Terrorism Lecture 1 Flashcards
What are some key defining elements of international law?
- International law is defined as the relationships between states; it is a state based system
-Decentralised structure
What are the Westphalia peace treaties?
From 1648, this was the moment when we shifted from a medieval system to a modern system, based on the cooperation between states. The model we have now is called the Westphalian model, based on hierarchies and sovereignties.
What are the relationships of states with their people, and with other states, in terms of hierarchies?
Within states, there is a hierarchical relationship between the state and its people. The state itself has sovereignty to make laws, adjudicate them etc. It is a top down/vertical relationship.
Between states, the relationship is bilateral, meaning states are equal sovereign entities, and do not have the right to interfere with/govern internal sovereignties of an individual state that is not their own.
What organisation oversees external sovereignty between states?
The United Nations. The General Assembly, within the UN, has representatives from every state, who all have an equal vote. In the Security Council, there are 5 member states who have permanent status (and veto power), China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States, and there are 10 states who rotate according to General Assembly elections, and change every 2 years.
How do states make laws?
Through treaties. These laws only count if the states consent. If a state does not consent, the law does not apply to them. This maintains the principles of internal and external sovereignty
What does adjudication mean in the context of international law?
The formal resolution of disputes between states, organisations, or individuals by an impartial judicial body, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or other tribunals. It involves applying international legal principles to reach binding decisions. Unlike diplomatic negotiation or mediation, adjudication relies on legal arguments and evidence, and the ruling is enforceable under international law.
How do states enforce laws in international law?
States have the burden of enforcing laws on each other, since their is no police force etc. This can be done through state pressures, the ICC, sanctions etc.
What are states obliged to do when they sign a treaty?
- Enact and enforce the law according to the treaty
- Exercise jurisdiction against internal (or external, in applicable cases) breaches of the law
- If you consent to a treaty and don’t adhere to/enforce it, you can be deemed a rogue statue, which can affect how other states interact with you, and your sovereignty can be questioned.
Is there a consensus on the definition of terrorism?
No- there are regional and international treaties on it, but no widely agreed-upon definition. Terrorist conventions will define what specific actions are criminal under terrorism, but will generally go no further to make an all-encompassing definition. “One man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter”. There is further controversy about whether the definition should include state terrorism (dictatorial states can commit terrorism). Religious, cultural and historical factors further muddy the waters.
What are some key facts about treaties?
- They are the main source of international law
- They are created and interpreted
- States can make reservations to them
- Treaties end if a situation changes
- The Vienna convention on the law of treaties is a treaty on treaties
Why is terrorism so hard to define?
- Political, religious, ideological and social factors: different motivations and objectives, which conflict across regions, make it hard to ‘pin down’ an all-encompassing, general definition (one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter)
- Context and perception: the distinction between terrorism and other forms of violence/crimes is arguable
- State actors v. non-state actors: the concept of terrorism is often associated with non-state actors, however states have been accused of terrorism too, further complicating the definition
- Evolving nature of terrorism: the development of tactics (such as cyber-terrorism and lone-wolf attacks) make it hard to have a relevant definition
What is the Vienna Convention on the law of Treaties?
The guiding treaty to govern treaties. It reflects customary international law, covering treaty formation, interpretation, reservations, obligations, and conditions for termination or suspension. Key principles codified include:
Good Faith: Treaties are binding and should be performed in good faith.
Material Breach: A breach can lead to suspension or termination of treaty obligations.
Fundamental Change of Circumstances: If there is a significant change, this can affect the treaty’s validity.
How do states adopt new obligations in international treaties?
- States meet
- They negotiate on a problem
- They ‘adopt’ the formal approval of a treaty’s final draft
- They sign
- They ratify
- The treaty enters into force
What does ratification mean?
If a government signs a treaty (as representatives of the state) the internal/state parliament must accept it. Ratification is the consent to be bound. If there is a dictatorship without parliament, the dictator just needs to accept once. The signing is the finishing of the negotiations process, and is somewhat of a symbolic act. Ratification sets consent into stone. The consent of the government is often dependent on the parliament.
What does article 18 of the Vienna convention (1969) say?
Article 18 states that even when a treaty has been signed and not ratified, you cannot do something that goes against the purpose of the treaty, despite not ratifying it and it is not formally enforced yet. If this occurs, other state’s must hold them accountable.
What is the term for a state that has expressed their consent?
Party!
What is a contracting state?
A state which has consented to be bound by the treaty, whether or not the treaty has entered into force.
To what extent is a state’s sovereignty limited if they are part of an international treaty?
It is not limited, because they consented to be bound, unless specifically indicated in the treaty. They consent to sign up to obligations, and in this way they no longer have the sovereign right to not follow through on their obligation(s).
What is a reservation?
When a state signs up to be part of a treaty, they can make a reservation, meaning that they don’t consent to the entirety of the treaty.
A reservation is a unilateral statement (i.e. made by one state alone, not in agreement with other states) made by a state when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving, or acceding to a treaty, aiming to exclude or modify the legal effect of certain treaty provisions for that state. Reservations allow states to modify treaty obligations while joining multilateral treaties. They must not undermine the treaty’s core objectives and are regulated by the VCLT.
States can make reservations to specific treaty provisions.
Consent to treaties does not negate sovereignty but requires adherence to agreed obligations.
Reservations are usually allowed unless a treaty explicitly prohibits them or they conflict with the treaty’s object and purpose. In cases of multilateral treaties with few parties, where complete application of the treaty is essential, reservations may be prohibited to maintain the integrity of the agreement.
General Rule: If another party objects to a reservation, it cannot be invoked in relations between the reserving and objecting parties. However, if the objecting party remains silent, the reservation is valid between them.
How is the decentralised structure of international law characterised?
- Law making through treaties
- Adjudication
- Enforcement is through state responsibilities
What is a treaty?
A formal agreement between two or more sovereign states or international organisations, governed by international law. Treaties can be bilateral (between two parties) or multilateral (involving multiple parties).
What is a convention?
A specific type of treaty that typically refers to a multilateral agreement, often established to regulate specific issues or areas of international concern. Conventions usually have broader participation and are often open for signature by multiple states.
What are arbitration proceedings?
A method of resolving disputes outside of traditional court systems, where parties involved agree to submit their conflict to one or more arbitrators. Arbitrators are neutral third parties who review evidence and make a binding decision (arbitral award).
What is lex arbitri?
Applicable law. Refers to the law that governs arbitration proceedings.
What is jus cogens?
Also known as peremptory norms, and non-derogable rights. Established in Articles 53 and 64 of the VCLT (1969), as non-derogable (never acceptable to breach, even under treaties), universally-recognised obligations that all states must uphold and protect. Jus Cogens are considered an example of customary international law, because there is no strict, all-encompassing codified list of them (since situations change). However, there are some widely accepted jus cogens norms:
Prohibition of genocide
Prohibition of torture
Prohibition of slavery and the slave trade
Prohibition of aggression and unlawful use of force
Prohibition of crimes against humanity
Prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid
Prohibition of piracy
Prohibition of war crimes
What do Articles 53 and 64 VCLT (1969) refer to?
Peremptory norms/jus cogens.
Art. 53 says that a treaty becomes void if it conflicts with non-derogable rights (jus cogens)
Art. 64 says that if a new peremptory norm emerges, any existing treaty is void if it conflicts with the new norm.
What are some examples of jus cogens norms?
Prohibition of genocide
Prohibition of torture
Prohibition of slavery and the slave trade
Prohibition of aggression and unlawful use of force
Prohibition of crimes against humanity
Prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid
Prohibition of piracy
Prohibition of war crimes
How are treaties interpreted?
Treaty interpretation is guided by the VCLT, which emphasizes the ordinary meaning of terms, the context, and the treaty’s purpose. Various methods, including objective, subjective, and teleological approaches, are employed to clarify treaty provisions.
Treaty interpretation is essential in international law to determine the precise meaning of treaty provisions. The VCLT (1969) provides guiding principles (Articles 31–33) to assist in the interpretation process, which is considered a judicial function aimed at clarifying, not changing, treaty terms.
What are the primary methods of treaty interpretation, and where are they described?
Objective (Textual) Approach: Focuses on the actual text of the treaty, emphasising the ordinary meaning of the words used.
Subjective (Intentional) Approach: Seeks to understand the parties’ intentions behind the treaty, especially in cases of ambiguity.
Teleological (Purposive) Approach: Focuses on the treaty’s object and purpose to determine the meaning of provisions.
Article 31 VCLT (1969) reflects all three approaches, stating that treaties should be interpreted in good faith, with attention to the ordinary meaning of terms, their context, and the treaty’s object and purpose. This is considered customary international law.
What does article 31 VCLT (1969) say?
States that all treaties should be interpreted in good faith, with attention to objective, subjective and teleological approaches. This is considered customary international law.
What is the objective (textual) approach to treaty interpretation?
Focuses on the actual text of the treaty, emphasising the ordinary meaning of the words used.
What is the subjective (intentional) approach to treaty interpretation?
Seeks to understand the parties’ intentions behind the treaty, especially in cases of ambiguity.
What is the teleological (purposive) approach to treaty interpretation?
Focuses on the treaty’s object and purpose to determine the meaning of provisions.
What is a reservation to a treaty?
Reservations are unilateral statements by states that exclude or modify the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty when agreeing to be bound by it. These allow states to become parties to multilateral treaties while addressing concerns about specific provisions. Reservations are governed by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), Articles 19-23. See below for more.
Which articles of the VCLT (1969) govern reservations?
Articles 19-23
How can treaties end?
- Invalidity, on relative or absolute grounds, or due to a breach of jus cogens
- Termination
- Suspension, for example due to a material breach, inter se suspension, new agreement on same subject matter, supervening impossibility of performance, or fundamental change of circumstances
What ways can a treaty end due to invalidity?
On relative grounds: These grounds allow a party to challenge the treaty’s validity with respect to itself and the offending party, but the treaty remains valid between other parties. Essentially, the treaty is voidable only between the invoking and offending parties. Reasons for relative invalidity can be violation of internal law (e.g. constitutional procedures), lack of authority, error, fraud, or corruption.
On absolute grounds: These render the treaty void ab initio (from the beginning), meaning it never had legal effect, and all parties are released from obligations under the treaty. Reasons for absolute invalidity can be coercion of a representative (when signing), use of force or threats (when signing), or peace treaties after military defeat (a party is defeated and then forced to sign)
Treaty is in breach of jus cogens (peremptory norms): in this case, the treaty is automatically void, as specified in Article 53 VCLT. If a new jus cogens norm emerges, any treaty conflicting with it is automatically terminated, regardless of consent.
How can a treaty end on relative grounds?
These grounds allow a party to challenge the treaty’s validity with respect to itself and the offending party, but the treaty remains valid between other parties. Essentially, the treaty is voidable only between the invoking and offending parties. Reasons for relative invalidity can be violation of internal law (e.g. constitutional procedures), lack of authority, error, fraud, or corruption.
How can a treaty end on absolute grounds?
These render the treaty void ab initio (from the beginning), meaning it never had legal effect, and all parties are released from obligations under the treaty. Reasons for absolute invalidity can be coercion of a representative (when signing), use of force or threats (when signing), or peace treaties after military defeat (a party is defeated and then forced to sign)
How can a treaty end when in breach of Article 53/64 VCLT (1969)?
Treaty is in breach of jus cogens (peremptory norms). If a new jus cogens norm emerges, any treaty conflicting with it is automatically terminated, regardless of consent.
What is inter se suspension of a treaty?
Inter se suspension of a treaty refers to the suspension of a treaty or certain provisions of a treaty between the parties to the treaty, but not with respect to third parties.
Some parties may suspend obligations without affecting others, provided the treaty allows for such suspension and does not conflict with its purpose. Can be grounds for the end of a treaty.
What is a material breach of a treaty?
If a party materially breaches the treaty, other parties may suspend or terminate their obligations, as per the principle of reciprocity (“one has no obligation if the other does not perform”). Material breach includes repudiation of a treaty or violation of provisions essential to the treaty’s objectives. Some treaties, like humanitarian or human rights treaties, are exempt from termination due to material breach.
What is the supervening impossibility of performance (of the contents of a treaty)?
If performance becomes permanently impossible (e.g., a river dries up or a species goes extinct), a party can withdraw from or terminate the treaty. This is rare and applies only to extreme circumstances beyond the party’s control.
How is customary law established?
Customary law is established through:
General practice: Consistency, duration, and generality of state practices. Essentially actus reus (objective element), but formally known as the material element, usus.
Opinio iuris: The belief that states are acting out of a legal obligation. Essentially mens rea (subjective element), but formally known as the subjective element, opinio juris.
General customary law is binding on all states, regardless of consent, unless a state is a persistent objector.
Art. 38 ICJ Statute (1945) defines customary international law in this way.
What is opinio juris?
The belief that states are acting out of a legal obligation. Essentially mens rea (subjective element). One of the requirements for international customary law
How can states be exempt from international customary law?
Persistent objection: A state can avoid being bound by a new customary rule if it continuously and explicitly objects to it while it is forming
Subsequent objection: A state that accepted an existing rule may later object to any modifications of that rule
What does article 38 of the ICJ statute say?
It says that treaties, customary international law and general principles of law (e.g. pacta sunt servanda) are considered equal in their capacity to generate legal norms.
It names subsidiary/secondary means for determining rules such as judicial decisions and teachings of qualified scholars.
However, treaties are often seen as more specific (lex specialis), compared to customary law, meaning that treaty obligations can take precedence in specific cases. Additionally, new customary rules may emerge that modify or supplement existing treaty frameworks.
While no explicit hierarchy exists between the primary sources (treaties, customary law, general principles), there is a hierarchy when considering jus cogens norms (peremptory norms). These norms take precedence over all other treaties and agreements, and any treaty conflicting with them is considered void and terminated, as specified in articles 53 and 64 of the VCLT (1969).
What is lex specialis?
Partially referred to in Art. 38 of the ICJ statute, meaning that a specific law overrides a general law.
What is lex posterior?
When two laws or legal norms conflict, the more recent law (lex posterior) takes precedence over the older law (lex anterior).
What are the primary sources of international law, and where are they named?
- International treaties and conventions
- International custom(ary law)
- General principles of law- fundamental principles such as good faith, pacta sunt servanda, equity - different to jus cogens! Modern interpretation requires principles to be found across a wide range of legal systems. They can fill gaps where no pre-existing laws yet exist.
They are named in Art. 38 ICJ Statute (1945)
What are the secondary/subsidiary sources of international law, and where are they named?
Subsidiary means for determining rules (judicial decisions and the teachings of qualified scholars), named in Art. 38 ICJ Statute (1945)
What is a state-based system within international law?
The international legal order is primarily composed of sovereign states, which are the main actors creating, enforcing, and complying with international law.
What is internal sovereignty within international law?
Refers to a state’s authority to govern itself without interference from other states or external forces.
What is external sovereignty in international law?
Refers to the state’s independence and equality in the international community, as well as its freedom to engage in international relations without external coercion.
What is hierarchy within international law?
Unlike domestic legal systems, international law lacks a strict hierarchy, with no central authority to enforce rules universally.
What is pacta sunt servanda?
It is outlined in Art. 26 VCLT (1969), and Art. 2(2) UN Charter (1945). Pacta sunt servanda is a fundamental principle in international law stating that once a state consents to a treaty, it is obligated to fulfill its commitments in good faith. Parties are expected to honour their commitments and cannot simply disregard them at will.
What is the ratification process?
Ratification is the formal acceptance of a treaty by a state’s parliament, which follows the signing of the treaty. Key points include:
Signing indicates intent to be bound, while ratification solidifies consent.
Article 18 of the VCLT prohibits actions against the purpose of a treaty even if not ratified.
What does Art. 18 VCLT (1945) say?
Prohibits actions against the object and purpose of a treaty, even if not yet ratified
What are acceptance and approval of a treaty?
Acceptance and approval are alternative procedures to ratification that bind a state to a treaty without the need for legislative approval. These methods are often used when the executive branch can consent without parliamentary ratification.
What is accession of a treaty?
Another alternative to ratification, accession allows a state to become a party to a treaty it did not originally sign. This procedure is used when a treaty is already in force, enabling states to join treaties post-adoption and entry into force.
What is a ‘soft’ objection?
If a party objects but doesn’t challenge the treaty’s entry into force, the reservation does not apply to the provisions in question between the two states. This maintains the treaty’s overall validity while excluding the contested provisions.
A soft objection refers to an objection made by a state that does not prevent the treaty from entering into force between the objecting state and the state making the reservation.
Soft and hard objections are both responses to reservations made to treaties.
What is a ‘hard’ objection?
A hard objection refers to an objection that results in the treaty not entering into force between the objecting state and the state making the reservation.
In cases where the reservation is deemed incompatible with the treaty’s purpose (e.g., human rights treaties), some parties may refuse to enter into treaty relations with the reserving state. This often arises in treaties that aim for universal application, such as those focused on human rights or environmental protection.
Both hard and soft objections are responses to a state’s reservation(s) to a treaty provision.
What is an amendment of a treaty?
This formal procedure requires the consent of all parties to the treaty and follows the same formalities as the original treaty. Proposals to amend the treaty must be circulated to all parties, and they can choose to participate in the negotiations or opt out. Some treaties, like the UN Charter, specify a particular procedure for amendments, such as requiring a two-thirds majority and the approval of all permanent Security Council members.
What is a modification of a treaty?
A bilateral or multilateral agreement between certain parties to a treaty that alters the treaty’s application only among those parties, without affecting the rights or obligations of other states.
Unlike amendments, modification allows for changes to be made by only some parties to the treaty (not all). These modifications must not be prohibited by the treaty, must not interfere with other parties’ rights under the treaty, and must not contradict the treaty’s object and purpose. The modified provisions are only binding on the parties that agreed to them, not the other parties who remain bound by the original terms.
What is a negotiating state?
A state that participated in drafting and adopting the treaty text.
What is a contracting state?
A state that has consented to be bound by the treaty, regardless of whether it has entered into force.
What is a third state?
A state that is not a party to the treaty. A treaty does not create obligations for third states without their consent. Article 35 VCLT establishes that third parties may become bound by treaty provisions only if the treaty explicitly envisages their consent, and that consent must be written. Under Article 38 VCLT, if a treaty’s provisions become customary international law, then they can bind states, even without their direct consent. Article 36 VCLT allows third parties to benefit from rights under a treaty, even without their written consent, unless stated otherwise in the treaty. However, rights granted to third states can only be revoked or modified with the consent of the third state, unless the treaty says otherwise.
What is sovereign equality?
Sovereign equality encompasses two notions: equality and sovereignty. Equality means that all states, regardless of size or power, have equal rights and obligations. Sovereignty refers to a state’s freedom from external commands and its exclusive power to exercise authority over its territory and population without being undermined by other states.
What is decentralised authority?
A characteristic of international law, which recognises multiple sovereign entities and regulates relations among them without a supreme legislative authority.
What is centralised authority?
Domestic law typically has a single recognised sovereign authority.
What is express consent?
Consent through a treaty
What is tacit consent?
Consent through customary practices
What do immunities do?
Immunities seek to prevent foreign courts from exercising jurisdiction regarding the conduct of another State, its agents, officials, or diplomatic representatives, as well as from adjudicating on inter-State disputes without their consent. This always concerns civil proceedings, because you can’t put a state into jail (so can’t be criminal proceedings).
What do immunities in international law do?
These doctrines protect state sovereignty by preventing foreign courts from exercising jurisdiction over another state, its agents, or officials. They prevent adjudication of inter-state disputes without consent.
What is absolute immunity?
Absolute immunity (also called total immunity) means that states and their officials cannot be subject to the jurisdiction of foreign courts under any circumstances. This approach is rooted in the classical principle of sovereign equality of states. Sovereigns and other “higher ups” are completely immune from foreign jurisdiction. Evidence is required to support immunity claims.
What types of restrictive state immunity are there?
- Acta jure imperii
- Acta jure gestionis
What is restrictive immunity?
Restrictive immunity limits immunity to acts performed in the exercise of sovereign functions.
Acta jure imperii: A sovereign act, for which the state has full immunity, and cannot be sued in front of a domestic court. Acts defined under this are things only a state can do, for example mobilising an army, foreign policy, police powers, justice administration. Linked to restrictive immunity but not inherently meaning absolute immunity.
Acta jure gestionis: Commercial/non-sovereign/private acts done by the state, such as buying computers, for which the state is not immune against lawsuits for. Commercial transactions, employment contracts, personal injuries, property damage, intellectual property, participation in companies, and non-governmental use of state-operated ships.
How do you distinguish between acta jure imperii and acta jure gestionis? The nature and purpose of the act must be considered.
What is acta jure imperii?
A sovereign act, for which the state has full immunity, and cannot be sued in front of a domestic court- but it can be sued for internationally if they violate norms like jus cogens or treaties. Acts defined under this are things only a state can do, for example mobilising an army, foreign policy, police powers, justice administration. Linked to restrictive immunity but not inherently meaning absolute immunity.
What is acta jure gestionis?
Commercial/non-sovereign/private acts done by the state, such as buying computers, for which the state is not immune against lawsuits for. Commercial transactions, employment contracts, personal injuries, property damage, intellectual property, participation in companies, and non-governmental use of state-operated ships.
How do you distinguish between acta jure imperii and acta jure gestionis?
The nature and purpose of the act must be considered.
Acta jure imperii: A sovereign act, for which the state has full immunity, and cannot be sued in front of a domestic court. Acts defined under this are things only a state can do, for example mobilising an army, foreign policy, police powers, justice administration. Linked to restrictive immunity but not inherently meaning absolute immunity.
Acta jure gestionis: Commercial/non-sovereign/private acts done by the state, such as buying computers, for which the state is not immune against lawsuits for. Commercial transactions, employment contracts, personal injuries, property damage, intellectual property, participation in companies, and non-governmental use of state-operated ships.
What kinds of immunities are available to state officials?
Immunity Ratione Personae: Protects high-ranking officials from legal proceedings that could interfere with their duties. Applies to high-ranking officials like heads of State, heads of government, foreign ministers, and diplomats. It extends to both their official and private acts. The justification for such immunity is that these officials’ functions are so integral to the State that any legal proceedings against them could interfere with their duties. This immunity includes inviolability, freedom from arrest or detention, and absolute immunity from criminal jurisdiction, and lapses once the official leaves office.
Immunity Ratione Materiae: Covers acts performed in an official capacity, continuing even after leaving office. Unlike immunity ratione personae, which is tied to the individual, this immunity is based on the nature of the acts and is linked to the State’s sovereign functions. Like other immunities, it can be waived by the competent authorities of the sending State.
What is immunity ratione personae?
Protects high-ranking officials from legal proceedings that could interfere with their duties. Applies to high-ranking officials like heads of State, heads of government, foreign ministers, and diplomats. It extends to both their official and private acts. The justification for such immunity is that these officials’ functions are so integral to the State that any legal proceedings against them could interfere with their duties. This immunity includes inviolability, freedom from arrest or detention, and absolute immunity from criminal jurisdiction, and lapses once the official leaves office.
What is immunity ratione materiae?
Covers acts performed in an official capacity, continuing even after leaving office. Unlike immunity ratione personae, which is tied to the individual, this immunity is based on the nature of the acts and is linked to the State’s sovereign functions. Like other immunities, it can be waived by the competent authorities of the sending State.
What is the difference between consular and diplomatic immunity?
Diplomatic Immunity: Governed by the 1961 Vienna Convention, diplomats enjoy inviolability and protection, with exceptions for private matters. Diplomats enjoy inviolability of diplomatic premises (legal protection granted to buildings and property of diplomatic missions, e.g. embassies, without consent), and diplomatic bags (special form of protected communication used by diplomatic missions to transport documents and materials without interception).
Consular Immunity: Consuls have limited immunity compared to diplomats and are protected only for official duties. Consuls focus on administrative and technical matters rather than political relations, like diplomats. Consuls can be arrested for serious crimes. Consular immunity is ratione materiae, i.e. it only applies to actions performed within official duties.
What is responsibility in international law?
Refers to the attribution of fault for breaching international legal obligations, requiring reparations when obligations are not met. The 2001 Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA) provide a framework for understanding state responsibility. These Articles distinguish between primary rules (substantive and procedural obligations binding States, like prohibiting the use of force or respecting diplomatic immunity) and secondary rules (rules governing the consequences of breach, including responsibility). Responsibility falls within the secondary rules category.
International responsibility arises when a state commits an internationally wrongful act, defined as an act or omission that is both attributable to the state, and breaches an international obligation. This principle is grounded in customary international law.
Under what circumstances does international responsibility arise?
International responsibility arises when a state commits an internationally wrongful act, defined as an act or omission that is both attributable to the state, and breaches an international obligation. This principle is grounded in customary international law.
What is ARSIWA (2001)
Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001). ARSIWA are secondary rules (how to hold a State responsible) because they tell us what the procedures are in case States are obligating the convention- the conventions being primary rules. Entails procedures and processes to hold a state responsible. ARSIWA is not derived from a specific convention- rather, it codifies general principles of state responsibility under international law, which are applicable to multiple treaties, conventions and areas of law.
What are the key elements of State responsibility, and which articles apply?
Key Elements of State Responsibility under ARSIWA:
- Attribution: Responsibility arises when an act can be attributed to a state, which includes actions by state organs or agents. (Art. 4 and Art. 8)
- Breach of International Obligation: Occurs when states fail to adhere to international commitments, i.e. breaches an obligation. (Art. 12)
(3.) Situation Precluding Wrongfulness: Considers if there are legitimate reasons for a violation (e.g., crises affecting state operations). These can excuse acts that would otherwise be wrongful, thus preventing the state from being held internationally wrongful. These defences are exceptions, but do not nullify the obligation itself, and they do not apply to peremptory norms (jus cogens). When the justification ends, the state must stop the wrongful act. (Art. 25 and 26)
How do Art. 8 ARSIWA (2001) and the Nicaragua case (1986) intersect?
They both address state responsibility in terms of individuals or groups acting under effective control or instruction of the state. The Nicaragua case found that the US could not held responsible for the actions in Nicaragua because there was no effective control (and therefore there was no armed attack which the US was responsible for), and this is reflected in the later Art. 8 of ARSIWA, which states that actions of non-state actors can only be attributed to the state when the actions are specifically directed or controlled by the state.
Under what articles can states invoke responsibility?
Article 42 of ARSIWA: An injured (or “specially affected”) state can invoke responsibility if the obligation breached is owed to it or to a group of states.
Article 48 of ARSIWA: Any state can invoke responsibility for violations of obligations owed to the international community.
Where can states invoke state responsibility?
States can invoke breaches at the ICJ, with jurisdiction requiring consent through treaties or special agreements. The ICJ’s rulings serve as authoritative interpretations but are binding only on the states involved.
What are obligations erga omnes?
Not only are there some obligations (e.g. jus cogens) that apply to all states to uphold, but equally if one of these obligations is breached, any state can invoke responsibility for the breach. This is outlined in Article 48 of ARSIWA, which also says that any state can invoke responsibility if the obligation breached is owed to a group of states for collective interest.
Some obligations, such jus cogens norms, apply to the international community as a whole. Not all obligations erga omnes are jus cogens, but all jus cogens are obligations erga omnes! With violations of jus cogens, there is no situation precluding wrongfulness. They are so fundamental that all States in the international community have an interest in upholding them. Even if a State is not directly an injured State, if jus cogens is violated, any State can invoke State responsibility, because the international community is affected collectively by such grave violations.
What does Art. 48 ARSIWA (2001) state?
Any state can invoke responsibility for violations of obligations owed to the international community (obligations erga omnes)
Who’s actions can be attributed to a state?
Actions by states or state organs or agents (de jure or de facto) are attributable to the state. Private actors can also be attributed to the state if they operate under state control or endorsement (Nicaragua case). These actions must be a breach of international norms (Art. 12 ARSIWA, 2001), directly attributable to the state (Art. 4 and 8 ARSIWA, 2001), and there should not be any situations precluding wrongfulness which would excuse the actions (Art. 25 and 26 ARSIWA, 2001)
What is effective control?
Defined by Art. 8 ARSIWA (2001): “The conduct of a person or group of persons shall be considered an act of a State under international law if the person or group of persons is in fact acting on the instructions of, or under the direction or control of, that State in carrying out the conduct.”
In this way, funding, training etc., are not defined as effective control- there must be state control or command.
The ICJ Nicaragua case found that effective control can be proven through:
1. The state directed or controlled specific wrongful acts; and
2. The acts would not have occurred without the state’s instructions or orders.
Art. 11 ARSIWA also states that When a state encourages or supports the wrongful actions of a private actor to the extent that it acknowledges these acts as its own, it can still be held responsible (Art. 11 ARSIWA). Adoption requires more than approval; it implies that the state accepts the acts as if they were its own.
What does Art. 11 ARISWA (2001) state?
When a state encourages or supports the wrongful actions of a private actor to the extent that it acknowledges these acts as its own, it can still be held responsible. Adoption requires more than approval; it implies that the state accepts the acts as if they were its own.
What test did the ICJ Nicaragua case (1986) formulate for effective control?
The ICJ Nicaragua case found that effective control can be proven through:
1. The state directed or controlled specific wrongful acts; and
2. The acts would not have occurred without the state’s instructions or orders.
What are organs de jure?
State organs. Art. 4 ARSIWA states that actions by any state organ are attributable to the state, regardless of its hierarchical level. These organs are officially recognised by a state’s international law, and include police officers, military personnel, legislative and judicial bodies and provinces.
What are organs de facto?
A concept introduced by the Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro genocide case at the ICJ (2007). These are private actors or entities that may not be formally recognised as state organs (de jure), but whose actions are so closely aligned with the state’s will that they can be treated as state organs in practice. For instance, when a group or individual operates under the complete direction and control of the state, their actions can be attributed to the state.
This can be tied to multiple articles of ARSIWA, including:
Art. 4 ARSIWA (2001), which says that the conduct of a state organ (legislative, executive, judicial, or otherwise) is attributable to the state, regardless of its function or position within the state structure.
Art. 8 ARSIWA (2001), which says that acts of non-state actors or groups can be attributed to a state if they are acting on the instructions of, or under the direction or control of, that state.
Art. 12 ARSIWA (2001), which says that a breach of international obligations occurs when states fail to adhere to international commitments, i.e. they breach their international obligations
Art. 16 ARSIWA (2001), which states that a state is internationally responsible if it provides aid or assistance to another state or actor in committing an internationally wrongful act, provided the assisting state:
- Knows of the circumstances of the wrongful act; and
- Intends to facilitate or assist in the act.