Public International Law Flashcards
Are the “Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts” adopted by the International Law Commission legally binding?
No, the articles are not legally binding in themselves. While they do not have the character of binding rules of law, they contribute to the identification and development of customary international law. While the articles are not treaties, they are considered by many as an authoritative restatement of customary international law on this specific topic.
How do the “Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts” adopted by the International Law Commission become binding?
The articles become binding as they contribute to the development of customary international law through state practice and opinio juris, reflecting a general and consistent practice of states accompanied by a belief that such practice is legally required (opinio juris).
How could a claim arising from a wrongful act be barred due to time elapsed before the ICJ?
Acquiescence, in the context of Article 45 of the “Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts,” refers to a situation where the injured State, through its conduct, is considered to have validly accepted or given its implied consent to the lapse of the claim for responsibility against the responsible State. It involves the passive acceptance or non-opposition to the wrongful act, suggesting that the injured State, by its behavior, has waived the right to invoke responsibility for the internationally wrongful act committed by another State. Acquiescence is a form of implied agreement or acceptance through inaction or silence.
General Principles: Estoppel (Common Law), Forfeiture (Civil Law).
Reparation claim Poland against Germany. How could such a claim be barred by the ICJ?
Abuse of procedure, good faith
What was the international court under the League of Nations?
How does it relate to the International Court of Justice?
The Permanent Court of International Justice
The ICJ is basically a copy paste of the Permanent Court of International Justice
Regarding Russia, what can be said about the adherence to international public law?
Russian Federation is always explaining its actions by reference to international law. It’s almost universally true. Even states that are clearly in breach of international legal obligations. International law seems to be impossible to rejecting states. No state wishes to be excluded.
How did Judge Crawford (ICJ) describe international law? What are the necessary elements?
1) Core: Institutions and associated rules
2) Interstate relations
3) Principle of formal equality of states
4) Capacity of governments to represent the state
5) Processes of treaty making
Give 4 examples of how states can be differentiated
1) Capitalist and communist countries during the Cold War
2) Developed and developing states
3) Great powers and small states
4) Seafaring nations and coastal states
What is the role of IL in the international system?
Providing for cooperation on shared interests (global public goods)
1) Environmental stewardship
2) Peace
3) Health
4) Non-use of weapons of mass destruction and non-nuclear proliferation
5) Common trade rules
Permanent Court of International Justice, 1927, Lotus Case. What is international law?
International law governs relations between independent states.
International law governs the relations between independent states according to the Permanent Court of International Justice (1927). C. Jenks (1958) believed it was more than that. Explain.
International law represents the common law of mankind in an early stage of development, of which the law governing the relations between states is one, but only one, major division.
How is international law distinct from domestic law?
Different to domestic law, which usually has:
* recognised body to legislate or create laws
* hierarchy of courts with compulsory jurisdiction to settle
disputes over such laws
* accepted system of enforcing those laws
* Generally Assembly, ICJ and Security Council do not fulfil these role
What is Judge Mohammed Bedjaoui’s perspective on the foundation and nature of international law, as expressed in his statement from 1991?
Judge Mohammed Bedjaoui asserts that international law, unlike municipal law, primarily relies on the consent of states, either express or tacit. He contends that international law functions more as a law of coordination among sovereign states rather than a law of subordination, emphasizing the absence of a centralized coercive apparatus akin to that found in municipal legal systems.
What could be an argument that international law is not true law?
Critics contend that, unlike municipal laws that can be enforced through a centralized legal system within a sovereign state, international law lacks a universal coercive authority to ensure compliance. The challenge of enforcing rules against entire nations, particularly powerful ones, raises skepticism about the effectiveness and legitimacy of international law as a true legal system. The absence of a global enforcement mechanism, according to this view, undermines the traditional characteristics associated with legal systems.
What could be an argument that international law is true law?
The argument supporting the classification of international law as true law is grounded in the widespread and consistent adherence to its principles and obligations by nations. Scholars such as Louis Henkin and Brierly contend that the near-universal observance of international law by almost all nations, most of the time, provides compelling evidence for its existence. They emphasize that states not only recognize the existence of international law but also acknowledge their obligations to adhere to it. The analogy is drawn to municipal law, where individuals may violate laws, yet neither individuals nor states commonly assert that they are above the law, indicating a fundamental recognition and acceptance of the binding nature of international legal principles.
Give four examples how international law can be enforced
- Sanctions (Security Council etc)
- Judicial enforcement
- Loss of legal rights and privileges
- Self-help (WTO etc)
Give an example of an international organization that was established independently from states and has transpired into binding international law for states
In 1863, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) was founded with the primary objective of providing humanitarian aid and protection to individuals affected by armed conflicts. Subsequently, the development of the Geneva Conventions marked a crucial step in the “humanization” of conflict. This concept refers to the efforts to mitigate the impact of war on both combatants and civilians through the establishment of international legal instruments.
When were the United Nations and the International Court of Justice established?
Both in 1946
Which two important IOs were established in the 1990s?
1995: WTO
1998: Rome Treaty to establish the International Criminal Court
Domestic law has
- Constitution
- Legislature
- Hierarchy of courts
- Executive orders
What are the analogues in international law?
- No constitution, legislature, court hierarchy or executive
- Challenge of discovering where the law is
What is the oldest original source of international law?
Custom.
Is an agreement between the IMF and a member state a treaty?
No. A treaty is an international agreement concluded between STATES in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.
What are the two elements of customary international law? (including sub-elements)
Material element
* State practice
* Extent of practice
* Dissenting states and persistent objectors
* Duration of practice
Psychological element
* General practice is due to a feeling of legal obligation
According to the ILC draft conclusions on identification of customary international law,
2018, what is evidence for state practice?
- Practice may take a wide range of forms. It includes both physical and verbal acts. It may, under certain circumstances, include inaction.
- Forms of State practice include, but are not limited to:
diplomatic acts and correspondence;
conduct in connection with resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference;
conduct in connection with treaties;
executive conduct, including operational conduct “on the ground”;
legislative and administrative acts [of national governments]; and
decisions of national courts
In what form can state practice be used as evidence for state practice?
The statements can be made 1) about the law that is in force or 2) about the law which is desired to be established and 1) against the national interest or 2) for the national interest.
Most value as evidence has statements about the law that is in force against the national interest.
Can treaties be extended to bind third parties without their consent?
No, according to art. 34 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
However, the treaty purports to be declaratory of customary international law or if it can be established that it was intended to be declaratory of customary international law, then may be accepted as valid evidence of state of customary rule (North Sea Continental Shelf Cases).
According to the North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (1969), what are the three requirements for treaties to become customary international law?
- 1 convention provision must be of a fundamentally norm-creating character
- 2 must be widespread/representative participation in convention, particularly of those state whose interests are specifically affected;
- 3 must be opinio juris reflected in extensive state practice
Can conduct of international organizations be evidence of customary international law?
Yes, with reference to states’ relations to organizations, records of the cumulative
practice of international organisations may be regarded as evidence of customary
international law according to an advisory opinion of the ICJ.
When may a provision in a resolution adopted by an international organization
or at an intergovernmental conference constitute customary international law?
If it is established that the provision corresponds to a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio juris).
Material element: extent of practice (4 points)
- Should be ‘extensive’ (North Sea Continental Shelf cases)
- Must be common and widespread practice, although universal practice not necessary
- If practice is not widespread or general, may still be local or regional customary rule, - Asylum case (1950)
- Practice of specially affected states is also often significant – e.g. coastal states with a
continental shelf in the North Sea Continental Shelf (& not landlocked states)
Material element: duration of practice - is it necessary for a practice to have been applied for a long time?
No. Although the passage of only a short period of time is not necessarily, of itself, a bar to the formation of a new rule of customary law … within the period in question, short though
it might be, state practice … should have been both extensive and virtually uniform” (ICJ, North Sea Continental Shelf Cases).
The factor is relatively unimportant.
How can states be exempt from a customary international rule?
A persistent objector may not be bound by the eventual customary rule if it fulfils 2 conditions:
- objections must have been maintained from early stages of rule onwards
- objections must have been maintained consistently, to protect interests of other States
Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries case (1951) ICJ. Re Norway calculation of territorial sea.
ICJ found Norway not bound by existing general rule of customary law.
Do newly independent states have to accept international customary law?
See UN Charter: All states must accept principles including settlement of disputes ‘in conformity with the principles of justice and international law’ (Article 1(1)).
Explain the psychological element for international customary law
“opinio juris sive necessitatis” = belief (or opinion) of law or of necessity
High threshold of proof applied by courts. Proving OJ difficult
Evidence of a general practice, or the previous court judgments, may be taken as evidence of opinion juris (e.g. Gulf of Maine case (1984).
Also: UN General Assembly resolutions & other IO decisions (How a state votes is key)
What three ICJ cases are used most to apply international customary law?
- Asylum Case (ICJ) regarding proof of customary law
- North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (ICJ) regarding material elements of customary law (different from general ones)
- Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion (ICJ) regarding psychological element
Describea case in which the ICJ held that there was no customary international law
Columbia v. Peru (ICJ), Asylum Case
The Colombian government granted a Peruvan person asylum, but the Peruvian government refused to grant him safe passage out of Peru.
Colombia maintained that according to the Conventions in force - the Bolivian Agreement of 1911 on Extradition, the Havana Convention of 1928 on Asylum, the Montevideo Convention of 1933 on Political Asylum[2] - and according to American International Law, they were entitled to decide if asylum should be granted and their unilateral decision on this was binding on Peru.
Firstly, the Court found that there was an inability to discern a constant and uniform rule regarding diplomatic asylum in Latin-American states.
Secondly, even if it could be supposed that such a custom existed between certain Latin-American states, the Court held that it could not be invoked against Peru. This was due to Peru’s explicit rejection of the alleged custom, as evidenced by its non-ratification of the Montevideo Conventions of 1933 and 1939, which were the first to include a rule concerning the qualification of the offense in matters of diplomatic asylum.
In the Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion (ICJ), the court addressed the question if the use of nuclear weapons is illegal. What did the court find?
Discuss
1) Opinio juris
2) Diferent poles
3) Conclusion
The members of the international community are profoundly divided on the matter of whether non-recourse to nuclear weapons over the past 50 years constitutes the expression of an opinio juris. Under these circumstances the Court does not consider itself able to find that there is such an opinio juris.
The two poles in this discussion:
- States alleging illegality: ‘They refer to a consistent practice of non-utilization of nuclear weapons by States since 1945 and they would see in that practice the expression of an opinio juris on the part of those who possess such weapons’.
- States defending legality: Doctrine of deterrence, not opinio juris, is explanatory of no-use.
The Court held that there is no source of international law that explicitly authorises or prohibits the threat or use of nuclear weapons but such threat or use must be in conformity with the UN Charter and principles of international humanitarian law.
The Court also concluded that there was a general obligation to pursue nuclear disarmament.
How can UNGA Resolutions have normative character?
Where can we find such a statement?
Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion (ICJ)
‘The Court notes that General Assembly resolutions, even if they are not binding, may sometimes have normative value. They can, in certain circumstances, provide evidence important for establishing the existence of a rule or the emergence of an opinio juris (further reinforced by resolutions on the same topic).
Great powers have greater influence on creating customary international law. Give two examples.
UK on sea law during empire
US and Soviet Union on space law during Cold War
Give six examples for states to use treaties
- wars ended
- disputes settled
- territory acquired
- special interests determined
- alliances established
- international organisations created
Why are treaties binding?
Historically: Customary international law (pacta sunt servanda) - the oldest principle of international law
Now included in the Vienna Treaty on the Law of Treaties, art. 26
“Every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.”
What is the difference between law-making treaties and treaty contracts in international law?
The distinction between law-making treaties and treaty contracts lies in their scope and effects. Law-making treaties, also known as “traité-lois” or normative treaties, create obligations that can continue as general international law. They may even provide evidence of customary international law. An example of a law-making treaty is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), which establishes broad obligations applicable to a wide range of states.
On the other hand, treaty contracts, or “traité-contrats,” represent agreements between relatively few states. These agreements can only create specific obligations between the signatory parties and are capable of fulfillment. Unlike law-making treaties, treaty contracts do not have the same potential to shape general international law but are more focused on particular commitments among the involved states.
Both categories overlap, there are grey areas.
According to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, what is a treaty?
An international agreement concluded between states in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.
What is essential for an agreement to form a treaty?
Does it require a specific form?
No specific form.
Essential that the parties intend to create legal relations between themselves. Needs to be in writing.
What is a mandate agreement? In what case did the ICJ confirm that it was a treaty?
A mandate agreement, in the context of international law, typically refers to a legal arrangement where one country is entrusted with the administration of a territory on behalf of an international organization or community. Such mandates were often established by the League of Nations, and later the United Nations, to oversee the administration and governance of territories that were deemed not yet capable of self-government.
Context on the South-West Africa Cases (ICJ Reports, 1962):
In the South-West Africa cases, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) considered the legal status of the mandate agreement over South-West Africa (now Namibia). South Africa administered the territory under a League of Nations mandate. The ICJ regarded the mandate agreement as having the character of a treaty, and this recognition played a role in addressing the legal issues related to the administration of South-West Africa.
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties does not apply to which three kinds of agreements?
- Agreements involving international organizations
- Agreements between states governed by domestic law, e.g. commercial agreements
- Agreements not in written form
When did the ICJ discuss the intent to create legal relations?
Qatar v. Bahrain, re Minutes dated 25 December 1990 signed by the parties and Saudi Arabia. ICJ emphasised that whether an agreement constituted binding agreement depends upon ‘all its actual terms’ and circumstances in which it had been drawn up
Express terms and contextual interpretation
Extrinstic evidence: Minutes were to be construed as international agreement creating rights and obligations for the parties, since on the facts they enumerated the commitments to which the parties had consented
Within states, who can draft treaties?
Treaties may be drafted as between states, or governments, or heads of states, or governmental departments, etc
Which part(s) of government has the power to make treaties depends on domestic law of
each state
According to the VCLT, what are the two ways texts can be adopted as a treaty?
What practice does this mirror?
- Consent of all states participating in its drawing
- During a conference, by two thirds of the states present unless by the same rule a different rule is decided
Follows practice of UN General Assembly
How have the 1966 International Covenants on Human Rights and the 1984 Convention against Torture been adopted?
By a UNGA resolution. They subsequently still had to be ratified.
In the past, treaty text were adopted in the UNGA based on two-third majority. What is the more recent approach?
Consensus (e.g., Paris Agreement).
What four types of consent are there? (i.e., what are the forms treaties enter info force)
Consent by Signature: A state expresses its consent to be bound by a treaty through the signature of its representative. This can happen when the treaty explicitly states that signature has this effect, when there is an established agreement among negotiating states, or when the intention to give effect to the signature is evident from the full powers of the representative. Ratification is more common.
Consent by Exchange of Instruments: Consent to be bound by a treaty is expressed through the exchange of instruments between states. This occurs when the instruments themselves state that their exchange will have the effect of expressing consent, or when there is an established agreement among the involved states. This process involves the physical exchange of written instruments between the participating states. The term “instrument” refers to the formal documents, such as the written text of the treaty or relevant diplomatic notes, that embody the agreement between states.
Consent by Ratification: Ratification is defined as the international act by which a state establishes, on the international plane, its consent to be bound by a treaty. The consent is expressed by ratification when the treaty provides for such consent to be expressed this way. Ratification typically follows the act of signature. After the negotiators sign the treaty, each state must go through its domestic procedures to formally approve and accept the treaty. Delay between signature and ratification allows extra time for consideration.
Consent by Accession: Consent to be bound by a treaty is expressed by accession when the treaty allows such consent to be expressed through accession, when there is an established agreement among negotiating states that accession is acceptable, or when all parties subsequently agree that the state may express its consent through accession. States may resort to accession when they have not signed the treaty, often because the treaty limits signature to certain states or because a deadline for signature has passed. Multilateral treaties often allow states to accede at a later date.
What is a reservation? Is it covered in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties?
Yes, covered.
States can modify or exclude the legal effect of provisions of a treaty by reservations.
Why are reservations allowed?
It encourages more states to join multilateral treaties even if they are not satisfied with certain provisions.
What are the risks of reservations?
It can defeat or negate the purpose of a treaty.
It adds additional complications to international relations.
What are interpretative declarations? What legal effects do they have?
Unlike reservations, they have no legal effect.
When is a reservation invalid? (case)
‘if a party to the Convention objects to a reservation which it considers incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention, it can . . . consider that the reserving state is not a party to the Convention’ (Reservations to the Genocide Convention case, ICJ, 1951)
Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, when are reservations prohibited?
1) when prohibited by the treaty
2) when only certain reservations are allowed
3) when the reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty (ICJ Reservations on Genocide Convention)
Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, what if another signatory state objects to a reservation of another state?
It can object to the objection.
It can also object to the entry into force.
In the former case, there will be no legal relation in that regard between the member states.
Libyan reservation to the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations re the diplomatic bag, permitting Libya to search the bag with the consent of the state whose bag it was, and insist that it be returned to its state of origin. If another state did not object to this, what would follow?
The other state could give Libya the same treatment.
Can a reservation be withdrawn?
Yes, anytime unless the treaty specifies differently.
Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, how do treaties enter into force absent any other provision?
As soon as consent to be bound has been established for all negotiating states.
Can treaties operate retroactively?
Yes, but it has to be specified (art. 28).
Can treaties apply only to a certain territory?
Yes, but it has to be specified (art. 29).
When two treaties conflict on certain matters, which one prevails? Example Montevideo and NAFTA
The later one (art. 30)
Example Montevideo Convention and NAFTA.
Requires that the members of the second treaty are also members of the first.
How can treaties usually be amended?
According to the VCLT, the same procedures have to be follow as for the creation, unless specified.
How can the UN charter be amended?
Requires adoption and ratification of two thirds of all members, but including all permanent members of the UNSC.
What is the difference between amendment and modification?
- Amendment: formal alteration of treaty provisions, affecting all the parties to particular agreement
- Modification: relate to variations of certain treaty terms as between particular parties only
What are the three approaches to treaty interpretation?
- focus on actual text of agreement and analysis of the words used (objective approach)
- focus on intention of the parties adopting agreement as the solution to ambiguous
provisions (subjective approach)
- focus on intention of the parties adopting agreement as the solution to ambiguous
- emphasises the object and purpose of the treaty
- In reality, all components are necessary for interpretation.