Final Flashcards
Jus Gentium
a law of nations
Respublica v De Longchamps (Pre-colonial US court)
Issue: It must be determined on the principles of the law of nations, which form a part of the municipal law of Pennsylvania; and if the offenses charged in the indictment have been committed, there can be no doubt, that those laws have been violated
“This law, in its full extent, is part of the law of this state, and is to be collected from the practice of different nations, and the authority of writers. The person of a public minister is sacred and inviolable. Whoever offers any violence to him, not only affronts the sovereign he represents, but also hurts the common safety and well-being of nations- he is guilty of a crime against the whole world.”
Erga Omes
(crime) against all
Murray v Schooner Charming Betsy (US Supreme Court)
Issue: Is the Charming Betsy subject to seizure and condemnation for having violated a law of the United States?
Charming betsy Rule: “an act of Congress ought never to be construed to violate the law of nations, if any other possible construction remains, and consequently can never be construed to violate neutral rights, or to affect neutral commerce, further than is warranted by the law of nations as understood in this country.”
Treaty of Westphalia- 1648
carved Europe into nation states to bring an end to 30 years war. Brought into the lexicon the idea of sovereignty
Difference between state and nation
Nation= not a recognized state, but has a well defined territory. Examples: Kurdish nation, navajo and cherokee nations.
Difference between federal state and unitary state
Unitary= one unified central government Federal= central government with internal, somewhat autonomous independent states
The equality of states
Each state has the same legal rights as other states. “No principle of general law is more universally acknowledged, than the perfect equality of nations.”
The Montevideo Convention: 4 qualifications for a state
- A permanent population
- A defined territory
- Government
- Capacity to enter into relations with other states
In Re Duchy of Sealand (Administrative Court of Cologne)
Issue: The plaintiff seeks a declaration that he has lost his German citizenship as a result fo his acquisition of the citizenship of the so-called “dutchy of Sealand” from 14 November 1975
A State community must play a more decisive role in serving the other vital human needs of people from their birth to their death. These needs include eduction and professional training, assistance in all the eventualities of life and the provision of subsistence allowances where necessary
Can U.S. courts hear questions from unrecognized states?
No, this leads to political question.
De facto government
“In Fact” (effective control)
De Jure government
“Legal Government”
Disembratio
(dismemberment) in international law means the complete dissolution of the predecessor State and replacement by several successor States.
Republic of Croatia et al. V. Girocredit Ban A.G. der Sparkassen (Supreme Court of Australia)
Issue: question as to whether the assets invested by the National Bank of the SFRY in Austria were held by the National Bank as an independent legal entity or constituted State property (in terms of international law) are to be assessed according to the domestic law of the SFRY
In the case of disembration, state property is to be distributed according to the international principle of “equity”; passing of movable State property to the successor States in “equitable proportions”. Hence, each member of this community has a private law claim to the maintenance of the status quo, thus also a legal claim against the Defendant to desist from any disposal of such property as long as the successor States do not jointly dispose of such funds and assets.
Ex aequo et bono
what’s fair and equitable at the case in hand
The Tinoco Arbitration (Treaty of arbitration)
Issue: (1) Great Britain contends, first, that the Tinoco government was the only government of Costa Rica. (2) Second, that the succeeding government could not by legislative decree avoid responsibility for acts of that government affecting British subjects
The principles of the continuity of states. The state is bound by engagements entered into by government that have ceased to exist; the restored government is generally liable for the acts of the usurper.
Principle of the continuity of states (majority and minority rule)
Majority rule: ‘Clean Slate rule’: started more after WW2 in regards to former colonies
Minority rule: “Continuity” A government that establishes itself and maintains a peaceful de facto administration need not to conform to previous constitution, and non-recognition of the government by other governments does not destroy the de facto status of the government.
Autocephalous Greek-Orthodox Church of Cyprus v. Goldberg & Feldman Fine Arts, Inc. (U.S. Supreme Court)
Issue: Goldberg argues that several decrees of the TFSC (the entity established in Northern Cyprus by the Turkish military immediately after the 1974 invasion) divested the Church of title to the mosaics.
2 kinds of “de facto governments”
- Is such as exists after it has expelled the regularly constituted authorities from the seats of power and the public offices, and established its own functionaries in their places, so as to represent in fact the sovereignty of the nation. This kind of de facto government is treated as in most respects possessing rightful authority and its legislation is in general recognized
- Is such as exists where a portion of the inhabitants of a country have separated themselves from the parent State and established an independent government. The validity of its acts, both against the parent State and its citizens or subjects, depends entirely upon its ultimate success if it succeed, and become recognized, its acts from the commencement of its existence are uphed as those of an independent nation
Reference re Secession of Quebec (Supreme Court of Canada)
Issue: Does international law give the National Assembly, legislature of government of Quebec the right to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally. In this regard, is there a right to self-determination under international law that would give the National Assembly, the legislature of government of Quebec the right to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally.
“All peoples have the right to self determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” International law grants the right to self-determination to “peoples.” Accordingly, access to the right requires the threshold step of characterizing as a people the group seeking self-determination. It is clear that “a people” may include only a portion of the population of an existing state; the reference to “people” does not necessarily mean the entirety of a state’s population.
Difference between internal and external self-determination
“Internal” self-determination is a peoples pursuit of its political, economic, social and cultural development within the framework of an existing state
“External self determination is the establishment of a sovereign and independent state, the free association or integration with an independent State or the emergence into any other political status freely determined by a people constitute modes of implementing the right of self-determination by that people
Helsinki Final act
refers to peoples having the right to determine “their internal and external political status”, that statement is immediately followed by express recognition that the participating states will at all times act, as stated in the Helsinki Final Act, “in conformity with the purpose and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the relevant norms of international law, including those relating to territorial integrity of states.”
3 situations that allow for the exercise of external self-determination
(1) Former Colonies
(2) where a people is oppressed, as for example under foreign military occupation
(3) where a definable group is denied meaningful access to government to pursue their political, economic, social and cultural development.
In all 3 situations, the people in question are entitled to a right to external self-determination because they have been denied the ability to exert internally their right to self-determination
Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo (ICJ advisory opinion)
Issue: Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?
In instances of illegality attached to declarations of independence, stem not from the unilateral character of the declarations, but from the fact that they were, or would have been, connected with the unlawful use of force or other egregious violations of norms of general international law.
4 types of jurisdiction for ICJ
(1) State in contentious proceedings
(2) Compulsory (paragraph 2 of article 36, states must recognize)
(3) Cases referred to it by parties
(4) Advisory opinion requests- questions brought by the security council or another specialized agency
The Diplomatic and Consular Staff Case (Iran hostage)) (ICJ opinion)
Issue: Preliminary question of whether the ICJ has jurisdiction
Article 53 of the Statute requires the Court, before deciding in favor of an Applicant’s claim, to satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction, in accordance with Articles 36 and 37, empowering it to do so
Proprio Motu= Official act without a formal request
Proprio motu
official act without a formal request
Self judging provisions
States will typically stipulate that ICJ will not have jurisdiction over domestic matters, as determined by that state (U.S. Connally Amendment)
Vandemburg amendment provided that the U.S. 36(2) declaration would not apply to disputes arising under a multilateral treaty, unless…
(1) all parties to the treaty affected by the decision are also parties to the case before the Court, or (2) the United States of America specialty agrees to jurisdiction.
Legal consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palesinian Territory (ICJ opinion)
Issue: Argued in this case that the adoption by the General Assembly of resolutions ES-10/14 was Ultra vires as not in accordance with Article 12
When seised of a request for an advisory opinion, the Court must first consider whether it has jurisdiction to give the opinion requested and whether, should the answer be in the affirmative, there is any reason why it should decline to exercise any such jurisdiction
Given its responsibilities as the “principal judicial organ of the United Nations” (Article 92 of the Charter), the Court should in principle not decline to give an advisory opinion. In accordance with its consistent jurisprudence, only “compelling reason” should lead the Court to refuse its opinion. (ICJ has always agreed to advisory requests)
GATT Treaty
Part of the World-trade organization.
Goal of a more free economic system
Doctrine of abus de droit
prohibits the abusive exercise of a state’s right and enjoins that whenever the assertion of a right “impinges on the field covered by a treaty obligation, it must be exercised bona fide, that is to say, reasonably
Unjustified Discrimination (GATT)
It is not acceptalbe, in international trade relations, for one WTO Member to use an economic embargo to require other Members to adopt essentially the same comprehensive regulatory program, to achieve a certain policy goal, as that in force within that Member’s territory, without taking into consideration different conditions which may occur in the territories of those other members
Arbitrary discrimination
The provisions of Article X:3 of the GATT 1994 bear upon this matter. Rigorous compliance with the fundamental requirements of due process should be required in the application and administration of a measure which purports to be an exception to the treaty obligations of the Member imposing the measure and which effectively results in a suspension pro hac vice of the treaty rights of other Members.
Shrimp Turtle Case
The task of interpreting and applying the chapeau is, hence, essentially the delicate one of locating and marking out a line of equilibrium between the right of a Member to invoke an exception under Article XX and the rights of the other Members under varying substantive provisions (e.g.,, Article XI) of the GATT 1994, so that neither of the competing rights will cancel out the other and thereby distort and nullify or impair the balance of rights and obligations constructed by the Members themselves in that Agreement.
Unilateral actions to deal with environmental challenges outside the jurisdiction of the importing country should be avoided. Environmental measures addressing transboundary or global environmental problems should, as far as possible, be based on international consensus
The Reparation Case (ICJ advisory opinion)
Issue: Does the UN possess international personality?
U.N. has international personality. In the event of an agent of the United Nation in the performance of his duties suffering injury in circumstances involving the responsibility of a Member State, the United Nations as an Organization has the capacity to bring an international claim against the responsible de jure or de facto government with a view to obtaining the reparation due in respect of the damage caused to the United Nations
NGO’s
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are created under municipal law rather than by interstate agreement
Although some NGOs have links to governments or receive government grants, most are private, not-for-profit entities, receiving all their support from individual members or private contributions
Friends of the Earth Case (European Court of Justice)
Issue: Whether the action brought by Friends of the Earth ought not to be allowed on the basis of Article 10a of that directive
Where Member States lay down the detailed procedural rules governing actions for safeguarding rights which individuals derive from EU law, those detailed rules might not be less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (principle of equivalence) and must not make it in practice impossible or excessively difficult to exercise the rights conferred by EU law (principle of effectiveness)
Precautionary principle
when there is an issue about the applicability of environmental control must err on the side of administering environmental law
The Nottebohm Case (ICJ)
Issue: Guatemala objected that Liechtenstein was not a state that could legitimately protect Nottebohm before the court
Different factors are taken into consideration, and their importance will vary from one case to the next: the habitual residence of the individual concerned is an important factor, but there are other factors such as the centre of his interests, his family ties, his participation in public life, attachment shown by him for a given country and inculcated in his children…
‘Genuine link’ requirement for naturalization
3 types of international courts
(1) Specialized Tribunal
(2) ICC
(3) Hybrid courts; mixes national and foreign judges on hybrid national/international criminal tribunals (example; military courts)
International Criminal Court (ICC)
Based on the Rome statute, U.S. helped found but is not a member. Preferred policy of U.S. of bilateral treaties
U.S. is not a signatory, however, ICC relies upon Security Council, thereby allowing U.S. to exercise veto power. Problem from U.S. perspective is that disputes between states are not subject to security council and therefore no veto power
What crimes are covered by ICC and the Rome Statute?
(1) Crimes against aggression (2) war crimes and (3) crimes against humanity
The Barcelona Traction Case (ICJ)
Issue: The Spanish government contends that the Belgian nationality of the shareholders is not proven and that the trustee or the nominees must be regarded as the true shareholders in the case of the shares concerned
When a State admits into its territory foreing investments or foreign nationals, whether natural or juristic persons, it is bound to extend to them the protection of the law and assumes obligations concerning the treatment to be afforded them. These obligations however, are neither absolute nor unqualified. In particular, an essential distinction should be drawn between the obligations of a State towards the international community as a whole, and those arising vis-a-vis another State in the field of diplomatic protection. By their very nature the former are the concern of all States. In view of the importance of the rights involved, all States can be held to have a legal interest in their protection; they are obligations erga omnes. Domestic law generally governs corporate law: international law has had to recognize the corporate entity as an institution created by States in a domain essentially within their domestic jurisdiction. This in turn requires that, whenever legal issues arise concerning the rights of State with regard to the treatment of companies and shareholders, as to which rights international law has not established its own rules, it has to refer to the relevant rules of municipal law. Consequently, in view of the relevance to the present case of the rights of the corporate entity and its shareholders under municipal law, the Courts must devote attention to the nature and interrelation of those rights.
In international veil piercing, two particular situations must be studied
(1) the case of the company having ceased to exists and (2) the case of the company’s State lacking capacity to take action on its behalf (has country abandoned corporation?)
Nuremberg Judgement
(1) Crimes Against Peace: Namely planning, preparation, initiation, or waging a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing:
(2) War Crimes: namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deporation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity (exist after outbreak of conflict)
(3) Crimes Against Humanity: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated
What was the significant change in definition of crimes against international law after Nuremburg
Crimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit such crimes can the provisions of international law be enforced
The utility of International Criminal Courts
There seem to be four kinds of goals advanced for the creation of international criminal courts: (1) justice and punishment, (2) deterrence, (3) record-keeping, and (4) the progressive development of international law. So far, practice shows that achievement of the first two goals- justice/punishment and deterrence- has been spotty at best. However, the utility of international criminal tribunals has been surer of the other two aims- record keeping and the progressive development of international law.
UN Human Rights Articles
Article 55: With a view to the creation of conditions of stability and well-being which are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, the United Nations shall promote:
a. higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development;
b. solutions of international economic, social, health, and related problems; and international cultural and educational cooperation; and
c. universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.
Article 56: All Members pledge themselves to take joint and separate action in co-operation with the Organization for the achievement of the purposes set forth in Article 55.
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
Was signed on November 4, 1950. This formed the basis for what would be the European Court of Human Rights.
The Sunday Times Case (European Court of Human Rights)
Issue: regarded newspaper articles about a defective drug. Issue of article 10 of the European Convention. Balance of “maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary” against the public interest of families to be properly informed. All about “proportionality”
Article 10 of the European Convention holds:
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises
(2) The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation of rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
The Soering Case (European Court of Human Rights)
Issue: regarded the extradition of an indivdiual prosecuted for murder where he would face the death penalty in the United States. Issue of article 3 of the European Convention. Clashing of article 3 (which doesn’t allow for death penalty) and article 2 which allows for execution following conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law.
Case-law that a person’s deportation or extradition may give rise to an issue under Article 3 of the Convention where there are serious reasons to believe that the individual will be subjected, in the receiving State, to treatment contrary to that Article
“Later in time” principle
means that when an extradition treaty conflicts with congressional action, whichever occurs later in time prevails
Extradition treaties are almost always qualified (i.e. have exceptions)
(1) Exception of double criminality (must be a crime in both states)
(2) Political crime exception
The McCann Case (European Court of Human Rights)
Case illustrates an international legal rule made by a treaty, adjudicated by an international court, and enforced by a regional international legal system (case involved shooting of IRA)
Shooting was a violation of Article 2 of the convention.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)
Principal goals and the procedures to be followed: reconciliation, amnesty, reparation, and the search for truth. On the search for truth it declares that it is deemed necessary to make the findings known in order to prevent a repetition of such acts in future.
The “Committee on Amnesty”
unlike the TRC, is a quasi judicial body. An amnesty committee considers applications for amnesty and may grant amnesty if it is satisfied that the applicant has committed an act constituting “a gross violation of human rights” and made “a full disclosure of all relevant facts,” and that the act to which the application relates is “an act associated with a political objective committed in the course of conflicts of the past.”
The Eastern Greenland Case (Pre-WW2 court)
Issue: Whether the Ihlen declaration- even if not constituting a definitive recognition of Danish sovereignty- did not constitute an engagement obliging Norway to refrain from occupying any part of Greenland
In terms of unilateral declarations, see if there was a “bargain” or “estoppel + reliance” (think contracts)
Declarations made by way of unilateral acts, concerning legal or factual situations, may have the effect of creating legal obligations. Declarations of this kind may be, and often are, very specific. When it is the intention of the State making the declaration that it should become bound according to its terms,that intention confers on the declaration the character of a legal undertaking, the State being thenceforth legally required to follow a course of conduct consistent with the declaration. An undertaking of this kind, if given publicly, and with an intent to be bound, even though not made within the context of international negotiations, is binding. In these circumstances, nothing in the nature of a quid pro quo nor any subsequent acceptance of the declaration, nor even any reply or reaction from other states, is required for the declaration to take effect, since such a requirement would be inconsistent with the strictly unilateral nature of the judicial act by which the pronouncement by the state is made.