POLI 391 Intl Law Final Exam Review

Environmental responsibilities (of coastal states):

- the duty to prevent overexploitation of living resources in the EEZ - Coastal states must maintain levels of fishing that produces a "maximum sustainable yield," a level at which the maximum amount of fish can be harvested without depleting the stock. - to promote optimum utilization of living resources - state determines the allowable catch of the living resources within its EEZ and its own capacity to harvest the allowable catch.

Attorney General of the Government of Israel v. Eichmann case:

-Adolf Eichman was Head of Section for Jewish Affairs under the Nazis. He played a prominent role in the Final Solution. -Captured by Israeli Security Forces in Argentina and handed to District Court of Jerusalem to stand trials for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes against the Jewish people. -Does the Court of Jerusalem have jurisdiction to try the case in light of the fact that Eichmann is a foreign national and crimes were committed on foreign territory. -Yes under the universality principle (crimes which are so reprehensible that the usual rules of jurisdiction are waived and any state apprehending the alleged perpetrator is deemed competent to exercise its jurisdiction.

Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide case:

-Article 9 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide provides that disputes/cases arising under the Convention should be compulsorily within the jurisdiction of the ICJ. -Many states wanted to opt out of compulsory jurisdiction. -Can states make reservations to any provisions they disliked and still be parties to the convention? -Rejected this conclusion as it was too extreme. -Reservation must be compatible to the object and purpose of the convention (compatibility test) -Compatibility test viewed by many as too subjective.

Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 case:

-Aut dedere aut prosequi: legal obligation of states under public international law to prosecute persons who commit serious international crimes where no other state has requested extradition. -Belgium issued an international arrest warrant against Democratic Republic of Congo's foreign minister for humanitarian violations. -Does a foreign minister who is suspected of humanitarian violations enjoy full immunity from criminal jurisdiction in another state's court? -A foreign minister suspected of humanitarian violations and war crimes does not enjoy full immunity from criminal jurisdiction in another court.

Classification of disputes:

-Justiciable disputes: Those which are basically legal in nature in the sense that they raise a question of international law which can be answered by applying that law. Justiciable disputes may therefore be submitted to adjudication based on international law. -Non-justiciable disputes: Those which involve only questions of policy and other extra-legal concerns and therefore cannot be subject to adjudicatory settlement.

Llantoy Huamna v Peru case:

-Llantoy Huaman was denied an abortion in 2001 of an anencephalic fetus. -Could be punished for a maximum of 3 months when it's likely that at birth, the child would suffer serious physical/mental defects. -The welfare of the unborn child caused serious harm to the mother triggering the symptoms of depression and an inflammation of the vulva which required medical treatment. -The author claims a violation of article 7, 2, 17 and 24 of the International Covenant on Civic and Political Rights. -Human Rights Council upheld this and ordered Peru to provide effective remedy, including compensation.

What are Crimes Against Humanity?

"namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war; or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country were perpetrated."

What are Crimes of Aggression?

"namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing."

Article 1 of the UN Charter identifies what with respect to human rights?

"promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion," as one of the purposes of the UN. Response to failures of domestic law (i.e. holocaust).

20th Century early changes in human rights law:

The ILO set forth basic universal standards for labor and social welfare and has since promulgated over 100 conventions. A number of the peace treaties after World War 1 also provided protection to national, religious, linguistic and ethnic minorities in Central and Eastern Europe. These treaties focused on group rights- a minority's right to its own schools, language, and religions- and freedom from discrimination. The Covenant of the League of Nations also created a mandate system by which the population of the colonies formerly under German and Turkish control were to be protected.

What is the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights?

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights is a United Nations agency that works to promote and protect the human rights that are guaranteed under international law and stipulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948.

UN Security Council enforcement actions under the UN Charter General Assembly Action:

The Security Council may act with respect to "threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression." It may call upon member states to implement measures not involving the use of armed force in order to give effect to its decisions. Should the Security Council consider that such measures are inadequate, it may use force including demonstrations, blockades, and other operations by air, sea, and land forces of Members of the United Nations. Action taken under Chapter VII is binding on all members of the United Nations and such decisions are subject to the veto power of permanent members.

What is the legal status of the Principle of Self-determination?

The principle of self-determination is subject to some uncertainty as a result of its lack of concrete definition, as well as its conflict with the well-established principle of sovereignty.

What is and who has the Right of Asylum? What is extradition? Is there a political exception to extradition? What is the consequence of double criminality?

The right to asylum was codified in the Universal Declaration of Human rights saying "Everyone has a right to seek and enjoy another countries asylum". Usually the right to asylum is given to anyone persecuted under protected grounds such as race, caste, religion, nationality, political opinion, or social group. Extradition is the act of one state handing over to another state suspected or convicted criminals. Double criminality imposes that the crime should be a crime in both states based of the bilateral treaty that the extradition is based off. It also states that a state must only prosecute and punish extradited individual for the crime he was extradited for. On some cases there may be a political exception to extradition, however terrorism does not fall under the political expectation offense.

What does "Force" mean?

The threat or use of force found in art 24. The Preamble to the Charter declares that "armed forces shall not be used, save in the common interest" and Article 51 preserves the right of individual and collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs." Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operations Among States in Accordance with the Charter o the United Nations- states " No state or group of states has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal and external affairs of another state. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are in violation of international law."

Explain the difference between the traditional and modern concepts of sovereign immunity. What is the Act of State doctrine?

The traditional concept views sovereign immunity as appertaining to particular individual. The person is seen as the state and is immune from his own and foreign judicial proceedings. In the modern concept, sovereign immunity is seen as appertaining to an abstract manifestation of the existence and power of the state. As such, a state is immune from the procedural immunity of another state because all states are inherently equal and are not subject to another judicial processes. The Act of State doctrine states every sovereign state is bound to respect the independence of another sovereign state.

Right of transit passage:

Through straits which are used for international navigation between one part of the high sea and another part of the high sea or the territorial sea of a foreign state. The LOS grants the right between two areas of high seas on two exclusive economic zones. The right does not exist where a strait is broad enough to allow navigation through a high sea route in its middle. Unlike innocent passage, transit passage extends to aircraft and submarines, and the coastal state must place fewer limitations on it.

Relevance of a declaration of war?

Traditionally was necessary for a war to be recognized. Today the Geneva Conventions allows for the declaration of war even if not formally announced

True or False: International Human Rights Law argues that there are certain duties that all states must afford those within its territory, including to those who are not its citizens.

True

Human Rights and the United Nations/United Nations Charter Implementation:

UN Charter states in its Preamble that the goal of the UN is "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought until sorrow to mankind" and 'reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights."

International Human Rights Law sets out guidelines on how ... should be treated by ...

refugees, states

The principle that once a case or dispute has been decided by a court of law within a jurisdiction, there will be no second trial on the same issues or dispute. In short, once a case is decided, the issues are deemed resolved:

res judicata

Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/ Pulau Batu Putch, Middle Rocks and South Ledge case:

-Malaysia published a map in 1979 claiming Pedra Branca. Singapore launched a formal protest. -Singapore also claimed Middle Rocks and South Ledge -Singapore argued that Pedra Branca was terra nullius and there wasn't evidence that the island was ever under the sovereignty of the Johar Sultinate. They had sovereignty as the island past from its predecessor (UK) and had plans to build a lighthouse there. -Malaysia claimed that Jahor had original title to Pedra Branca, Middle Rocks, and South Ledge. -Johor didn't cede Pedra Branca to the UK but just granted permission. Letter confirming this was unauthorized according to Malaysia. -Rule: Pedra Branca is Singapore's and Middle Rock belongs to Malaysia. Country whose territorial waters South Ledge is located has sovereignty over the maritime feature.

El Hagagog v Libya case:

-Mohammed Bashir Ben Ghazi complained that his son had been infected with AIDS after a stay at a hospital in Benghazi. -Department of Public Prosecution received more complaints of a similar background. -El-Hagog (Bulgarian national) was accused of premeditated murder and causing an endemic. -El-Hagog was arrested and detained. Claims that Libya violated his human rights. -El-Hagog was sentenced to death for having caused the death of 46 children and contaminating 380 others. -El-Hagog's claims of torture were cooberated in court by medical records and witness's statements. State does not refute claims to his detained incommunicado. -Committee concludes that the treatment inflicted on El-Hagog was torture and a violation of human rights. -State has a duty to provide El-Hagog effective remedy.

Non-judicial methods of dispute resolution:

-Negotiation - A face to face dispute resolution without any procedure -Good faith - not an obligation but a genuine effort to reach an agreement -Enquiry (or Inquiry) - an attempt to clarify the facts -Good Offices - Essentially this involves a third party and the consent of those in the dispute with the idea of the third party to help them establish direct contacts and take up negotiations. A third party contributing 'good offices" usually does nothing more than simply encourage a resolution -Mediation - Involves the use of a third party to aid in discussion but usually involves more direct involvement of that party. The method is often employed when the negotiations have reached a deadlock and a third party is required to break the impasses and assist the parties in reaching an acceptable solution. -Conciliation

Limitations on nationality of vessels:

-One flag limitation -A state must have a genuine link to the vessel -Flag of convenience cannot be used; led to "genuine link" requirement -Questions about a vessel's flag/nationality must be directed to the flag state

The Width of the Territorial Sea:

-Originally the cannon shot rule -Recently the 3 mile rule -Very recently no more than 12 miles rule

Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others Ex Parte Pinochet case:

-Pinochet, the former head of state of Chile, was accused of violating provisions in the Torture Convention by the UK's House of Lords. -Pinochet argued that he was the head of state and, thus, he was immune under the principles of international laws. -The provisions of the Torture Convention is not consistent with the notion of continued immunity for former heads of state. -Allegations against Pinochet can only be held if the acts were committed by the defendant after he lost his immunity in December 1988.

Case of Leyla Shain v Turkey:

-Turkish Muslim woman claims Turkey violated her human rights by banning the wearing of the Islamic headscarf in institutions of higher education. -Are student's rights/freedom under Convention violated when a secular country places a ban on the wearing of religious clothing in places of higher learning? -No. The ban didn't prohibit Muslim students from manifesting their religion in terms of Muslim observance. The right to wear religious attire not protected under Article 9 (interference was justified and proportionate)

What is a Threat of Force?

A blatant and direct threat of force to compel another state to yield territory or make substantial political concessions (not required by law) would have to be seen as illegal under Article 2(4) if the words "threat of force" are to have meaning."

Jurisdiction over foreign vessels:

A foreign merchant ship that enters any port of a state subjects itself to the administrative, civil and criminal jurisdiction of that state, although a ship's 15 internal matters are left to the flag state. Although jurisdiction over a ship's internal matters is left to the flag state of the ship, jurisdiction may be exercised if matters concern the 'peace or dignity' of the coastal state or 'tranquility of the port'. (Exception: refugee vessels)

Rule of Non-Intervention:

A position based on the sovereignty of all nations and prohibits the interference in the internal affairs of another state.

What is a "National Standard" with regards to human rights?

A state is thus responsible only if it fails to accord foreign nationals the same standard of treatment afford its own nationals (cannot treat foreign nationals worse than its own citizens; subjective and discretion left up to states)

Conflicts encompassed by the Geneva Conventions and Protocols Sanctions and enforcement:

A state might be required to pay reparations if it, or any member of its armed forces, violated the Convention, although it established no procedural framework for claims.

Concept of "Individual responsibility":

According to positivists, the only actors in the arena of international law were states. However: -There was one area were individuals did have some international rights, knows as responsibility for injury to aliens, which was well established by the early part of the 20th century (and discussed further above). The fundamental idea was that while states were not obligated to let aliens into their territory, if they did so, they also had responsibility to abide by minimum standards of due care towards those aliens (even if the state could treat its own citizens any way it might wish. -At Nuremberg and other international criminal trials, a common defense proffered by those accused of crimes against humanity was that they were simply following the orders given to them by superiors. For international humanitarian law to have any practical application, however, someone in the chain of command must be personally accountable to the international community for his or her actions. Criminal prosecutions have established the invalidity of the "following orders defense" but they have focused only on individuals in position of power or command responsibility.

This is the term of acquisition of territory through natural processes, such as the shifting of rivers and growing of deltas in a state's territory:

Accretion

Explain constructivist approaches to international law:

Aims to answer what the meaning of the law is and how do we derive that meaning

Which of the following principles is considered to be jus cogens (a) Pacta sunt servanda. b) Prohibition against slavery c) Prohibition against piracy. d) Prohibition against genocide. e) All of the above.):

All of the above

Part 5 of The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees - Enumerated rights are what? (6)

Allows refugees to enjoy the widest possible exercise of fundamental rights -Access to courts -Rights to engage in wage-earning employment -Right to education, housing and food on the same basis as aliens and/or the population of the state. -Freedom of religion -Property rights -Freedom of association

A common or habitual practice of a state, not required by international law, but observed as a matter of goodwill at the discretion of a particular state:

An act of comity

Quasi-Judicial Methods/Arbitration:

Arbitration is the settlement of a dispute on the basis of law by the binding decision of a judicial tribunal whose composition is determined by the parties. -The parties can decide how the tribunal is selected wherein international law this is beyond their control -Parties may agree on a certain law or interpretation of the law and the arbitrator is bound by this agreement

Explain critical legal studies or critical law approaches:

Argues that law is a means for the ruling class to maintain domination on society

This case suggests that states may need to provide more substantial connections to the parties or the dispute in a case than just domestic legislation before it asserts a right to hear a case under universal jurisdiction:

Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 case

In this case, the court found that it was possible to establish regional customary international law if there was a showing of a general practice to that effect within that regional grouping:

Asylum Case

Doctrine of Command responsibility:

At Nuremberg and other international criminal trials, a common defense proffered by those accused of crimes against humanity was that they were simply following the orders given to them by superiors. For international humanitarian law to have any practical application, however, someone in the chain of command must be personally accountable to the international community for his or her actions. Criminal prosecutions have established the invalidity of the "following orders defense" but they have focused only on individuals in position of power or command responsibility. Defenses include mental diseases, involuntary intoxication, duress, and others.

The right to food is based on what?

At minimum, the right to equal rations

Switzerland buys a tract of territory from France through a treaty so that Switzerland can build an airport. Such a transfer would be an example of

Cession

Historically, this was a fairly common way for annexing new territory, but has generally become illegal under international law, even with a claim based on self-defense:

Conquest

This approach to international relations theory focuses on the role of beliefs, ideas, identities and constructed norms to explain how international relations need not exist as a set of antagonist relationships among competing powers but that the development of ideas might reflect changing attitudes and understanding of the nature of global politics:

Constructivism

How much standard of care do states owe foreigners?

Depends on the standard of treatment that international law imposes

Among its many functions, one of the things international law does not do is:

Determine the rules that govern immigration and citizenship of individuals (domestic law)

Modern international Law view of human rights:

Early in the 19th century, almost everything that would be considered a "human right" today was considered within the realm of states' national jurisdiction. This was slowly shifted away from, most significantly with the establishment of the League of Nations in 1919, in which Article 22 of the covenant set up a system designed to protect individuals in ex-enemy colonies. The 1st and 2nd world wars also had a major impact on the realization and creation of protections for innocent individuals (such as citizens during wartime) and those involved in warfare (such as soldiers and POWs). This resulted in a massive spike in the development of intergovernmental organizations and tribunals involved in protecting human rights; however, recent years have seen a rise in the return to domestic policies.

The 1959 European Agreement on the Abolition of Visas for Refugees and the 1980 European Agreement on Transfer of Responsibility for Refugees:

Established the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the member states by a third country National. MADE VISAS

Explain natural law approaches to international law:

Ethical and godly standards to the law. The law should resemble what ought to be. Idealistic. A set of truths about morality and justice. Derived from rights from creator/higher power. WHAT OUGHT TO BE.

What is an "International minimum standard"?

Every state must treat foreigners within its territory by reference to a international minimum standard as defined by international law, irrespective of how national law allows that state to treat its own citizens. Such a standard is a rare example of international law being superior to national law.

Legal prohibitions against armed conflict:

Every state was considered to possess the right to wage war. It was the business of kings to go to war. But in the 20th century, however, many international agreements, most notably Article 2(4) of the UN Charter have renounced force as a policy and encouraged first resort to peaceful settlement of disputes.

The Paquete Habana case:

Facts - Cuban fishing vessels were embargoed after fishing on the high seas. -US and Cuba had imposed a blockade -US captured the ships and auctioned them off for prize Issue -Should customary international law be incorporated into US domestic law if it does not conflict with pre-existing domestic law? -Can domestic legislation override international treaties? Rule - Federal courts could consider international law as an integrated part of American law. Application -"Latter in time" rule in order to understand the legal precedents regarding the case. Conclusion -There is numerous customary international law which shows that fishing vessels should be exempt from capture on the high seas during times of war.

Landlocked States rights to sea:

Geneva Convention on the High Seas, 1958 provided that 'in order to enjoy freedom of the seas on equal terms with coastal states, states having no sea coast should have free access to the sea. -common heritage of mankind -transit state concerned through bilateral, sub regional or regional agreements -transit states, in the exercise of their full sovereignty over their territory, shall have the right to take all measures necessary to ensure that the rights and facilities provided for in this part for land-locked states shall in no way infringe their legitimate interest

What is an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)?

Gives coastal states exclusive economic water rights beyond the contiguous zone.

Law of Armed Conflict:

Governs the circumstances under which a state may use military force. In addition, once armed hostilities have commenced, the law of armed conflict places limitations up on the means by which force may be exerted and the targets against which such fore may be directed. This are of law can be divided into two sections- jus ad bello (the law leading up to war) and jus in bello (the law during war).

Part 4 of The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees - The guarantee of non-penalization of asylum refugees and asylum seekers is what?

Guarantees non-penalization of asylum refugees and/or asylum seekers who show 'good cause' for illegal entry or stay.

What is Human Rights Law?

Human rights law can be traced back as far as the Peace of Westphalia. It is one of the bodies of public international law that has often been associated with the natural law tradition. Human rights law can also refer to different rights and sources of rights. In western democracies freedom of speech, religion and assembly are often seen as human rights that originate with the governed, whereas in the USSR and similar states today human rights are seen as more basic fundamental freedoms, such as life and liberty, that originate from the government.

With globalization comes?

INCREASED GLOBALIZATION CALLS FOR AN INCREASE OF INTERNATIONAL WORKERS' RIGHTS.

Flag state jurisdiction:

If a coastal state does not assert jurisdiction over an offense in its ports or internal waters, "it is the duty of the courts of the (flag state) ... to apply its own statutes."

Role of UN Security Council in international disputes:

If parties cannot settle their dispute peacefully, under Article 37, they are to refer it to the UN Security Council, which can make recommendations that carry significant weight but create no legal obligations

Define the General Rules of Responsibility and the Treatment of Aliens:

In general, a state is under international obligations not to ill-treat foreign national present in its territory and a state may incur responsibility should it violate these obligations to the state of whom the person is a national. States also are in general obligated to: -Not allow mistreatment of foreign national in the custody of judicial authorities -Protect from unlawful expropriation foreign-owned property. -States can be liable for failing to punish those individuals responsible for attacking a foreign national. -States can also be liable for direct injury to foreign national by state officials -For a denial of justice where foreign nationals are denied due process of law in respect of a legal dispute arising in a state, whether civil or criminal.

What are the rights of indigenous peoples?

Indigenous peoples have asserted a right to self-determination to prevent their complete absorption into states dominated by non-aboriginal populations. Indigenous people may be seeking to secede to form their own states or to retain control over their own communities and land.

In this case, an arbitrator states the idea of intertemporal law, that "a juridical fact must be appreciated in the light of the law contemporary with it.":

Island of Palmas case

What is the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities?

It aims to provide individuals with disabilities the same rights and access to information as those without disabilities.

What is the The Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance?

It calls for states parties to investigate claims of enforced disappearance and bring the perpetrators to justice, to cooperate with other states parties to 15 bring people involved in the enforced disappearance of people to justice, and to ensure that victims of enforced disappearance receive adequate compensation.

What is the concept of "National Liberation?"

It has been argued that outside states may aid insurgents if the war is one of national liberation.

Humanitarian Intervention as a justification for the use of force:

It is generally agreed that the state using force would have to act from humanitarian motives (not against 'the territorial integrity" or political independence" of the target state) and cease military operations as soon as the humanitarian objective is achieved, even assuming humanitarian intervention is permissible under international law.

Protection of nations and property:

It is legally distinguishable because advocates of the right have asserted that attacks on a state's national triggers a right of self-defense under a broad reading of article 51 or a right of self-help under customary international law.

What is the Convention on the Protections of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families?

It mainly seeks to protect the human rights of migrant workers by calling attention to the fact that they are humans.

Civil and Political Human Rights:

Key to this is the idea that individuals are entitled to free elections and equal access to public positions as well as many of the civil and political rights that are seen as foundational to democratic political systems, and generally reflect the focus of human rights development of democratic state

Economic, Social and Cultural Human Rights:

Key to this is the idea that individuals are entitled to free elections and equal access to public positions as well as many of the civil and political rights that are seen as foundational to democratic political systems, and generally reflect the focus of human rights development of democratic state

This approach to international relations theory focuses on the relationship between people and governments, usually emphasizing rational calculation within pluralistic domestic systems to shape internal domestic politics and foreign policy behavior. These approaches highlight the role of economic interests as well as the existence of democracy as major factors shaping foreign policy:

Liberalism

Baseline Determinations for Measuring Coastal Zones:

Make up 20% of the ICJ docket. Are usually hotly debated but there are specific rules for specific bodies of water.

For a practice to be considered a rule of customary international law, certain indispensable elements need to be identified including the presence of:

Opinio juris & state practice consistent with that practice or norm

Essentially, the principle that states are obligated to honor their promises or are servants of their pacts:

Pacta Sunt Servanda

Right of innocent passage:

Passage means navigation through the territorial sea for the purpose of either traversing that sea without entering internal waters or proceeding to and from internal waters.

This disputed principle is much disputed among legal scholars and criticized for extending jurisdiction too far. It allows an injured state to assert the victim's nationality as a basis for exercising jurisdiction. It is often not asserted for ordinary crimes. If a crime is committed abroad and the victim is one of your nationals, you can bring jurisdiction against the alleged criminal, even if that means the accused has become subject to a legal system with which he or she has had no contact and whose rule he or she had no necessary reason to know or understand:

Passive personality principle

Explain positivist approaches to international law:

Pragmatic, laws are to be examined empirically to fit our modern world and be shorn of all ethics. WHAT IS

An international treaty is void if it conflicts with one of these:

Preemptory Norm (also called "jus codgens")

By which physical presence coupled with continuous and peaceful display of territorial sovereignty over territory belong to another state transfers title to the state exercising physical presence and territorial sovereignty:

Prescription

These are the rules of conduct, what you are legally obligated to do or to refrain from doing, as well as what are the consequences attached to obedience and disobedience. An example of this these would be the elements of criminal or property law:

Primary Rules

This principle allows states to exercise jurisdiction over crimes or acts that threaten its security and integrity or vital economic interests. As such, it allows the US to take aggressive action against foreign nationals who might be conspiring to commit terrorist attacks against the United States:

Protective Principle

Part 3 of The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees - The Principle of non-refoulement is what?

Protects refugees from return to those country where they face threat to life or freedom.

Part 2 of The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees - The Principle of non-discrimination is what?

Provides that individuals who are protected by the Convention should enjoy the same rights regardless of immigration or other status except where distinctions can be objectively justified

This case suggests that pre-existing international agreements may remain in force even during a time of warfare:

Techt v Hughes

This principle of jurisdiction is perhaps the most fundamental and universal. It recognizes that jurisdiction is an essential attribute of a state's sovereignty, which means the state has jurisdiction of all persons and objects within its territory. This principle has been applied the state to assert jurisdiction to acts outside the state that may have an impact within the state. For example, if Exxon-Mobile conspired with OPEC nations to raise gas prices in the US, it is likely to be subject to US jurisdiction under this principle:

Territorial Principle

What is Self Defense and what are the 2 requirements?

The 2 requirements are necessity and proportionality. First there must be a "necessity of self-defense, instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation." Second, the actions justified by the necessity of self-defense "must be limited by the necessity and kept clearly within it." These two requirements are often referred to as the requirements of necessity and proportionality. Also, there must be an "armed attack" against a state under Article 51. Self defense against terrorism was introduced the controversial policy of anticipatory self-defense.

This case, involving a collision on the high seas by nations of different flags, found that unless a state expressed and accepted a limitation on its jurisdiction, there could be no presumption of such a limitation to its jurisdiction. A practice without a clear indication of opinio juris could not be assumed to generate customary international law:

The Case of the S.S. Lotus (The Lotus Case)

What is the Human Rights Council?

The Human Rights Council replaced the Commission on Human Rights as the intergovernmental body of the UN in 2006. The Human Rights Council undertakes a Universal Periodic Review Mechanism. A review conducted by the Human Rights Council of the 192 UN member nations that occurs every 4 years and involves investigations and reports into the conduct of member states.

Caroline test:

A 19th-century formulation of customary international law, reaffirmed by the Nuremberg Tribunal after World War II, which said that the necessity for preemptive self-defense must be "instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation." The test takes its name from the Caroline affair.

This case suggests that states may be still obligated to comply with existing agreements even if the government of the country that made the agreement has changed and there are likely to be significant environmental consequences should the agreement be enforced:

Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project case

Under the modern international law, for an international treaty to exist...:

-It must be in writing -It must be governed by international law -It needs to be a bilateral or multilateral agreement -It must impose binding obligations

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide- (Bosnia and Herzegovina v Serbia and Montenegro) 2007 case:

-Bosnia and Herzegovina claimed that the Republic of Yugoslavia had violated the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Rule -The conduct of any state organ is to be considered an act of state, giving rise to the responsibility of the state if the conduct constitutes a breach of an international obligation of the state. Issue -Is the conduct if any state organ considered an act of the state, which can give rise to the responsibility of the state if the conduct constitutes a breach of an international obligation of the state? Conclusion -Yes. The conduct of any state organ it to be considered an act of the state, giving rise to the responsibility of the state if the conduct constitutes a breach of an international obligation of the state.

Goals of International Criminal Tribunals (4):

-Bring closure to victims -Restore people's belief in the operation of justice -Express the condemnation of the international community and, -Deter future crimes by holding individuals personally responsible for their actions.

What are traditionally seen as fundamental rights? (8)

-Civil and Political Rights -Economic, social and cultural rights -Prohibition of slavery -Prohibition of Genocide -Crimes against Humanity -Prohibitions of discrimination -Freedom from torture -Rights of Refugees

Protections provided by the laws of armed conflict:

-Combatants, legally entitled to take part in hostilities. -Wounded, sick or shipwrecked combatants; -Prisoners of war; and -Civilians

United States v Fawaz Yunis a/k/a Nezeeh case:

-Convictions of Yunis (conspiracy, hostage taking, air piracy), were affirmed. -Arguments relating to Anti-Hijacking Act, legality of seizure, Posse Comiatus Act, discovery claims, jury instructions and obedience to military order claims are all omitted.

The M/V Saiga Case:

-Crimes: Contraband, fraud, and tax evasion -Tribunal bases jurisdiction on the 1998 Agreement. -Guinea asserts that the ship wasn't validly registered between 9-12-97 and 11-28-97. Should qualify to be a ship without nationality. -Vincentian nationality isn't lost because of the expiry of its provisional certificate of registration. Must be expired for at least one year. -Provisional certificate is evidence but not a source of national status. -Question: Did the Saiga have Vincentian nationality at the time of its arrest? -Guinea can't successfully challenge the registration/nationality of the Saiga. Rejects Guinea's objection to the admissibility of Vincentian claims of registration. -There is a geniune link between the Saiga and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.

The Prosecutor v. Drazen Erdemovic case:

-Erdemovic was a member of a unit of the Bosnian Serb Army which participated in the killing of Bosnian Mulsim men near Bosnia and Herzegovina. -The crimes on the Pilicia farm and his role were aggravating circumstances. -What is the appropriate sentence for Erdemovic? -He was sentenced to 5 years of imprisonment.

Norwegian Loans case:

-France sued Norway for French holders of Norwegian bonds. Norway objected saying that ICJ lacked jurisdiction as France had invoked a domestic affairs reservation. -Norway, who submitted compulsory jurisdiction, argued they should be able to invoke the same reservation as France. -France's reservation is compatible with Article 36 paragraph 6 of the Statute. -Norway is entitled to invoke the same reservation as France. -The Court lacks jurisdiction to decide the case as France's reservation contradicts the Statute of the Court. The reservation, or part of it, is invalid.

International treaties may be invalidated based on which of the following conditions:

-Fraud, but only if the party subject to that fraud chooses to invalidate the agreement -Corruption, provided that the corruption originated from one of the other negotiating states and not from within the representative's own state

General rights of the High Seas (6):

-Freedom of navigation -Freedom of overflight -Freedom of fishing and conservation measures -Freedom to lay submarine cables and pipeline -Freedom to construct artificial islands -Freedom of scientific research

United States v Garcia:

-Garcia and Torres were aboard a Guatemalan registered boat. The Coast Guard seized 2,500 kg of cocaine. -Argues that the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA) (purported to criminalize drug smuggling by foreign nationals on foreign vessels) was beyond Congress' authority. -High Seas Clause pursuant to the MDLEA. -Conviction was affirmed. High Seas Clause grants Congress power to define/punish offenses on the high seas. -Nexus between the US and offense conduct isn't necessary under MDLEA or its predecessor.

United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran case:

-In response to the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979. -A group of armed Iranian students attacked the US Embassy in Tehran overtaking it. The students were motivated by the Iranian Revolution. -Court issued an order of provisional measures which essentially declared that Iran should restore the embassy to the possession of the US.

International conventions regarding human rights include:

-International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of 1965. -Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women of 1979. -Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984. -Convention on the Rights of the Child. -International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. -Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons case:

-Is the threat or use of nuclear weapons in any circumstances permitted under international law? -If the envisaged use of force is unlawful, the stated readiness to use it would be a threat prohibited under Article 2, paragraph 4. -If it is to be lawful, the declared readiness of a State to use of force must be a use of force that is in conformity with the Charter. -Possession of nuclear weapons may justify an inference of preparedness to use them. -Must force be used for particular object to violation article 2(4)? -The threat/use of force is contrary to article 2(4) unless it fails within specific Charter expectations. -Exceptions to Article 2(4): Self-Defense -Inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a member of the UN until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.

Coercive Measures not amounting to Armed Force? (2)

-Retorsions are unfriendly, non-forceful but not illegal, retaliatory actions taken by one state against another in response to actions that are regarded as hostile, unfriendly or not in keeping with the policy aims of the responding states. This type of retaliation can take a variety of forms, such as breaking off trade or diplomatic relations or imposing embargoes on the export or import of goods from or to the offending states. -Reprisals not involving the use of armed force, as a measure of self-help in response to a prior illegal act. Reprisals are acts that if carried out individually would violate international law, but when in response to another state's breach of international law, are ok. Provided the state undertaking the reprisal is correct in its assessment that the other state's prior actions were indeed illegal and provided the reprisal is proportionate to the initial wrongdoing, then the reprisal is not considered unlawful.

Case of Atal Riffo and Daughters v Chile:

-Riffo is a Chilean judge and lesbian mother of 3. After divorcing her husband and coming out, a family court judge gave custody to the father stating Riffo's sexuality threatened her daughter's safety. -Commission admitted the case as it concerned Article 24 of the American Convention concerning equal protection. -Court ruled that sexual orientation was a suspect class and Atala was discriminated due to her sexuality. -She was awarded damages for the case.

What are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (with the Optional Protocol to the Civil and Political Covenant) & the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights?

-Rights of peoples" or group rights: the right of self-determination and the right of all peoples to freely dispose of their natural wealth 14 and reserves. Article 27 also provides that ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities "shall not be denied the right in community with the other members of their own group to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language. Interestingly, neither Covenant includes the right to property included in the Universal Declaration. -Similar to above but deals with the protections states must afford individuals regarding economic, social and cultural rights. Limitations can be seen in Article 2, which requires a state only to "take steps... to the maximum of its available resources... with a view to achieving progressively" the right in the Covenant. Moreover, the state may limit rights "for the purpose of promoting the general welfare in the democratic society."

The Prosecutor v. Aloys Simba case:

-Simba, a retired Hutu lieutenant, colonel and parliament member was charged with various crimes relating to genocide. -Simba was sentenced to 25 years of imprisonment.

Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) Notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970) case:

-South Africa occupied Namibia under claims of the right to annex the territory. They claimed that Namibia's nationals desired South Africa's rule. -A UN Mandate prohibited Member States (to which South Africa is party to) from taking physical control of other territories.

Negusie v Holder case:

-The U.S. adopted the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, which was enacted into law via the Refugee Act of 1980. Under this specific protocol, a foreigner can be given asylum in the U.S. if they have faced persecution or have a well-founded fear of persecution in their home state. Daniel Girmai Neguise, a national of both Eritrea and Ethiopia, was incarcerated in Eritrea in 1994. Following his imprisonment, Neguise was forcefully conscripted into the Eritrean military. -At the outset of war between Ethiopia and Eritrea in 1998, Neguise was conscripted into the military again. Refusing to fight against Ethiopia, Neguise was incarcerated again. He was released following two years of services and was forced to work as a prison guard on rotation for approximately four years. Neguise managed to escape from prison and hid in a container headed towards the U.S. Once he arrived on U.S. soil, Neguise applied for asylum and withholding of removal. Issue -Can a foreign citizen be granted asylum in the U.S. despite their involvement in the persecution of others, given that the individual was forcefully compelled to do so and attempted to aid certain individuals facing persecution? Conclusion -Deciding that the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit made a mistake when they decided that the potential coercion of an individual in the persecution of others was unimportant, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings. Thus, the Court did not answer the question of the case as they decided that the lower courts made an error in their judgment.

Continental Shelf:

-The continental shelf is that submarine area that begins at the shore and ends where the continental shelf slope to the deep seabed begins. -The coastal state has limited obligations in managing the continental shelf and has extensive rights in the resources of the shelf -In the US, control over the continental shelf is divided between the federal government and coastal states of the United States. The US government has paramount rights in and full dominion and power over, the lands, minerals and 28 other things, beyond the low water mark. The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), establishes a federal regulatory system for the resources of the outer continental shelf (generally the area more than three miles from the baseline). The Submerged Lands Act granted states full jurisdiction and rights over the inner continental shelf area, although the US federal government reserves its power to regulate commerce, navigation, defense and international affairs within the inner shelf.

What actions are not considered innocent passage?

-Threat or use of force -Exercise or practice with weapons; -Collecting information that prejudices the defense or security of the coastal state; -Propaganda affecting the defense or security of the coastal state -Aircraft activity -Any activity involving a military device; -Loading and unloading any commodity; -Pollution in contravention of international law; -Fishing; -Research or surveying -Interfering with communications of the coastal state.

Types of international arbitral clauses (3):

-Treaty clauses -Treaty specifically designed to agree on arbitration -"After the fact" arbitral agreements

The Corfu Channel Case (merits):

-Two ships, Saumarez and Volage, mined in Albanian territorial waters. Struck a mine causing substantial damage with British ships, Orion and Superb, being struck by an Albanian battery within the vicinity of Saranda. -Issue: Did Albania have knowledge of minelaying in its territorial waters independently of connivance on its part of the operation? This proof must leave no room for reasonable doubt. -Conclusion: Minelaying couldn't have taken place without the knowledge of the Albanian government. -Albania had an obligation to warn the British vessels ahead of time to prevent potential danger to them. -Based on general and well-recognized principles: elementary considerations of humanity, freedom of maritime communication, and that every state has an obligation to not knowingly allow its territory to be used contrary to other states' rights. -Albania is responsible under international law for the explosions.

Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo case:

-Uganda claimed that the DRC was violating diplomatic immunity. Congolese forces are alleged of carrying out 3 separate attacks on Ugandan Embassy in Kinshasa, confiscating property, a maltreating diplomats and Ugandan nationals. -DRC violated obligations owed to Uganda under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations as a result of its armed forces' attack on the Ugandian Embassy, maltreatment of Ugandan diplomats on Embassy premises, and maltreatment of Ugandan diplomats at Ndjili International Airport. -Failing to come to an agreement between the two parties will permit the Court to settle to an agreement. -The DRC is obligated to make reparations to Uganda for the injuries caused.

Avena and Other Mexican Nationals case:

-United States breached its obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations by not allowing Mexican nationals receive legal representation from the Mexican consulate.

The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees defines refugees as (part 1):

1)be subject or be in fear of prosecution 2) the grounds for persecution must fit. Owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.

Restrictions on labor rights covered by International Human right International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (5):

1. It must be a time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation. 2. The existence of such dire circumstances must be officially proclaimed. 3. Derogation is permitted "only to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation"; 4. The measures may not be "inconsistent with their other obligations under international law;" and 5. The measures may not "involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, color, sex, language, religion or social origins."

Criticism of international criminal tribunals:

1. Local communities rather than the international community should try criminals and pass judgments. 2. The international state system cannot allow a supranational judicial body to have personal jurisdiction over individuals; 3. The international community is not well suited to pass judgment on individuals because it can never properly understand the conflicts that lead to massive human rights disasters and 4. The UN Charter does not permit the creation of criminal courts

Trail Smelter Case:

Facts -A Canadian company dealing in the smelting of zinc and lead was operating in Trail, British Columbia, Canada. The town of Trail is approximately eleven (11) miles upstream from the border of the United States, nearby Washington State. As a result of increased production in the 1930s, fumes produced by the company are alleged to have blown into the United States resulting in damage to property in Washington State. Seeking retribution for property damage, the United States and Canada referred the case to the International Joint Commission. Issue -Does a State have an ongoing duty to protect other States from acts which have the possibility of producing injury to another State within its jurisdiction? Conclusion -Basing their decision on applicable US Supreme Court decisions and principles of international law, the Tribunal found that no State has the right to use or permit the use of its territory in a way which can cause injury as a result of fumes in or to the territory of another State, given the case can result in serious consequences and the damage can be proven clearly and convincingly via evidence. -As a result, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the United States thus placing responsibility on Canada for the company's action. Trail Smelter, the Canadian company, was ordered to refrain from causing further damage to Washington State as a result of fumes as long as Washington's air pollution conditions exist.

Island of Palmas case:

Facts -Both the Netherlands and the US claimed ownership over the Island of Palmas. -US claimed it was part of the Philippines which it won from Spain with the Treaty of Paris (1898) and they had possession from then on. -Netherlands claimed that it had possession since 1677. Rule -A title that is inchoate (undeveloped) cannot prevail over definite title found on the continuous and display of sovereignty. Conclusion -A title that is inchoate cannot prevail over a definite title found on the continuous and peaceful display of sovereignty.

North Sea Continental Shelf Case:

Facts -Denmark and the Netherlands disputed West Germany over the division of the continental shelf Issue - Whether customary international law could be generated by a multilateral treaty (the 1959 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf) to which West Germany was not a party to. Rule -Provision in the treaty had to be 'norm creating' (intended to embody fundamental legal rules rather than merely secondary obligations) -Accompanied by opinio juris and other elements of custom as appropriate. Conclusion -Treaty was secondary which allowed a wide and ill defined set of special circumstances to affect its implementation.

Techt v Hughes case:

Facts -Despite the fact the US and US and Austria were at war, Techt claimed that she was entitled to take property in New York on the basis of the 1848 Treaty between the United States and Austria. Issue -Is the provision inconsistent with national policy or safety in a situation whereby a treaty between belligerents at war has not been denounced? Conclusion -Yes. Court must decide whether the provision involved in a controversy with national policy in a situation where a treaty between belligerents at war has not been denounced. -If a treaty is in force, it implies that it is the supreme law of the land.

United States v Bin Laden case:

Facts -Fifteen foreign nationals were all charged with a multitude of crimes which were terrorist-related offenses including conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals, intent to destruct U.S. buildings and property, as well as to destroy U.S. defense utilities. -In addition to the charges, some of the defendants were charged with various other crimes which were suspected to be in connection with the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998. Additionally, one defendant was charged with multiple counts of perjury and false statements. -The defendant Mohamed Sadeek Odeh, with several other defendants in agreeance, filed a motion to dismiss many of the counts arguing a lack of jurisdiction. Issue -Does the statutes passed by Congress permit the regulation of conduct outside of United States territory and, if so, do these statutes apply to foreign nationals in addition to U.S. nationals? Rule -Odeh argues that many of the counts in the Indictment must be dismissed as they are based on U.S. statutes which would be inapplicable to the charges he has been alleged of committing. Citing the Bowman v. United States case, Odeh argues that, while the U.S. statues may apply outside U.S. territory, they are not to be applied to foreign nationals. Conclusion -After concluding that the U.S. does have the jurisdiction to monitor conduct of non-U.S. nationals outside of U.S. territory under both the Bowman rule and the protective principle, the Court cannot find that the arguments advanced by the defendant, Odeh, have grounds in Court. As a result of the apparent contradiction between Odeh's argument and the various cited cases/statutes, the Court ruled against Odeh with the defendant's convictions eventually being affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project case:

Facts -Hungary claimed that Czechoslovakia violated provisions in a treaty when Czech appropriated the waters of the Danube River to construct a dam. Rule -Watercourse states shall participate in the use, development and protection of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner. Issue -Shall watercourse states participate in the use, development, and protection of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner? Conclusion -Yes. They shall participate in the use, development and protection of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner. -Hungary was deprived of its right to an equitable and reasonable share of the natural resources of the Danube by Czech.

Nottebohm Case:

Facts -Nottebohn, a German citizen, applied for Liechtenstien citizenship a month after the start of WW2. -He had lived in Guatemala, however, for 34 years. Rule -When nationality can be conferred as a device, nationality can be disregarded by other states. Conclusion -Issues in regards to citizenship are the concern solely of the granting nation. -The change of Nottebohm's nationality was used merely as a tool and Guatemala was not forced to recognize it.

Nationality of Vessels:

Generally, there are three basic principles that govern the nationality of vessels and freedom of the sea. -A ship of any state can navigate the oceans freely. -The state of a ship's nationality has exclusive jurisdiction over the ship on the high seas. -No other state can exercise jurisdiction over that ship absent some affirmative rule authorizing concurrent jurisdiction.

Define International Human Rights Law:

One of the major sub-disciplines and fields of public international law, international human rights law refers to the rules that govern the treatment and rights afforded to all humans on the international stage. Can be traced back as far as the Peace of Westphalia. Argues that there are certain duties that all states must afford those within its territory, including to those who are not its citizens.

Abdullahi v. Pfizer case:

Facts -Pfizer Inc sent a team of doctors to Nigeria and recruited about 200 children to get treatment for bacterial meningitis. -They administered Trovan to half of the children and Ceftriaxone to the other. -Pfizer was allegedly aware of the various health risks but failed to mention them to the parents. -The doctors then left without administering follow-up care. Issue -Does the case brought by the appellants comply with subject matter jurisdiction under the Alien Torts Claims Act? Rule -In order to determine if the case lacks jurisdiction under the Alien Torts Claims Act, the Court had to determine if there were inadequate international customary law and/or norms which suggested that informed consent on behalf of participants in medical research is required. -In determining if there is sufficient international customary law, it needs to be clear that the custom/norm is universal, specific and definable, and displays mutual concern. Application -the appellants argued that Pfizer deliberately violated international customary law when it did not communicate the extent of the medical research to guardians of the patients. -Furthermore, this international customary law/norm regarding medical research is proven by the Court to be universal as it is specific, focused, and generally accepted among various states internationally. Conclusion -The Court reversed the judgements of the district court and remanded the case finding that there was enough customary international law regarding the explicit consent of patients prior to participating in medical research

Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory case:

Facts -UN objected to the construction of a wall in which Israel put up on the Palestinian territory. Issue -Did Israel contravene international law, the 4th Geneva Convention of 1949, the Hague Convention, relevant Security Council, and General Assembly resolutions when it constructed the wall? Conclusion -Yes. Israel impacted the liberty of movement of the occupied territory with the exception of Israelis. -Israel and the Palestinians have an obligation to observe the rules of international humanitarian law.

United States v. Aluminum Co of America case:

Facts -US brought a case against the Canadian company Aluminum Co. of America on the claims that they contravened the Sherman Act by the participation of each company in a foreign cartel called the Alliance. Rule -Any state can impose liabilities on persons for participating in conduct outside of its borders which may have consequences within its borders. Conclusion -Under the Sherman Act, agreements within Alliance in 1931 and 1936 would be unlawful had they been made within the US. -The 1936 agreement violated the Sherman Act as the Sherman Acts purpose was that all factors that contribute to determining prices must be kept free to operate unhampered by agreements.

Wildenhus' Case:

Facts -Wildenhus (a Belgian national) was arrested in New Jersey for killing another Belgian national aboard a Belgian vessel while moored in Jersey City. -Belgian consul sought to have him released to Belgian authorities. Issue -Does the sovereignty of the flag ship deal with disorders which disturbs the peace of the ship only? Do local authorities have jurisdiction to punish those who disturb public peace? Conclusion -Yes. Felonious homicide is subject to local jurisdiction as it disturbs the public peace. The consul does not have a right to interfere if authorities are proceeding with the case in a regular way.

United States v Conroy, United States v Walker:

Facts: Larson Budal, A Danish Citizen who was living in US had been an informer for several months, and had worked on other cases. He was paid $200 by the DEA. Budal along with Schubert and Convoy formulated plan to smuggle a boatload of marijuana from Jamaica. During the time Budal was in constant communication with a DEA agent. Budal goes to fort Lauderdale to meet the defendant who has bought a boat. Budal had a electronic detection device on him which with a press of a button would let the agent know when the boat was loaded. Budal had concealed one in the engine and one in the air vent on the boat or the vessel. The agent who was waiting for the vessel sighted her and tried to communicate with her to heave to. But they didn't stop the vessel and went straight into the Haitian waters. They got an approval from the Haitian chief of staff to search the vessel and stop her—which it did. The agent found 7000 pounds of marijuana The defendants claimed that the electronic devices were illegal and the search was unreasonable and warrantless and that it violated their constitutional right Question: was the search valid? And was their 4thamendment rights violated. Opinion: Fourth amendment extends to beyond the people in US. US's only has jurisdiction to the high seas Waters over which the US has jurisdiction was not intended to be restrictive and that the Coast Guard has implicit authority to search an American vessel in foreign water even in the absent of express statutory authority Congress intended for the Coast Guard to have the authority to stop and search American vessels on foreign waters and the high seas an in territorial waters. -Article 16(1) gives coastal states the right to take necessary steps in its territorial sea to prevent illegal acts. -Defendant can't claim that the seizure of their vessel in Haitian waters was illegal because permission was obtained from the foreign government.

Explain liberal approaches to international law:

Focused on legal institutions and what ins

How is "peoples" defined?

For a group to be characterized as a "people" there must exist the proper objective and subjective elements. The objective element is the existence of an ethnic group linked by some common history. The common history is often, but not always, expressed by a common language, religion or territory. The subjective element is the group's own identification of itself as a "people." The group maintains the desire to live together and uphold common traditions.

Knab v. Republic of Georgia:

Makharadze, the defendant, was undisputedly a diplomat of the Republic of Georgia. In January, 1997, he caused a car accident that resulted the death of one person and injuries to several. The US requested that Georgia waive Makharadze's diplomatic immunity to be tried for causing the accident. No civil liability was discussed, but Georgia waived his immunity to be tried for his crimes concerning the accident in January 1997. The plaintiff is the personal representative of the woman who was killed in the accident; he is attempted to pursue civil charges for damages resulting from her death. (4) Procedure- After Makharadze plead guilty to the criminal charges, Knab served the complaint to bring civil charges. (5) Issues or Issues- Does Makharadze have civil immunity? A) Did Georgia's waiver of rights include civil immunity? B) Was the defendant acting in an official capacity at the time of the accident? (6) Rules- The State Department will not ask for a waiver of diplomatic immunity for civil cases, but notes that if the defendant was not serving in an official capacity at the time of the accident, civil charges may be pursued. According to Art. 32 of the Vienna Convention, a waiver of rights must be "express." Art. 39 of the Convention allows for residual immunity for actions that took place while serving a diplomatic function, even after than function has been terminated. (7) Application- Since Georgia's waiver was in response to the request from the state department which dealt only with criminal issues, it cannot be considered to have expressly waived civil immunity. Under art. 39, the defendant still has immunity from civil liability for the accident of January 1997 because he was acting in an official capacity at the time, even though at the time of the suit, his diplomatic status has been terminated. (8) Conclusion/Decision- Yes, he has civil immunity in this case. Georgia's waiver of criminal immunity did not cover civil immunity. The defendant was in fact acting in an official capacity as a diplomat at the time of the accident.

This doctrine is the view that international Law and municipal law are actually interrelated parts of one overarching legal system:

Monism (similar to natural law)

This convention defines the legal requirement for the existence of a state

Montevideo Convention

Only states possess international rights and duties, therefore no other entities are entitled or capable of possessing international legal rights and obligations. This principle is consistent with:

Montevido Convention

Worker/Employment Rights with regards to international law:

NOT A LOT. international labour union do most of the work.

For this jurisdiction to be asserted over a citizen, there must be a 'genuine connection' between the person and the state which seeks to exercise that jurisdiction. This jurisdiction also allows the state to assert control and sovereignty over ships and aircrafts that are registered to it and fly its flag:

Nationality Principle

This approach to international relations theory emphasizes that while states may operate for rational self-interest, they are capable of forging cooperative organizations and institutions to mitigate the consequences of anarchy and promote peace, interdependence and positive sum outcomes:

Neo-Liberalism

This structural approach to international relations theory focuses on the distribution of power within the international system as shaping the competition among rival, self-interested states. Rivals within this field emphasize that state may be power-maximizers or security seekers:

Neorealism

This case is noted for the possibility that a multilateral treaty could create customary international law (although it didn't in that particular case):

North Sea Continental Shelf Case

This case suggests that for individuals to claim nationality under international law, the state defending nationality needs to establish more than mere legal relationship but a more substantial relationship of "genuine connection" with that individual:

Nottebohm Case

This approach to the acquisition of territory is similar to the common law idea of adverse possession, by which the effective display of authority over a territory transfers sovereignty over that territory from another state that has failed to assert its own authority over that territory:

Occupation

What is the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees?

Offers international protection to refugees and seek durable solutions for refugees or their integration with new communities. It is a non-political position operating in accordance with humanitarian and social needs.

Corfu Channel Case (non-merits):

On the 15th of May, 1946, two British cruisers, the Orion and the Superb were passing through the North Corfu Channel, and were fired upon by an Albanian battery in the area of Saranda. The Albanian government argued that the strait were the territorial waters of Albania, and that any foreign warship or merchant vessel could not pass through without prior permission from Albania. The case was before the I.C.J. as a result of a claim filed by the United Kingdom. The questions before the court were 1) Is the North Corfu Channel an "international highway" or is it a route of secondary importance, and 2) if the North Corfu Channel is an "international highway," can passage through it be prohibited by a coastal state in peacetime? The court, relying on customary international law, stated that it is a right of states and merchants to send their vessels through straits used for international navigation between two parts of the high seas, even without prior authorization of the respective coastal states. This was as long as the passage in question was of innocent nature. The court relied on a geographical test to determine the value of the strait. The court held that even though an alternative route existed, the British passage was innocent in nature and the strait in question had the potential to be used for international navigation as it connected the high seas; as such, it qualified as an "international highway," and aggression by the coastal state was unwarranted.

Reference re Secession of Quebec case:

Quebec wanted to secede from Canada. (4) Procedure- The case was brought to the Supreme Court on the request of the Governor in Council. (5) Issues or Issues- 1. Under the Canadian Constitution, can Quebec secede? 2. Does international law give Quebec the right to self-determination? 3. In the event of a conflict between domestic and international law, which takes precedence in Canada? (6) Rules- International law does not specifically grant a right to secession but it does not specifically prohibit it. It does grant a 'people' the right to self-determination. Self-determination usually take shape in the form of internal self-determination, in which a people goes through the existing channels within their state. External self-determination may be appropriate when the people is being oppressed or the said channels within the state are being blocked (7) Application- The people of Quebec can in no way be considered oppressed by the government; neither are they subject to foreign rule or colonialism. Thus, they have no right to self determination. (8) Conclusion/Decision- 1. Under the Canadian constitution, there is no right to secession. 2. No, international law does not give Quebec the right to self-determination through secession secession. 3. There is no conflict to be addressed here. Quebec may still declare independence, though the success of the new state would be determined by the legitimacy given to it through the recognition of the international community, which may or may not be given.

Legality of the Threat of the Use of Nuclear Weapons case:

Question -Is the threat/use of nuclear weapons in any circumstances permitted under international law? -Are obligations stemming from treaties applicable to be obligations of total restraint during military conflict? Finding -Unique destructive capacity of nuclear weapons must be taken into account in examining the relevant law. -The environment is under daily threat and nuclear weapons may constitute a catastrophe for the environment. -States must take environmental considerations into account when assessing what is necessary and proportionate in the pursuit of legitimate military objectives. As seen in Principle 24 of the Rio Declaration and Article 36, paragraph 2 and 55 of Additional Protocol I.

This approach to international relations emphasizes the competition among self-interested states led by calculating elites who are concerned with relative gains and who utilized rational calculations based on economic and military power to survive in a global anarchy:

Realism

The theory of International Relations is divided by three main schools (Realism, Liberalism and Constructivism) while International law is divided largely into two dominant schools (Positivism and Natural Law). How do each of the main theories of international explain the role and significance of international law? How do the different schools of international law account for the creation of international law?

Realism in the scope of international relations sees the law as not very consequential. The realist point of view argues that the law will only be consequential if the powerful want the law to be. What matter most is the distribution of power not the rules of law directly. Realism sees the creation of international law as a way for powerful countries to subordinate peripheral states. Liberalism sees the law as another international institution that rationally self interested states create to promote peace among the democratic international community. Constructivism views international law as a social construct developed by states that helps further construct an ideal society. Positivism argues that laws should be pragmatic and observed empirically to fit the modern world and its problems (what is the law); contrastingly, natural law argues that the law should resemble what ought to be and that ethical and societal standards should all be accounted for in the development of law. International Law was created for the purpose of promoting peaceful dispute resolution in the international community, and the divide between the two major schools of international law is reflected in the divide over what the goals of international law should be.

This case suggests/allows for inter-governmental organizations to have the rights and obligations of a legal personality, departing from the tradition of legal personality on the international stage belonging solely to states:

Reparations for Injuries Suffered in the Services of the United Nations Case

If land is occupied by no sovereign actor, not claimed by any state, such that no state owns the territory, and perhaps the land is newly discovered, the territory is often referred to as:

Res nullius

The Charter of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg Limitations on the Methods of warfare:

Restrictions on conduct of warfare cover types of weaponry (such as the prohibition against the use of poisonous gas and chemical weapons) and tactics (false surrenders) there are also prohibitions on extending warfare to neutral states or demilitarized zones.

Define Human Rights:

Rights that are inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more.

These are the rules that allow for the creation, extinction and alteration of primary rules:

Secondary Rules

What level of armed force gives rise to the right of self-defense?

See Nicaragua case: Nicaragua charged that the US was dropping off mines and training an rebel army in neighboring Honduras. The US tried to justify its action as a case of self-defense on behalf of El Salvatore from insurgent forces supported by Nicaragua. In review, the ICJ recognized that the nature of an armed attack must be more than an action of the regular armed forces across a border but could include armed bands and other irregular forces but was willing to go further to acknowledge that the provisioning of weapons or logistical support could rise to an armed attack, an illegal use of force an intervention into the internal and external affairs of other states. But the Court also found that the followed that the level of assistance sent and received and not reached a point of any significance, and so did not rise to the level of an armed attack. Thus it seems low-level use of force or less grave uses of force that do not constitute an armed attack and therefore do not give rise to a right of self-defense under Article 51 from more grave or higher level use of force.

Define the rights of peoples to self-determination:

Self-determination is the right of peoples in a territory to decide the political and legal status of that territory.

Possible customary international law regarding human rights:

Since 1948, there has been an argument that many of the provisions have become binding as a new rule of customary international law. Those finding a legal obligation point to a 1968 UN Resolution proclaiming the Declarations to constitute "an obligation for members of the international community." It should also be noted that most human rights documents contain exceptions to the protections provided as necessary to maintain public order and preserve the security of the state. Accordingly, the Universal Declaration allows limitations "for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society."

Law of the Seas protections of the environment:

States are under general obligations to preserve environment; codified in Stockholm Declaration

Concept of State Responsibility:

Under national law, many governmental officials, such as heads of state , prime ministers, foreign ministers and ambassadors enjoy immunity from prosecution in foreign states. The ICJ has implied that such immunity was required by customary international law in the Arrest Warrant 11 April 2000 case. Sovereign states also enjoy broad measures of immunity in foreign national courts for governmental activities but not for commercial activities. High government officials can, however, be prosecuted in their own national courts, provided that legislation or judicial decisions permit tis. Similarly, a state may choose to allow its own citizens to sue their government in the state's own courts, provided this is permitted. High government officials can, however be prosecuted in international and hybrid courts provided the statute governing the particular court makes it clear that such persons are not immune from prosecution.

This international agreement entered into by sovereign states actually governs the behavior of private and public firms engaged in global and transnational commerce:

United Nations Convention on the Sale of Goods

Pirates be careful of this principle of jurisdiction because if a country catches you, you are probably hung! Slavers and war criminals also need to take care not to be caught. This principle is that there are criminal offenses so serious that they are subject to the jurisdiction of all states:

Universality Principle

This international agreement was meant to unify the customary law of treaties under one convention and to expand the law on treaties to make treaty construction clearer and easier:

Vienna Convention on Treaties