international law handouts

7/31/2019 International Law Handouts

1/40


2/40

Prepared by: Muhammad Faisal ul Islam Cell: 03336587420 Page 2

Sources of International Law

1) International Conventions Art 38 (1) (a) Convention & Treaty Nature Priority Background Kinds

i. Law Making Treatiesii. Treaty Contracts

Typesi. Bilateral

ii. Multilateral Significance Foundation / Basis

Pacta Sunt Servanda

Some Important Treaties

2) International Customs Art. 38 (1) (b) the Statute ofInternational Court of Justice Background

o The Statute of International Court of Justice recognizes GeneralCustoms but in practice,

o Courts accept local or regional customs amongst a group or betweentwo or more countries.

o Local customs may supplement or derogate from General Customs. Peremptory Norm A Norm of general international law that is

accepted and recognized by international community as a whole as anorm for which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified

only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the

same character. (Jus Cognes).

According to Article 53 of Vienna Convention, a treaty is void if

it conflicts with Peremptory Norm.

Custom vs. Usageo Usages are considered the first stage of custom. They mean a

long established use of a matter, which States repeat to perform.

Usages, on long usage, will become Custom.o Usages may conflict with one another. Customs do not.
http://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justice


3/40


Significance Essntials

o Immemorial Antiquity (Long duration)o Uniformity / Consistencyo Generality in Practiceo Opimi Joris et Necessitatuso Judicial Application of Custom

Factors Responsible For Custom Evolution (Sources of Customs)o Diplomatic relations between Stateso Practice of International organso State laws, decisions of State Courts and State military or

administrative practices

o Treaties between States Customary Rule Now Applied

West Road central Mining Co. vs. R (1905)

Judicial Application of Customi. Pagoethe Habnna Case (1900)

ii. S.S Lotus Case (1927)Related Case Laws:

North Sea Continental Shelf Case

Asylum Case West Rand Central Gold Mining Co. Ltd Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries Case

3) General Principles of Law Recognized by Civilized States Art. 38 (1) (c) Meaning Significance

Instances Conversion into Intl Law Principle Formation Background (first in PCIJ Art.38)

4) Decisions of Judicial/ Arbitral Tribunals Art. 38 (1) (d) Art. 59 Intl Court Decisions


4/40


State Court Decisions Arbitration Decisions

5) Juristic Works Art. 38 (1) (e) Significance

6) Decisions of International Organs of Internatioanl Organizations Security Council European Economic Commiety (EU)

7) Ex Acquo Et Bona (In justice and fairness) Art. 38 (2)

8) Subsidiary Sources


5/40


True Law or Not1. Introduction2. Interpretation

a)

Oppenheimb) J.S Starkec) S.S Lotus Case (1927)

3. International Law --- A True Law or Not? Depends upon definition of term Law

i. Command Theoryii. Natural Theory

4. Two School of Thoughts5. International Law --- As True Law

Exponents View of Jurists

i. Starkeii. Lawrence

Argumentsa) Need of sovereign

b) Customary lawsc) International conventionsd) No relying upon moral argumentse) State practicesf) Settlement of international disputesg) Basis of United Nations (UN)h) Sanctioni) Executive

j) Sovereignk) No effect of violationl) ICJ

6. International Law --- Not A True Law Exponents

View Arguments

a) No sovereihnb) Lack of sanctionc) No Executived) Lack of Potent Judiciarye) Violation of lawsf) Customary laws not lawsg) Lack of effective legislation

7. Conclusion


6/40


Intl Law vs. Municipal Law

1. Introduction2.

Interpretationa) Intl Law

b) Municipal Law3. Explanation4. Theories As to Relation

(Table)

A. Monistic Theory Exponents Basic Idea Features of Monistic Theory

a) General orderb) Governance of conductc) Imperalue natured) Origin of source

Juristic Viewa) Prof. Haus Kelsen

b) Stancec) Prof. Duguitd) Soviet View

Criticism

B. Dualistic theory Exponents Basic Idea Triepels Exposition

i. Subjectii. Origin

iii. Criticism Anzillottis Exposition

i. Difference (Legislature vs. Pacta Sunt Servanda)ii. Criticism

Oppenheims Viewa) Different

o Sourceo Territorial jurisdictiono Relation to subjectso

Sovereignty

o Enforcement


7/40


8/40


a) Court interpret Municipal Law in accordance withIntl Law

Exception: when M.L ambiguous

b) Rule of evidenceException:c) View of Jurists

o Blacks Lawo Lord Atkin

II. As Regards As Treatiesa) Basis. Crown vs. Parliament

b) Treaties and Consent of Parliamentc) Conflict Treaty vs. M.Law

2) USA PracticeI. Regarding Customary Rules

i) Part of US Lawii) Justice Grayiii) Conflict Intl Custom vs. US Congress

II. Regarding Treaty Lawsi. Art. of constitutionii. Conflict latter in date shall prevailiii. Types of Treaties

a. Self-existing Treatyb. Nov of existing Treaty

3)

Pakistan Practice Follows Intl Law Transformation Parliament Sanction Regarding Treaty Laws

a) Specific Adoption of Treatyb)Vienna Convention 1961c) The Consular Rights 1972

9. Conclusion


9/40


Subjects of International Law

1. Introduction2. Interpretation

Starke Brownlie Reparation for Injuries Case (1949)

3. Different Theories As To Subjects of International Law4. States As Subjects Only

Basic View Chief Exponents Soviet Union states main subject Criticism

a) Slavesb) Individual subject not object

Reparation for injuries case (1949)

5. Individuals As Only Subjects Basic Idea Exponents No Difference b/w International Law and Municipal Law Criticisma) Only states competent

b)Act in law6. International Organization

Basic Idea Arguments International Organizations Non-state Entities

7. Place of Individual In International Law

Pact View Modern View

a) Espionage

8. Conclusion


10/40


State And Its Kinds

1. Introduction2. Interpretation

Salmond Lawrence Starke

3. Explanation4. Essentials of State

Ar 1 Oppenheim Holland

5. Functions of State Past police state Present welfare state

6. Concepts Relating to States Sovereignty of States

o Jean Bodin De Republic (1576)o Hobbes Absolute and complete form ofo Austin

Theory of Auto-limitation

o Viewo Criticism

Principle of Equality of Stateso Viewo Effects (Oppenheim)

i) Vote (exception)ii) Equal Vote (exception)iii) Territorial Jurisdictioniv) Judicial Jurisdiction

Principle of SovereignEquality among the equal

7. Rights and Duties of The States


11/40


8.Different Kinds of The States1) Sovereign States:

Sovereignty is the supreme power by which a state is governed, and this power may

be exercised internally or externally. Independence, in a negative sense, signifies the

absence of any control or dictation exercised by other states. Sovereignty and

independence cannot always be used interchangeably, as there may be different

degrees of sovereignty, while independence does not permit of grading. A state is

either independent or dependent, whereas international law recognizes a state to be

sovereign when it is independent of every other state in the exercise of its

international rights, and states having an existence not entirely independent of other

states are recognized as semi-sovereign.

o Principle of Good Neighbourliness: (Agarwal)o Union of States: (Agarwal)

Union of states may be classified as

i) Simple States:Simple states are distinguished again as

Single States Personali Unione (Personal Unions) - Several States temporarily

united under one Sovereign. The best example of a personal unionis that of Great Britain and Hanover during 1714-1837.

ii) Composite States:A state is designated as composite when comprising two or more states,and in accordance with the nature of the act creating the union, they areclassed as

Reali Unione (Real Unions) - Several States perpetually unitedunder one Sovereign.

Confederation - A confederation is a permanent association of statesexercising in common the prerogatives of sovereignty for the generaladvantage. It differs from a league of nations not only by thepermanence of existence, but by the possession of a common

organization constituting the agency for carrying into effect the willof the component states. The states retain their external sovereigntyto a greater or less extent, and constitute a band of states.In a confederation, the constituent states have surrendered to thecentral authority only a part of the control of their foreign relations;the great example of this kind of union being the German Bund,

which existed from 1815 to 1866, in which the various statesretained to themselves certain rights of receiving and accreditingministers and of making treaties and alliances.

Federal Unions - A federal union exists when states are unitedunder a central government exercising national sovereignty in

foreign matters. The act effecting the union is called the


12/40


constitution. Instances of a federal union are the United States andSwitzerland.

iii) Condominium:In this instance two or more states equally exercise sovereignty with

respect to a territory and its inhabitants. There are arguments as to

then relationship between the states concerned, the identity of the

sovereign for the purposes of the territory and the nature of the

competences involved. In the case of the New Hebrides, a series of

Anglo-French agreements established a region of joint influence, with

each power retaining sovereignty over its nationals and neither

exercising separate authority over the area. A Protocol listed the

functions of the condominial government and vested the power to issue

joint regulations respecting them in a British and a French High

Commissioner. This power was delegated to resident commissioners

who dealt with their respective nationals. Three governmental systemsaccordingly co-existed, with something of a legal vacuum with regard to

land tenure and the civil transactions of the indigenous population.

The process leading to the independence of the territory also reflected

its unique status as a condominium. It was noted that the usual

independence Bill would not have been appropriate, since the New

Hebrides was not a British colony. Its legal status as an Anglo- French

condominium had been established by international agreement and

could only be terminated in the same fashion. The nature of the

condominium was such that it assumed that the two metropolitan

powers would always act together and unilateral action was not

provided for in the basic constitutional documents. The territory

became independent on 30 July 1980 as the state of Vanuatu. The

entity involved prior to independence grew out of an international

treaty and established an administrative entity arguably distinct from

its metropolitan governments but more likely operating on the basis of

a form of joint agency with a range of delegated powers. The Central

American Court of Justice in 1917 held that a condominium existed

with respect to the Gulf of Fonseca providing for rights of co-ownership

of the three coastal states of Nicaragua, El Salvador and Honduras. Theissue was raised in the El Salvador/Honduras case before the

InternationalCourt of Justice. The Court noted that a condominium

arrangement being a structured system for the joint exercise of

sovereign governmental powers over a territory was normally created

by agreement between the states concerned, although it could be

created as a juridical consequence of a succession of states (as in the

Gulf of Fonseca situation itself), being one of the ways in which

territorial sovereignty could pass from one state to another. The Court

concluded that the waters of the Gulf of Fonseca beyond the three-mile

territorial sea were historic waters and subject to a joint sovereignty of


13/40


the three coastal states. It based its decision, apart from the 1917

judgment, upon the historic character of the Gulf waters, the consistent

claims of the three coastal states and the absence of protest from other

states

2)Non-fully Sovereign States:a) Protectorate:

o A State under the Protectorate of another, or of others, but retaining itsInternational personality.

o A State under such Protectorate so as to have forfeited its InternationalpersonalityThe Ionian Islands.

b)Vassal State:c) Commonwealthd)Associated Statese) Trust Territories

3)Non-typical States:i) Holy Sea / Vatican City

1850 Italy capital 1871 Pope only 1929 As state

ii) Neutral Stateiii) Neutralised States

In contradistinction to a neutral state, which holds aloof from countries in

a state of war, neutralized states are such as are officially created by

convention. These states cannot participate in a war entered into by

neighbouring states and in return be secured against attack. The Treaty of

Paris (1815) and the Treaty of Turin (1860) neutralized Switzerland and

portions of Savoy. The Treaties of 1831 and 1839 neutralized Belgium,

recognizing her as an "independent and perpetually neutral state, bound to

observe the same neutrality with reference to other states."

iv) Free Cities9. Difference

a) Confederation vs. Federationb)Vassal vs. Protectoratec) Neutral and Neutralized

10.Analysis


14/40


Recognition

Introduction Interpretation

o Kelsono Fenwick

Recognition Depends Upon Principle of Co-operation Yardstick for recognition Various Aspects of Recognition

o Stateo Governmento Insurgencyo Belligerency

Theories of Recognition of State Constitutive Recognition

o Theoryo Chief Exponentso Jurists Viewo Criticism

i) Legal Dutyii) Rights and Duties

o Examplesi) China was not recognized by USA

ii) Israel isnt accepted by Pakistan and some Arab countries Declaratory or Evidentiary Recognition

o Theoryo Chief Exponentso Jurists Viewo Criticism

Which Theory Is Opt and WorkableOppenheim

Modes of RecognitionA) De Facto Recognition

a. Viewb. Oppenheimc. Exampled. Effectse. Modes of Grant

B) De Jure Recognitiona.

Viewb. Jurists


15/40


c. Conditionsd. Examplee. Effectsf. Modes of Grant

De Facto vs. De Jure Recognitiono Natureo Revocabilityo Statuso Immunitieso Diplomatic Relationo As too Conversion

De Facto ---- De Jure De Jure ---- De Facto

o Withdrawalo Mode of Granto Practice of Stateo Successiono Sovereigntyo Courts

Legal Duty or Discretionary Act1st View: Legal Lauterpacht

2nd View: Kelson. Collins Political Discretion

Facultative TheoryChina, Russia, UK, USA

Suggestion

Jessup View

UN Supervision for recognition

Legal Effects of Recognition Right to Sue: Right of suing in the courts of the recognizing state. Effect on Enactment: Have effect of its legislation by these courts. Certain Immunities: May claim immunity from suit in regard of its property and

its diplomatic representatives.

Right to Demand Property: Entitles to demand and receive property. Certain Privileges: Privileges of membership of international community. Right of Treaties: Capacity to conclude treaties. International Obligations: Subject to various obligations under International Law.

Consequences of Recognition Other Types of Recognition

i) Expressii) Implied (Dogar)


16/40


iii) Conditionalo Mandatoryo Prohibatory

iv) Collective Is Withdrawal of Recognition Possiblei. De Facto Yes

ii. De Jure Never Retrospective Effects of Recognition

o Yeso Friendly Relations

Recognition of Governmenti. Change of Government By

a. Peacefulb. Revolution

Recognition of Insurgencyo Viewo Conditionso Effect

Recognition of Belligerencyo Viewo Conditionso Effect

Analysis


17/40


State Responsibility

1. IntroductionEvery State has its full power and sovereign control over its municipal law. In

general, International Law does not interfere with the internal law of the state.

However, at times, the State is held responsible, directly or vicariouslyfor the acts

of its nationals.

2. Interpretation Starke Cargo Camel Case (1949)

3. Explanation4. Evolution of Doctrine of State Responsibility

Old View Modern View: Hague Conference 1930

5. States Are Responsible For International Wrongful Acts Internationally wrongful act of state

Art. 3 of International Law Commission on State Responsibility (1974)

6. Types of State Responsibility Direct - by the act of the state Indirect by the acts of its individuals (the use of expression Vicarious is

surely erroneous says Brownlie)

7. State Responsibility In Different FieldsA. International Delinquencyi. By whom? President, Government

ii. How? Intervention, Breach of Treaty etc.iii. Delinquency vs. Crime

oo Entity vs. Person

B. State Responsibility For Injury to Aliens Aliens like citizens

a. For acts of individualsb. For acts of mob-violence: (Reparation of Injuries Case 1949)c. For acts of insurgents

Calvo DoctrineC. State Responsibility For Acts of Govt. OrgansD. State Responsibility For Contracts With ForeignersE. State Responsibility For Breach of Treaty / Contractual ObligationF. State Responsibility In Expropriation of Foreign Property

Ex. Nationalization of Suez Canal 1956

8. State Responsibility During WarViolation of War Rules

Art. 3 of Hague Convention 1970
http://www.lawnotes.in/International_Lawhttp://www.lawnotes.in/Vicarious_Liabilityhttp://www.lawnotes.in/Vicarious_Liabilityhttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Law


18/40


9. Consequences of State Responsibility Restitution

i) By performing the undischarged obligationii) By revocation of unlawful actiii) By abstention from further wrongful act

Indemnity (compensation) Satisfaction

o In cases where states dignity and personality is injured10.Analysis


19/40


Acquisition & Loss of Territory


Acquisition

Loss

Types of Acquisitioni) Derivative

ii) Original Modes of Acquisition

A) Occupationi. Meaning

ii. Elements Will to exercise sovereignty An exhibition of actual authority

iii. Conditionsiv. Explanationv. Case Laws

o Eastern Grounded Case (1933)o Island of Palmas Arbitration (1929)

vi. Occupation in International Law same as Possession in Civil Lawsvii. Occupation vs. Subjugation

viii.

Proximity or Contiguity Is Not Valid Legal Text For AcquisitionIndonesia vs. India for Fishing Island

B) Prescriptioni. Meaning

ii. Conditionsiii. Explanationiv. Cases of Prescription

o Immemorial Possessiono Competing Act of Sovereigntyo Acquiescence

C)Accretioni) Natural Act

ii) No Formal Assertion of Title Is NecessaryD)Cession

o By Treatyo Gratuitous or Considerationo Voluntary or Under Compulsiono Case Law: Exampleo Derivative Title

E)Annexation / Conquest

By War


20/40


ConditionF) Lease

o Lease Contracto Hong Kong, Malta Island . (UK)

G)Pledge

Part of Land Is Pledged for Money Island of Corsica to France (1768)

H)AwardI) Plebiscite

o Voting by Peopleo West Irian

J) Newly Emerged States Newly Liberated Colonies: Pakistan, India etc. Swat, Hunza, Bahawalpur etc.

K) DiscoveryPast: 16th Cent Valid

New: 21st Cent Consolidation in Reasonable Time Only

Modes of Losing Territory1. Cession

Peacefully: Estonia, Lativia and Lithuania from U.S.S.R (1991) Revolt: Bangladesh from Pakistan

2. Operation Natureo Through Earthquake - a coast of the sea or an island may disappearo Change In The Course of Rivers3. Subjugation

4. Prescription5. Recoil

o Holland, Iran, Spaino UKs --- USA (1776)

6. Derelictioni) Meaning

ii) Conditions Actual abandonment of territory The intention of giving up sovereignty over that territory

iii) Case Law (examples) Island of Santa Lucia Delegoa Bay

7. Grant of Independence to A Colony By An Imperialist State(UK) 1947 Pakistan, India

8. Gift: Pak-China9. Sale: Gawadar

Analysis


21/40


Extradition

Prelude Interpretation

Literal Oppenheim

Territorial State

Requesting State

Starke Concept of Extradition

Grotius

Basis of ExtraditionAut Punive Aut Dabare

Object / Purpose of Extradition Suppression of crime Warn the criminals from escaping Safeguards the interest of the territorial state Reciprocity International co-operation Territorial state is more likely to try the offender

Is There A General Duty of States in Respect of Extraditiono Grotius Viewo Only Treaty: Factor vs. Labubenheimero Intl Law doesnt recognize any such dutyo No Universal rule of Customary Intl Law regarding extradition

Extradition vs. Expulsion Extraditable Persons Extradition Crimes

o Pak, France, UK (Extradition Act 1870) Restrictions on Extradition

Treaty MustGanga High-jacking Case

Bilateral treaty

No Political Offencei) Meaning

ii) Cautions (1891)iii) Zia Regimeiv) Attempts

a) Belgium 1856b) Russian 1881c) 1892

Common Offence


22/40


Prima Facie Evidence No Religious Crime

i) Salman Rushdi (Malun)ii) Hafiz Saeed Art. 5 (A)

Citizenship of persons in question Rules of Speciality

Try for only case for which extradition soughtUS vs. Rausher

India vs. Pakistan same as above

No Military CrimeExtradition Act 1972

Double Criminality Formalities Terms and Conditions of Extradition Fulfilled

Pressure of The Offender Not Compulsory Analysis


23/40


Asylum


Literal: Asylum is a Latin term. a (not) + sylon (right to seizure). Hence Asylum is a

place of refuge, retreat and security.

Institute of International Law: Asylum is the protection given to a personseeking it in a territory of another State.

Elements of Asylumi) Shelter: A place where the person wants to be protected

ii) Active Protection: By another State in whose territory the person seeksprotection

(These two elements distinguishes asylum from immigration)

Basis of Asylum Object / Purpose of Asylum

To save a person from the jurisdiction of the local authorities. Extra Legal / On Humanitarian Grounds For the sake of national security

Right To Asyluma) Art. 14 Universal Declaration of H.R 1948

b) Un Declaration On Territorial Asylum 1967c) UN Conference of Plenipotentiaries on Territorial Asylum 1977

Kinds of Asylumo Territorial Asylum / Internal Asylum

When asylum is granted by a state on its own territory, it is called Territorial/

Internal Asylum.

1) Political AsylumIt is sometimes said that a fugitive has right to asylum. It is incorrect,

fugitives have no enforceable right in international law to enjoy asylum under

international law, only state has a right to grant asylum to individuals fleeing

from persecution.1. Convention on Territorial Asylum 1954

Right of the state to admit in its territory

2. Draft Declaration on AsylumArt. 1: exercise of one state be repeated

Art. 3: at burden must give refugee

3. Resolution 14th Dec. 1967i) Give asylum except security

ii) If problem in the n such nations response to granting asylumiii) Repeat to asylum by state

2)Refugees:


24/40


Above principles also apply to refugees. Most applicants for territorial asylum

will also claim status as refugees.

Refugee is a person who flees to a place of safety, esp. a foreign country, to

escape danger or persecution in own country or habitual residence because

of his race religion or political beliefs.

Convention on Status of Refugees 1951 [Art. 31, 32, 33 (same)]According to COSR, refugee is a person who owing to a well pounded fear of

being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a

particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of which he

is a national and is unable or unwilling to return to it.

Convention on Status of Refugees 1951 also provides the principle of Non-

refoulment. According to article 33, even if for some reason a state no longer

desires that a refugee remains in its territory, it may not return or expel

(Refoul) a refugee to the territories where his life or liberty may be threatened

on according of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular

social group or political opinion. This principle is now considered as binding

principle of international law. However the problem is that it does not apply

until a refugee has already been determined to be so be the host state.

3) General AsylumFor persons who have feed from their own country to seek economic

betterment but do not have status of immigrants. They do not qualify to be

refugees under COSR 1951. Neither do they have any fear of persecution

under UDHR. Such persons therefore are not asylum seekers but future

immigrants. Other persons in this category may be persons seeking asylum

not because of political or other reasons but because of natural disasters such

as famine or flood or civil war in own country.

o Extra-territorial Asylum / External Asylum1) Asylum in Foreign Legation

Modern international law recognizes no general right of head of a

mission to grant asylum in the premises of legation. Such grant is infact prohibited under international law when its effect would be to

exempt a fugitive from the regular application of laws. The back of any

general right of diplomatic asylum was affirmed by ICJ in Asylum case.

Exceptionally, but without acknowledgment of any absolute right of

fugitive to require this, asylum can be granted in legation premises in

fall cases

i) As a temporary measure, to individuals physically in dangerfrom mob disorder or mob rule or corruption in the local state,


25/40


its justification being that an urgent that is temporarily tided

over.

ii) Where there is binding custom diplomats asylum is permissible.iii) Under special treaty, between territorial state and state which is

represented by legation concerned.2)Asylum in Consular Premises3)Asylum in the Premises of International Institutions4)Asylum in War Ships

If a person after committing a crime boards a warship/ public vessel,

he cannot be arrested or removed form ship by local authorities if

consent to this course is refused by commander of the ship. Where

consent is refused, only remedy is remedy through diplomatic

challenge. Further, asylum may be granted on humanitarian grounds.

If crew breaks laws ashore, it is not protected although normally localpolice would hand them over to ships authorities for punishment or

other action, if offence is not serious or local interests are not greatly

affected.

5) Asylum in Merchant VesselsMerchant vessels are not exempt from local jurisdiction and cant

give asylum.

6)Asylum Due to Religious DifferencesQadiani

Territorial vs. Extra-territorial Asylum Definition Subject Grant Primary right Restrictions

Asylum vs. Extradition

Analysis


26/40


Nationality

Definitions Literally, Nationality is the loyalty of an individual towards the State. Nationality is

different from Citizenship andDomicile. TheInternational Court of Justice, dealing with Nottebohm Case defined Nationality

as 'A man's nationality forms a continuing state of things and not a physical fact whichoccurs at a particular moment... A man's nationality is a continuing legal relationshipbetween the sovereign state on the one hand and the citizen on the other.

Starke in An Introduction to International Law defined Nationality as 'the status ofmembership of the collectively individuals whose acts, decisions and policy arevouchsafed through the legal conception of the State representing those individuals.

Oppenheim defined Nationality as the linkthrough which an individual can enjoy thebenefits ofInternational Law.

International Importance of Nationality

1. Entitlement to diplomatic protection abroad is an essential attribute ofnationality.

2. If a state does not punish or prevent a national for his criminal acts, such statemay be liable without international law.

3. Covenant on Civil and Political rights 1966 no one shall be arbitrarilydeprived of his right to enter his own country.

4. Nationality imports allegiance. Thus a national may have to do compulsorymilitary service.

5. States may refuse to extradite own national.6. Enemy status at the time of war may be determined by nationality of person

concerned.

7. States may frequently exercise criminal or other jurisdiction on basis ofnationality.

Modes of Acquisitiono Depends upon legislation of each stateo Recognized modes are as follows

A) By Birth: Each state provides acquisition of nationality by birth 2 Principles apply

a) Jus Sanguinisb) Jus Soli

i) Jus Sanguinis:- (by descend) Nationality of Father (Pakistan, India)

For legitimate child

Nationality of Father Where Father Resides in Foreign LandWhere Birth Took Place

(Nationality laws of Belgium)
http://www.lawnotes.in/Domicilehttp://www.lawnotes.in/Domicilehttp://www.lawnotes.in/Domicilehttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Lawhttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Lawhttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Lawhttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Lawhttp://www.lawnotes.in/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://www.lawnotes.in/Domicile


27/40


Nationality of One of Childs Parents Irrespective of Sex,Legtimacy of Child

(French nationality Code)

Only one generation allowed transmission of citizenship bydescent of father working abroad except Govt. duty

(British Nationality Act 1981)

Illegitimate Child Takes His Mothers Citizenshipii) Jus Soli:- (By Soil, Territory)

Paraguay Constitution of 1940o It born in Paraguayan lando It born abroad of Paraguayan

Parents were one of the

Parents in Govt. Service of the Republic of Paraguay at the

time of the birth

French Nationalityo It born in France and parents are unknowno If parents are foreigner and child does not acquire their

nationality

British Nationality Act 1981o Abolishes Jus Soli Principleo Abuse law to give birth to child in UK for nationalityo British birth certificate is no longer evidence of British

Citizenship

B) By Naturalisation Grant of Nationality to alien by a formal act an application of Acquisition of some other countrys nationality by a person.

Certain requirements are to be fulfilled for naturalisation

a) Modes of Naturalisation1. Involuntary

Hudsons View

Marriage Adoption Legitimation Appointment as University Teacher Appointment as Public Servant

2. Voluntary Prolonged Residence Option of Choice

A. Marriageo Traditional View

Wife acquires her husbands nationality

Wife loses her nationality after marriageo Modern View


28/40


General Assembly Convention on The Nationality of

Married Women 1957

Contracting marriage with alien Dissolution of marriage Change of husbands nationality during marriage

Doesnt effect automatically wifes nationality

B.AdoptionAdopted child acquires nationality of the adopter

[The British Nationality Act 1981 u/s 1(5)]

C. LegitimationLegitimated child acquires nationality of his father

(The British Nationality Act 1981 u/s 470)

C)By Resumption: Relinquish and start again

D)By Subjugation: One state conquered by another and hence nationality of itspeople changes

E) By Cessation: A State is ceded in another StateF) By Migration: To leave one country or region to settle or work for a period in

another

G)Long Service in StateH)Legislature

Related Cases

Liechtenstein vs Guatemala (Nottembohm Case (1955)) Belgium vs Spain (ICJ Reports 1970)

Modes of Losing Nationality1) By Release2) By Deprivation3)

By Renunciation

4) B Substitution5) By long standing residence6) Removal


29/40


Intervention


o Oppenheimo

Explanation Types of Intervention

a) Diplomatic: threat by speechb) Military: direct attack

Principle of Non-interventiono Viewo Rules

a. 2(7)b. 2(4)c. Resolution 2131 (1965)d. Panama Charter (1973)

Grounds of InterventionA/Self Defence

i) Oppenheimii) Corolive Case (1941)

iii) Nuremburg Tribunal (1946)iv) Mancuria Case (Art. 51 UN Charter)v) Self Defence

vi) Self-PreservationB/Humanitarian Grounds

a) Past: England, France, Russia ---- Turkey/Greek (1827)b) Present: UN Art, 3(7)

C/To Enforce Treaty Righti) England with Belgium 1939

ii) America in Cuba (1963)iii) Now u/a 2(7) UN

D/To Prevent Illegal Interventioni) England helped Portugal (1926)

ii) NowE/Balance of Powers

i) Pastii) New

Art. 24, Collective Security

F/ Protection of Person and Propertyi) Past

ii) Present


30/40


G/Collective Interventioni) Chap. III UN Charter

ii) UN against Korea (1950)Congo (1961)H/Intervention in Civil Wars

i) Past: Spain War (1936-37)ii) Now: UN in Congo (1961)

Concept of Domestic Jurisdiction1. Art. 2(7) UN Charter2. Art. 15 Covenant of League of Nations

a) League Council to decideb) Prove domestic jurisdictionc) 2(7). If not covered by UN then it falls in domestic

Important Doctrineso Monroe Doctrineo Drogo Doctrine

Analysis


31/40


Treaty

Ratification Art. 14, Art. 2 (1) (b)i) Definition

ii) Objectiii) Nature: retrospectiveiv) Art. 14: when required?v) Reasons for Ratification

a) Sovereigntyb) Lengthy Discussionc) Amendment in Stated) Parliament Check

vi) Is Ratification to Be Donevii) Consequences of Non-ratification

Interpretation of Treaty Art. 31, 32, 33i) Grammatical

ii) Object & Contextiii) Reasonableiv) Effectivenessv) Extrinsic Material

vi) Treaty Law 1969Art. 31

a) Good Faithb) Ordinary Meaningc) Context

o Preambleo Annexureo Agreement leading to conclusiono Relating to conclusion

d) Object / Purposee)

Subsequent Agreementf) Subsequent Practice

g) Relevant Intl RolesArt. 32

a) Preparatory work and treatyb) Circumstances of Conclusion

Art. 33

a)All text authoritative unless treaty says

b) Other language is good only if treaty says


32/40


c) Presumption of terms of treaty same in alld) If conflict in authentic interpretation then best reasonable

interpretation shall prevail


33/40


Blockade


Oppenheim Starke

Explanation Objectives Elements

o By men of waro Act of waro Ingress / egresso Effectiveo Impartiality

Conditions1. Continuous2. Effectiveness3. Impartiality4. G5. Sufficient Force6. Declaration, Notification7. Limits of Area8. Establishment

End of Blockadei) Victory

ii) Withdrawniii) Settlementiv) Defeatv) Blockade Violated

vi) Move away Ships Violation of Blockade

a) US, UK notificationb) France, Italy warn

Kinds of BlockadeA. PeacefulB. Forceful

Forms of Blockade1) Strategic2) Long Distance3) Blockade Defacto


34/40


4) Military5) Economic

Consequences of Violationi) Past

ii) Present Analysis


35/40


United Nations

Introduction Historical Background United Nation legal person of Intl Law Origin of U.N

i) The declaration of St. James Palace (1941)ii) The Atlantic Charter (1941)

iii) The United Nations Declaration (19412)iv) Moscow declaration (1943)v) The Tehran Conference (1943)

vi) Conference (1944)vii) The Yalta Conference (1945)viii) Conference

Preamble of U.N Charter-we the people of united nations

Legal Character of U.N Purpose of U.N

To maintain Intl Peace/ Security To develop friendly relations among nations Intl c-operation in solving Intl Problems of economic, social, cultural.. To make UN for the attainment of the above common ends

Principles of the United Nationo Sovereign equality of all memberso Obligations to be fulfilled in good faitho Peaceful settlement of Intl disputeso Principle of Non-interventiono Assistance in common actiono Non-intervention in domestic matters of state

Membershipo Originalo Admission

Withdrawal of State Member from U.N Expulsion of Member from U.N Suspension of Membership Principle Organs of U.N

i) General Assemblyii) S.C

iii) I.C.Jiv) Trusteeship Council


36/40


v) The Economic and Social Councilvi) The Secretariat

League of Nations vs. United nationi) Basis

ii) Principle Organsiii) Subjectiv) Furicliousv) Decision Making

vi) Veto Powersvii) Withdrawal

viii) Separation of Powersix) Interventionx) Implementation

xi) Human Rightsxii) War

xiii) N Forcexiv) Scopexv) Court

xvi) Civil Servicexvii) New-members

xviii) Regional Agreementxix) Self-defencexx) Responsibility to Give Force Assistance

Analysis


37/40


Settlement of International

Disputes

Introduction Interpretation Origin of Rules and Procedure Types of Settlement

1. Amicable MeansA)Arbitration Settlement

i) Meaningii) Termsiii) Selection of Arbitratoriv) Art. 15 of the Hague Convention 1899v) History

a) Jay Treaty of 1794b)Alabama Claim Arbitration 1872c) Adoption of Hague Convention 1899 9codified)d) Establishment of P.C of Arbitratione) Kutch arbitration 1968 (Pak-India)

vi) Advantages / DisadvantagesB) Judicial Settlements

a) Backgroundo P.C.I.J (League of Nations)o I.C.J (United Nation)

b) ExampleWar Criminal 1971 (Pak-India)

c) Distance b/w Arbitration and JudicialC) Extra-Judicial Peaceful Settlements

Negotiation Good Offices (just services) Mediation (active role by 3rd party) Conciliation (communism independent) Enquiry Under UNO Organs

2. Coercive SettlementsA) Retortion

1. Meaning2. Example3.

UNO Charter

B) Reprisals


38/40


1) Starke2) Conditions3) Israeli Bombardment4) UNO Charter Prohibits5)

Friendly Relation Declaration6) Reprisal vs. Retortion

7) KindsC) Embargo

Stop ships which are within territory

D)Pacific Blockadei. Meaning

ii. Kindsiii. Art. 42 UNO Charteriv. Example

Cuba by USA 1962E) InterventionF)War and Non-war Action

3. Analysis


39/40


Diplomatic Agents

Introduction Interpretation of Terms

Diplomatic Agent Receiving State Sending State

Classification of Diplomatic Agents Congress of Vienna 1815 Congress of Aix-la-Chappete 1818 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961 .. Art. 14(1)

Appointment of Diplomatic Agents Ascertainment of Acceptance Formal Acceptance on Persona Grata

Reception Procedure of Diplomatic Agento Letter of Credenceo Sealed Officiallyo Copy to Foreign Officeo Original to President/Head of Stateo Formal Ceremony

Circumstances Under Which State Can Refuse Acceptance of Diplomatic Agents Functions of Diplomatic Agents

Representation of Sending State Protection of Interests of sending State Negotiation and Mediation Ascertainment by Lawful Means the Conditions and Developments in

Receiving State

Promotion of Friendly Relations Basis of Immunities & Privileges of Diplomatic Agents

A/Theory of Extra-Territorialityo Theory

Deemed outside jurisdiction of receiving state

Conventional Theory

o CriticismProf. Oppenheim,

Fenwick Dee

The Vienna Convention 1961

o Case Lawsi. Bergman vs. De Sieyes (1946)

(District Court of New York)


40/40

Foreign Minister is alter ego of sovereign

ii. Ex-Party Petroff (1971)(S.C of Australia)

Australian 2 citizens

Russian chancery Claimed extra-territoriality Rejected Plea

B/

international law handouts

Documents