Exam 3 Review

Air Waves

A different use of airspace involves wireless transmission into the state's airspace and perhaps through it. In 1927, a conference in Washington D.C. resulted in the International Radio convention, signed by representatives of 78 governments. It expanded controls and required private radio stations to obtain government licenses and provided for the use and allocation of radio frequencies and types of transmitters permitted. Many states sought to maintain strict controls over telecommunications through state monopolies. With rapid changes occurring in technology during this period, telecommunications quickly expanded in scope and sophistication. The Madrid telecommunications Convention of 1932 created a new international agency, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). It was given control of all varieties of telecommunications. I developed a separate set of regulations to govern each mode of communication and has convened a number of conferences to discuss common problems. As the power of transmitters increased, states and others recognized the potential for propaganda, both in terms of supporting domestic regimes and as a relatively low-cost foreign policy option. Among the basic regulations adopted by the ITU was the requirement that all radio stations must be operate din such a manner that avoided interference with the communications services of all contracting governments or agencies authorized by them. the real question revolves around the right of a state to "invade" the "airwaves" of other states, deliberately or not. Jamming in this case could be considered a legitimate right of self-defense. Pirate Broadcasting: In 1958, privately owned radio stations, located on vessels anchored or sailing outside the territorial sea or established on artificial islands beyond territorial jurisdictions, began broadcasting into the territory of states whose governments did not permit, or controlled rigorously, the transmission of commercial advertising. The ITU rules prohibited such commercial broadcasting from international waters, but the responsibility for enforcement rested on the country in which the vessel in question was registered. UNCLOS III contained several provisions that gave states the right to close down stations. the phenomenon disappeared as states liberalized domestic laws and began to license private stations.

Fixed Exchange

A fixed exchange rate, also known as a pegged rate is set and maintained by the central bank. The central bank links its currency to another country's currency making it so that the rate will not change. Most often countries peg their rate to the U.S. dollar, but it can also be seen pegged to the euro, the yen or a basket of currencies. In order for countries to maintain the value of their currency at the official level, the central bank must intervene by keeping a high level of foreign reserves. The central bank uses these funds to adjust to fluctuations in the market. The central bank possesses the power to release or absorb funds into or out of the market and maintaining the right amount of foreign reserves is the key to managing this power. Pros Enable the currency's value to remain stable Can help lower inflation which encourages investment The Central Bank has the power to maintain rate Cons Central bank must intervene often Country loses monetary independence Can be expensive to maintain

Internal Waters

A state has an exclusive right to exploit and control those areas designated as internal waters. The include ports, harbors, and all navigable waterways (rivers, lakes, and canals.) In theory, a coastal state ahs the right to refuse entry to its internal waters to any ship except on one distress. The important questions normally involve the status of ships once in port. For merchant ships, a right of entry is presumed unless a state has expressly indicated otherwise. A state has the right to assert territorial jurisdiction over all private ships docked or moored there, meaning that it may enforce its laws in full if it chooses to do so. In practice, pragmatic concerns tend to limit the willingness of the port state to assert its authority to only the most serious crimes. In summary, for many reasons, including expedience, a port state may choose not to exercise its full jurisdictional rights over ships within internal waters. But that decision still remains within the discretion of the port state. 1. First, treaties may apply, particularly among or between states, with strong commercial ties that generate large volumes of maritime contact. 2. Second, as a matter of customary law, except under extraordinary circumstances, a port state does not have the right to interfere in the internal operation of the ship. 3. Third, a state does not have to permit a warship entry (unless in distress), but once docked, a warship has absolute immunity from civil and criminal jurisdiction in that port. Warship and crew are expected to obey the rules and regulations of the port state while visiting. If asked to leave by state authorities, a warship must do so. Ships in Distress: This is customary law of the sea. Ships in genuine distress are exempt from duties, fees, and customs regulations that otherwise may have applied. Contemporary issues of refuge have centered on the issue of the right of a state to refuse entry if by granting entry to the ship, the state might suffer damage. The International Maritime Organization developed guidelines for this. The guidelines make granting access to a place of refuge a political decision that can be taken only on a case-by-case basis. Gulfs and Bays: If the distance between the headlands of a bay or gulf is less than 24 miles, a state may claim the area as internal waters. If the distance between the headlands exceeds 24 miles, states may draw a straight baseline of 24 miles within the bay to enclose the maximum amount of water possible with a line of that length. Controversies arise here over claims base upon historic status to bays and gulfs that fall outside of these rules of delimitation. The Gulf of Sidra: In early 1986, the United States and Libya clashed over Libyan claims to the Guld of Sidra as a historic body of water belonging exclusively to Libya. The United States and other countries rejected the claim because (1) the baseline exceeded current standards by more than 12 times the permissible length (24 nautical miles); (2) Libya had not claimed jurisdiction beyond territorial waters prior to 1973, thus putting the "historic" claim into doubt; (3) Libya had failed to exercise effective jurisdiction over the gulf; and (4) the international community had not recognized, or acquiesced to, the Libyan claim of historic possession. The U.S. sent a naval task force across the Libyan baseline and while damage was minimal on both sides, the U.S. action had the effect of emphasizing the lack of international recognition for the claim.

Arbitration v. Litigation

Adjudication is a formal legal process, typically used in court, where a judge or panel of judges renders a decision based on the evidence presented. Arbitration, on the other hand, is a form of alternative dispute resolution, where a neutral third party (the arbitrator) makes a binding decision.

Geneva Conventions

Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field: The First Geneva Convention protects soldiers who are hors de combat (out of the battle). The 10 articles of the original 1864 version of the Convention have been expanded in the First Geneva Convention of 1949 to 64 articles that protect— • Wounded and sick soldiers. • Medical personnel, facilities, and equipment. • Wounded and sick civilian support personnel accompanying the armed forces. • Military chaplains. • Civilians who spontaneously take up arms to repel an invasion. The wounded and sick shall be respected and protected without discrimination on the basis of sex, race, nationality, religion, political beliefs or other criteria. &The wounded and sick shall not be murdered, exterminated or subjected to torture or biological experiments. The wounded and sick shall receive adequate care. The wounded and sick shall be protected against pillage and ill treatment. All parties in a conflict must search for and collect the wounded and sick, especially after battle, and provide the information concerning them to the Central Tracing and Protection Agency of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members in Armed Forces at Sea: The Second Geneva Convention adapts the protections of the First Geneva Convention to reflect conditions at sea. It protects wounded and sick combatants while on board ship or at sea. Its 63 articles apply to— Armed forces members who are wounded, sick, or shipwrecked. • Hospital ships and medical personnel. • Civilians who accompany the armed forces. (The Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949) The Third Geneva Convention sets out specific rules for the treatment of prisoners of war (POWs). The Convention's 143 articles require that POWs be treated humanely, adequately housed, and receive sufficient food, clothing, and medical care. Its provisions also establish guidelines on labor, discipline, recreation, and criminal trial. Prisoners of war may include— • Members of the armed forces. • Volunteer militia, including resistance movements. • Civilians accompanying the armed forces Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War: Civilians in areas of armed conflict and occupied territories are protected by the 159 articles of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Conflict (AP I): Protocol I expands protection for the civilian population as well as military and civilian medical workers in international armed conflicts. Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Conflict (AP II): Protocol II elaborates on protections for victims caught up in high-intensity internal conflicts such as civil wars. It does not apply to such internal disturbances as riots, demonstrations, and isolated acts of violence. Protocol II expands and complements the non-international protections contained in Article 3 common to all four Geneva Conventions of 1949.

Anticipatory and Preemptive

Anticipatory and preemptive defense exist. Many debates center on the claim that states have a right to ancticipatory action in self-defense. Anticipatory self-defense depends upon the nature of the contingencies addressed. Anticipatory self-defense depends upon a "palpable and imminent threat" in the sense of Webster's definition. Preemptive self-defense moves the nature of the contingency back from imminent and threating to "an incident development contingency back from imminent and threating to "an incipient development that is not yet operational...but permitted to mature could then be neutralized only at a high and possibly unacceptable cost." The US has claimed the right to engage in preemptive. President Clinton and British Prime Minister Blair used it implicitly in their justification of the continued action to keep Iraqi military capabilities at relatively low levels.

International Whaling Commission

As one of the first international organizations set up with a conservation mission, the IWRC had the formal mission to provide "for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry." The politics surround the history of it illustrate the dilemmas associated with developing "hard law" standards for many perceived environmental threats. Some states have continued commercial whaling under the loophole that permits killing whales for scientific purposes. The key to the convention is the Schedule, which protects some specifies, sets limits on catches, establishes sanctuaries, etc. Any amendments to it must be based on scientific findings. The decision to declare a moratorium on commercial whaling began in 1986. The IWRC Scientific Committee developed a Revised Management Program. The IWRC does not mandate compulsory arbitration proceedings,, but all parties accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court. In a suit brought against Japan by Australia, the Court ruled that the objectives outlined did not justify the scale of lethal taking and violated the moratorium on commercial whaling, but parts of the program could be road characterized as scientific research. No state has acted totally in "bad faith."

Tragedy of the Commons

Atmospheric pollution, global warming, marine pollution, ozone depletion, disposal of radioactive and other hazardous wastes, and questions of conservation and management o wildlife and fish stocks are problems that states have in common, but none can solve by itself. Modern concerns embody not only potential transboundary problems but also more general threats to the atmosphere and global commons. From the beginning, many organizations operating at different levels have played significant roles in developing international environmental policy. In analyzing the impact and importance of the Stockholm Conference (1972), two prominent political scientists concisely summarized many of the issues touched on in the receding discussion that still have resonance for contemporary efforts: "Environment" as an issue has no simply bounds. To be concerned with assessing the impact of scientific and technological developments on the environment requires being concerned with the full array of issues affecting civilizations, from disposal of waste...to the calculation of the real costs of economic growth...Inevitably, as i=international institutions develop their concern and capacity for analyzing environmental impact issues, they will find themselves involved in many questions touching on major political, economic, and social problems. As with human rights, the diversity of efforts has resulted in fragmentation that has often resulted in a lack of coordination among organizations working on similar problems. At the international level, the growth in the number of specialized organizations means that individuals and organizations need to spend increasing amounts of energy and resources in simply keeping abreast of research and other activities in the same area of interest. Four guiding principles have emerged in instruments: 1. Consultation and cooperation on issues that might affect others. 2. Precaution or prudence--avoidance of policies that could adversely affect the environment. 3. Good neighbors--the extension of precaution to avoidance of policies that may have adverse joint effects. 4. Intergenerational equity--the duty to preserve the environment for the future. Because many of the issues here do have direct economic consequences, the incentives to maximize or preserve short-run benefits because of the perceived cost of long-run gains have real, not theoretical, impacts on government calculations. Environmental law uses science to predict and regulate the conseuquences of humna behavior on natural phenomena.

Bretton Woods System

Bretton Woods System International Monetary Fund International Band of Reconstruction and Development(World Bank) Fixed Gold Standard Floating Exchange Rate As mentioned above, 44 allied nations met in Bretton Woods, NH in 1944 for the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference. At that time, the world economy was very shaky, and the allied nations sought to meet to discuss and find a solution for the prevailing issues that plagued currency exchange. The summit was also looking for policies and regulations that would maximize the potential benefits and profits that could be derived from the global trading system. What resulted from the conference were the Bretton Woods Agreement and the Bretton Woods System. The Bretton Woods System is a set of unified rules and policies that provided the framework necessary to create fixed international currency exchange rates. Essentially, the agreement called for the newly created IMF to determine the fixed rate of exchange for currencies around the world. Every represented country assumed the responsibility of upholding the exchange rate, with incredibly narrow margins above and below. Countries struggling to stay within the window of the fixed exchange rate could petition the IMF for a rate adjustment, which all allied countries would then be responsible for following. The 730 delegates at Bretton Woods agreed to establish two new institutions. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) would monitor exchange rates and lend reserve currencies to nations with balance-of-payments deficits. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, now known as the World Bank Group, was responsible for providing financial assistance for the reconstruction after World War II and the economic development of less developed countries. The system was depended on and was used heavily until the beginning of the 1970s. Backing currency by the gold standard started to become a serious problem throughout the late 1960s. By 1971, the issue was so bad that US President Richard Nixon gave notification that the ability to convert the dollar to gold was being suspended "temporarily." The move was inevitably the final straw for the system and the agreement that outlined it. Still, there were several attempts by representatives, financial leaders, and governmental bodies to revive the system and keep the currency exchange rate fixed. However, by 1973, nearly all major currencies had begun to float relatively toward one another, and the entire system eventually collapsed.

War Crime Tribunals

Criminal Law and Domestic Courts Universal Jurisdiction International Criminal Court (2002) Statute of Rome Genocide Crimes Against Humanity War Crimes - United States Crimes of Aggression - United States Torture (Non-War Crime) UNCAT Requirements Public Official Not Intensity or Duration UNCAT Duties Investigate Enact Legislation Grant Universal Jurisdiction International Criminal Court International Court of Individual Criminal Behavior Rome Statute Signed 1998 Entered into Force 2002 China, Russia and US Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes and Aggression* Concurrent Jurisdiction No Immunity International Criminal Court 18 Judges 9 Year Staggered Terms Political Consequences 30 Cases 10 Convictions 4 Acquittals Remaining Ongoing Bias

Rules for Prisoners of War

Customary Law - *Equal Treatment *Immune for Domestic Prosecution *Repatriation *Rules for Confinement *No Torture *Removal from Combat Zone

Incendiary Weapons:

Devices designed to burn at extremely high temperatures, such as napalm and white phosphorus; mostly designed to be used against equipment, though some (e.g. napalm) are designed to be used against people.

Hijacking

Hijacking is the forcible seizure of aircraft. The motivations behind air hijackings vary. In some instances, individuals either harbor some grudge against their own government or have other personal reasons for wishing to leave their country of residence and to go to another place. Ransom for the plane and passengers may play a major role, either for the hijacker's personal enrichment or to finance some underground or rebel movement. Aircraft have been hijacked as a lever for bringing about the release of certain political prisoners or to draw attention to a political or social cause. In some other instances, they are caused by the desire of an individual or small groups to escape from a regime that is objectionable to them. During the early period of modern air jackings, those guilty of the acts in question pleaded for asylum on the grounds that they were political offenders. While that held true in many cases, the danger to everyone else was of a higher proportion. It has become gradually accepted that the dangers posed to property as well as to innocent people should not be overshadowed by real or alleged political aspects. The Convention of Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft was signed in 1963 and dealt briefly with the possibility of skyjacking. The ICAO drafted another convention specifically aimed at skyjacking: the 1970 Hauge Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft in 1970. That convention gives states parties a grant of universal jurisdiction over the crimes defined in the treaty. It specifically gives concurrent jurisdiction to the state or registration as well as to any state where the aircraft may land with the offender(s) still aboard. If a state party apprehends a perpetrator, the treaty requires authorities to extradite or ty the person. Aircraft hijacking will be added as an offense to all existing extradition treaties and is to be included as an offense under any future extradition treaties. The Hague instrument made air hijacking a distinct separate crime and gave the receiving state no real discretion on the issue of prosecution of a hijacker. It excluded motivation from consideration. The 1971 Diplomatic Conference on Air Law in Montreal concluded the Montreal Convention to Discourage Acts of violence Against Civil Aviation which agreed that hijackers could be tried if found in the territory of a state other than the state in which the aircraft in question had been registered. The record of the UN in dealing with air hijacking has been less than impressive over the years. It adopted resolutions over the years that declared it wanted to stop hijacking, but these did not have great effects on the issue. A resolution following a renewed outbreak of hijacking was adopted in 1979. An amendment to is stressed the concept of national sovereignty. It implied that the 1977 West German rescue of crew and passengers of a hijacked Lufthansa craft in Somalia was acceptable, in view of Somalia's approval of the action to be taken, whereas Israel's 1976 rescue of hostages from Entebbe in Uganda was not acceptable in view of Ugandan opposition. The failure of international agencies to develop effective measures aimed at air hijackers resulted in regional, bilateral, and unilateral plans of action. On a unilateral basis, country after country has amended its domestic legislation to provide for the trial and punishment of air hijackers. Unusual Hijackings with Special Legal Implications: Several cases of hijacking provided unusual and interesting problems, as well as unorthodox solutions, in the sphere of international law. In the famous episode referred to as the Entebbe Raid, problems raised were debated, unsuccessfully, before the UN Security Council. Palestinian Liberation organization terrorists seized an Air France plane and demanded the release of over 150 terrorists in exchange. They landed in the Entebbe Airport, and Uganda appeared to have done nothing. An Israeli military commando unit liberated the surviving hostages. Two draft resolutions were introduced in the Security Council: One by Tanzania, Libya, and Benin condemning Israel for violating the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Uganda; the other by the UK and the US condemned hijacking but affirmed the need to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all states. The frequency of major hijackings of aircraft declined sharply in the 1990s. Aerial Intrusions: Under the doctrine of exclusive sovereignty over the national airspace, authorities may adopt one of several actins when a foreign aircraft intrudes into that space without permission: they may ignore the intruder; they may attempt (in the event of a landing) to exercise administrative and possibly judicial authority over the craft and its occupants; they may attempt to destroy the craft after intrusion has become a fact; or they may attempt to force the craft to leave the sovereign's airspace, change course , or land in a designated area. The procedures just outlined do not make a distinction between military and civilian planes. Driven by Cold War concerns, major disputes over aerial intrusion surfaced soon after the end of WWII. Rights of Distress: The right to penetrate national airspace and to land on national territory in the event of distress or unfavorable weather conditions has been generally accepted and is based on analogous rights of vessels in distress. National regulations govern the rights of aircraft in this category of intrusion into the national airspace. In March 1992, 25 states signed a Treaty on Open Skies. This unusual agreement permits surveillance flights over North America, Europe, and the former Soviet Union to ensure compliance with arms control agreements. It established an annual quota of overflights for each country. Satellites: The development of both reconnaissance satellites and digital photography has rendered long-range overflights by manned aircraft somewhat obsolete. any countries believe satellites have to be tolerated.

Commission on Human Rights

In 1948, the UN established the HRC under the ECOSOC as the mechanism to develop human rights programs. It is composed of 53 members, elected from as many member states. Because of its composition and elective status, the commission was a highly political body. In April 2006, the GA replaced the commission with a new Human Rights Council. It consists of 47 member states. The resolution mandated an "equitable geographical distribution." It has not measurably improved performance. The egd ensures, for the moment, that membership contains a high proportion of autocratic governments. Council members tend to vote in blocs rather than as measured responses to individual issues. The use of special rapporteurs (or investigators) has been one of the main methods used by the HRC as well as its processor.

Stockholm Conference

In analyzing the impact and importance of the Stockholm Conference (1972), two prominent political scientists concisely summarized many of the issues touched on in the receding discussion that still have resonance for contemporary efforts: "Environment" as an issue has no simply bounds. To be concerned with assessing the impact of scientific and technological developments on the environment requires being concerned with the full array of issues affecting civilizations, from disposal of waste...to the calculation of the real costs of economic growth...Inevitably, as i=international institutions develop their concern and capacity for analyzing environmental impact issues, they will find themselves involved in many questions touching on major political, economic, and social problems. As with human rights, the diversity of efforts has resulted in fragmentation that has often resulted in a lack of coordination among organizations working on similar problems. At the international level, the growth in the number of specialized organizations means that individuals and organizations need to spend increasing amounts of energy and resources in simply keeping abreast of research and other activities in the same area of interest. Four guiding principles have emerged in instruments: 1. Consultation and cooperation on issues that might affect others. 2. Precaution or prudence--avoidance of policies that could adversely affect the environment. 3. Good neighbors--the extension of precaution to avoidance of policies that may have adverse joint effects. 4. Intergenerational equity--the duty to preserve the environment for the future. The 1972 Stockholm conference produced the Declaration of the UN Conference on the Human Environment and provided the impetus for the UN Environmental Program by the UN GA. While the declaration itself contains no standards, it mentions several specific forms of potential damage states have a duty to address and states 3 general legal principles as guides for future development: 1. All humans have a "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. Also, individuals are responsible for protecting and improving an environment for future generations. 2. States shall cooperate to develop further the international law regarding environmental damage. 3. States have a duty to cooperate through international agreements to promote this. Principle 1 marks and interesting departure from traditional law in that it embodies the idea of an individual right to a clean and health environment as well as that of intergenerational equity reflected in an individual duty to "protect and improve" the environment for future generations.

Floating Exchange

In comparison, floating currency exchange rates depend on supply and demand. This means that when the demand for a currency is high its value will increase. Conversely, when the demand is low a country will experience the latter. The value of a country's currency greatly affects its position in international trade. When a country's currency value increases, imported goods will become cheaper, making this a desirable position for the country. The International Monetary Fund considers any country that is driven by a floating exchange rate to be demonstrating financial maturity, according to Bloomberg. Pros Allows greater change of internal policy Less power on central banks as changes occur automatically No need for large reserves Cons Day to day uncertainty Highly volatile More exchange rate risk

Laws of War

Incendiary Weapons: Devices designed to burn at extremely high temperatures, such as napalm and white phosphorus; mostly designed to be used against equipment, though some (e.g. napalm) are designed to be used against people. (illegal) Biological Weapons Convention: an agreement that prohibits the development, production, and possession of biological weapons but makes no provision for inspections Chemical Weapons Convention: An agreement that bans the production and possession of chemical weapons and includes strict verification provisions and the threat of sanctions against violators and nonparticipants in the treaty Partial Test Ban Treaty: - is a treaty prohibiting all test destinations of nuclear weapons except underground. Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: A proposed treaty to prohibit all testing of nuclear weapons in all environments: underground, underwater, in the atmosphere and in space. In 1999, the U.S. Senate refused to ratify the treaty. Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Occupation: when one state has authority over another state's territory without its consent

IMF - History & Functions

International Agency Governing International Transactions Adjustable Exchange Rate (Changed to Floating) Stabilization Fund (Controversial) Universal Participation Weighted Toward Major Powers Allowed Exchange Controls The IMF's mission is to promote global economic growth and financial stability, encourage international trade, and reduce poverty around the world. The IMF was originally created in 1945 as part of the Bretton Woods agreement, which attempted to encourage international financial cooperation by introducing a system of convertible currencies at fixed exchange rates.1 The IMF collects massive amounts of data on national economies, international trade, and the global economy in aggregate and provides economic forecasts. One of the IMF's most important functions is to make loans to countries that are experiencing economic distress to prevent or mitigate financial crises. The IMF also acted as a gatekeeper: Countries were not eligible for membership in the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)—a World Bank forerunner that the Bretton Woods agreement created in order to fund the reconstruction of Europe after World War II—unless they were members of the IMF.4 Since the Bretton Woods system collapsed in the 1970s, the IMF has promoted the system of floating exchange rates, meaning that market forces determine the value of currencies relative to one another. This system remains in place today.6 The IMF gets its money through quotas and subscriptions from its member countries. These contributions are based on the size of the country's economy, making the U.S., with the world's largest economy, the largest contributor. Controversy Too Much or Too Little Intervention The IMF has been criticized for not doing much and for overreaching. It has been criticized for being too slow or too eager to assist failing national policies. Since the United States, Japan, and Great Britain feature prominently in IMF policies, it has been accused of being a tool for free-market countries only.9 Simultaneously, free-market supporters criticize the IMF for being too interventionist.2 Creates Moral Hazard Some member nations, such as Italy and Greece, have been accused of pursuing unsustainable budgets because they believed the world community, led by the IMF, would come to their rescue.10 11This is no different than the moral hazard created by government bailouts of major banks.

Third Party Dispute Resolution - Strengths and Weakness

International Courts and International Arbitral Tribunals Third Party Dispute Resolution Advantages Legitimacy: States resort to adjudication because they see it as impartial, impersonal, principled, and authoritative. At least in theory, he ideas of impartiality and neutral principle underlie all adjudication by third parties. Arbitrators or judges presumably apply the rules of relevant law or other agreed-upon principles rather than relying upon personal preference or political factors associated with the dispute. Decisions of impartial tribunals convey strong claims for legitimacy to other states. Disadvantages -Expense and Possible Delay: Litigation is expensive and time consuming. -Lack of control: Control moves from the parties to the lawyers and judges actively involved in the case. -Limitation on relevant issues- The costs of preparing and hearing the case flow from the necessity of framing all the issues in terms of the law perceived to be relevant law even if doing so does not adequately capture the underlying issues in the case or address longer-term considerations. -Limitation on possible solutions- Having to frame any solution in terms of relevant law limits the possibility of the parties finding common ground for solution other than that dictated by application of the law. Adjudication may also limit solutions in that it tends to look for principles of existing law rather than for principles to develop the law if needed. -Winner-Loser context- The winner-loser framework adds to the possible psychological costs and impact over time. -There must be a consent to adjudication and it must be based in treaty: Unless a treaty or other agreement--to which a state has assented designates a specific court or arbitration panel as the process for dispute settlement, no rule of customary law mandates a compulsory rule for dispute settlement. Even if relatively few international disputes are resolved through judicial methods, it's still useful. A number of solutions lend themselves to resolution through adjudication. Among there are those that do not involve a significant interest, but for which governments may feel unable to make concessions in direct negotiations because they do involve highly charged emotional issues such as borders or maritime boundaries, and disrupts that involve difficult factual or technical questions.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights United Nations

International Covenant on Civil and POlitical Rights The ICCPR guarantees, among other rights, equality of treatment by laws and courts, freedom of religious expression, peaceful assembly, and freedom of movement within states and between states. It prohibits inhumane treatment as well as arbitrary arrest or detention, asserts a right to life and to a fair trial, and provides for the protection of all varieties of minorities. The Covenant on Civil and political Rights also has generated an option protocol on abolition of the death penalty.

Arbitration

Many states specify the ICJ as the method of resolving disputes. Arbitration is the use of an arbiter to resolve disputes outside of a judiciary court. In modern form, arbitration differs from formal settlements by a permanent court in that panels are ad hoc, constituted for each specific dispute through an agreement usually called a compromis. States have a choice in designating panel members; they can specific the issues deemed relevant 9scope of jurisdiction), the procedures, and even the embody of law or other rules applicable. A typical panel would consist of three individuals--one chosen by each party and a neutral individual. The procedure for selecting the neutral individual will be specified in the compromis. -at least one neutral member An arbitration award may be binding but not necessarily final. The right to appeal with rarely included, but often the right to seek clarification is included. Indus Water Treaty: The Indus Waters Treaty was signed in 1960 after nine years of negotiations between India and Pakistan with the help of the World Bank, which is also a signatory. The Treaty allocates the Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan and the Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India. At the same time, the Treaty allows each country certain uses on the rivers allocated to the other. The Treaty also sets forth distinct procedures to handle issues which may arise: "questions" are handled by the Commission; "differences" are to be resolved by a Neutral Expert; and "disputes" are to be referred to a seven-member arbitral tribunal called the "Court of Arbitration." As a signatory to the Treaty, the World Bank's role is limited and procedural. In particular, its role in relation to "differences" and "disputes" is limited to the designation of individuals to fulfill certain roles in the context of Neutral Expert or Court of Arbitration proceedings when requested by either or both of the Parties. The two countries disagree over whether the technical design features of these two hydroelectric plants contravene the Treaty. In 2016, Pakistan asked the World Bank to facilitate the setting up of a Court of Arbitration to look into its concerns about the designs of the two hydroelectric power projects. India asked for the appointment of a Neutral Expert for the same purpose. No solution yet. Soft Lumber Dispute: The dispute was set in motion when the US lumber industry objected to the low Canadian stumpage rates and transportation costs, perceived by the US as an unfair advantage. US producers contended that Canada was subsidizing its lumber industry by allocating timber in a non-competitive manner. Since its implementation in October 2006, the Softwood Lumber Agreement (SLA) has worked well, providing certainty for industry and returning approximately CDN$ 5 billion in duties to Canadian softwood lumber producers. On January 18, 2008, the U.S. government filed an arbitration request with the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), an internationally respected forum under which all SLA arbitrations will take place.

Nationality of Ships

Nationality: Jurisdiction Follows the Flag Every ship outside of its own territorial jurisdiction must fly a flag indicating the state or registry. Each state determines for itself the conditions for granting its nationality to vessels. Most state laws and regulations apply to most acts undertaken aboard the vessel, but the ascription of territoriality from the standpoint of national law and established practice does not necessarily stand at the top of the hierarchy of principles in determining resolution of problems associated with concurrent jurisdiction from the standpoint of international law. Ships may also fly the flag of certain international organizations. Within ports (internal waters) or territorial seas and contiguous zones, a ship must obey the host country's navigation and similar regulations. On the high seas, the law of the flag state prevails. Flags of Convenience: Under the law of the sea, flags of convenience--in essence nationalities of convenience--have been a long0standing problem. Presumably, the right of registry entails in turn obligations and ability to police the vessels so registered. Lack of effective inspection, administration, and enforcement has raise concerns about the qualifications for masters, officers, and other classes of skilled seamen, as well as about the seaworthiness of the ships. Most of the vessels so registered any never visit any port in their "home" state. UNCLOS III attempted to address the issue by requiring a "genuine link" between states and ships. One might interpret the wording here to mean that another state could feel free to deny recognition to the asserted nationality of a vessel flying a flag of convenience, effectively making the vessel "stateless." These vessels have no guaranteed right of entry to ports and are subject to boarding, search, and arrest by the authorities of any member of the family of nations. The U.S. has maintained a convenient benign blindness toward the use of flags of convenience by U.S. shipowners--but with the understanding that in time of war, American-owned ships, no matter where registered, can be requisitioned to support the war effort. The reasons for adopting flags of convenience are numerous: low or no taxes, lower wage rates than would be necessary if registered in state of ownership, and lenient health and safety regulations. The state of registry is responsible for investigation and any subsequent action. Ship owners often argue that the realities of international competition mean that many regulations in economically developed countries make profitable operation impossible. On the other hand, the question of effective administration, inspection, and enforcement has become a topic of great concern in Europe because of a series of shipping disasters. The 1986 Convention on Conditions for Registration of Ships aimed at defining the minimum elements of a genuine link that should exist between a ship and its flag state. 1. The state should have a competent and adequate national maritime administration subject to its jurisdiction and control. 2. The administration actively engaged in activities to ensure that ships flying the flag of that state complied with its law and regulations. 3. A "satisfactory part" of the complement (officers and crew) should consist of nationals of the flag state. As of April 1, 2016, the convention had only 15 state parties. All major states outside of Russia have signed. Liberia is the only state identified as a flag of convenience that has acceded.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

One should look no further than the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights to see some contentious propositions abouts rights every human being should possess. As a FA resolution, the UDHR stands as a statement of desired goals rather than black-letter, substantive, law. It has played an important role in the evolution of human rights law over the past 65-plus year. Restrictions on the Jurisdiction of States over their Nationals. The Principal Allied and Associated Powers concluded a number of treaties with some countries in which those countries promised just and equal treatment of their minority groups. Sometime later, others gave similar guarantees as conditions of their admission to the League of Nations. Theory and Practice: To ensure practical observance of the various rights guarantee to minorities, the affected sovereign states had to acknowledge that the "minorities clauses" constituted " fundamental laws." Regardless of the motives that had inspired acquiescence in the guarantees extended to minorities, the governments in question all too soon shared a growing conviction that the guarantees represented intolerable intrusions into the domestic jurisdictions of sovereign states. During WWII, many instruments promoted and preserved human freedoms and rights. The Nuremberg War Crimes Trials implicitly assumed that certain laws applied directly to individuals. However, after the war, none of the various peace treaties included provisions for the protection of minorities, except on a very selective basis. The UN and Human Rights: The UN Carter asserts in its Preamble that the members are "determined to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women." Article 62 directions the Economic and Social Council to make recommendations in pursuance to set up a commission for the "promotion of human rights." The Charter contains no sanctions or enforcement machinery specifically related to human rights. Only Article 56 represented a pledge by all member states to take joint and separate action to achieve the purposes outline in Article 55. The UN Charter denies authority to the UN "to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." To achieve positive protection of human rights, the Economic and Social Council began in early 1946 to produce multilateral conventions through the Commission on Human Rights as a drafting body. In 1948, the GA approved the UDHR, with no opposition but with eight abstentions. This was intended to lay down "a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations." The UHDR has served as a convenient standard by which many jurists and even national courts have evaluated compliance with the broad human rights provisions of the UN Charter. It is suspected for become part of customary international law. The following form the "International Bill of Rights": 1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) 2. International covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (1966) 3. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 4. Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 5. Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (aiming at abolition of the death penalty) Human rights treaties do not create a system of rights, duties, and obligations between states. Some argue they form a category of obligations erga omnes: those protecting and promoting basic values and common interests of all states. International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights the ICESCR embraces the right to work, education, medical care, and related economic and social benefits. A considerable body of public opinion in the US agrees that "It does not make sense to proclaim that a particular level of economic and social entitlements are rights if most governments are not able to provide them." Nine multilateral treaties form the core of the international human rights regime. Nondiscrimination forms a major theme of these treaties with respect to individuals as well as groups. The Human Rights Commission stated that reservations should not engender a situation where states, by weakening the obligations, produce a state of affairs that would preclude the attainment of international human rights standards. Implementation: The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination became the first UN-sponsored treaty to set up a monitoring system. While ostensibly set up to safeguard individual rights, individuals often have no right to seek redress directly from the monitoring bodies. Six of the monitoring bodies listed earlier permit individual petitions under severely restricted circumstances. To generate any action by the HRC, a petition must satisfy 3 preliminary conditions: 1. It must have ratified the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR. 2. The individual must have exhausted local remedies. 3. The individual must not have submitted the petition to any other international body. None of the monitoring bodies can issue indiying decisions on cases received. Several treaties contain provisions to allow states parties to complain to the relevant treaty body about alleged violations of the treaty by another state party. States generate periodic reports, but common sense suggest that none will contain an open admission of a treaty violation. Many human rights NGOs have consultative status with the HRC under the ECOSOC. Funding for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights suffers. Many states fail to pay even the minimum dues.

Statute of Rome

President George W. bush unsigned the Rome Statute of the ICC. International crimes presumably reflect violation of values fundamental to all members of the international community. For example, the Rome Statue of the ICC uses the phrase "the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole." The Rome Statute of the ICC addresses the question "consider the challenge faced in making that case without some assessment of a collective effort that gives context to the individual acts" by adding a contextual requirement. Article 6 of the elements of Crimes states: "The term 'in the context of' would include the initial acts in an emerging pattern. In 1998, 60 countries signed the Rome Statute after it was opened for signature by the United Nations. The Statute laid the foundation for the establishment of the International Criminal Court in 2002. Its purpose is to investigate and prosecute war criminals. Crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court War crimes War crimes include torture, mutilation, corporal punishment, hostage taking and acts of terrorism. This category also covers violations of human dignity such as rape and forced prostitution, looting and execution without trial. War crimes, unlike crimes against humanity, are always committed in times of war. Genocide This includes all acts committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic or religious group. Crimes against humanity Crimes against humanity are acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, such as murder, deportation, torture and rape. The ICC prosecutes the perpetrators even if the crimes were not committed in times of war.

Aggression

Self-defense, the legitimate use of force, was in response to aggression, or the illegitimate and/or illegal use of force. 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, asset out in this Definition The League, UN, and other parties wanted to define this. Many states felt that a definition through state responses on a case-by-case basis. They argued that a rigid definition might be abused by an unscrupulous state to fit its aggressive design. Recently, the term has fallen out of use.

Caroline Test

Textbooks routinely have relied on the Caroline case as defining the elements of self-defense in the customary law. Caroline: In 1837, settlers in Upper Canada revolted due to dissatisfaction with the British administration in North America. The United States remained officially neutral about the rebellion, but American sympathizers assisted the rebels with men and supplies, transported by a steamboat named the Caroline. In response, a combined Anglo-Canadian force from Canada entered United States territory at night, seized the Caroline, set the ship on fire, and sent it over Niagara Falls. An American watchmaker, Amos Durfee, was accidentally killed by Alexander Macleod, a Canadian sheriff.[1] The British claimed that the attack was an act of self-defense. In a letter to the British Ambassador, Secretary of State Daniel Webster argued that a self-defense claimant would have to show that the: necessity of self-defense was instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation ..., and that the British force, even supposing the necessity of the moment authorized them to enter the territories of the United States at all, did nothing unreasonable or excessive; since the act, justified by the necessity of self-defense, must be limited by that necessity, and kept clearly within it.[2] Caroline Test Necessity - self-defense is instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation. Proportionality - respond in a manner proportionate to the threat.

Chicago Convention

The 1944 Chicago Convention on Civil Aviation provides the essential structure for modern commercial and private aviation operations and reaffirmed the rule from the Paris Convention. It specifically states that no scheduled international flights may come into the territory of a state party without explicitly previous authorization. Group of Concepts emerged for the conference known as the "five freedoms of the air": 1. The privilege of flying over the territory of another state without landing; 2. The privilege of landing in another state for technical reasons only; 3. The privilege of landing in another state to discharge passengers, cargo, or mail picked up in one's own state; 4. The privilege of landing in another state to pick up passengers, cargo, or mail destined for one's own state; 5. The privilege of landing in another state to pick up or discharge passengers, cargo, or mail from a third state. For the most part, state practice has ignored the difference between "scheduled" and "unscheduled international air services." They've struggled with the multiplicity of issues raised by the ideas but failed to create a multilateral regime governing traffic rights (the last three freedoms) for scheduled air service. As a result, permission for international commercial air operations is granted primarily only through an unwieldly set of bilateral treaties that deal with routes, capacities, and other matters of concern. The doctrine of absolute sovereignty means that aircraft have no right of innocent passage through national airspace, though most states clearly has the right to assign entry and exit lanes. This includes the right to delineate routes or lanes over its territory through which planes may traverse the national airspace. The state may designate specified areas as close to foreign aircraft in the interest of national security. Most countries require that foreign commercial airlines in transit passage obtain prior permission to cross national territory. Specific permission is required if foreign military aircraft wish to enter the national airspace. It also created the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as the operation arm that would promote technical and administrative cooperation among states party to the convention. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) is a private organization that represents the industry regarding issues of mutual concern. Today, it provides a forum for discussion of common concerns besides acting as a lobbyist in various other situations when the industry wishes to present a common front.

Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)

The CITES emerged as the first post-Stockholm environmental instrument. CITES does not substitute for national legislation. It has guidelines that provide a framework which each state party must utilize in developing appropriate domestic legislation. To summarize quickly, CITES is not a framework convention per se in the sense of guiding the future development of international law; rather, it sets guidelines for the development of national law. When the IUCN first proposed that certain species needed protection from extinction, few states though a problem existed. The treaty has three areas of concern: (1) endangered species or those threatened with extinction; (2) species not endangered, but needing monitoring to ensure sustainability; and (3) species designated by at least one country as protected, where the state has asked international cooperation in controlling the trade. The treaty has 2 administrative levels: International and domestic. At the international level, the Conference of the Parties meets biennially. The COP has responsibility for amendments to the three categories of protected species and for any new resolutions affecting the implementation of the treaty. The CITES standing committee takes care of issues arising between meetings of the COP. The CITES secretariat takes care of the everyday business associated. Financing of the core activities associated with COP, the standing committee, and the secretariat comes from the CITES trust fund. Funding comes from contributions from the parties. At the national level, CITES requires that state parties enact certain controls with respect to international trade inn specimens of selected species. Al import, export, reexport, and introduction from the sea of species covered by the convention must be authorized through a licensing system.

Charter of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal

The Charter of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal first defined crimes against humanity and waging aggressive war as international crimes for which individuals could have personal (individual) criminal responsibility. The term genocide had not yet entered into general usage. The charges elicited many protests about "victor's justice" because of questions about whether these alleged "crimes" had been identified and specifically "criminalized" in the sense of making individuals personally responsible for their acts. Nonetheless, the precedent set by Nuremberg and its counterpart at Tokyo firmly established the principle that individuals could e held directly responsible for certain acts. The Nuremberg Charter represented the first time that crimes against humanity were asserted as part of positive international law. A quick search of contemporary international documents reveals 11 texts that include definitions of crimes against humanity. All differ slightly in detail but share the idea that crimes of humanity are specific acts of violence associated with and directed towards, the persecution of a group of persons. The list of the specific crimes contained within the meaning of crimes against humanity has been expanded since Article 6(c) of the IMT to include, in the ICTY and the ICTR, rape and torture.

Kyoto Protocol

The Framework Convention on Climate Change was aimed at reducing the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, the UNFCC achieved immediate and almost universal acceptance. The difficulties came with the following Kyoto Protocol. Many countries signed but did not carry through with ratification due to the treaty's lack of specificity in monitoring an compliance rules. A second round of negotiations finally produced the Marrakesh Accords. The treaty reflects the development debate by placing the main burden of reducing emissions on the developed countries. President G.W. Bush questioned the underlying science and noted that it would harm the U.S. economy and would diminish U.S. sovereignty over its own economy. During a second commitment period known as the "Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol" parties will be committed to reduce Greenhouse Gas emissions by at least 18% below 1990 levels.

GATT - History & Function

The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was the predecessor to the WTO before 1995, and aimed at freer trade by cutting tariffs and other barriers. It had some powers of judicial settlement of disputes. It, along with the WTO have done much good, bringing tariffs to an all-time low. The GATT was established in 1948 to regulate world trade. It was created to boost economic recovery after the Second World War by reducing or eliminating trade tariffs, quotas and subsidies. It was refined over eight rounds of negotiations, which led to the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Despite its institutional deficiencies, the GATT managed to function as a de facto international organization, sponsoring eight rounds of multilateral trade negotiations. The Uruguay Round, conducted from 1987 to 1994, culminated in the Marrakesh Agreement, which established the World Trade Organization (WTO). General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Exceptions National Security National Legislation Uruguay Round Goals Non-discrimination Fair Tariffs

Montreal Protocol, Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, Helsinki Declaration on the Protection of the Ozone Layer

The Montreal Protocol and VCPOL are part of the LRTAP. They are an international framework. They regulate 96 chemicals that have ozone-depleting properties. A widespread concern with the effects of CFCs on the ozone layer prompted action that produced the international framework treaty. Freon, at the time, a widely used gas in refrigeration and air conditioning units as well as aerosol spray cans, is a CFC. Phasing out its use had very real economic costs in terms of retooling and conversion. In 1987, states negotiate the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, which set explicit goals for reduction of both chlorofluorocarbons and halons. By 1989, concern had arisen that the original goals in the protocol were too lenient. The parties then adopted the Helsinki Declaration on the Protection of the Ozone Layer, which specified a 2000 deadline for the total phaseout of CFCs and the phaseout of halons as soon as economically feasible. The Vienna/Montreal regime has been considered a success story.

Outer Space

The UN maintains an Office for Outer Space Affairs in Vienna. UN Action In 1961, the GA adopted the Resolution on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, which asserted that international law, including the Charter of the UN, applied to outer space as well as to celestial bodies and that both such space and such bodies were to be regarded as free for exploration and use by all states. These concepts were expanded in the 1963 GA's Declaration of Legal Principles Governing Activities in Outer Space. That declaration, though not a binding treaty, summarized the consensus arrived at after serious debate in the GA. 1. It provided that space exploration and use of space were to be fore the benefit of all humankind; 2. states conducting activities related to space would be responsible for their acts; 3. all activity in space was to be guided by the principles of cooperation and mutual assistance; 4. states launching objects and personnel were to retain jurisdiction over them in space and on their return to Earth, no matter where they might land; 5. states were to be liable for any damages on Earth, in the airspace, or in outer space caused by objects launched by them into outer space; and 6. astronauts were to be considered envoys of all humankind and, in case of accident, all states were to be bound to render them all possible assistance and to return them promptly to the state in which their space vehicle was registered. Outer Space Treaty In 1966, the Legal Committee (on Outer Space, now composed of 28 members) quickly began to draft an agreement to prevent any state from claiming title to the moon and other celestial bodies, adding sections on the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction in outer space or on celestial bodies. An examination of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space reveals that despite the exaggerate claims put forth in 1967, the instrument represents little more than a declaration of "principles." The 1968 UN Committee treaty on Outer Space on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts, and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space. Of the six substantive articles in the treaty, one pertains to the recovery and the return of artificial space objects, one to the inclusion of international agencies as launching authorities affected by the agreement, and the other four to the rescue and return of astronauts on Earth as well as in space. This instrument contains detailed and well-though-out provisions concerning the duties and rights of states respecting the rescue and return of astronauts who have crash-landed on Earth. The treaty's provisions dealing with the rescue of astronauts who have encountered difficulties in space are incomplete. A major reason for the enactment of the 1974UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space draft treaty the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space was due to the ever-increasing number of artificial objects floating through space. Agreement Governing the Activities on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies states that neither surface nor the subsurface of the moon shall become national property of nay country.

Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Treatment (UNCAT)

The UNCAT is considered a major humans right instrument and core instrument to the charter of the United Nations. Its monitoring body is the Committee Against Torture (CAT). In 1984, the UN GA adopted the UNCAT. The U.S. has ratified the convention, but with several reservations and with enabling legislation that severely limits its application in practice. Unlike the terrorism conventions, the UN Torture Convention does have an explicit definition of torture. Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. States have obligations to enact appropriate domestic criminal legislation; to prevent, punish, or extradite individuals accused of such activities in territories under their control; and to provide effective remedies for victims of torture. Some states argued that the concept of torture should be legally distinct from that of "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." Additional questions revolved around standards for terms such as severe and mental, the extent to which omissions might engage liability, or whether the convention should specifically list "purposes." Administration lawyers have argued that while it bans both torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment it only criminalizes torture.

Laws and Enforcement Alien Tort Claims Act (1789)

The US Congress adopted the ATCA in 1789 as part of the original Judiciary Act. It made no assertion about legal rights; it simply provided that "the district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States. It remained largely unnoticed until Filtarga v. Pena-Irala. In 1978, Joel Filartiga filed suit against Americo Pena-Irala had abducted and tortured to death Filartiga's son. Filtarga had attempted to commence a criminal action against Irala in Paraguay, but ha din turn been arrested. He then immigrated to the US. Irala entered the US on a worker's visa. He was arrested and served with a civil complaint by the Filtargas. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision when the case was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. The court argued that among the fundamental human rights protected by every relevant multilateral treaty was freedom from torture and that customary international law condemned torture as well. Every state accused of torture has denied the accusation, and none have tried to justify torture. It could be asserted correctly that official torture was a tort "in violation of the law of nations." Because of increasing international concern with human rights issues, litigants have begun to seek redress more frequently under the ATS. The case held that deliberate torture perpetrated under the color of official authority violates universally accepted norms of international human rights law and that such a violation of international law constituted a violation of the domestic law of the United States. Human rights advocates have made an effort to use the ATS to sue transnational corporations for violations of international law in countries outside the US. The Court that claims would not be allowed under the ATS if they dealt with conduct occurring in the territory of a foreign country. The statute had no extraterritorial reach.

World Bank - Function

The World Bank is an international organization that provides financing, advice, and research to developing nations to help advance their economies. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF)—founded simultaneously under the Bretton Woods Agreement—both seek to serve international governments. The World Bank has expanded to become known as the World Bank Group with five cooperative organizations, sometimes known as the World Banks. The World Bank Group offers a multitude of proprietary financial assistance, products, and solutions for international governments, as well as a range of research-based thought leadership for the global economy at large. The World Bank's Human Capital Project seeks to help nations invest in and develop their human capital to produce a better society and economy.

WTO - History, Function and Cases

The World Trade Organization aims at freer trade by cutting tariffs and other barriers. It has some powers of judicial settlement of disputes. It, along with the GATT, have done much good, bringing tariffs to an all-time low. Dispute Resolution Types Mediation Negotiations Arbitration Adjudication Dispute Settlement Body (Dispute Settlement Understanding) Appellate Body (Adjudication) Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products Cases July 11, 2003 - Dispute Settlement Body Panel 1) the US failed to demonstrate that the alleged increased imports were the result of unforeseen developments; 2) for most products, imports have not increased; 3) the US did not properly establish the causal link between the alleged increased imports and the purported serious injury faced by the US steel industry; 4) the US excluded imports from Canada, Mexico, Israel and Jordan from the measures in violation of WTO obligations. The US appealed on 11 August 2002. Appellate Body - Upheld Ruling European Union - Rebalancing Regulation - Orange Juice and Cars U.S Removed the Tariffs

Gold Standard

The gold standard is a monetary system in which a currency's value is pegged to gold. Before being a medium of exchange, gold was used for worship. With its large discoveries of gold, England became the first country to implement the gold standard. The Bretton Woods agreement established that the U.S. dollar was the dominant reserve currency and that the dollar was convertible to gold at the fixed rate of $35 per ounce. In 1971, President Nixon stopped the convertibility of the U.S. dollar to gold. The appeal of a gold standard is that it arrests control of the issuance of money out of the hands of imperfect human beings. With the physical quantity of gold acting as a limit to that issuance, a society can follow a simple rule to avoid the evils of inflation. The goal of monetary policy is not just to prevent inflation, but also deflation, and to help promote a stable monetary environment in which full employment can be achieved. A brief history of the U.S. gold standard is enough to show that when such a simple rule is adopted, inflation can be avoided, but strict adherence to that rule can create economic instability, if not political unrest.

Air Space

The proposition "states had absolute and unlimited sovereignty over national airspace, with no upper limit" quickly received general approval when the outbreak of WWI led all belligerent states to assert full sovereignty over their national airspace. Neutrals, in turn, denied all right of passage to belligerent aircraft. By the end, national sovereignty over airspace had gained almost universal acceptance. The 1919 Paris Convention for the Regulation of Aerial Navigation embodied the idea of full sovereignty but also contained a right of innocent passage for private aircraft subject to he rules of the question. Today, states have complete and exclusive sovereignty over the air above their territories. Jurisdiction: Like ships, aircraft also have nationality. Unlike the law of the sea, no "flags of convenience" exist for aircraft. Within foreign national airspace or airports, both the foreign state and the "flag" state have concurrent jurisdiction. Just as with ships "territory" trumps "flag" if the foreign state chooses to exert its authority in a specific case. Beyond the the territorial sea, coastal states do not have jurisdiction over the airspace above their contiguous zones, the continental shelves, or their EEZs. Once outside the territorial sea, for aircraft the flag forms the basis of exclusive jurisdiction. States have asserted a right to enact measures for air defense that extend into areas of airspace outside of their territorial waters. The U.S. and Canada have established an air defense identification zone 9AIDZ) that, among other regulations, requires the filing of detailed flight plans. The U.S. also mandates a distant early warning identification system (DEWIZ) adjacent to Alaska's coastal waters. For air law, the greatest majority of the issues litigated have revolved around the Warsaw Convention (1929). The Convention for International Carriage by Air 1999 updated and modernized the Warsaw Convention. Thile differing standards of liability and compensation among countries constitute important problems, these problems do not form part of the essential material for an undergraduate text in public international law because they require considerable background in the principles and application of civil law for an adequate understanding of the issues. The ICAO took the initiative to develop the 1963 Tokyo convention on Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft. It addresses possible gaps in jurisdiction by making sure that at least one state (normally the "flag" state) will have a basis to assert jurisdiction no matter where the aircraft was flying at the time of the incident. In normal circumstances, a territorial state may not interfere with an aircraft in flight unless the offense has some dimension that affects security or traffic rules. The convention specifically establishes the authority of the aircraft commander to deal with offenses on board.

War

The resort to war was not illegal. Originally, it was thought normal. They just had to issue a declaration of war. Legally, a state of war did not have to mean overt clashes between armed forces. It only meant that relations between the two states, and between the two states and third-party states, were now controlled by the laws of war. Force short of war and conduct within war were ostensibly roughly governed by the twin principles of necessity and proportionality, but the resort to force remained deeply wedded to a rather open-ended perception of necessity. The Charter has no language except the rather vague "threat to the peace, breach of peace, or act of aggression" to determine if an international violation is the equivalent of first-degree murder or justifiable homicide. The Charter has several deficiencies. First, it presumed that armed conflict in the future would occur only between states. Second, it postulates that a clear distinction can be drawn between conditions of war and conditions of peace. Third, action by the UN requires that all 5 permanent members of the Security Council agree on a characterization of a particular situation, persuade at least 3 me of the other 10 nonpermanent members, and then decide upon appropriate measures through a resolution. "armed conflict is said." Hague Conferences of 1899 and 1907: The first Hague conferences in 1899 was attended by 26 nations and was charged with charting a course toward disarmament and placing limitations on the means of conducting warfare. While disputing nations made agreement impossible, provisions were made to set up a Permanent Court of Arbitration (aka Hague Tribunal), which would render decisions on international disputes between cooperating nations. During the second Hague conferences, the United States pushed for the establishment of a world court, different that the Hague Tribunal. Again, the nations were not able to reach agreement. However, there was some success in adopting resolutions defining the codes of conduct in modern warfare, and the continuation of the Hague Tribunal. . The Interwar Period: The period between the 1919 end of WWI and 1939 beginning of WWII, shaped by the results of WWI and Great Depression. Kellogg-Briand Pact (Pact of Paris, 1928): Agreement signed in 1928 in which nations agreed not to pose the threat of war against one another

Unlawful Combatant

The term Unlawful/unprivileged combatant/belligerent encompasses all persons taking a direct part in hostilities in an international armed conflict without being entitled to do so and who therefore cannot be classified as prisoners of war upon falling into the power of the enemy. A lawful combatant is: 1. To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates. 2. To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance. 3. To carry arms openly. 4. To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. Military noncombatants cannot engage in hostilities except in self defense and defense of the wounded. An unlawful combatant would be liable for all activities. The International Committee of the Red Cross defines them as still having the status of "protected persons." There's questionable international status. Hamdi v. Rumsfeld Rule of Law Due process guarantees that United States citizens held in the United States as enemy combatants must be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decision-maker. Facts In 2001, in response to attacks against the United States by the al Qaeda terrorist network on September 11, 2001, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), authorizing the President to use all appropriate and necessary force against persons suspected of engaging in terrorist activity against the United States. The President shortly thereafter ordered United States military forces into Afghanistan. This case arises out of the detention of Yaser Hamdi (defendant), a U.S. citizen, who was seized in Afghanistan on suspicion that he was actively working with the Taliban regime. He was turned over to the United States military. The United States interrogated Hamdi in Afghanistan before transferring him to the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in 2002. After learning he was an American citizen, authorities transferred him to Norfolk, Virginia, and then Charleston, South Carolina. The Government contended that because Hamdi was an "enemy combatant" it could hold him indefinitely in the United States without formal charges or proceedings until it determined that access to counsel or further process was warranted. Hamdi's father filed a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that Hamdi's detainment violated the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, and demanding that Hamdi be appointed counsel and given a fair hearing. The government (plaintiff) filed a motion to dismiss, which included an outline of the evidence against Hamdi, called the Mobbs Report. The district court found that the Mobbs Report did not contain enough evidence to hold Hamdi without trial. The Fourth Circuit reversed, holding that the United States acted constitutionally in detaining Hamdi, and Hamdi petitioned for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari. Issue Does due process guarantee that United States citizens held in the United States as enemy combatants be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decision-maker? Holding and Reasoning (O'Connor, J.) Yes. A U.S. citizen accused of being an enemy combatant must be afforded an opportunity to be heard by a neutral decision maker. The government must provide basic procedures for the citizen-detainee to challenge his detention.

Framework Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution

This addresses the problem of acid rain. It is an international framework convention that to date has eight protocols addressing specific problems. the treaty ahs modest goals. States agree to limit and gradually reduce air pollution that may have transboundary impact. The regime does not deal with questions of potential liability from damage caused by transboundary pollution. Progress is slow but continuous. 1. Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution 2. Vienna Convention for Protection of the Ozone Layer 3. Framework Convention on Climate Change 4. Montreal Protocol 5. Kyoto Protocol 6. Basel Convention 7. Stockholm Convention of Persistent Organic Pollutants

Paris Agreement

This builds upon the UNFCC. The Agreement commits Parties to undertake a concerted effort to combat climate change. The goal is to commit to measures that will keep global temperature this century below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and ideally, to only 1.5 degrees Celsius. It relies on Parties making their "best efforts through "nationally determined contributions" and to strengthen these efforts in the years ahead." All parties have committed to report regularly on their emissions and on their implementation efforts.

ICJ - Structure

This is generally considered the successor to to the PCIJ: the Permanent Court of International Justice established under the authority of the League of Nations. This is the only international court that exercises a truly global jurisdiction. Litigants must be states, but the statute does not limit the range of issues that states may refer to the court. International Court of Justice (ICJ) - 1946- (United Nations) 15 Judges-do not serve as reps Slate Created by Arbitrators 9 Year Staggered Terms Limit One Per Nationality absolute majority elected by the Security Council and the General Assembly If a party does not have a judge on the court, it has the right to appoint one. Judges enjoy diplomatic immunity when engaged with the ICJ. Nominees must be members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration or similar groups specially constituted in countries not members of the PCA. International Courts (ICJ) Limited to States Jurisdiction is Violation of Treaties and Customs Typically Jurisdiction if Granted in Treaty Establishing Jurisdiction Can Be Very Difficult Advisory Opinions - General Assembly Operates as a Court of Original Jurisdiction No Concept of Precedent Appeals Heard by the Security Council (15 Members, 5 Permanent with Veto Power) International Courts (ICJ) Ad Hoc Chambers of the Court (3 or 5 member panels) A judgement given by a chamber is to be considered as a judgment of the court. Either party may request one, but most must agree. These can be less expensive and can enable the court to handle a much greater caseload. Non-Appearance Whenever one of the parties doe snot appear before the court, or fails to defend its case, the other party may call upon the court to decide in favor of its claim. Must satisfy jurisdiction and claim is well founded. - Rulings in Absentia

Earth Summit

This was know as the UN Conference on Environment and Development and Rio Conference. It generated 2 soft-law statements of general principles and a program for future action. The Rio Declaration dealt with problems associated with development and environmental quality and protection. The themes that states have duty to consult, cooperate, and take effective domestic action run throughout the document. The debate continues over the status of these principles as new customary rules of international law. Principle 3 speaks of a right to development, and Principle 4 defines environmental protection as an integral part of the development process. Principle 7 says "The developed countries acknowledge the responsibility that they bear in the international pursuit to sustainable development in view of the pressures their societies place on the global environment and of the technologies and financial resources they command. Because it is characterized as soft law, the declaration does not bind states to specific legal obligations. Every five years, an international conference should convene to examine and evaluate the progress toward the standards contained in Agenda 21. Agenda 21: this is often mentioned as the blueprint for developing future management plans for all sectors of the environment. This does not generate binding obligations. There are delays involved with disputes over definitions. Most of these goals depend on the actions of independent states in establishing appropriate domestic goals and mechanisms for their achievement. Sustainable development implies the necessity to reconcile the competing demands of global social equity, environmental protection, and economic efficiency. The Commission on Sustainable Development: The GA created the Commission on Sustainable Development to monitor progress toward achievement of the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21 objectives. It meets every two years, focusing on a specific set of thematic issues. The World Summit on Sustainable Development produced another plan of implementation when a focus on improvement at the micro level replaced that at the macro level. Progress over the years after Rio seems modest.

ICJ - Examples

U.K. v Norway - Fisheries Case: In 1933, the government of the United Kingdom (plaintiff) sent a memorandum to Norway complaining that the Norwegian government used unjustifiable baselines when setting the boundaries of Norway's territorial sea in a process known as delimitation. The government of the United Kingdom brought a case against the government of Norway in the International Court of Justice. Under international law, may a nation set the boundaries of its coastal waters based on the unique features of its coastline? Yes. Under international law, a nation may set the boundaries of its coastal waters based on the unique features of its coastline. Mexico v. United States - Avena Case: The United States, Mexico, and many other countries are parties to the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (the Convention), 596 U.N.T.S. 261, which guarantees to foreign nationals the right upon arrest to contact their consulate and to have consular officials informed of the arrest. Jose Ernesto Medellin, a Mexican national, was involved in the rape and murder of two Texan girls and was later arrested by Texas police. Medellin was not informed of his rights under the Convention when arrested, and was later convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. In January 2003, while the petition was pending, Mexico (plaintiff) filed suit against the United States (defendant) for violations of the Convention in Medellin's case, as well as the cases of 53 other Mexican nationals who had received death sentences in the United States. Under international law, must a party that breaches an international agreement make adequate reparations to redress the injury? Yes. Here, the United States breached its obligations under the Convention by not (1) advising the Mexican nationals of their rights under the Convention upon arrest, (2) informing Mexican consular officials of the Mexican nationals' arrests, and (3) allowing Mexican consular officials to have access to the Mexican nationals. Because of these breaches, remedies are necessary to redress the injury done to Mexico and its citizens by the United States. Contrary to Mexico's assertions, overturning the convictions and sentences is not an appropriate remedy, because the outcomes in those cases were not themselves the violations of international law, but only resulted after certain breaches of the Convention that occurred at or around the time of arrest.

International Criminal Court (2002)

Until the emergence of the ad hoc criminal tribunals and the International Criminal Court in the 1990s, writers tended to define ICL as that part of a state's legal code that dealt with transnational crimes. The statute of the ICC also expands the list of specific acts considered crimes against humanity. It adds the crimes of enforced disappearance of persons and apartheid. Further, the ICC statute contains clarifying language that more precisely defines the specific crimes of extermination, enslavement, deportation or forcible transfer of population, torture, and forced pregnancy. This functions only among states parties and may only try individuals accused of the delimited set of crimes described in the Rome Statute.