any of the following acts qualify as an act of aggression

CHAPTER 7: THE RIGHT OF INDEPENDENCE

TWO ASPECTS OF SOVEREIGNTY

This rule was, however, dissipated by the Porter Resolution.

CHAPTER 8: THE RIGHT OF EQUALITY

LEGAL EQUALITY V. FACTUAL INEQUALITY

ACQUISITION AND LOSS OF TERRITORY

Mode of Losing Territory

DISCOVERY AND OCCUPATION: Discovery and occupation is an original mode of acquisition

REQUISITES OF VALID DISCOVERY AND OCCUPATION