Professional Documents
Culture Documents
REFER TO
SUPPLEMENT #1
PUBLIC
FOR SOME
CORRECTIONS
AND ADDITIONS
INTERNATIONAL
- ED.
LAW
UP LAW A2015 reviewer for the class of
1
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
2. This provision shall not prejudice the power of Nonetheless, resolutions cannot be a substitute for
the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the ascertaining custom. Each resilution must be assessed
parties agree thereto. in the light of all the sircumstances and also by
reference to toher evidence of opinions of states on
The ICJ statute provides an enumeration of sources that the the point in issue. (Brownlie, Chapter 1)
Court shall apply with respect to controversies.
International Custom; Elements
(Brownlie, Chapter 2)
*Note that this is not an enumeration of sources of
1. Duration
international law; it is only a list of things that the court can
No particular duration is required. While passage
consider in arriving at decisions.
of time can be considered as part of the evidence
of generality and consistency, a long practice is
A. International conventions
not necessary.
B. International custom Primary Sources
2. Consistent state practice
C. General principles of law
In invoking custom, it must be proven that there is
a constant and uniform usage of a custom practised
D. Judicial decisions and Secondary Source
by the states in question. (Asylum Case, infra.)
teachings of publicists
Complete uniformity is not required; substantial
uniformity is enough.
There exists a hierarchy among the sources. A, B and C are
3. Generality of practice
primary sources, while D is a secondary source.
4. Opinio juris sive necessitatis
This refers to a recognition by states that a certain
The Court is not constrained to consider only one source. Its
practice is “obligatory,” and a belief that such
decisions may arise as a result of a combination of sources.
practice is required by, or consistent with
international law. They do so for the reason that
International Conventions; Treaties
the practice is required by law, and not merely
International conventions and treaties are sources of
because of courtesy or political expediency.
obligations in the nature of domestic contracts. These call
into operation the principle of pacta sunt servanda, literally,
This exists when states must have behaved in
agreements must be kept. These, tribunals will merely
such a way that their conduct is “evidence of a
interpret.
belief that practice is rendered obligatory by the
2
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
existence of a rule of law requiring it.” (North except between the parties and in respect of that
Sea Continental Shelf Cases, infra.) particular case.
A new norm cannot emerge without both practice and Moreover, the ICJ does not observe stare decisis or the
opinio juris; and an existing norm does not die without the principle of judicial precedent, though it strives to maintain
great majority of states engaging in a contrary practice and judicial consistency.
withdrawing their opinio juris. (Higgins, Chapter 2)
Decisions of national tribunals also have evidential value.
In order for a practice to crystallize into a customary They provide indirect evidene of the practice of the state of
norm, class discussions and Higgins (ibid.) only point to the forum on the question involved. Writers also make
the following essential elements: frequent reference to municipal decisions. (ibid.)
1. Consistent state practice; and
2. Opinio juris Teachings of Publicists
CLASS NOTES Teachings of publicists are also only evidence of law.
Nonetheless, they are used widely in arbitral tribunals,
Q: What is the effect of a breach of a customary national courts, and the ICJ itself, and there are cases where
international norm? writers have had a formative influence on international law.
Generally, a breach of a customary norm can give rise (ibid.)
to the birth or creation of a new norm. There would
thus be instances where state conduct inconsistent Jus Cogens Norm
with established rules can be an indication of the A jus cogens or peremptory norm is a norm which States
recognition of a new rule. cannot derogate or deviate from in their agreements. It
owes its status from the fact that the community as a whole
However, “if a state acts in a way prima facie regards these norms as of critical importance, such that
incompatible with a recognized rule, but defends its particular states cannot “contract-out” of them. It is
conduct by appealing to exceptions or justifications mandatory and cannot be set aside or modified by
contained within the rule itself,…the significance of agreement. (Higgins, Chapter 2)
that attitude is to confirm rather than to weaken the
rule.” (Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Q: Is a jus cogens norm the same as an erga omnes
Activities in and against Nicaragua [Nicaragua v. USA], obligation?
supra.) No. A jus cogens norm is a peremptory norm which
states consider as one from which no derogation is
General Principles of Law permitted.
This refers to analogies derived from general principles of
municipal law. According to Brownlie (Chapter 1), the An erga omnes obligation, on the other hand, refers to
rationale for its inclusion is to authorize the Court to apply obligations that a state owes to the international
municipal law principles, legal reasoning and private law community as a whole. Given the importance of the
analogies insofar as they are applicable to relations rights involved, all states can be held to have a legal
between states in order to make the law of nations a viable interest in their protection. (Case Concerning The
system for application. Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company,
Limited) As such, it is used as a remedial law principle
This category also contemplates principles traced to state that allows all states to have standing with respect to
practice regarded as such by civilized nations. These include its breach.
principles of consent, reciprocity, equality among states,
finality of awards and settlements, legaility of agreements, “The notion of erga omnes is concerned with standing;
good faith, and domestic jurisdiction. (ibid.) that of jus cogens with the non-derogable quality of a
norm.” (Higgins, Chapter 9)
Judicial Decisions
Decisions of the ICJ are merely “subsidiary means for the In the Case Concerning East Timor (Portugal v.
determination of rules of law,” and consitute only an Australia) (infra.), Portugal invoked the erga omnes
evidence of the law. The ICJ applies the law and does not obligation of right to self-determination in order to
make it. However, it may be contended that a unanimous press a claim against Australia in its actvities in East
or almost unanmous decision has a role in the progressice Timor, though it in itself was not directly affected by
development of law. Austalia’s acts.
3
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
example, the constitutional machinery of law Convention and the Geneva Convention
making in municipal law. because the Philippines is not a signatory
thereto at the time of the commission of
The ICJ cannot be considered as a formal source the acts.
because it does not have the concept of stare decisis.
The Commission had jurisdiction to try him.
UN GA Resolutions also cannot be formal sources
because they are merely restatements of customs. The Military Commission had jurisdiction to try Petitioner
CLASS NOTES because even if the Philippines was not a signatory to the
Conventions, which both US and Japan were signatories to,
2. Material Source – they are the substantive the rules and regulations of the Hague and Geneva
evidence of the existence of norms. They supply conventions form part of and are wholly based on the
the substance of the rule to which the formal generally accepted principles of international law. Such rules
sources gives the force and nature of law. In other and principles form part of the law of our nation .
words, they are evidence that the norm in fact
exists. For example, RA in printed form. Moreover, when the crimes charged against petitioner
were allegedly committed, the Philippines was under the
ICJ Statute, Article 53. sovereignty of United States and thus we were equally
bound together with the United States and with Japan to
1. Whenever one of the parties does not appear the right and obligation contained in the treaties between
before the Court, or fails to defend its case, the the belligerent countries. These rights and obligation were
other party may call upon the Court to decide in not erased by our assumption of full sovereignty. As held in
favor of its claim. Laurel v. Misa, “The change of our form government from
Commonwealth to Republic does not affect the prosecution
2. The Court must, before doing so, satisfy itself, not of those charged with the crime of treason committed
only that it has jurisdiction in accordance with during the Commonwealth because it is an offense against
Articles 36 and 37, but also that the claim is well the same sovereign people.”
founded in fact and law.
This case illustrates the relationship between
customary law and treaty law.
Q: Does repetition play a role in the development
of international law?
On the one hand, if a treaty provides conventional law,
Repetition is necessary because a customary only the parties thereto are bound. On the other hand,
international norm arises out of repeated state action. if a treaty provides customary law, all states,
It is therefore basic to the formation of a rule of signatories thereto or not, are bound.
conduct. Norms of international law are created by
States through definite norm-creating methods This decision finds support in the Incorporation Clause
accepted or recognized by them as a means of in Article II, Section 2 of the Philippine Constitution.
expressing consent as to their binding effect. In other However, this case shows that even without the said
words, international law is based on their normative clause, general principles of international law
consent. continue to be binding by virtue of
our membership in the community of nations,
CLASS NOTES
KURODA v. JALANDONI
83 Phil 171 (1949)
YAMASHITA v. STYER
Shigenori Kuroda was formerly a Lieutenant-General of the 75 Phil 563 (1945)
Japanese Imperial Army and Commanding General of the
Japanese Imperial Forces in the Philippines (1943-1944). He Tomoyuki Yamashita is a commanding general in the
was charged before a Military Commission convened by the Japanese Imperial Army in the Philippines. From being a
Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines for the prisoner of war after his surrender, his status was changed
atrocities committed by Japanese Forces against civilians to that of an accused war criminal and was charged before
and other conduct during the war. an American Military Commission for having allowed
members under his command to commit massacre of
Kuroda: The Military Commission has no jurisdiction thousands of unarmed non-combatant civilians.
to try him.
No jurisdiction to try him for acts Yamashita: The Military Commission has no jurisdiction
committed in violation of the Hague to try him.
4
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The Philippines is bound to treat Yamashita in accord with No further proof of his legal entry is necessary. His arrival
established rules of treating war criminals. as part of the group of Russian soldiers was well
“Impelled by irrepressible endeavors aimed towards the documented, and his continuous residence in the
ideal, by the unconquerable natural urge for improvement, Philippines for 25 years without issue can be taken as
by the unquenchable thirstiness of perfection in all orders of evidence of the legality of his residence.
life, humanity has been struggling during the last two dozen
centuries to develop an international law which could It is well known that the Soviet dictatorship has left
answer more and more faithfully the demands of right and thousands of stateless refugees and displaced persons
justice as expressed in principles which, weakly enunciated without country and without flag. Its oppression has made
at first in the rudimentary juristic sense of peoples of it natural for those who were able to escape from it to “feel
antiquity, by the inherent power of their universal appeal to the loss of all bonds of attachment” therefrom. As such,
human conscience, at last, were accepted, recognized, and there is no need for him to further prove his statelessness
consecrated by all the civilized nations of the world.” apart from his testimony that he “owes no allegiance to the
communist government” and that he has fled from it. He
“Yamashita is entitled to be accorded all the guarantees, even refused to claim Russian citizenship during the
protections, and defenses that all prisoners should have Japanese citizenship even if it meant better conditions for
him.
5
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
6
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
7
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
In the course of negotiations, the factors to be taken into Humanitarian considerations are sufficient
account were to include: to generate legal rights and obligations,
the general configuration of the coasts of the parties, which South Africa violated.
as well as the presence of any special or unusual
features; The Mandate system operated under a
so far as known or readily ascertainable, the physical “sacred trust of civilization” (i.e. aim of
and geological structure and natural resources of the aiding the well-being and development of
continental shelf areas involved; people not able to govern themselves), and
all civilized nations had an interest to see
8
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Victor Raul Haya de la Torre, a Peruvian political figure, The Montevideo Convention relied on by Columbia for
applied for asylum before the Colombian Ambassador in unilateral qualification has been ratified by 11 states and
Lima after the Peruvian Government instituted rebellion has not been ratified by Peru. As such, it can neither be
charges against him for leading a botched coup attempt. taken as a reliable evidence of custom, nor be invoked
The Colombian Ambassador granted him asylum, and against Peru.
thereafter requested safe-conduct to enable the refugee,
whom he unilaterally qualified as a political offender, to As shown by the inconsistency and rapid succession of
leave the country. Peru refused and insisted that he asylum conventions and their acceptance and rejection by
committed common crimes so he was not entitled to enjoy various states, there is so much fluctuation and discrepancy
the benefits of asylum. The two Governments were unable in the exercise of diplomatic asylum that it is not possible to
to reach an agreement so they submitted the matter to the discern any constant and uniform usage in support of
Court. unilateral qualification, accepted as law by all States.
Colombia: An asylum-granting state (i.e. Colombia) is Haya de la Torre is not entitled to asylum.
entitled to unilaterally qualify persons
seeking asylum as political refugees. The While the charge of military rebellion was not a common
territorial state (i.e. Peru) is bound to crime which would justify Peru’s objection to the asylum,
respect such qualification and to give the there was no urgency within the meaning of the Havana
guarantees necessary for the departure of Convention to justify a grant of asylum as there was no
the refugee. imminence or persistence of a danger to the refugee.
9
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
10
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
11
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
12
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
13
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The Temple of Preah Vihear is an ancient Hindu Temple The signing of the map by Thai officials is a positive
subject to a lengthy dispute on ownership between act which constituted estoppel.
Cambodia and Thailand. Both states stationed troops to CLASS NOTES
enforce their claim. Cambodia claims that the territorial
sovereignty over Preah Vihear belongs to Cambodia, and
14
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
15
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Reparation is the corollary of the violation of the obligations Although a State can make a claim when investments by its
resulting from an engagement between States. In nationals abroad (such investments being part of a State’s
determining reparation, the following must be considered: national economic resources) were prejudicially affected in
a. Existence of the obligation to make reparation; violation of the right of the State itself to have its nationals
b. Existence of the damage which must serve as the enjoy a certain treatment, such right could only result from
basis for the amount of the indemnity; a treaty or special agreement. There is no instrument of
c. Extent of the damage. such kind which was in force between Belgium and Spain.
The essential principle in determining compensation for an A corporation enjoys a separate personality from its
act contrary to international law: shareholders and from the State in which it is
“Reparation must wipe out all the consequences, organized.
as far as possible, of the illegal act and re- CLASS NOTES
establish the situation which would, in all
probability, have existed if the act had not been
committed.” Principle of Acquired or Vested Rights
The principle of respect for acquired rights is one of the
Since the seizure of the factory and the undertaking therein fundamental principles of both public international law and
is prohibited by the Geneva Convention, the obligation to municipal law of most civilized States.
restore the undertaking is incumbent or, if not possible, to
pay indemnity. Since it is already impossible to restore the
factory to its owners, then compensation for the loss SAUDI ARABIA v. ARABIAN AMERICAN OIL
sustained as a result of the seizure and payment of COMPANY (ARAMCO)
indemnity is incumbent upon Poland. 27 ILR 117
Domestic Corporations are Separate Entities from The Government of the State of Saudi Arabia made a
their Respective States concession agreement with the Arabian American Oil
Company (ARAMCO), which includes the exclusive right to
transport oil which it had extracted from its concession area
CASE CONCERNING THE BARCELONA in Saudi Arabia. Subsequently, Saudi Arabia concluded
another concession agreement with Mr. Onassis and his
TRACTION, LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY,
company (Saudi Arabian Maritime Tankers) which gave the
LIMITED (BELGIUM v. SPAIN) latter a 30-year right of priority for the transport of Saudi
ICJ Reports 1970, p.3 (1970)
Arabian oil. An issue therefore arose regarding those
provisions and the agreement between Aramco, which was
Barcelona Traction and its subsidiaries are incorporated in previously given the
Canada and Spain. BT’s share is largely held by Belgian
nationals. After the Spanish Civil War, the Spanish In its capacity as first concessionaire, Aramco enjoys
government refused the authorization for the transfer of exclusive rights which have the character of acquired or '
foreign currency necessary for the servicing of bonds issued vested ' rights and which cannot be taken away from it by
by BT. BT incurred debt for the payment of interest on the the Government by means of a contract concluded with a
bonds and subsequently, it was declared bankrupt. Belgium second concessionaire, even if that contract were equal to
filed an Application with the ICJ. its own contract from a legal point of view. The principle of
respect for acquired rights is one of the fundamental
16
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
17
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
British Petroleum had a contract with Libya to extract, In Bayan vs. Zamora, the SC upheld the constitutionality of
process and export oil. Libya passed a Nationalization Law the VFA stating that the VFA was duly concurred in by the
which restored ownership of all properties, rights and assets Philippine senate and has been recognized as a treaty by the
to the nation and transferred them to the Arabian Gulf US. Though the VFA was not submitted for advice and
Exploration Company. BP protested the consent of the US Senate, it is still a binding international
nationalization. agreement or treaty recognized by the US because:
Only policymaking agreements are submitted to the US
BP: Cited Clause 28 of their Agreement which Senate;
provides that: Those that carry out or further implement
The applicable law in resolving disputes policymaking agreements are submitted to Congress
between Libya and BP would be Libyan under the provisions of Case-Zablocki Act. Submission
principles of law common to the principles of of this kind of agreement to the US Senate is not
international law; necessary;
If there are no common principles, general The RP-US Military Defense Treaty is the policymaking
principles of law will apply; agreement, while the VFA is its implementing
General principles of law will be preferred agreement. The RP-US Military Defense Treaty has
over Libyan principles of law. been ratified & concurred by both Philippine & US
senates.
When a State breaches a concession agreement through
sovereign power in the form of nationalization, the The VFA is different from Medellin vs. Texas because in
concessionaire does not have the right to ask for specific Medellin vs. Texas, the US SC held that treaties entered into
by the US are not automatically part of their domestic law
unless these treaties are self-executing or there is an
implementing legislation to make them enforceable.
18
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
19
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
20
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
21
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
ICJ rejected the doctrine that only states are subjects “Do the expenditures authorized in General
of international law. Assembly resolutions relating to the UN
CLASS NOTES operations in the Congo undertaken in pursuance
of the Security Council resolutions and the
expenditures authorized in the General Assembly
THE MAVROMMATIS PALESTINE CONCESSIONS resolutions relating to the operations of the UN
PCIJ, Ser. A, No. 2, (1924) Emergency Force constitute ‘expenses of the
Organization’ within the meaning of Article 17,
The Greek Republic filed a case before the ICJ alleging the paragraph 2, of the Charter of the United
refusal of the Government of Palestine and the British Nations?“
Government who holds the mandate over Palestine, to
recognize the rights acquired by Mavrommatis (a Greek Yes, they were expenses of the organization within the
subject). Prior to the controversy, Mavrommatis concluded meaning of the UN charter.
contracts and agreements with the Ottoman authorities in
regard to concessions for certain public works to be Article 17, paragraph 2 states:
constructed in Palestine. The dispute was in the beginning “The expenses of the Organization shall be borne
between a private person (Mavrommatis) and a State by the Members as apportioned by the General
(Britain). Assembly.”
22
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
23
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
24
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
context referring to sovereignty as “absolute.” However, in placed the latter in estoppel because said
the international sphere, sovereignty realizes itself in the treaty kept Spain’s title over the area in
existence of a large number of sovereignties, such that dispute intact.
there prevails in fact co-existence of sovereignties under The Treaty of Paris wherein Spain ceded
conditions of independence and equality. the Philippines to the United States and
by virtue of which the latter became the
The sovereignty of one state ends where the sovereignty of successor of Spain.
another begins. That limitation is built into the nature of It has constructive possession over Las
state sovereignty under international law. To conceive it as Palmas pursuant to the principle of
unlimited is to negate its existence in the context of the co- contiguity in that the island forms a
existence of sovereignties, resulting in the negation of the geographical part of the Philippines and
international community composed of juridically equal therefore is under the power exercising
states. sovereignty over the Philippines.
Netherlands: Discovery by Spain, or any other method
State Sovereignty as defined in International Law of acquisition over the disputed territory,
It is the right to exercise in a definite portion of the globe has not been adequately proven.
the functions of a State to the exclusion of another state. Assuming arguendo that Spain indeed
According to the widely accepted opinion Of Judge Huber in had title over Las Palmas, it has lost such
the Island of Las Palmas case, “Sovereignty in the relations title thru acquiescence because it did not
between states signifies independence. The development exercise sovereignty over the disputed
of the national organization of States during the last few territory.
centuries, as, as a corollary, the development of It has been represented by the East India
international law, have established this principle of the Company through which it possessed
exclusive competence of the State in regard to its own and exercised sovereignty over Las
territory I such a way as to make it the point of departure in Palmas from 1648 onwards.
settling most questions that concern international Contracts of Suzerainty wherein it
relations.”
established conventions with natives
(included collection of taxes, etc.) which
show Netherlands’ exercise of
ISLANDS OF LAS PALMAS CASE (U.S. v. sovereignty over the territories of the
NETHERLANDS) native princes of the island.
2 RIAA 829 (1930)
25
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
This is in context of the continued dispute between the territory regardless of the evolution underwent by
Philippines and Indonesia as to which territory Las Palmas international law.
should belong to. In 2002, amidst negotiations between the
two states, Indonesia enacted a new Baselines Law wherein As to Huber’s ruling that US failed to show effective
it used Las Palmas as a basepoint in drawing its archipelagic occupation, Jessup criticized this using the Theory of
baselines. If the this new law was to be followed, the Constructive Possession which provides that the possession
Philippines will not only lose Las Palmas but also around of the whole is tantamount to the possession of the parts
15,000 square miles of archipelagic and territorial waters of the whole. In occupying Mindanao, Spain also occupied
which are currently defined as Philippine territory under the Las Palmas as part of the Philippine archipelago. Jessup also
Treaty of Paris. Said law is contrary to Indonesia’s former criticized Huber’s rejection of the Principle of Contiguity
commitment to delimit the area in dispute only after which is actually recognized in international law and has
negotiations with the Philippines have concluded. been prominently practiced in 1928 (time of the arbitration)
Accordingly, the Baselines Law was equivalent especially in dealing with a
26
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
27
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
28
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Construction of cabins.
29
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
30
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Indonesia: In 1895 and 1928, Dutch Royal Nay Ethiopia, which had in turn inherited its
deployed ships in the area; title from Italy;
Indonesian fishermen fished in the area; Construction and maintenance of
and lighthouses in different islands.
Non-inclusion of the islands in their maps Yemen: Historic title. This title can be traced to the
immaterial because they were prepared in Bilad el-Yemen, which is said to have
haste. existed as early as the 6th Century AD.
Malaysia: As early as 1914, the Great Britain regulated Automatic reversion. When the Ottoman
the control and collection of turtle eggs in Empire collapsed, ending its occupation of
the area; the area, the title reverted back to Yemen.
It established licensing for boats; Construction and maintenance of
Established reservations for bird lighthouses in different islands.
sanctuaries;
British North Borneo authorities No title by succession. Italy, Eritrea’s predecessor, did not
constructed lighthouses in the 1960s which obtain title to the territory under the Treaty of Lausanne
were under the control of the Malaysian because it was provided that the allied powers have yet to
authorities. agree on who can claim sovereignty over the territory.
The court ruled for Malaysia because of its “effective acts No historic title. Medieval Yemen had no concept of
of administration” territorial sovereignty. Therefore, Yemen cannot claim title
by automatic reversion.
Among other evidence presented, Malaysia’s construction
of lighthouses in 1962 and 1963 was considered by the The tribunal found out that none of them presented a
Court. While they are not usually used as an indicator of better claim, so it decided based on effective occupation,
state authority (as in the Minquiers and Ecrehos Case), since occupation is the prima facie evidence of title.
they are legally relevant in the case of small islands.
Portico Doctrine. – A method by which off-shore islands
The Court rejected Indonesia’s claim that they merely can be attributed to a State’s sovereignty. Islands near
tolerated the construction of the lighthouses because they coastal states must pertain to such states.
are useful for safe navigation. According to the Court, these
lighthouses are very important to people in North Borneo, Both parties have constructed and operated lighthouses in
and the silence of Indonesia over this construction is highly different islands. The significance of these lighthouses
unusual. would thus have to be considered separately, on a per
island basis.
31
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
(This section deals with the parties’ claims relating to maps. (This section deals with the parties’ claims relating to maps.
For a more exhaustive discussion, refer to p. 31) For a more exhaustive discussion, refer to p. 14)
Claims relating to maps: Two treaties were entered into by France and Siam which
Eritrea: Maps from the 20th century that Italy (its involved delimitation of certain areas. A commission was
predecessor state) was sovereign over the tasked to survey the delimitation points and the final stage
islands. of the delimitation was the preparation of maps. Siam did
Yemen: Maps from the 18th to 19th centuries show not possess adequate technical means to do so, prompting
that the islands once belonged to Yemen, it to ask French officers to do the mapping for them. The
proving its historical title. maps were drawn by a well-known French cartographer and
UN maps from the 1950’s show that the given wide publicity. It was communicated to the
islands were not considered part of government of Siam.
Ethiopia (present-day Eritrea)
The principle of estoppel was applicable. The maps were
As to the pre-19th century maps, Court ruled that there was communicated to Siam as purporting to represent the
no attribution of the islands to Yemen. outcome of the work of delimitation. Since there was no
reaction on the part of Siam, either then or for many years,
As to the use of maps to prove Italian sovereignty during the and that France (later, Cambodia) relied on this non-
20th century, it appears that official Italian cartography did objection of Siam, Siam (later, Thailand) is estopped from
not wish formally to portray the Islands as being under claiming otherwise. The uti possidetis juris principle is
Italian sovereignty in the inter-war period. However, the applicable as to the successor states i.e. Cambodia and
map evidence – whilst supportive of and consistent with the Thailand.
conclusions reached – is not itself determinative. Were
there no other evidence in the record concerning the Principle of Uti Possidetis Juris. – Successor states shall
attitude or intentions of Italy, this evidence would be of respect colonial boundaries of colonial rulers.
greater importance.
As to the UN maps, it is UN practice that its publication of CASE CONCERNING THE TERRITORIAL
maps does not constitute a recognition of sovereign title DISPUTE (LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRIYA v. CHAD)
over territory. Hence, they cannot be relied upon by either ICJ Reports 1994, p. 6 (1994)
party.
32
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The Court applied the principle of uti possidetis juris – which The Norwegian mainland is bordered in its western sector
provides that successor states must respect the colonial by the "skjaergaard", which constitutes a whole with the
boundaries of colonial rulers, and such boundaries would mainland. This being so, it is the outer line of the
survive after independence. "skjaergaard" which must be taken into account in
delimiting the belt of Norwegian territorial waters.
With respect to the fact that the treaty itself specified that
it has a life of only 20 years, the Court applied the theory of Straight baseline method. This method consists of selecting
auto-limitation – which provides that boundaries have a life appropriate points on the low-water mark and drawing
of its own, separate from the treaty itself. A boundary straight lines between them.
established by treaty achieves permanence which the
treaty itself does not necessarily enjoy. Following this method, there is no need to follow all of the
indentations or sinuosities in drawing the baseline. Straight
baselines shall be drawn connecting appropriate points
ANGLO-NORWEIGIAN FISHERIES CASE (UNITED along the skjaergaard. It is from this line that the territorial
KINGDOM v. NORWAY) sea shall be reckoned.
ICJ Reports 1951, p. 116 (1951)
33
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
34
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Clipperton Island, apparently uninhabitable, is a low coral Its roots can be traced to the treatise “Mare Liberum” by
reef in the Pacific Ocean. In 1858, the French Navy, while Portuguese Hugo Grotius, which advanced the principle
cruising about half a mile off Clipperton, declared that the that the sea is owned by everyone and that it was under the
sovereignty of the island beginning from that date belongs regime of the “common heritage of mankind.”
to Emperor Napoleon III. The vessel didn't reach the shore
and it left without leaving on the island any sign of It divides the oceans and seas into the following maritime
sovereignty. The declaration was communicated to the zones:
government of Hawaii and was published in the journal The
Internal Waters
Polynesian of Honolulu. The island remained without
Territorial Sea
population and no administration. Later, Mexico arrived and
Contiguous Zone
ignored the occupation claimed by France and hoisted their
Exclusive Economic Zone
own flag. It claimed that the islands belong to it.
High Seas
France: 1858 landing, and hoisting of French flag;
Declaration of sovereignty communicated
to the Government of Hawaii through the BASELINES
journal, “The Polynesian”;
Baseline
Mexico: Spain discovered it and by virtue of the
Papal Bull of Alexander VI, it belonged to It is a line from which the breadth of the territorial sea and
Spain and, in 1836, to Mexico as Spain’s other maritime zones is measured. It is essential for the
successor. determination of the maritime boundary of the coastal
state.
France has title over the islands.
There are two types:
There is no proof that Spain discovered the island first and 1. Normal Baseline
that Spain effectively exercised such right. It presented a 2. Straight Baseline
map but the official character of such map cannot be
affirmed. Also, proof of historic right is not supported by UNCLOS, Art. 5.
manifestation of sovereignty over the island. The tribunal Normal baseline
found that the island was terra nullius and susceptible of
Except where otherwise provided in this
35
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Convention, the normal baseline for measuring the 4. Straight baselines shall not be drawn to and from
breadth of the territorial sea is the low-water line low-tide elevations, unless lighthouses or similar
along the coast as marked on large-scale charts installations which are permanently above sea level
officially recognized by the coastal State. have been built on them or except in instances
where the drawing of baselines to and from such
Normal Baseline elevations has received general international
It is the low-water line along the coast as marked on large- recognition.
scale charts officially recognized by the coastal state. (Art.
5) 5. Where the method of straight baselines is
applicable under paragraph 1, account may be
There is no fixed or definitive method to determine the taken, in determining particular baselines, of
location of the low-water line. One way is to mark it on the economic interests peculiar to the region
lowest ebb tide or on the lowest astronomical tide. Another concerned, the reality and the importance of which
way, as suggested in the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries Case, is are clearly evidenced by long usage.
to use the mean between the high and low tides.
6. The system of straight baselines may not be
applied by a State in such a manner as to cut off the
territorial sea of another State from the high
seas or an exclusive economic zone.
Straight Baseline
It is used where the coastline is deeply indented and cut
into or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its
immediate vicinity, by joining the appropriate points of
these features using straight lines. (Art. 7 [1])
1. In localities where the coastline is deeply 3. Must not be drawn to and from low-tide
indented and cut into, or if there is a fringe of elevations;
islands along the coast in its immediate vicinity, the UNLESS, lighthouses or similar
method of straight baselines joining appropriate installations permanently above sea
points may be employed in drawing the baseline level have been built on them; and
from which the breadth of the territorial sea is UNLESS such use of baselines on low-
measured. tide elevations have received general
international recognition. (Art. 7 [4])
2. Where because of the presence of a delta and 4. Cannot be applied by a state in such a manner as
other natural conditions the coastline is highly to cut off the territorial sea of another from the
unstable, the appropriate points may be selected high seas or an EEZ. (Art. 7 [6])
along the furthest seaward extent of the low- water
line and, notwithstanding subsequent regression of The drawing of straight baselines may take into account
the low-water line, the straight baselines shall economic interests peculiar to the region concerned, the
remain effective until changed by the coastal State realty and importance of which are clearly evidence by a
in accordance with this Convention. long usage. (Art. 7 [5]) This has likewise seen application in
the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries Case.
3. The drawing of straight baselines must not
depart to any appreciable extent from the general
direction of the coast, and the sea areas lying within
the lines must be sufficiently closely linked to the
land domain to be subject to the regime of internal
waters.
36
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Baselines for Mouths of Rivers 5. Where the distance between the low-water
marks of the natural entrance points of a bay
UNCLOS, Art. 9. exceeds 24 nautical miles, a straight baseline of 24
Mouths of rivers nautical miles shall be drawn within the bay in such
a manner as to enclose the maximum area of water
If a river flows directly into the sea, the baseline that is possible with a line of that length.
shall be a straight line across the mouth of the river
between points on the low-water line of its 6. The foregoing provisions do not apply to so-
banks. called "historic" bays, or in any case where the
system of straight baselines provided for in
article 7 is applied.
37
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Fig.
Fig. (Magallona, 2005)
Baselines for Low-tide Elevations
If the bay has more than one mouth because of the
presence of islands: UNCLOS, Art. 13.
The baseline shall be drawn on a line as long as the Low-tide elevations
sum total of the lengths of the lines across
different mouths. 1. A low-tide elevation is a naturally formed area of
land which is surrounded by and above water at low
tide but submerged at high tide. Where a low- tide
elevation is situated wholly or partly at a distance
not exceeding the breadth of the territorial sea from
the mainland or an island, the low-water line on
that elevation may be used as the baseline for
measuring the breadth of the territorial sea.
Ports
Baselines may be reckoned from such low-tide elevations
when such LTE lies wholly or partly within the breadth of the
For the purpose of delimiting the territorial sea, the
territorial sea (i.e. 12 nautical miles) from the mainland or
outermost permanent harbor works which form an
an island.
integral part of the harbor system are regarded as
forming part of the coast. Off-shore installations
and artificial islands shall not be
considered as permanent harbor works. INTERNAL WATERS AND INNOCENT
PASSAGE
Port installations forming an integral part of a harbor
system, such as breakwaters, wharves and loading bays, are UNCLOS, Art. 8.
regarded as forming part of the coast. (Art. 11 [5]) Baselines Internal waters
shall be drawn from their openings.
1. Except as provided in Part IV, waters on the
landward side of the baseline of the territorial sea
form part of the internal waters of the State.
38
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
39
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
In fact, RA 9522 increased PH total maritime space. While The UNCLOS did not require any new baseline law. The
having reduced territorial seas from (271,136 sq. nm 32, language of the convention is permissive.
106 sq. nm), it allowed the country to claim 382,669 sq. nm
of EEZ. This EEZ even extends beyond the waters covered Contrary to the Arroyo Administration’s insistence, the
under the old baselines law. (Caveat: subject to delineation May 2009 deadline was not for archipelagic states to
of boundaries in accordance with UNCLOS in case of revise their baselines. It was for purposes of making
overlapping EEZs) claims to an extended continental shelf (which we did
for Benham Rise).
TERRITORIAL SEA
UNCLOS, Art. 3.
Breadth of the territorial sea
40
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
xxxx
UNCLOS, Art. 4
Outer limit of the territorial sea There is innocent passage if such passage is not prejudicial
to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state.
The outer limit of the territorial sea is the line every
point of which is at a distance from the nearest Non-innocent passage. – Passage shall NOT be innocent if
point of the baseline equal to the breadth a foreign ship, without the consent of the coastal state,
of the territorial sea. engages in any of the following acts while passing though
the territorial sea:
Territorial Sea, Defined a) any threat or use of force against the sovereignty,
It is a belt of sea adjacent to internal waters or archipelagic territorial integrity or political independence of
waters, as the case may be, whose breadth extends up to a the coastal State, or in any other manner in
limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles from a coastal state’s violation of the principles of international law
baselines. embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;
b) any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind;
c) any act aimed at collecting information to the
prejudice of the defense or security of the coastal
State;
d) any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the
defense or security of the coastal State;
e) the launching, landing or taking on board of any
aircraft;
f) the launching, landing or taking on board of any
military device;
g) the loading or unloading of any commodity,
currency or person contrary to the customs, fiscal,
Fig. (Magallona, 2005) immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of
the coastal State;
Coastal State Has Sovereignty h) any act of willful and serious pollution contrary to
A coastal state’s sovereignty covers the territorial sea, this Convention;
which extends to the airspace over the same as well as to i) any fishing activities;
its bed and subsoil. (Art. 2 [2]) j) the carrying out of research or survey activities;
k) any act aimed at interfering with any systems of
Right of Innocent Passage communication or any other facilities or
Passage means navigation through the territorial sea for installations of the coastal State;
the purpose of: l) any other activity not having a direct bearing on
a) Traversing that sea without entering internal passage. (Art. 19 [2])
waters; or
b) Proceeding to or from internal waters. (Art. 18 Rights of protection for the coastal state. – A coastal state
[1]) is given the following rights of protection with regard to the
right of innocent passage. It may:
Passage must be continuous and expeditious. But a ship is 1) Take necessary steps in its territorial sea to
allowed to stop and anchor if: prevent non-innocent passage;
a) Such anchoring or stopping is incidental to 2) Take measures to prevent any breach of the
ordinary navigation; or conditions for the admission of ships to internal
b) Rendered necessary on account of force majeure waters, with respect to ships proceeding to
or for the purpose of rendering assistance to internal waters or ports or to ships calling at a
persons, ships or aircraft in danger or distress. port facility outside internal waters; and
(Art. 18 [2]) 3) Suspend temporarily the innocent passage of
foreign ships in specified areas of the territorial
UNCLOS, Art. 19. sea
Meaning of innocent passage IF, such suspension is essential for the
protection of its security
1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial Such suspension may take effect only
to the peace, good order or security of the coastal after publication. (Art. 25)
State. Such passage shall take place in conformity
with this Convention and with other
rules of international law.
41
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
42
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Submarines,
Navigate on the surface; and
Underwater
Show their flag (Art. 20)
Vehicles
Foreign nuclear-
powered ships, and Carry documents; and The Gulf of Sidra is a maritime area situated north of Libya
ships carrying Observe special precautionary covering an area of 22,000 sq. mi. In 1973, the Libyan
nuclear or other measures established for such government announced that the Gulf of Sidra is an integral
inherently ships by international part of the Libyan Arab Republic, with sovereignty thereon
dangerous or agreements (Art. 23) having been exercised through history, and thus it
noxious substances constituted internal waters. It proceeded to delimit its
claimed territorial waters by drawing the gulf’s closing line
Q: Are warships allowed innocent passage through 300 miles across its mouth, with the warning that any
the territorial sea? foreign vessel that would breach the line without
authorization would be in violation of Libyan sovereignty.
Yes. The right to innocent passage pertains to all ships,
Further, it claimed that its 12mi territorial sea limit was to
including warships. UNCLOS lays down in Articles 29-
be reckoned from this line. This position has led to several
32 special rules applicable only to
incidents involving US ships.
warships and other government ships operated for
non-commercial purposes. (infra)
Libya: The gulf is a “historic bay” over which Libya
Rules on warships. - A "warship" means a ship: has exercised sovereignty through history.
As such, the Gulf’s closing line
43
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Gulf of Sidra is not a historic bay, and waters within it are In a 1947 decision (United States v. California, 332 US 804),
not internal waters. It may not validly restrict access the Court granted the US Federal government dominion
thereto. over submerged lands and mineral rights underlying the
Pacific Ocean beyond 3 nautical miles seaward from the
UNCLOS lays down rules on for a body of water to be ordinary low water mark of the coast of California. Areas
properly considered as a bay (i.e. semi-circle test, supra.). within the 3 mile belt would constitute internal waters of the
An exception to this requirement is if a body of water is a state, and those without would constitute federal waters.
“historic bay”. (UNCLOS, Art. 10 *6+)
This was followed by a 1965 (United States v. California,
Claims to historic waters in general are relics of an older and 381 US 139) decision which included bays and other
by now a largely obsolete legal regime, and the coastal features which satisfied the semi-circle test (supra.
international community has firmly rejected any attempts p. 37) as well as historic bays as part of internal waters of
to establish any new maritime claims. Such claims encroach California.
on what would otherwise be considered the common
domain of the international community and would hence This 1966 decision is a supplemental decree, which held
deprive the international community of certain portions of that the subsoil and seabed of the continental shelf:
the high seas. Within 3 nautical miles seaward, from the COASTLINE of
California (not just from the low water mark as in the
In the instant case, Libya drew a 300 mile closing line at the 1947 decision) – appertains to CALIFORNIA; and
mouth of the gulf, well exceeding the 24mi limit set by the Those beyond 3 nautical miles – appertains to the
UNCLOS., under the premise that the gulf fell under the UNITED STATES.
“historic bay” exception. However, this claimed exception
must fail because Libya has failed to offer any evidence to The Court made use of the following definitions:
substantiate its claim of historical sovereignty over the gulf.
In fact, prior to 1973, it did not claim the gulf as a historic Coastline
bay. Neither is their mention of the Gulf in the survey of - Line of mean lower low water on the mainland,
historic bays conducted by the UN. islands, and on low tide elevations within 3
geographic miles from the line of mean lower low
As such, the acts of Libya in restricting access to the waters water; or
of the gulf beyond 12mi from its coast (not the Libyan-
drawn closing line) constitutes illegal interference of
- Line marking seaward limit of inland waters; and
international navigation and is incompatible with the - Includes outermost permanent harbour works that
international legal regime of the high seas. form an integral part of harbour system.
Island
ANGLO-NORWEIGIAN FISHERIES CASE (UNITED It is a naturally formed area of land surrounded by water,
KINGDOM v. NORWAY) which is above the level of mean high water
ICJ Reports 1951, p. 116 (1951), supra.
Low Tide Elevation
A naturally formed area of land surrounded by water at
(supra. For an exhaustive discussion, refer to p. 8)
mean lower low water:
above the level of mean lower low water; but
not above the level of mean high water
THE CASE CONCERNING THE LAND, ISLAND
AND MARITIME FRONTIER DISPUTE (EL
Mean Lower Low Water
SALVADOR v. HONDURAS, with NICARAGUA The average elevation of all daily lower low tides
intervening)
(1992), supra.
Mean High Water
44
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
In a previous case between U.S. vs. Louisiana, the Court held STRAITS AND TRANSIT PASSAGE
that based on the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, U.S.
quitclaimed to Louisiana the lands underlying the Gulf of Straits, In General
Mexico within 3 geographical miles of the coastline. In that It is a comparatively narrow passageway connecting two
Act, the coast line was defined as the “line marking the large bodies of water. (Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate
seaward limit of inland waters”. Dictionary, 2003)
45
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
46
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
47
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
48
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
All ships and aircraft are entitled to this right. (Art. 53.2)
1) Within such baselines, the main islands must be These include warships and submarines. Navigation of such
included and an area in which the ratio of the area ships is meant to be in “normal mode”; as such, submarines
of the water to the area of the land, including need not surface (unlike in innocent passage.)
atolls is between 1:1 and 9:1; (ibid.)
2) Baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical miles; No suspension of archipelagic sea lanes passage. – Like in
(Art. 47 [2]) transit passage (supra, p. 47), archipelagic sea lanes passage
3) Baselines drawn shall not depart to any cannot be suspended unilaterally. (Art. 54, applying 44)
appreciable extent from the general
configuration of the archipelago; (Art. 47 [5])
Archipelagic sea lanes passage may not suspended by
(Refer to Art. 47 for other limitations) the archipelagic state. This differs from the right of
temporary suspension granted to archipelagic states
The breadths of the following maritime zones are measured with respect to right of innocent passage over
from the archipelagic baselines:
archipelagic waters.
Territorial sea CLASS NOTES
Contiguous zone
Exclusive economic zone Designation of sea lanes and air routes. – It is the
Continental shelf (Art. 48) archipelagic state that designates sea lanes and air routes,
and prescribes traffic separation schemes, subject to the
Archipelagic Waters approval of a competent international organization (i.e.
This refers to the waters enclosed by the archipelagic International Maritime Organization). (Art. 53 [9])
baselines, regardless of their depth or distance from the
coast. (Art. 49 [1]) If the archipelagic state does not designate such lanes or
routes, ships and aircraft may exercise the right through the
Archipelagic State Has Sovereignty routes normally used for international navigation. (Art. 53
The sovereignty of the archipelagic state extends to the [12])
archipelagic waters, its superadjacent airspace, bed and
subsoil, and the resources contained therein. (Art. 49 [1; 2]) Application of Rules of Transit Passage. – The rules of
transit passage governing the following apply to
Right of Innocent Passage over Archipelagic Waters
archipelagic sea lanes passage: (Art. 54)
Ships of all states have the right of innocent passage
through archipelagic waters as it applies to territorial seas
(supra. p. 47). (Art. 52) Duties of vessels in transit passage (Art. 39) (supra. p.
47)
Right may be suspended. – the archipelagic state may Authorization for research and survey activities (Art.
temporarily suspend the right of innocent passage subject 40) (supra. p. 47)
to the following conditions: Laws and regulations by coastal state. (Art. 42)
1. only with respect to specified areas of the (supra. p. 47)
archipelagic waters; Duties of states bordering straits used for
2. if it is essential for the protection of the security of international navigation. (Art. 44) (supra. p. 47)
the state; and
3. without discrimination among foreign ships. (Art. 52 Q: How does archipelagic sea lanes passage differ
[2]) from transit passage?
Archipelagic Sea Lanes Transit Passage
Note that what can be suspended is the right of
Passage
innocent passage over archipelagic waters, NOT the
Navigation; Overflight
right of archipelagic sea lanes passage.
CLASS NOTES Purpose of continuous, expeditious and unobstructed
transit
Right of Archipelagic Sea Lanes Passage Submarines in normal mode
It is the right of all foreign ships and aircraft to have Cannot be suspended
continuous, expeditious and unobstructed passage in Over archipelagic waters Over straits used for
designated sea lanes and air routes through or over and superadjacent airspace international navigation
archipelagic waters and the adjacent territorial sea of the and superadjacent airspace
archipelagic state, (Art. 53 [1]) Sea lanes/traffic separation Sea lanes/traffic separation
schemes subject to IO schemes subject to IO
Such passage contemplates “transit between one part of adoption and agreement adoption and agreement
the high seas or an EEZ and another part of the high seas or between IO and among bordering states
an EEZ.” (Art. 53 *3+) archipelagic state
49
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
50
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
51
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
52
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
53
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The Court does not have jurisdiction over the case; hence. UK: Technical issue: the chart provided for in and
it declined to rule on the continental shelf issue. the dispositif of the 1977 decision ignored
certain basepoints that should be sued in
While the Court refused to rule on the substantive drawing the median/equidistance line;
issues of the case, the controversy nonetheless hence it did not reflect description in
presents an interesting case of continental shelf the decision itself, which must be corrected.
delimitation. This issue remains unresolved to this day. France: The mistake is but a minor inconsistency
which can be ignored;
Siding with Greece would significantly diminish The dispositif must be followed;
Turkey’s rights to the Aegean given their geographical modification is not allowed.
proximity. Siding with Turkey would deprive Greek
islands of its waters. The changes may be effected; the boundary should be
rectified so as to take account of the base-points
Sir’s proposed solution: Give Turkey its continental previously not taken into account.
shelf, but leave small pockets of water as Greek
territorial seas. Parties agree that there is a discrepancy in the drawing of
the boundary. It was a material error which the court has
The Portico Doctrine in the Eritrea-Yemen Arbitration the power to rectify. The court left it to the parties to effect
Case (supra., p. 31) can find application here. (Karichi a correction consistent with the decision.
Notes, citing Prof. Roque, 2010)
Court proceeded to discuss the actual delimitation of the
CLASS NOTES continental shelf.
54
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
adopted has been some modification or variant of the zone/continental shelf extending up to
equidistance principle rather than its total rejection. Here 200 nautical miles from the coast of
the problem also arises precisely from the distorting effect Greenland; a single delimitation line
of a geographical feature in circumstances in which the line should be drawn for the purpose.
equidistant from the coasts of the two States would Norway: A median line drawn from equidistant
otherwise constitute the appropriate boundary. (Karichi points between Greenland and Jan Mayen
Notes, 2010) (e.g. in this case, British islands lying within the is the proper boundary.
French side of the equidistance line)
Half-effect. – This method consists in delimiting the line The Court found that there was no agreement between the
equidistant between the two coasts, first, without the use parties to draw a single line for the delimitation of their
of the offshore island as a base-point, and, secondly, with fisheries zone and continental shelf boundaries. Hence, it
its use as a base-point; a boundary giving half-effect to the proceeded to examine the boundaries separately.
island is then the line drawn midway between those two
equidistance lines. For the continental shelf delimitation, the Court found the
1958 Geneva Convention to be the applicable law, while the
In order to effect these principles, the Court divided the fishery zone shall be governed by the relevant customary
delimitation into two steps: law. Also, the court said that special or relevant
1. First, determine the median/equidistant line circumstances, pursuant to the 1958 Geneva Convention
between the opposing states reckoned from their and to customary law shall be considered, to the effect that
coasts, ignoring the special geographical features the shifting of the provisionally drawn median line is
(e.g. islands); then required.
2. Second, delimit a second boundary line, taking
into consideration the special geographical In drawing the delimitation, the following circumstances
features were taken into account:
the disparity of length of coasts;
It is the line drawn midway between those the access to fishery resources.
boundary lines which would give half-effect. The Court did not consider population, socio-economic
factors, and the conduct of the Parties.
“Method of half-effect = proceed first as if the island
doesn’t exist, then shift the lines.” (ibid.) The result thus reached by the Court was that the median
line between the coasts shifted in the direction of Jan
This case was “a delimitation in a delimitation.” Mayen - but not as far as reaching the 200 nautical miles
CLASS NOTES line measured from the coast of Greenland - constituted the
line to be drawn in this case. Although Norway was of the
opinion that the actual line was to be drawn by the Parties
CASE CONCERNING MARITIME DELIMITATION on the basis of the decision of the Court, the Court
IN THE AREA BETWEEN GREENLAND AND JAN considered its task only fulfilled after having drawn the
MAYEN (DENMARK v. NORWAY) concrete line. Accordingly, the Court fixed the line in the
ICJ Reports 1993, p. 38 (1993) region situated between the median line and the 200
miles-line by dividing this region into three sectors and
taking into account the relevant circumstances, in particular
This case is a dispute regarding the extent of the continental
the access to the fishery resources.
shelves of Denmark and Norway in the area between
Greenland (Danish) and the island of Jan Mayen
(Norwegian).
55
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Saint Pierre & Miquelon are two French islands close to the
Canadian coast. The trigger of this case is the issuing by the
two parties of hydrocarbon exploration permits in the area,
with both contending that the other did not have the right
to do so.
56
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The Court also noted the fact that throughout the entire
ARIGO v. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
history of the old Sultanate of Johor, there is no evidence
(PETITIONERS’ PLEADING)
that any competing claim had ever been advanced over the
supra.
islands in the area of the Straits of Singapore. Hence, the
Court concluded that the Sultanate of Johor had original title
to Pedra Branca. In addition, the Court found that the (For an exhaustive discussion, refer to p. 27)
nature and degree of the Sultan of Johor’s authority
exercised over the Orang Laut—“the people of the sea” who
were engaged in various activities in the waters in the EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
Straits of Singapore—confirms the ancient original title of
the Sultanate of Johor to islands in the Straits of Singapore, UNCLOS, Art. 55.
including Pedra Branca. Specific legal regime of the exclusive economic
zone
The next issue is whether Malaysia has retained sovereignty
over Pedra Branca or whether the sovereignty has since The exclusive economic zone is an area beyond and
passed to Singapore. Singapore claims that it acquired adjacent to the territorial sea, subject to the specific
sovereignty over Pedra Branca in 1844 when it constructed legal regime established in this Part, under which
a lighthouse on the island as well as various other activities. the rights and jurisdiction of the coastal State and
This contention then brought the Court to examine the the rights and freedoms of other States are
conduct of the Parties relating to Pedra Branca. governed by the relevant provisions of this
Convention.
In this context, an important element is the construction
and commissioning of Horsburgh lighthouse on Pedra UNCLOS, Art. 57
Branca by the United Kingdom between 1850-1851. Breadth of the exclusive economic zone
Malaysia argued that the conduct of the United Kingdom
and Singapore related only to the construction and The exclusive economic zone shall not extend
commissioning of the lighthouse and later operating it
57
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
58
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
59
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Rights and Duties of Other States in the EEZ Canada: Court has no jurisdiction over the case.
In the EEZ of coastal states, all states enjoy the following
freedoms of the high seas: (Art. 87, infra, p.63) The Court decided in favor of Canada when it ruled that it
had no jurisdiction to hear the case as it fell under Canada’s
Navigation and overflight;
reservation to ICJ jurisdiction under Article 36.
Laying of submarine cables and pipelines.
The doctrinal value of the case is its statement on what in
Nonetheless, states shall have due regard to the rights and
international law may be regarded as “conservation and
duties of the coastal state and shall comply with the latter’s
management measures”. Accordingly, only two types of
laws and regulations. (Art. 58)
measures taken by a coastal State may be regarded as such:
1. Those relating to the State's exclusive economic zone;
FISHERIES JURISDICTION (SPAIN v. CANADA)
and
ICJ Reports 1998, p. 432 (1998)
2. Those relating to areas outside that zone, in so far as
these came within the framework of an international
(*Note: With respect to the case, the outline contains a agreement or were directed at stateless vessels.
notation, “FACTS ONLY.”)
Measures not satisfying these conditions were not
conservation and management measures but unlawful acts
pure and simple.
60
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
61
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Art. 292 is designed to free a ship and its crew from entitled to extend its territorial sea
prolonged detention on account of the imposition of beyond the median line, every point of
unreasonable bonds in municipal jurisdictions, or the failure which is equidistant from the nearest
of local law to provide for release on posting of a reasonable points on the baseline from which the
bond, inflicting thereby avoidable loss on a ship owner or breadth of the territorial sea is measured.
other persons affected by such detention. Furthermore, it
safeguards the interests of a coastal State by providing for
release only upon the posting of a reasonable bond or other Exception:Equidistance rule shall not apply and a
financial security determined by a court or tribunal referred different delimitation is required in the
to in Art. 292, without prejudice to the merits of the case in following cases:
the domestic forum against the vessel, its owner or its crew. Historic title;
Other special circumstances. (Art.
Bond demanded by France was excessive; should only be 8 15)
million Francs Rules on Delimitation of EEZ and the Continental
The value of the vessel alone may not be a controlling factor Shelf between Adjacent or Opposite States
in the determination of the bond, the overall circumstances Rule: By agreement among states on the basis
of the case must be considered. of international law “in order to achieve
an equitable solution”;
The 20 million-Franc demand was found unreasonable.
Instead, the tribunal set the bond in the amount of 8 million In the absence of agreement, matter shall
Francs. be subject to UNCLOS dispute
settlement measures (infra.)(Arts. 74, 83)
“Mustn’t submit vessels guilty of illegal fishing to
incarceration, but must promptly release them upon Negotiations must be meaningful. – Parties must enter into
the posting of a cash bond.” (Karichi Notes, citing Prof. negotiations with a view of arriving at an agreement. They
Roque, 2010) should not insist on their own positions, such that the
engagement amounts to mere compliance with a formal
Art. 292 is an independent remedy that requires no requisite.
exhaustion of local remedies.
CLASS NOTES Duty to make provisional arrangements pending
agreement. – Pending a final agreement, parties shall make
every effort to enter into provisional arrangements which
shall govern their conduct. They must refrain from acts
DELIMITATION OF MARITIME
which jeopardize or hamper efforts toward a final
BOUNDARIES agreement. (Art. 74 [3]; 83 [3])
Delimitation, Defined Dispute Settlement Procedures
Delimitation is a process which involves establishing the When no agreement is reached by the parties with regard
boundaries of an area already, in principle, appertaining to to territorial sea, EEZ and continental shelf boundary
the coastal state. It is not the determination de novo of such limitations, the following shall be done:
an area (i.e. not created out of nothing); rather, it is a Reference to third-party settlement of disputes under
process of drawing a boundary line between areas which Part XV of UNCLOS;
already appertain to one or other of the states affected. If the state declares an exception to acceptance of
(North Sea Continental Shelf Case, supra., p. 7)
UNCLOS dispute settlement procedures under Article
298, and the dispute arises subsequent to the entry of
It always has an international aspect; it cannot be
force of UNCLOS and there is no agreement between
dependent merely upon the will of the coastal state as
parties – dispute shall be submitted to a conciliation
expressed in its municipal law. Its validity is hinged on
commission, which shall come up with a non-binding
international law. (Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries Case, supra.,
report on the basis of which the parties shall
p. 8) negotiate an agreement;
If they still fail to reach an agreement, they are
Rules on Delimitation of the Territorial Sea
between States with Opposite or Adjacent Coasts required to submit the dispute to a third-party
compulsory procedure (e.g. ICJ, ITLOS, arbitral
General Rule: Left to the agreement between opposite
tribunals)
or adjacent coasts;
62
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The provisions of this Part apply to all parts of the States shall cooperate with each other in the conservation
sea that are not included in the exclusive economic and management of such resources, including the
zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters determination of the allowable catch. (Arts. 118, 119)
of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an
archipelagic State. This article does not entail any
abridgement of the freedoms enjoyed by all States SOUTHERN BLUE FIN TUNA CASES (NEW
in the exclusive economic zone in accordance with ZEALAND & AUSTRALIA v. JAPAN)
article 58. ITLOS Order, August 27, 1999
63
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
THE AREA
The Area, Defined
It is the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof beyond
the limits of national jurisdiction.
In order to access the seas, they are given the right of Common Heritage of Mankind
freedom of transit through the territory of a coastal state The Area and its resources are the common heritage of
by all means of transport. This shall be governed by mankind. All rights over its resources are vested in mankind
bilateral, subregional or regional agreements. (Art. 125) as a whole. (Art. 136)
These provisions apply in cases like the Case Concerning Its exploration and exploitation is carried out for the benefit
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India). of mankind by the International Seabed Authority, acting in
(supra., p. 13) behalf of all mankind.
64
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Nationality of Ships is that of Flag State Duty with regard to Transport of Slaves
Ships carry the nationality of the state whose flag they are It is the duty of the flag state to take effective measures to
entitled to fly (i.e. flag state). (Art. 91 [1]) prevent and punish the transport of slaves in ships
authorized to fly its flag, as well as to prevent the unlawful
There must be a “genuine link” between the state and the use of its flag for that purpose. (Art. 99)
ship. (ibid.)
Flag State Jurisdiction in the High Seas
65
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The flag state have exclusive jurisdiction over a ship which whose coastline is threatened may
flies its flag on the high seas. (relate to discussion on High take and enforce measures beyond
Seas, supra., p. 63) the territorial sea, including on the
high seas. (Art.
General Rule: Exclusive jurisdiction over all ships sailing 221)
its flag in the high seas. It covers all
legislative and enforcement jurisdiction Penal jurisdiction in matters of collision or any other
over administrative, technical and social incident of navigation. – In the event of a collision or any
matters concerning the ship, its master, other incident of navigation concerning a ship on the high
officers and crew. seas, involving the penal or disciplinary responsibility of the
master or of any other person in the service of the ship, the
In particular, its jurisdiction includes: following have concurrent jurisdiction over the latter’s
1. Penal or disciplinary proceedings person for the institution of penal/disciplinary proceedings:
against the master or any other Flag state; or
person in the service of the ship State of nationality of the person. (Art. 97 [1])
arising from collision or any other
incident of navigation concerning a No arrest or detention of the ship, even as a measure of
ship on the high seas; (Art. 97) investigation, shall be ordered by any authorities other than
2. Prevention or punishment of those of the flag State. (Art. 97 [3])
transport of slaves in ships
authorized to fly its flag. (Art. 99) This rule departs from the decision in the Case of SS
Lotus (supra., p. 29), which allowed Turkey (the state
Exceptions: 1. In penal or disciplinary proceedings with jurisdiction over the place of the incident) to
on the master or person in the exercise jurisdiction over a French captain (i.e.
service as regards to incidents territorial jurisdiction.)
arising from collision or any other
incident of navigation – the state of Hence, the rule applicable at present is that it is either
which that person is a national has the flag state or the state of which such person
jurisdiction concurrent with the flag is a national which may exercise jurisdiction over the
state; person in question. (Art. 91 [1])
2. Piracy – every state may seize a CLASS NOTES
pirate, ship taken by pirates, seize
the pirates and property on board; Complete immunity of ships in the high seas. – The
3. On persons or ship engaged in following ships enjoy complete immunity from the
unauthorized broadcasting from jurisdiction of any other state other than the flag state:
the high seas – the following states Warships; (Art. 95)
may arrest the person, seize the Ships owned or operated by a State and used only
broadcasting apparatus, and on government non-commercial service. (Art. 96)
prosecute the offender
a. state of registry of the Piracy
broadcasting installation; States have the duty to cooperate in the repression of
b. state of which the offender piracy in the high seas or in any other place outside the
is a national; jurisdiction of the state. (Art. 100)
c. state where the broadcast
transmission is received; UNCLOS, Art. 101.
or Definition of Piracy
d. any state where authorized
radio communication is Piracy consists of any of the following acts:
suffering interference (Art. a) Any illegal act of violence or detention, or any
109, infra., p. 67) act of depredation, committed for private
4. Exercise of the right of hot pursuit ends by the crew or the passengers of a
– a warship or military aircraft of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:
state may stop & arrest a foreign i. on the high seas, against another
ship on the high seas; (Art. 111, ship or aircraft, or against persons or
infra., p. 67) property on board such ship or
5. Pollution from a marine casualty – aircraft;
jurisdiction off the coastal state ii. against a ship, aircraft, persons or
66
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Unauthorized Broadcasting
67
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
This also applies to the boarding if such foreign ships by In exercising their rights and performing their duties
military aircraft. (Art. 110 [4]) under this Convention, States Parties shall refrain
from any threat or use of force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of any State, or
SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES in any other manner inconsistent with the principles
of international law embodied
Duty to Settle Disputes by Peaceful Means in the Charter of the United Nations.
It is the right of the parties to resort to peaceful means of
their own choice on which they can agree ay time
ARCHAELOGICAL AND HISTORICAL
UNCLOS vs. Peaceful Settlement of Parties
UNCLOS will only be applicable when the agreement of the OBJECTS
parties prove unsuccessful and their agreement does not
exclude any further procedure UNCLOS, Art. 301.
Archaeological and historical objects found at sea
UNCLOS not applicable if party requests submission of
dispute to a procedure pursuant to any other general, 1. States have the duty to protect objects of an
regional, bilateral agreement archaeological and historical nature found at sea
and shall cooperate for this purpose.
Principle of Compulsory Settlement 2. In order to control traffic in such objects, the
This is applicable when no successful settlement can be coastal State may, in applying article 33, presume
achieved or if the parties are unable to agree on the means that their removal from the seabed in the zone
of settlement referred to in that article without its approval would
result in an infringement within its territory or
Choices for the compulsory means of settlement of territorial sea of the laws and regulations referred
disputes. – to in that article.
1. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea 3. Nothing in this article affects the rights of
2. International court of Justice identifiable owners, the law of salvage or other
3. Arbitral tribunal rules of admiralty, or laws and practices with
4. Special arbitral tribunal respect to cultural exchanges.
4. This article is without prejudice to other
Jurisdiction of the court or tribunal. – international agreements and rules of international
1. Interpretation or application of UNCLOS law regarding the protection of
2. Interpretation or application of an international objects of an archaeological and historical nature.
agreement
68
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
69
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The Philippines has consented to the application of the Lol-lo and The crime, having been committed
Trading with the Enemy Act within its jurisdiction by Saraw: outside the Philippines, is not within the
enacting the Philippine Property Act of 1946 jurisdiction of any court in the Philippine
Islands.
Section 3 of the PPA of 1946 provides that "The Trading with
the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917” as amended shall Piracy is within the jurisdiction of the CFI since jurisdiction
continue in force in the Philippines after July 4, 1946. for crimes similar to piracy has no territorial limits.
According to the court, a foreign law may have Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas,
extraterritorial effect in a country other than the country of without lawful authority and done animo furandi, and in the
origin, provided the latter, in which it is sought to be made spirit and intention of universal hostility.
operative gives its consent thereto. As a general rule, the
jurisdiction of the nation within its territory is necessarily Pirates are in law hostes humani generis. Piracy is a crime
exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no limitation not not against any particular state but against all mankind. It
imposed by itself. Any restriction upon it, deriving validity may be punished in the competent tribunal of any country
from an external source, would imply a diminution of its where the offender may be found or into which he may be
sovereignty to the extent of the restriction, and an carried. The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes has
investment of that sovereignty to the same extent in that no territorial limits. As it is against all so may it be punished
power in which would impose such restriction. However, by all. Nor does it matter that the crime was committed
there are exceptions to the full and complete power of a within the jurisdictional 3-mile limit of a foreign state, "for
nation within its own territories, which can traced up to the those limits, though neutral to war, are not neutral to
consent of the nation itself. They can flow from no other crimes."
legitimate source. This consent may be either express or
implied. The consent of a Senate to the operation of a There is universal jurisdiction over crimes hostes
foreign law within its territory does not need to be express; humani generis – literally, enemy of mankind.
it is enough that said consent can be implied from its
conduct or from that of its authorized officers. Ratification This categorization includes piracy, torture, genocide,
can be given tacitly as well as expressly. Tacit ratification war crimes, and other crimes against humanity.
takes place when a State begins the execution of a treaty
without expressly ratifying it. Existence of armed conflict is not required for its
invocation.
In this case, the application of the Trading with the Enemy CLASS NOTES
Act in the Philippines is based on the enactment of the
Philippine Property Act of 1946 as well as the conduct of the
Philippine government (act of Pres. Roxas and Sec. of TUBB v. GREISS
Foreign Affairs). G.R. No. L-1325 (1947)
70
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The principle of International Law is that a foreign army Acts of a belligerent military occupant is valid if it is not
allowed to march through a friendly country or to be political. Confiscation is not allowed, only
stationed in it, by permission of its government or sequestration which is a valid measure of prevention.
sovereign, is exempt from the civil and criminal jurisdiction (Karichi Notes, citing Prof. Roque, 2010)
of the place. The agreement for the stationing of the US
Army or a part of its forces in the RP implies a waiver of all The receiver appointed by a belligerent occupying
jurisdiction over their troops during the time covered by state has the authority to receive payment by virtue of
such agreement, and permits the allied general or the rights of such occupying state. Payment to him
commander-in-chief to retain that exclusive control & extinguishes the obligation to the enemy obligor.
discipline which the government of his army may require. CLASS NOTES
71
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
consent, is both municipal and international Philippines, the District Court must have personal
law. jurisdiction over it. Also, none of the exceptions to foreign
sovereign immunity under the FSIA is available to Hilao in
Diplomatic and Consular Immunities this case to be able to successfully sue the RP in the District
Much of the law governing diplomatic relations is Court of Hawaii.
customary law. Official representatives of a state are given
immunities and privileges when they are within the territory An injunction against the Republic in the absence of
of another state. The immunities are personal, in that they personal jurisdiction over it would be futile, as the court
benefit the person. But the purpose is functional, that is, to would be powerless to enforce its injunction. A court should
enable them to perform their functions properly. On the not issue an unenforceable injunction: "The rule that a
part of the receiving state there lie certain obligations to court of equity will not issue an unenforceable decree of
protect the representative and his property and office. injunction comprehends as a reason for denying injunctive
relief that the court... does not have the means to punish
disobedience once discovered.'"
HILAO v. ESTATE OF FERDINAND MARCOS Also, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of the US is the
sole basis for jurisdiction over a foreign state which Hilao
(*Note: There are several Hilao v Estate cases. This first one also hinges his case on. Personal jurisdiction over a foreign
has to do with RP’s sovereign immunity.) state depends on subject-matter jurisdiction over the action
against the foreign state under the FSIA. It states that
Ferdinand Marcos and his wife Imelda fled to Hawai'i. Five "Personal jurisdiction, like subject-matter jurisdiction, exists
suits filed in the Northern District of California and the only when one of the exceptions to foreign sovereign
District of Hawai'i by individuals alleging that they or their immunity in [the FSIA] applies." However, the court rejected
relatives had been arrested, tortured, or executed by Hilao’s argument that the “commercial activity” exception
military intelligence personnel acting pursuant to martial is applicable to the RP in this case because accordingly, the
law declared by Marcos in 1971. The district courts State was merely acting pursuant to its mandate to recover
dismissed all five suits on the ground that the Act of State misappropriated public assets. As a general rule, foreign
doctrine precluded liability. In an appeal of those decisions states are immune from the jurisdiction of courts in the
to this court, the Republic filed an amicus curiae brief urging United States unless a claim against them falls within an
the U.S. courts to exercise jurisdiction over the human rights exception to immunity under the FSIA. Thus, the district
claims. The human rights cases were eventually court lacked jurisdiction over the Republic absent the
consolidated in the Hawaii district court and the existence of an applicable exception under the FSIA.
consolidated case was certified as a class action suit against
the Estate. The Republic also sued the Estate. However, they (*Note: This next Hilao case has to do with claims based on
eventually reached a settlement that included the transfer the US Aliens Torts Claims Act [ATCA])
of some of the Estate assets to the Republic. Meanwhile,
Hilao was eventually awarded punitive and compensatory Hilao, representing victims of Martial Law sued the Estate of
damages against the Estate. He also requested an injunction Ferdinand Marcos under the US Alien Torts Claims Act – an
against the RP, as aiders act which gave universal jurisdiction to US courts for
72
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
73
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Aurora Rarang was a merchandise control guard in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. RUIZ
Office of the Provost Marshal. Wylie, the assistant G.R. No. L-35645 (1985)
administrative officer of the US Naval Base, supervised the
publication of the Plan of the Day, a newsletter featuring The US held a bidding for some naval repair projects. Eligio
important announcements and general matters of interest
de Guzman and Co., Inc submitted bids. Subsequently, the
to the personnel of the base. Captain Williams, on the other company received from the US two telegrams requesting it
hand, was the commanding officer of the base. One feature to confirm its price proposals and for the name of its
of the Plan of the Day was the Action Line Inquiry. Under the bonding company. The company then received a letter
said feature, an article was published alleging that a certain which said that the company did not qualify to receive an
“Auring” appropriated confiscated items for their own
award for the projects, because of its previous
consumption or use. Rarang filed a suit for damages (libel unsatisfactory performance rating on a repair contract with
against Wylie and Williams for her humiliation because of
the US. The letter further said that the projects had been
the article. awarded to third parties. The company sued the US to allow
them to perform the work on the projects.
Wylie and They are entitled to functional immunity
Williams: because the publication was done in the United Philippine courts do not have jurisdiction
performance of their duties. States: over it since it is a foreign sovereign which
had not given its consent to the
The defendants are not entitled to functional immunity suit.
because such is not available with regard to tortious acts.
US is entitled to immunity since sovereign immunity is not
American naval officers who commit a crime or tortuous act lost when a state enters into contracts related to its
while discharging official functions are not covered by state sovereign functions.
immunity from suit. While the doctrine is also applicable to State immunity exempts a State from being sued in the
complaints filed against officials of the state for acts courts of another State without its consent or waiver. This
allegedly performed by them in the discharge of their rule is a necessary consequence of the principles of
duties. The rule is that if the judgment against such officials independence and equality of States. However, the court
will require the state itself to perform an affirmative act to said that the rules of international law are not petrified;
satisfy the same, such as the appropriation of the amount they are constantly developing and evolving. Thus, it has
needed to pay the damages awarded against them, the been necessary to distinguish between sovereign and
suit must be regarded as governmental acts (jure imperii) and private, commercial
74
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Makasiar, J., dissenting: Informations for grave oral defamation were filed against
Liang, a Chinese national was employed as an Economist by
When the U.S. Government, through its agency at Subic Bay, the Asian Development Bank. On separate occasions, Liang
confirmed the acceptance of a bid of a private company for accordingly uttered defamatory words (“bitch!”) to Joyce V.
the repair of wharves or shoreline in the Subic Bay area, it Cabal, an ADB clerical staff. The MeTC judge received an
is deemed to have entered into a contract and thus waived “office of protocol” from the DFA stating that Liang is
the mantle of sovereign immunity from suit and descended covered by immunity from legal processes under Sec. 45 of
to the level of the ordinary citizen. Its consent to be sued, the Agreement between ADB and the Philippines. Judge
therefore, is implied from its act of entering into a contract. dismissed the cases without notice to the prosecution.
75
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Scalzo was not able to sufficiently establish that he has Holy See enjoys sovereign immunity.
entitled to diplomatic immunity. However, the court
76
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
77
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
SOUTHEAST ASIAN FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT ICMC and IRRI have diplomatic immunity.
CENTER v. ACOSTA
G.R. No. 97468-70 (1993) Specialized agencies are international organizations having
functions in particular fields. The grant of immunity from
local jurisdiction is necessitated by their international
Two labor cases were filed against Asian Fisheries
character and respective purposes. The objective is to avoid
Development Center-Aquaculture Department (SEAFDEC-
the danger of partiality and interference by the host country
AQD) before the NLRC. The private respondents claim that
in their internal workings.
they have been wrongfully terminated from their
employment by SEAFDEC. SEAFDEC filed a Motion to
Conduct of certification elections is violative of diplomatic
Dismiss, alleging that it is an international inter-
immunity.
government organization composed of various Southeast
Asian countries, and that therefore, the NLRC does not have
This immunity grants international organizations immunity
jurisdiction over it.
from any form of legal process. While certification elections
are not suits against these organizations per se, they cannot
SEAFDEC is an international agency entitled to functional
be viewed as isolated processes; they could trigger off a
immunity.
series of events in the collective bargaining process which
can lead to the eventuality of court litigation.
SEAFDEC is an international agency enjoying diplomatic
immunity, enjoying functional independence and freedom
Functional immunity is available to international
from control of the state in whose territory its office is
organizations.
located. One of the basic immunities of an international
CLASS NOTES
organization is immunity from local jurisdiction, i.e., that it
is immune from the legal writs & processes issued by the
tribunals of the country where it is found. The obvious
reason for this is that the subjection of such an organization
to the authority of the local courts would afford a
REGINA v. BARTLE AND THE COMMISSIONER
convenient medium thru which the host government may OF POLICE FOR THE METROPOLIS AND
interfere in their operations or even influence or control its OTHERS, EX PARTE PINOCHET
[1999] UKHL 17 (24th March, 1999); 38 ILM 581
policies and decisions of the organization; besides, such
objection to local jurisdiction
78
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
79
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
80
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Ker was not denied due process. Alvarez- US courts do not have jurisdiction over
Machain: the case because the abduction violated
Due process of law is complied with when the party is the US-Mexico Extradition Treaty.
regularly indicted by the proper grand jury in the state
court, has a trial according to the forms and modes
US courts have jurisdiction over the case notwithstanding
prescribed for such trials, and when in that trial and
the abduction of Machain.
proceedings he isn’t deprived of rights to which he is
lawfully entitled. For mere irregularities in manner in which
The court in interpreting the treaty ruled that there is
he was brought into the custody of the law, he isn’t entitled
nothing about the obligation of the US and Mexico to
to say that he shouldn’t be tried for the crime with
which he is charged in a regular indictment. refrain from forcible abductions of people from the territory
of the other nation, or the consequences under the Treaty
This treaty of extradition doesn’t provide that a party fleeing if such an abduction happens. It also found that finds that in
from the US to escape punishment for crime becomes the history of negotiation and practice under the treaty,
thereby entitled to an asylum in the country to which he has there is no showing that abduction outside of the Treaty
fled. It isn’t contended that Peru couldn’t have ordered Ker constitutes a violation. , Since his abduction was not in
out of the country on his arrival, or at any period of his violation of the Extradition Treaty, therefore the Ker
residence there. Nor can it be doubted that Peru could, of doctrine is applicable to this case. The fact that Machain was
its own accord, without any demand from the US, have forcibly abducted does not therefore prohibit his trial in a
surrendered Ker to an agent of Illinois, and this surrender court in the United States for violation of criminal laws of
would’ve been valid within the dominions of Peru. The right the United States. However, in the end Machain was
of the Peruvian government to voluntarily give a party, in acquitted for insufficiency of evidence against him.
Ker’s condition, an asylum in that country is quite a different
thing from his right to demand and insist upon security in
such an asylum. The treaty, so far as it regulates the right of SOSA v. ALVAREZ
asylum, is intended to limit this right in the case of one who 542 US 692 (2004)
is proved to be a criminal fleeing from justice; so that, on
proper demand and proceedings had therein, the Upon his acquittal from the charges lodged by the DEA,
government of the country of the asylum shall deliver him Alvarez-Machain sued Sosa and a DEA operative, claiming
up to the country where the crime was committed. And to damages from the US under the Federal Torts Claim Act for
this extent, the treaty does regulate or impose a restriction his false arrest. FTCA authorizes suits for personal injury
upon the right of the government of the country of the caused by a negligent and wrongful act or omission of an
asylum to protect the criminal from removal. In this case, employee of the government while acting within the scope
the treaty wasn’t called into operation or relied upon. of his office (like the DEA operative). He was also seeking
damages from Sosa under the Alien Torts Statute for a
The Court pronounced a veritable “Ma- and Pa- violation of the law of nations. ATS provides that “district
Doctrine” – the manner of arrest is no longer relevant, courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by
granted the accused is subjected to a fair an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of
and impartial trial. nations or a treaty of the US.
CLASS NOTES
Alvarez-Machain’s claims based on the ATS and FTCA were
rejected by the US SC.
UNITED STATES v. ALVAREZ-MACHAIN
504 US 655 (1991) According to the court, it cannot exercise jurisdiction over
the claim of Alvarez-Machain. Accordingly, the FTCA is
Humberto Alvarez-Machain is a medical doctor, indicted for provided an insufficient basis for the suit, even if abducting
participating in the kidnap and murder of US-DEA special the doctor from Mexico violated customary norms of
agent Enrique Camarena Salazar and a Mexican pilot international law. Accordingly, while the FCTA does
working with Camarena, Alfredo Zavala-Avelar. It was provides a waiver of immunity of the US government in
alleged that Machain participated by prolonging the personal injury caused by its employee, this is subject to
81
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
82
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
83
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
84
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
85
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
86
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
87
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
and ethics go together and this must be kept in mind to Senegal: Charges concerned crimes committed
realize justice at both the national and international levels. outside the territory of Senegal by a
foreign national against foreign nationals
• Court: covered by immunity and that they would involve the exercise
• Sir: of universal jurisdiction, while the
• Could not file under domestic laws, because Senegalese Code of Criminal Procedure
forced labor is not absolutely prohibited. then in force did not provide for such
• The case is controversial because we don't jurisdiction
know if the court was correct. Belgium: The complaints filed before the Belgian
courts were based on crimes covered by
• Italy and dissenting the Belgian Law of 1993 concerning the
• Jus cogens prohibition should not be precluded punishment of serious violations of
by procedural law. Substantive shall prevail over international humanitarian law, as
procedural. amended by the Law 1999 and by the
• Duty to provide redress for violation: Convention against Torture (CAT). The
• Reparation - not limited to compensation Convention was ratified by Senegal on 21
• Restoration of status quo ante August 1986, without reservation, and
• Satisfaction - formal apology became binding on it on 26 June 1987, the
• Duty to prosecute and punish date of its entry into force. Belgium
CLASS NOTES ratified the Convention on 25 June 1999,
without reservation, and became bound
by it on 25 July 1999.
QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE OBLIGATION
TO PROSECUTE OR EXTRADITE (BELGIUM v. Senegal is bound to extend its jurisdiction relating to the
SENEGAL) prosecution of a Head of State of a foreign country under
ICJ Judgment of 20 July 2012 the Convention against Torture.
Mr. Habré was President of Chad for 8 years, during which Senegal’s failure to enact implementing legislation for the
large-scale violations of human rights were allegedly CAT delayed the submission of this case to Senegalese
committed, including arrests of actual or presumed political authorities, thus causing Senegal to breach its obligation
opponents, detentions without trial or under inhumane under Article 6 of the CAT to “immediately make a
conditions, mistreatment, torture, extrajudicial executions preliminary inquiry into the facts” as soon as a suspect is
and enforced disappearances. After being overthrown, he identified in the territory of the state party. The first
was granted political asylum by the Senegalese government complaint against Habré was filed in Dakar, Senegal. It
and he subsequently settled in Dakar. “became imperative” for Senegal to conduct the
preliminary inquiry. Senegal failed to include any materials
Complaints were filed against Mr. Habré with a Belgian demonstrating that it had carried out such an inquiry with
investigating judge, for serious violations of international respect to Habré’s involvement. Senegal breached CAT
humanitarian law, crimes of torture and the crime of Article 7, which requires the state party having jurisdiction
genocide. The complaints were based on crimes covered by over the territory where a person accused of offenses under
the Belgian Law of 1993 concerning the punishment of the CAT is found, to submit the case to its competent
serious violations of international humanitarian law, as authorities for prosecution or to extradite him.
amended by the Law 1999, and by the Convention against
Torture. The Minister of Justice of Chad stated that the The prohibition on torture is part of customary international
Sovereign National Conference had officially lifted from the law and has become a peremptory norm (jus cogens).
former President all immunity from legal process. However, However, the obligation to prosecute alleged perpetrators
when Belgium sought to extradite Mr. Habré, the Dakar of torture only arises after the Convention has entered into
Court of Appeals held that, as “it could not extend its force for that state party. Senegal’s obligations under the
jurisdiction to matters relating to the investigation or Convention date back to June 1987 when Senegal joined the
prosecution of a Head of State for acts allegedly committed CAT. There were a number of complaints regarding serious
in the exercise of his functions”; that Mr. Habré should “be offenses committed by Habré after that date for which
given jurisdictional immunity”, which “is intended to survive Senegal is obligated to prosecute. Belgium is entitled to
the cessation of his duties as President of the Republic”; and invoke Senegal’s compliance with the Convention beginning
that it could not therefore “adjudicate the lawfulness of in 1999 and has, in fact, requested Senegal’s compliance
*the+ proceedings and the validity of the arrest warrant since 2000 when the first complaint against Habré was filed
against a Head of State”. in Senegal.
88
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Congo filed an Application instituting proceedings against The basis of the rules on state responsibility, at present, is
Uganda in respect of a dispute concerning “acts of armed the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for
aggression perpetrated by Uganda on the territory of the Internationally Wrongful Acts, prepared by the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, in flagrant violation of International Law Commission.
the United Nations Charter and of the Charter of the
Organization of African Unity”. Uganda allegedly violated Elements of Internationally Wrongful Acts
principles of conventional and customary law by engaging
in military and paramilitary activities against Congo, by ILCDA, Art. 2.
occupying its territory and by actively extending military, Elements of an internationally
logistic, economic and financial support to irregular forces wrongful act of a State
having operated there, by committing acts of violence
against nationals of the Congo, and by engaging in the There is an internationally wrongful act of a State
illegal exploitation of Congolese natural resources. when conduct consisting of an action or omission:
a) is attributable to the State under
Uganda filed a counter-claim alleging involvement by Congo international law; and
in armed attacks against Uganda and in an attack on the b) constitutes a breach of an international
Ugandan Embassy and on Ugandan nationals in Kinshasa. obligation of the State.
Accordingly, this was a violation of the immunity accorded
to diplomats pursuant to the Vienna Convention on 1. Attribution to state.
Diplomatic Relations. Owing to a state’s lack of physical being, it can
only act by and through its agents and
Congo violated its obligations under the Vienna representatives. (Higgins, Chapter 9) As such, a
Convention on Diplomatic Relations by launching attacks state can be subject to international responsibility
on the Ugandan Embassy. by “attribution”, that is, by considering the acts or
omissions committed by a person or state organ
Through the attacks by members of the Congolese armed which can be attributed to the state.
forces on the premises of the Ugandan Embassy in Kinshasa,
and their maltreatment of persons who found themselves The rules on attribution to a state are discussed,
at the Embassy at the time of the attacks, the Congo infra.
breached its obligations under Article 22 of the Vienna
Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Furthermore, by the 2. Breach.
maltreatment by members of the Congolese armed forces There is a breach when a State violates a rule
of Ugandan diplomats on Embassy premises and at Ndjili contained in any source of international law. This
International Airport, Congo also breached its obligations includes treaty provisions, customary norms as
under Article 29 of the Vienna Convention. well as general principles of international law. The
breach may relate to an obligation under a
customary norm or a conventional rule.
(Magallona, 2005)
D. International Responsibility
Eight (8) Instances of State Attribution
ILC Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Acts and omissions of certain persons or individuals are
Internationally Wrongful Acts (ILCDA), Art. 1. attributed to the state as its own act in determining its
Responsibility of a State for its responsibility for an internationally wrong act. (Magallona,
internationally wrongful acts 2005)
Every internationally wrongful act of a State entails The ILC provides for rules governing such attribution. They
the international responsibility of that State. may be categorized as follows:
1. Those pertaining to state organs or officials
International Responsibility, Generally State organs; (ILCDA, Art. 4)
International responsibility arises as a consequence of State organ placed at the disposal of
illegal acts or for failure of a state to observe obligations another state (ILCDA, Art. 6)
under international law. (Magallona, 2005)
89
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
90
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
91
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Rules on Breach
3. This article is without prejudice to the There is a breach of an international obligation when an act
attribution to a State of any conduct, however or omission of a state is not in conformity with what is
related to that of the movement concerned, required of it by that obligation, regardless of its origin or
which is to be considered an act of that State character. (ILCDA, Art. 12) It can arise from breaches of
by virtue of articles 4 to 9. bilateral obligations, obligations owed to some states or to
the international community as a whole. (ILC, Comments on
No government can be held responsible for the conduct of the Draft Articles, 2001)
rebellious groups committed in violation of its authority.
Hence, if an insurrection is successfully abated, the state In the context of state responsibility, there is no distinction
cannot be held liable for any culpable violation of between contractual and tortious responsibility. (Rainbow
international law committed by the insurrectionists Warrior Arbitration, infra.)
(granted the State was itself not guilty of bad faith or
negligence). In considering the breach, the following rules must be
considered:
This article applies in cases where the insurrection is The state must be bound by the obligation in
successful and the original government is overthrown. Such question at the time the act occurs. (ILCDA, Art.
movement which had installed itself as the new government 13)
or establishes a new state will be liable for the acts it The breach occurs at the moment the act is
committed during the insurrection which would constitute performed, even if its effects continue. (ILCDA,
breaches of international law. Art. 14 [1])
A breach of a continuing character extends over
State ratification. – the entire period during which the act continues
and remains not inconformity with the
ILCDA, Art. 11. international obligation. (ILCDA, Art. 14 [2])
Conduct acknowledged and adopted by a State as A breach committed through a series of actions or
its own omissions defined in aggregate as wrongful
occurs when the aggregate of acts or omissions is
Conduct which is not attributable to a State under already sufficient to constitute the wrongful act
the preceding articles shall nevertheless be prohibited by the obligation. (ILCDA, Art. 15)
considered an act of that State under international o The fact of breach continues for as long
law if and to the extent that the State acknowledges as the actions or omissions are repeated
and adopts the conduct in question and remain not in conformity with the
as its own. international obligation. (ibid.)
While purely private conduct cannot generally be attributed Principle of Objective Responsibility. – This principle
to a state, this article covers situations where such provides that, provided agency and causal connection are
attribution can be made “to the extent that the state established, there is a breach of duty by result alone.
acknowledges and adopts the conduct in question as its Responsibility arises for acts committed by a state despite
own.” the absence of fault or culpa. (Brownlie, Chapter 21)
Note that this does not cover mere support or This in effect gives rise to “strict liability.” All a claimant
endorsement. It must consist in acknowledgement or needs to show is the fact of breach, fault or negligence
adoption of the acts as the state’s own by way of official act. on the part of the state notwithstanding.
In the Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and This is not to say, of course, that fault or negligence is
Consular Staff in Tehran (United States Of America v. immaterial. They may be considered in determining
Iran), supra, the ratification was done by a decree the extent of reparation that must be made.
issued by Ayatollah Khomeini, in which he announced CLASS NOTES
that no release of the US hostages were to be made
unless the US turned over the Shah of Iran to them. Responsibility in connection with the act of another state.
– A state may also be held responsible in relation to
By that decree, the Court ruled that the act of internationally wrongful acts of other states in the following
occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran by militants instances:
was effectively transformed into an act of the Iranian When a state aids or assists another state in the
State itself. commission of an internationally wrongful act by
CLASS NOTES the latter, if:
92
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
93
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Use with risk. – A state which resorts to countermeasures (Lifted from Karichi Notes, 2010)
based on its unilateral assessment of the situation does so
at its own risk and may incur responsibility for its own French agents destroyed a Greenpeace, Int’l vessel, the
wrongful conduct in the event of an incorrect assessment. Rainbow Warrior, while in harbour in New Zealand. New
Zealand prosecuted 2 captured French agents of the
Must be commensurate to the injury. – Countermeasures Directorate General of External Security.
must be commensurate with the injury suffered, taking into
account the gravity of the internationally wrongful act and Acts of organs of state. A communiqué from the Prime
the rights in question. Minister of France confirmed that agents acted under its
instructions, & promised reparation. Dispute over France’s
94
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The problem in IL is that the only way that a taking can Legal Consequences
be illegal is if there is no just, adequate and prompt • Third party states must not recognize the building
compensation. (Cielo Notes, 2013) of the wall;
CLASS NOTES • Israel must make reparation for damages, and
remove the wall, pursuant to the doctrines of
international responsibility.
LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A WALL IN THE
OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY CASE CONCERNING APPLICATION OF THE
(ADVISORY OPINION) CONVENTION ON THE PREVENTION AND
ICJ Reports 2004, p. 176 (2004) PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE
(BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA v. SERBIA AND
MONTENEGRO)
ICJ Reports 2007, p. 43 (2007)
95
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
96
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
crew at the time when the real damage took place. The
Act of state organ. Harrison purported to act upon nature of the crew, the absence of civil or military control
instructions given to him, and in doing so, he committed 2 ashore, and the situation of the neutral property, were
mistakes in as much as it 1) was neutral property; and 2) was circumstances calling for diligence on the part of those in
intended for a road, an not a railway bridge. The charge of the Chinese crew to see to it that they were under
consignment of the material to Blomfontein was a wrongful control when they went ashore in a body.
interference with neutral property, and it was within
Harrison’s duty, as railway storekeeper, to forward material
BOLIVAR RAILWAY COMPANY CLAIM (GREAT
by rail, and he did so under instructions which fix liability on
the British gov’t. This liability is not affected by the fact that
BRITAIN v. VENEZUELA)
(1903)
this was done under a mistake, or that the British had no
intention to appropriate the material.
(Lifted from Karichi Notes, 2010)
YOUMANS CLAIM (US v. MEXICO)
(1926) Claims were brought by Bolivar arising out of the revolution
in Venezuela that brought Castro to power & against Castro
himself, after his assumption to power.
(Lifted from Karichi Notes, 2010)
Successful insurrectionists. Claims in respect of contractual
obligations incurred by both the old and new governments
A mob killed 3 US nationals & Mexican police’s attempt to
were allowed, but claims incurred by an unsuccessful
quell the mob, under the Mayor’s instructions, led to the
revolution against Castro were not allowed. If the personal
open firing upon the house & more killings.
responsibility of Castro were the question for decision, it
might be possible to hold him responsible for the claims
Act of state organ; failure to protect aliens in territory.
incurred by the 2nd revolution as growing out of the
Mexico is liable for the acts of the soldiers whether 1)
revolution he had led. However, such is not the ground on
outside the scope of their authority; or 2) done in a private
which successful revolutions are charged, through the gov’t,
capacity. Clearly, it is not intended by the rule to say that no
with responsibility. Responsibility comes because it is the
wrongful act of an official acting in the discharge of duties
same nation. Nations do not die when there is a change of
entrusted to him can impose responsibility on a gov’t under
government. These are but expressions of a change of
IL because such wrongful act must be considered to be
national will. The nation is responsible for the debts
“outside the scope of his competency.” If this were the
contracted by its titular government until the obligation is
meaning intended by the rule, then no wrongful act
discharged. The nation is responsible for the obligations of
committed by an official could ever be considered as acts
a successful revolution from its beginning, because, it
for which the gov’t could be held liable. The soldiers’
represented ab initio a changing national will, crystallizing
participation in the murder cannot be considered as acts in
in the finally successful result — success demonstrated that
their private capacity when it is clear that at the time of the
from the beginning it was registering the national
commission of these acts, the neb were on duty under the
immediate supervision and in the presence of a
commanding officer. Duty: to exercise due diligence to
NEER CLAIM (US v. MEXICO)
protect the person and property of aliens.
(1926)
ZAFIRO CLAIM (GREAT BRITAIN v. US) (Lifted from Karichi Notes, 2010)
(1925)
US claims damages for Mexico’s failure to exercise due
(Lifted from Karichi Notes, 2010) diligence in prosecuting the murderer of an American.
Claim WRT acts of a Chinese crew of the Zafiro, a private Standard of treatment of aliens in territory. The proprietary
ship commissioned by the US military, in looting houses in of governmental acts should be put to the test of
Cavite during the Spanish-US War of 1898; defense: soldiers international standards, and that the treatment of an alien,
on shore leave. in order to constitute an international delinquency, should
amount to an outrage, to bad faith, to wilful neglect of duty,
Act of state organ. US is liable for the whole damage as the or to an insufficiency of governmental action so far short of
Chinese crew of Zafiro are shown to have participated to a international standards that every reasonable and impartial
substantial extent, and the part chargeable to unknown man would readily recognize its insufficiency. Whether the
wrongdoers cannot be identified. But interest is not allowed insufficiency proceeds from deficient execution of an
because a considerable, though unascertainable part of the intelligent law or from the fact that the laws of the country
damage is not chargeable to the Chinese crew of the Zafiro. do not empower the
There was no effective control of the Chinese
97
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
STARETT HOUSING CORPORATION v. IRAN While the definition excludes unwritten agreements, such
4 Iran-US Claims Report (1983)
exclusion does not mean that those have no legal force and
effect.
(Lifted from Karichi Notes, 2010, and subsequently edited)
Covered Not Covered
Starett Housing Corporation was contracted by the Iranian
Government for the construction of a 6000-unit apartment
Agreements between Agreements between
states states and other actors
complex. It contends that their property interests in the
housing Project have been unlawfully taken by the post- of
international
revolution Government of Iran through the appointment of
law
a temporary manager which has deprived them of the
Those in writing Those not in written
effective use, control and benefits of their property by
form
means of various actions authorizing, approving and
ratifying acts and conditions that prevented Starrett from
Those governed by Those governed by
international law the national law of
completing the Project.
one of the parties or
any other national
Expropriation Even Without Nationalization Law. The Court
law
noted that the Government of Iran did not issue any law or
system
decree according to which the Zomorod Project or Shah Goli
expressly was nationalized or expropriated. However, it is No Substantive Requirements of Form and Name
recognized in international law that measures taken by a The definition also covers simplified agreements which are
State can interfere with property rights to such an extent not in the form of formal treaties but have become of
that these rights are rendered so useless that they must be common use, such as: exchange of notes, agreed minutes,
deemed to have been expropriated, even though the State memoranda of understanding, among others. Its form will
does not purport to have expropriated them and the legal vary according to usage.
title to the property formally remains with the original
owner. Nomenclature is likewise insignificant. It can be called:
“treaty”, “covenant”, “pact”, etc.
Assumption of control over property by a government does
not automatically and immediately justify a conclusion that Conclusion and Entry into Force of Treaties
the property has been taken by the government, thus Representatives of a state. – A person may be said to be
requiring compensation under international law. In this representing a state for purposes of adopting or
case it cannot be disregarded that Starett has been authenticating the text of a treaty, or for expressing the
requested to resume the Project. It has been proved that at consent of the state to be bound by a treaty, given the
least by the end of January 1980 the Government of Iran had following:
interfered with the Claimants' property rights in the Project He produces a “full powers” instrument; or
to an extent that rendered these rights so useless that they
must be deemed to have been taken. “Full powers.” – A document from a state
designating a person/s to represent it for:
There is no actual taking; instead, there was o negotiating, adopting or authenticating
CREEPING taking. It does not have to be a complete the text of a treaty;
taking as long as there is serious interference with o Expressing a state’s consent to be
the property. bound by a treaty; or
CLASS NOTES o For accomplishing any other act with
respect to a treaty. (TC, Art. 2 [1c])
98
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
99
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Entry into force. – It is the fixed date or periods reckoned organization. (TC, Art. 20 [3])
from certain events as agreed upon by the parties which
mark the beginning of the binding force of a treaty as law. (For the effect of reservations to multilateral treaties, see
Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and
Example: TC, Art. 84 (1) – “The present Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, infra.)
Convention shall enter into force on the thirtieth
day following the date of deposit of the thirty- No reservation of peremptory norms. – Reservations that
fifth instrument of ratification or accession.” offend jus cogens norms would not be compatible with the
object and purpose of the covenant. Accordingly, provisions
Provisional application. – A treaty or an agreement among therein which represent customary international law may
the parties may provide for the application of certain not be the subject of reservations. (Brownlie, Chapter 26)
provisions before a treaty’s entry into force. (TC, Art. 25 [1])
Observance of Treaties
Reservation Pacta Sunt Servanda. – Literally, “pacts must be respected,”
It is “a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, it is the fundamental principle of the law of treaties. Every
made by a State, when signing, ratifying, accepting, treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be
approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to performed by them in good faith. (TC, Art. 26)
exclude or to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of
the treaty in their application to that State.” (TC, Art. 2 [1d]) Cannot invoke internal law to evade treaty obligations. –
General Rule: A party may not invoke the provisions of
Right to formulate reservations; Exceptions. – A State may, its internal law as justification for its
when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to failure to perform a treaty. (TC, Art. 27)
a treaty, formulate a reservation. (TC, Art. 19) Exceptions: The violation concerns the state’s
competence to conclude treaties; or
It is a right that pertains to the sovereignty and The violation concerned a rule of
independence of a state in regulating its foreign relations. It internal law of fundamental
aids the development of international relations by enabling importance. (TC, Art. 46, infra.)
states to ratify treaties which they would not have
otherwise ratified had they not been able to make Retroactivity. –
reservations thereto. (Magallona, 2005) General Rule: No retroactive application. It cannot bind
a party in relation to any act or fact which
There are three (3) exceptions to this grant: took place or ceased to exist before the
a) the reservation is prohibited by the treaty; fate of the entry into force.
b) the treaty provides that only specified (TC, Art. 28)
reservations, which do not include the Exception: Unless a different intention appears from
reservation in question, may be made; or the treaty. (ibid.)
c) in cases not failing under subparagraphs (a) and
(b), the reservation is incompatible with the Treaties and Third States
object and purpose of the treaty. (TC, Art. 19) General Rule: Pacta tertiis nec nocent nec prosunt – A
treaty does not create either obligations
Consent/acceptance by other state parties. – or rights for a third State without its
General Rule: Acceptance by other parties not required consent. (TC, Art. 34)
for reservations expressly allowed by the Exceptions: Express acceptance. – Parties to the
treaty. (TC, Art. 20) treaty establish an obligation therein,
Exception: Acceptance will be required in the and the third state expressly accepts
following cases: the obligation in writing; (TC, Art. 35)
1. When it appears from the limited Stipulations pour autrui. – Treaty gives
number of the negotiating States third states rights, and a third state
and the object and purpose of a gives his assent thereto. (TC. Art. 35)
treaty that the application of the Treaty as customary international law.
treaty in its entirety between all the – A treaty may become binding on
parties is an essential condition of non-parties if it becomes a part of
the consent of each one to be international custom. (Brownlie,
bound by the treaty; (TC, Art. 20 [2]) Chapter 26) (TC, Art. 38)
2. When a treaty is a constituent
instrument of an international Interpretation of Treaties
100
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
101
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
In multilateral agreements, a breach by one may Void treaties. – The following grounds render a treaty void:
lead to: Coercion of a state
Removal of the state in breach from the Conflict with jus cogens (ibid.)
treaty relation;
Termination of the treaty;
Suspension of the treaty only between In the case of the Philippines, the treaty-making
a specially affected state and the one in process consists of the following steps:
breach; 1. Negotiation
6. Supervening impossibility of performance (TC, Art. 61) 2. Signature
3. Ratification
A party may invoke the impossibility of
performing a treaty as a ground for terminating or Note that affixation of the Philippine representative’s
withdrawing from it if the impossibility results signature does not constitute consent to be bound.
from the permanent disappearance or This is due to the requirement in Art. VII, Sec. 21 for
destruction of an object indispensable for the the 2/3 concurrence of the Senate for a treaty to be
execution of the treaty. valid and effective.
102
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
private law contract. The agreement consists of the also held that the World Bank Guidelines on Procurement
exchange of two documents, each of the parties being in the under IBRD Loans are not in any way superior over the local
possession of the one signed by the representative of the laws.
other. Under the usual procedure, the accepting State
repeats the text of the offering State to record its assent. Foreign loan agreements with international financial
The signatories of the letters may be government Ministers, institutions such as the IBRD Loan Agreement partake of an
diplomats or departmental heads. The technique of executive or international agreement within the purview of
exchange of notes is frequently resorted to, either because Section 4, RA 9184 as held in the Abaya case.
of its speedy procedure, or, sometimes, to avoid the process
of legislative approval. All interested bidders were notified by DepEd that the
procurement of the project was to be funded from the
Treaties, agreements, conventions, charters, protocols, proceeds of the RP-IBRD Loan Agreement which stipulates
declarations, memoranda of understanding, modus vivendi that the goods shall be procured in accordance with the
and exchange of notes all refer to "international instruments World Bank guidelines.
binding at international law. Both the 1969 Vienna
Convention and the 1986 Vienna Convention do not Doctrine: Even if there is a conflict between the World
distinguish between the different designations of these Bank procurement guidelines and municipal
instruments. Instead, their rules apply as long as they meet procurement law (RA 9184), the WB guideline prevails.
the common requirements.
Prof. Roque commented that the ruling was “stupid”
Section 4 of RA 9184 states that: for the following reasons:
103
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
This contravenes the sovereignty of the state; executive agreements must comply with the laws they
The World Bank is not a state that could be a implement. Only a treaty, upon ratification of the Senate,
party to a treaty; its guidelines were not even in acquires the status of municipal law.
the form of a treaty;
There is no conflict between PH and WB rules That the Chinese government handpicked ZTE Corporation
regarding conflict of interest; In fact, the WB to supply the goods and services does not make the ZTE
guidelines are the basis of the procurement law Supply Contract an executive agreement. ZTE Corporation is
in the Philippines but there is a penal clause in not even a government agency but a business enterprise
our law (that is the only difference) performing purely commercial functions.
In ruling that this is an executive agreement, Abaya Also, an executive agreement is generally governed by
was used but the court cited a portion of Abaya which international law. However the ZTE Contract itself provides
does not exist. that it shall be governed by Philippine law. Thus, the ZTE
contract is not an executive agreements but simply a
Note that in Abaya, what was deemed an executive commercial contract, which must comply with the public
agreement was the Exchange of Notes, not the loan bidding mandated by the governing Philippine law.
agreement itself.
CLASS NOTES
CNMEG v. HONORABLE SANTA MARIA
G.R. No. 185572 (2012)
SUPLICO V. NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CNMEG and North Luzon Railways Corporation entered into
G.R. No. 178830 (2008) an agreement that the latter will conduct a feasibility study
and construct the Northrail Project. A complaint was filed
The Philippine government through the DOTC entered into a for the annulment of the contract and loan agreement on
project with the Chinese government known as the ZTE the ground that it is unconstitutional and it also violated RA
National Broadband Network Project or the ZTE-DOTC NBN 9184. It is alleged that the contract and the loan agreement
deal. Suplico sought to enjoin NEDA from pursuing, entering is an executive agreement and therefore its validity cannot
into indebtedness, disbursing funds and implementing the be questioned before the local courts.
ZTE-DOTC Broadband Deal
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties defines a
Suplico’s petition was dismissed because the issue was treaty as an international agreement concluded between
already moot. Prior to Suplico’s action, it was shown that in States in written form and governed by international law,
the Notes of Meeting between Philippines and China, the whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more
Philippine government conveyed its decision not to related instruments and whatever its particular
continue with the project due to several constraints. The designation.
same Notes also contained President Hu Jintao’s expression
of understanding of the Philippine Government decision. To be considered an executive agreement, the following
three requisites provided under the Vienna Convention
Carpio, J., dissenting: must concur:
a) the agreement must be between states;
The NBN Project should be declared null and void for its b) it must be written; and
failure to comply with requirements set by law: c) it must governed by international law.
1. an appropriation law funding the contract;
2. certification of appropriation and fund availability This case lacks the first and third requisites.
Also the Government Procurement Reform Act states that The agreement is not between states. The Contract
all procurement of infrastructure, goods and services shall Agreement was not concluded between the Philippines and
be done through Competitive Bidding. ZTE’s argument that China, but between Northrail and CNMEG. CNMEG is neither
there is no provision in the executive agreement between a government nor a government agency. Northrail and
China and the Philippines for the conduct of public bidding CNMEG entered into the Contract Agreement as entities
will only be tenable if executive agreements can amend or with personalities distinct and separate from the Philippine
repeal a prior law. However, executive agreements cannot and Chinese governments, respectively. Neither can it be
amend or repeal a prior law. said that CNMEG acted as agent of the Chinese government.
An executive agreement has the force and effect of law. It is not governed by international law. Since the Contract
But like implementing rules of executive agencies, Agreement explicitly provides that Philippine law shall be
104
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The holding of the Balikatan Exercises must be viewed in line The constitutional provision which governs the VFA is
with the Mutual Defense Treaty and the Visiting Forces Section 25, Article XVIII of the 1987 Constitution:
Agreement. The VFA permits United States personnel to “After the expiration in 1991 of the Agreement
engage, on an impermanent basis, in “activities,” the exact between the Republic of the Philippines and the
meaning of which was left undefined. Since the terminology United States concerning Military Bases, foreign
used in the VFA is ambiguous, the Court referred to the military bases, troops, or facilities shall not be
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which contains allowed in the Philippines except 1) under a treaty
provisos governing interpretations of international 2) duly concurred in by the Senate and, when the
agreements. It clearly provides that the cardinal rule of Congress so requires, ratified by a majority of the
interpretation must involve an examination of the text, votes cast by the people in a national referendum
which is presumed to verbalize the parties’ intentions. The held for that purpose, and
Convention also dictates what may be used as aids to 3) recognized as a treaty by the other
deduce the meaning of terms, which it refers to as the Contracting State.”
context of the treaty, as well as other elements may be
taken into account alongside the aforesaid context. The VFA is constitutional because it has met all the
requisites laid down by Section 25, Article XVIII.
105
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
106
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
107
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
108
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
109
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
110
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Personal privileges, at a glance. – Diplomatic agents and
family members forming part of their household enjoy the
Basis. – There are three theories that form the basis of the
following rights:
grant of diplomatic immunities and privileges:
1. Extraterritoriality theory – premises of the Personal inviolability; (Art. 29)
diplomatic mission represent an extension of the Immunity from jurisdiction; (Art. 31)
territory of the sending state; Exemption from social security provisions; (Art.
2. Representational theory – the mission personifies 33)
the sending state; and Exemption from dues and taxes; (Art. 34)
3. Functional necessity theory – it ensures the Exemption from personal services; (Art. 35)
efficient performance of its functions. Exemption from customs duties and related
charges; (Art. 36)
Inviolability of the diplomatic premises. – The diplomatic
premises consist of: Classes of immunities. – The application of the succeeding
Buildings or parts of buildings and the land ancillary immunities is qualified by the designation of the person
thereto, irrespective of ownership, used for the concerned. To wit:
purposes of the mission; and
The residence of the head of the mission; (DC, Art. 1 Diplomatic Personal inviolability; (Art. 29)
[i]) Staff and their Immunity from jurisdiction; (Art.
Families 31)
The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. It consists of Criminal: FULL IMMUNITY
three elements: Civil: FULL IMMUNITY, with
1. The agents of the receiving state may not enter exceptions (1-3)
them, except with the consent of the head of the Exemption from social security
mission. (DC, Art. 22 [1]) provisions; (Art. 33)
No legal writ may be served inside Exemption from dues and taxes;
without consent. (Art. 34)
2. Special duty of the receiving state to take all Exemption from personal services;
appropriate steps to protect the premises of the (Art. 35)
mission against any intrusion or damage and to Exemption from customs duties
prevent any disturbance of the peace of the and related charges; (Art. 36)
mission or impairment of its dignity. (DC, Art. 22
[2]) Administrative Personal inviolability; (Art. 29)
3. The premises of the mission, their furnishings and and Technical Immunity from jurisdiction; (Art.
other property thereon and the means of Staff: 31)
transport of the mission shall be immune from Criminal: FULL IMMUNITY
search, requisition, attachment or execution. (DC, Civil: FUNCTIONAL IMMUNITY
Art. 22 [3]) Exemption from social security
provisions; (Art. 33)
111
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Exemption from dues and taxes; discharge of his duties, he may be held liable for the
(Art. 34) same.
Exemption from personal services;
(Art. 35) Q: If a diplomatic mission rents a lot for its embassy,
but the lot is subject to a deed of restriction
Service Staff: Immunity in respect of acts which was breached by the former, can the
performed in the course of their restriction be enforced against the mission?
duties (FUNCTIONAL) (Art. 37 [3])
Exemption from dues and taxes on Theoretically, you can sue the lessor (i.e. owner of the
the emoluments they receive by lot) and receive judgment. However, it would not be
reason of their employment possible to enforce the judgment against the mission
Exemption from social security since the premises of the embassy, leased or
provisions; (Art. 33) otherwise, is inviolable and no legal writ may be
served therein.
Immunity from jurisdiction. – A diplomatic agent enjoys Exemption from all dues and taxes. – A diplomatic agent
immunity from the following: shall be exempt from all dues and taxes, personal or real,
1. Criminal jurisdiction; national, regional or municipal, except:
2. Civil and administrative jurisdiction; a) Indirect taxes of a kind which are normally
Exceptions: incorporated in the price of goods or services;
i. A real action relating to private b) Dues and taxes on private immovable property
immovable property situated in the situated in the territory of the receiving State,
territory of the receiving State, unless he unless he holds it on behalf of the sending State
holds it on behalf of the sending State for for the purposes of the mission;
the purposes of the mission; c) Estate, succession or inheritance duties levied by
ii. An action relating to succession in which the receiving State;
the diplomatic agent is involved as d) Dues and taxes on private income having its
executor, administrator, heir or legatee source in the receiving State and capital taxes on
as a private person and not on behalf of investments made in commercial undertakings in
the sending State; the receiving State;
iii. An action relating to any professional or e) Charges levied for specific services rendered;
commercial activity exercised by the f) Registration, court or record fees, mortgage dues
diplomatic agent in the receiving State and stamp duty, with respect to immovable
outside his official functions. (DC, Art. 31 property; (DC, Art. 34)
[1])
Exemption from personal services. – The receiving State
Q: If the secretary of the Ambassador were to be shall exempt diplomatic agents from all personal services,
charged administratively with sexual from all public service of any kind whatsoever, and from
harassment, would he be immune? military obligations such as those connected with
No. The secretary falls under “administrative and requisitioning, military contributions and billeting. (DC, Art.
technical staff,” and thus only has FUNCTIONAL civil 35)
and administrative immunity.
Exemption from customs duties and related charges. - The
Since the sexual harassment was not part of the receiving State shall, in accordance with such laws and
112
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Consular Relations
regulations as it may adopt, permit entry of and grant
Establishment. – Consular relations are established by
exemption from all customs duties, taxes, and related mutual consent. (Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
charges other than charges for storage, cartage and similar [CC], Art. 2 [1])
services, on:
a) Articles for the official use of the mission; Arises with diplomatic relations. - Consent given to the
b) Articles for the personal use of a diplomatic agent establishment of diplomatic relations between two States
or members of his family forming part of his implies, unless otherwise stated, consent to the
household, including articles intended for his establishment of consular relations. (CC, Art. 2 [2])
establishment. (DC, Art. 36 [1])
This makes the following possible:
Some diplomatic officers abuse this privilege by • Establishment of diplomatic relations without
importing local goods duty-free, then selling them in consular relations, by express declaration; and
their areas. “Maliit sweldo nila e. Pero at least may • Establishment of consular relations initially, ahead or
natitirhan ako for free when I’m abroad.” (Roque, as a preliminary step to diplomatic relations.
2013)
CLASS NOTES
Functions. – Consular functions consist in:
a) Protecting in the receiving State the interests of the
Period of enjoyment. – The privileges and immunities shall sending State and of its nationals;
be enjoyed:
b) Furthering the development of commercial, economic,
FROM the moment he enters the territory of the cultural and scientific relations between the sending
receiving State on proceeding to take up his post State and the receiving State and otherwise promoting
or, if already in its territory, from the moment friendly relations between them;
when his appointment is notified to the Ministry c) Ascertaining by all lawful means conditions and
for Foreign Affairs; developments in the commercial, economic, cultural
TO when he leaves the country after the basis for and scientific life of the receiving State, reporting
his immunity ends. thereon to the Government of the sending State;
o It subsists for a reasonable time even after d) Issuing passports and travel documents to nationals of
his functions end, up the time he leaves the sending State, and visas or appropriate documents
the receiving state. to persons wishing to travel to the sending State;
o But, with respect to acts performed by e) Helping and assisting nationals, both individuals and
such a person in the exercise of his bodies corporate, of the sending State;
functions as a member of the mission, f) Acting as notary and civil registrar, and performing
immunity shall continue to subsist. certain functions of an administrative nature;
g) Safeguarding, within the limits imposed by the laws
Immunity while in transit. - If a diplomatic agent passes and regulations of the receiving State, the interests of
through or is in the territory of a third State in the process minors and other persons lacking full capacity who are
of: nationals of the sending State;
proceeding to take up or to return to his post; or h) Representing or arranging appropriate representation
when returning to his own country, for nationals of the sending State before the tribunals
and other authorities of the receiving State;
Such third State shall accord him inviolability and such other i) Transmitting judicial and extrajudicial documents or
immunities as may be required to ensure his transit or executing letters rogatory or commissions to take
return. evidence for the courts of the sending State;
j) Exercising rights of supervision and inspection in
This does not include vacations to third states. respect of vessels having the nationality of the sending
CLASS NOTES State, and of aircraft registered in that State, and in
respect of their crews, and extending them assistance;
This right also applies with regard to: k) Performing any other functions entrusted to a consular
Any members of his family enjoying privileges or post. (CC, Art. 5, paraphrased)
immunities who are accompanying the diplomatic
agent, or travelling separately to join him or to Consular officers may also perform diplomatic functions or
return to their country; acts granted these conditions:
Official correspondence and communications; • The sending state has no diplomatic mission in the
receiving state;
• The sending state is not represented by a diplomatic
VIENNA CONVENTION ON CONSULAR mission of a third state therein;
RELATIONS
113
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
114
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
115
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
This immunity from jurisdiction may be waived by the Iran breached its obligations under the Vienna
sending state, by way of express waiver. (CC, Art. 45 [1]) Conventions on Diplomatic Relations and Consular
Relations.
Exemption from certain requirements of the receiving
state. – Members of the consular post are entitled to the Under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and
following exemptions: Consular Relations, Iran was obligated to take appropriate
• Registration of aliens and residence permits; (CC, Art. steps to protect the US Embassy and Consulates. However,
46 [1]) it did nothing to prevent the attack, stop it before it reached
• Work permits for employment of foreign labor, with its completion or oblige the militants to withdraw from the
respect to services rendered by them for the sending premises and release the hostages. This inaction is a clear
state (CC, Art. 47 [1]) and serious violation of Iran’s obligations under the said
• Social security provisions, with respect to services Conventions.
rendered by them for the sending state (CC, Art. 48 [1])
• All dues and taxes, personal or real, national, regional The obligations laid on States by the two Vienna
or municipal, except: (CC, Art. 49 [1]) Conventions are of cardinal importance for the
o Indirect taxes normally incorporated in the price; maintenance of good relations between States in the
o Taxes or dues on private immovable property in interdependent world of today. There is no more
the territory of the receiving state; fundamental prerequisite for the conduct of relations
o Estate succession or inheritance taxes and duties between States than the inviolability of diplomatic envoys
on transfers; and embassies, so that throughout history nations of all
creeds and cultures have observed reciprocal obligations
for that purpose. The institution of diplomacy has proved to
be an instrument essential for effective Cooperation in
116
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
117
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
118
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
On Third-Party Methods
topic is the ILC's significant progress when it comes to
• The Security Council may ask the Security-General to
state immunity and the law of non-navigational uses of provide conciliators and mediators
international watercourses. • Art. 33 does not insist that only the UN provides the
o ILC was also able to pass a first draft of a code personnel who will participate in third-party methods
of crimes against the peace and security of
• Art. 33 focuses on pacific settlement
mankind
o Emphasizes the important role of regional
• Topics for codification, with a necessary element of organizations in the maintenance of international
development, must also be selected with care. For peace and security
example, after starting with the topic on Relations o some are of the opinion that the creation of
between States and International Organization, the ILC dispute-settlement mechanisms by regional
eventually decided not to pursue it. organizations are expression of a regional desire
• However, there is the recent tendency to go for topics for local resolution of the dispute, to the exclusion
of manageable dimensions in order to conclude them of any interference by the Security Council
within a reasonable time-scale. Now that the o Sometimes it is also the UN that wishes to avoid
Commission has been enlarged, it is expected to be
dealing with an issue. The Western Sahara and
able to cover more topics and be more productive.
the Chad vs. Libya case may be used as examples
to prove the point.
Peaceful Settlement of Disputes
• On the relationship of regional agencies to the UN in
• Chapter VI: contains provisions on the Pacific
matters of peaceful settlement.
Settlement of Disputes
o No indicia to serve as guide when it is more
• Who may bring disputes before the Security Council
appropriate to go for regional, rather than the
and General Assembly
global
o Secretary-General (art. 99) - on any matter which • Disadvantage of regional bodies: the desire for
in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of
regional stability will often cause regional bodies to
international peace and security
seek to accommodate the more powerful of the two
o Members of the UN - whether they are parties to
protagonists, at the expense of the other
the dispute or not (art. 35)
o States which are not members of the UN, but is a Peace and Collective Security: Intention and
party to the dispute - art. 35 (2) Innovation
• Non-members of the Security Council shall be allowed, • The UN, by virtue of Chapter VII, has an important role
under various conditions, to participate in the debates in the containment of disputes
of the Security Council (arts. 31 & 32) • The provision of collective security by the Big Powers
o The keystone of international peace
On the Fact-Finding Mission of the Security Council
o Big Powers: the Soviet Union, US, China, France,
• The Security Council can investigate any dispute and and the UK
enter into fact-finding missions
o Through the collective security, it would be
• The neutral verification of the facts has been proven to unnecessary for states to act in self-help and their
be successful and is used as a means of containing and unilateral use of force would be restricted to self-
defusing a situation defense and such would be monitored by the
• There seems to be a resolution that the Secretary- Security Council
General may himself establish a fact-finding mission, o However, when the Cold War happened, the
without the need for an authorization by the Security intentions of the collective security came into
Council nothing
• Dispute settlement possibilities (art. 33) o Until now, no real machinery for collective
1. Negotiation security through enforcement measures is in
2. Mediation place
3. Conciliation • Veto power of the Big Powers
4. Arbitration o The power to defeat a decision of the Security
5. Judicial settlement Council by a single negative vote
6. Resort to regional agencies o Mirrors the intention that the collective military
7. Sometimes, the Secretary-General himself action cannot be used against the Big Powers
will put proposed solutions to the Security o Intention during the drafting of the Charter: veto
Council power to be used only if the passage of a
8. Usually, the Security Council devises the resolution could otherwise culminate in military
proposals action against one of the Big Powers
• The Security Council sometimes suggests assistance in o The practice in using the veto power: to stop the
the pursuit of the measures enumerated above possibility of any sanction directed against an
119
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
120
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
implicitly passed on in the context of Security Council retains its responsibility to take
decisions and are subsequently deemed as such action as it deems fit
international law Article 2(4) explains what is prohibited, Article 51
what is permitted
Conclusion Issue: Can there be a use of force that is not against
121
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
122
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
123
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
124
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
125
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
126
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
127
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
128
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Principle of Self-Defense Test before the attack: when the state believes that it is
The terms "anticipatory self-defense", "preemptive self- about to become a target; such must be palpable, imminent
defense" and "preemption" traditionally refers to a state's and prospectively destructive to require defense as
right to strike first in self-defense when faced with prevention
imminent attack.
As Reisman observed, the rules of the game/war has always
The Caroline Test been a regime of mutually assured destruction and system
of minimum world order. However, such regime creates a
“…necessity of self-defense, instant, context of intense suspicion and distrust.
overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no
moment for deliberation. It will be for it to show, As a challenge to the prevailing rule is the Antiballistic
also, that the local authorities of Canada,- even missile (ABM) weapon. Reisman claimed that a
supposing the necessity of the moment authorized comprehensive and effective ABM system in one
them to enter the territories of the United States superpower would have defeated the deterrence
at all,- did nothing unreasonable or excessive; mechanism by tempting that state to strike first and then
since the act justified by the necessity of self- hunker down behind its shield, which would cause the
defense, must be limited by that necessity, and second striker’s nuclear missiles to bounce off harmlessly.
kept clearly within it.” Consequently, ABM enhances the ability of the major
nuclear and other potentially targeted states to protect
1. Necessity themselves from limited nuclear attack by other states.
“Instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of
means, and no moment for deliberation.” On the other hand, there is also the preemptive self-
defense as brought about by the proliferation of atomic,
129
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
CLASS NOTES
biological, and chemical weapons (ABC weapons) and by the
diffusion of non-state actors (not superpowers).
• Preemptive self-defense – a claim to use
unilaterally, and without prior international B. International Court of Justice
authorization, high levels of violence to arrest an
incipient development that is not yet operational
and not yet directly threatening.
UN Charter, Art. 92
Reisman favors the ABM system as it is an entirely passive
self-defense to combat states likely to be targets of surprise The International Court of Justice shall be the
ABC missile attacks. principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It
shall function in accordance with the annexed
On Regime Change Statute, which is based upon the Statute of the
Reisman says that because the context has changed – Permanent Court of International Justice and forms
wherein necessity, proportionality, and discrimination are an integral part of the present Charter.
no longer the sole factors to be considered – the legal
arrangements to implement policies of international law
must change as well. UN Charter, Art. 93
Although the US attacks were not justified under a separate UN Charter, Art. 96
provision of the Treaty as “measures necessary to protect
the essential security interests”, they did not violate the 1. The General Assembly or the Security Council
Treaty. may request the International Court of Justice to
give an advisory opinion on any legal question.
The US did not claim to have been exercising collective self- 2. Other organs of the United Nations and
defense on behalf of the neutral States. As regards its specialized agencies, which may at any time be so
individual self-defense, the US must show that attacks were authorized by the General Assembly, may also
actually made upon it for which Iran was responsible. request advisory opinions of the Court on legal
Furthermore, US must also show that its actions were questions arising within the scope of their
necessary and proportional to the armed attack. However, activities.
no evidence was submitted to support the contentions of
the US.
ICJ Statute, Art. 1
The Court used a technicality in the Treaty in order to
allow the US to escape liability. The International Court of Justice established by
130
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
the Charter of the United Nations as the principal which the parties refer to it and all matters
judicial organ of the United Nations shall be specially provided for in the Charter of the United
constituted and shall function in accordance with Nations or in treaties and conventions in force.
the provisions of the present Statute. 2. The states parties to the present Statute may at
any time declare that they recognize as
ICJ Statute, Art. 34 compulsory ipso facto and without special
agreement, in relation to any other state
1. Only states may be parties in cases before the accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of
Court. the Court in all legal disputes concerning:
xxxx a. the interpretation of a treaty;
b. any question of international law;
c. the existence of any fact which, if
ICJ Statute, Art. 35
established, would constitute a breach of
an international obligation;
1. The Court shall be open to the states parties to
d. The nature or extent of the reparation to
the present Statute.
be made for the breach of an
xxxx
international obligation.
3. The declarations referred to above may be made
unconditionally or on condition of reciprocity on
APPLICABLE LAW the part of several or certain states, or for a
certain time.
ICJ Statute, Art. 38, supra.
131
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
132
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
the stage of the merits. As to the last issue, the Court has
parties regarding the existence of a dispute between them found an application at the jurisdictional stage 'premature'.
are not determinative, and it is for the Court to decide
based on the facts of the case. In advisory jurisdiction, a In several cases such as Certain Expenses of the UN and the
state may claim that the advice should not be given because Western Sahara Case, the Court, despite the claims of a
there actually exists a 'dispute', and that it is not appropriate State-party that giving an advisory opinion would be
to give advice to a UN body that would entail the equivalent to settling a dispute, gave an opinion
determination of a dispute between states. In the UN nonetheless. In the Western Sahara Case, the Court agreed
Headquarters Case, the Court held that neither the fact that that there was a legal dispute between Morocco and Spain
different views existed within the US administration, nor the at the time of the request for advisory opinion, but it still
fact that the PLO office, which was subject for closing based proceeded with the opinion but allowed Morocco an ad hoc
on a US law that was passed, had not actually been closed judge on the Bench, as there was already a Spanish judge.
down, meant that a dispute did not exist between the UN The Court also distinguished the Eastern Carelia Case, noting
and the US. that in that case one of the key states was neither a party to
the Statute, nor a member of the League, while in the case
Some Issues Relating to Advisory Opinions
of Spain and Morocco they were both members of the UN.
Article 65 of the Statute provides that the Court may give
an advisory opinion on any legal question at the request of
The issue of third-party rights has arisen not bilaterally but
whatever body may be authorized by or in accordance with
in the context of the work of the requesting organ. The ICJ
the UN Charter to make such a request. There are no
has shown that it will rather robustly preserve its right to
adversarial proceedings and there will be no judgment
provide advice to authorized requesting organs.
binding on the parties, but only advice as to the state of the
law. But Article 68 of the Statute provides that the Court Dispute Settlement and Law Development
shall apply the same procedures as in contentious cases 'to The determination of specific disputes and the provision of
the extent to which it recognises them to be applicable'. specific advice by the ICJ develop international law. It is hard
State parties to the Statute get notified under Article 66 of to point to a case where the Court has just applied rules to
the request and can present their views even though they facts. Although decisions of the Court are said to be a
are not parties to the case. subsidiary source of international law (Article 38 (1) (c) of the
Statute) and any judicial determination is only binding upon
The principle of audiatur et altera pars, which states that the parties before it (Article 59), in reality, the judgments
the Court will not determine in their absence the rights of and opinions of the Court are treaty as authoritative
third parties, applies to advisory opinions, and it underlies pronouncements upon the current state of international
consent as basis for the Court's jurisdiction. This has been law.
applied to contentious jurisdiction in the Monetary Gold
Case and also applied in the Phosphates Case. The test used Even advisory opinions have a role of great importance.
by the Court in that case is whether the legal interests of the Very often, the organ requesting an advisory opinion will
third party that was not before the Court was 'the very then pass a resolution 'appreciating' or 'accepting' that
subject matter of the decision'. opinion. This was done in the Reservations Case an in Legal
Expenses of the United Nations. It does not give rise to a
In the Eastern Carelia Case, the Permanent Court declined legal obligation, but it is a public affirmation of the advice's
to give an advisory opinion because the issue is related the authoritative quality. Many resolutions of disputes have
main point of a pending dispute between the two states, been assisted by advisory opinions (e.g. Admissions Cases).
such that answering the question means deciding the
dispute. As far as contentious litigation is concerned, Article Higgins opines that the Court, even though it is necessarily
62 of the Statute allows a state not party to a litigation in choosing, explaining, and refining rules, should still do so in
the Court to intervene should it consider that 'it has an respect of the particular issue it is required to decide or
interest of a legal nature which may be affected by the upon which it is asked to advise.
decision in the case'. In cases under Article 63 which entails
the construction of a Convention to which other states are
parties, these states are to be notified, and have the right to
intervene. However, the Court often points to Article 59 CASES ON JURISDICTION
whereby a judgment only binds the parties to a case to deny
the applicant's legal interest which could be affected by the
case. Intervention under Articles 62 to 63 presents new CASE CONERNING MILITARY AND
problems such as new elements to the case, the issue about PARAMILITARY ACTIVITIES IN AND AGAINST
the right to intervene when the state has no jurisdictional NICARAGUA (NICARAGUA v. UNITED STATES)
connection to the subject-matter or the other states, ICJ Reports 1986, p.14 (1986), supra.
whether the proper stage to intervene is at the jurisdictional
stage or at
133
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
134
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
135
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The Court should not indicate such measures unless the A Member is not legally entitled to make admission
provisions invoked by the applicant or found in the ICJ dependent on conditions not expressly provided by the
Statute appeared, prima facie, to afford a basis on which the Article. Art. 4, par. 1 is exclusive.
jurisdiction of the Court might be established. The object of
the power to indicate provisional measures of protection Art. 4, Par. 1 enumerates five conditions: a candidate must
was to ensure that irreparable prejudice should not be be:
caused to rights which might subsequently be adjudged to
belong to one of the parties. The Court could
136
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
THE MAVROMMATIS PALESTINE CONCESSIONS The Court held that the phrase “the international
PCIJ, Ser. A, No. 2, (1924), supra.
obligations accepted by the Mandatory” includes the
obligations arising out of Protocol XII of the Lausanne
(For an exhaustive discussion on the merits, refer to p. 22) Treaty. This Protocol concerns concessionary contracts duly
entered into before Oct 29, 1914. Since the Jerusalem
Whether or not the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the Concessions were dated from before the Protocol, they fall
case in accordance with Art. 26 of the Mandate under Art. 2 of the Mandate. However, the Jaffa
Concessions, although dated January 17 and March 6, 1914,
YES TO THE JERUSALEM CONCESSIONS; NO TO THE JAFFA were not confirmed by the Imperial Firman. Therefore, they
CONCESSIONS do not fall under the Protocol. In sum, the Court held that it
had jurisdiction to entertain the claim relating to Jerusalem
The Court first looked at the conditions laid down by Art. 26 only.
to determine whether it had jurisdiction or not. It found
that: 1) there was a dispute between the Mandatory
(Britain) and another Member of the League of Nations APPLICABILITY OF THE OBLIGATION TO
(Greece); 2) the dispute cannot be settled by negotiation; ARBITRATE UNDER SECTION 21 OF THE
and 3) the dispute related to the interpretation or the UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS
application of the provisions of the Mandate. AGREEMENT OF 26 JUNE 1947
PCIJ, Ser. A, No. 2, (1924), supra.
The Court found that there was a dispute or a disagreement
on a point of law or fact, a conflict of legal views or of
The UN GA adopted a resolution on 2 March 1988 to request
interests between two persons. The dispute in this case was
the Court for an advisory opinion. The question was: “In the
first between a private person and a State. When the Greek
light of facts reflected in the reports of the Secretary-
government took up the case, the dispute
General, is the United States of America, as a
137
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
In order to answer the question put to it, the Court first CASES ON ADVISORY OPINIONS
considered whether there existed between the United
Nations and the United States a dispute as contemplated by
section 21 of the Headquarters Agreement, which provided: LEGALITY OF THE THREAT OR USE OF
“(a) Any dispute between the United Nations and the NUCLEAR WEAPONS (ADVISORY OPINION)
United States concerning the interpretation or application ICJ Reports 1996, p. 226 (1996), supra.
of this agreement or of any supplemental agreement, which
is not settled by negotiation or other agreed mode of (This section deals with the jurisdictional aspect of the case.
settlement, shall be referred for final decision to a tribunal For a discussion on the merits of the case, refer to p. 12)
of three arbitrators, one to be named by the Secretary-
General, one to be named by the Secretary of State of the Jurisdictional issue: Whether or not the Court had
United States, and the third to be chosen by the two, or, if jurisdiction to entertain this request for an advisory opinion
they should fail to agree upon a third, then by the President submitted by the WHO, a specialized agency.
of the International Court of Justice.” If there was a dispute,
the Court had to determine whether that dispute The WHO failed to satisfy the requisites for asking an
concerned the interpretation or application of the advisory opinion.
Headquarters Agreement and had not been settled by
negotiation or other agreed mode of settlement. There are three conditions that must be satisfied for the
Court to acquire jurisdiction to entertain a request for an
A dispute is disagreement on a point of law or a conflict of advisory opinion submitted by a specialized agency.
legal views or interests is a matter for objective 1. First, the agency requesting the opinion must be
determination and cannot depend upon the mere duly authorized under the UN Charter to request
assertions or denials of parties. The Court found the opinions from the Court.
opposing attitudes of the UN and the USA showed the 2. Second, the opinion requested must be on a legal
existence of a dispute. question.
3. Third, the question must be one arising within the
The Court then considered whether the dispute was one "not scope of the activities of the requesting agency.
settled by negotiation or other agreed mode of settlement",
in the terms of section 21 (a). The Court found that, taking The first two conditions were met; however, the Court
into account the United States' attitude, the Secretary- found that “although according to its Constitution the
General had in the circumstances exhausted such World Health Organization (WHO) is authorized to deal
possibilities of negotiation as were open to him, nor had any with the effects on health of the use of nuclear weapons,
"other agreed mode of settlement" been contemplated by or of any other hazardous activity, and to take preventive
the United Nations and the United States. In particular, the measures aimed at protecting the health of populations in
current proceedings before the United States courts could the event of such weapons being used or such activities
not constitute and "agreed method of settlement" within engaged in, the question put to the Court in the present
the meaning of section 21, considering that their purpose case relates not to the effects of the use of nuclear
was the enforcement of the Anti- Terrorism Act and not the weapons on health, but to the legality of the use of' such
Agreement. Furthermore, the United Nations had never weapons in view of their health and environmental effects.”
agreed to a settlement in the domestic courts. The Court pointed out that whatever these effects may be,
the competence of WHO to deal with them is not
The Court held that the United States was bound to respect dependent on the legality of the acts that caused them.
the obligation to enter into arbitration. That conclusion
would remain intact even if it were necessary to interpret The Court also held that the responsibilities of WHO are
the settlement that the measures against the Mission were necessarily restricted to the sphere of public “health” and
taken "irrespective of any obligations" of the United States cannot encroach on the responsibilities of other parts of the
under the Headquarters Agreement as intended to refer not UN system, and that there is no doubt that questions
only to any substantive obligations under sections 11-13 but concerning the use of force, the regulation of armaments
also to the obligation to arbitrate provided for in section 21. and disarmament are within the competence of the UN and
It was sufficient to recall the lie outside that of the specialize agencies like the WHO.
138
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
CASE OF THE MONETARY GOLD REMOVED The Court held that Italy’s first submission (that the gold
FROM ROME IN 1943 (ITALY v. FRANCE, UNITED must be delivered to her) required the determination of
KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND whether Albania has committed any international wrong
NORTHERN IRELAND AND UNITED STATES OF against Italy and whether Albania is under an obligation to
AMERICA) pay compensation. Going into the merits of the case
ICJ Reports 1954, p. 19 (1954) without Albania’s consent would violate the well-
established principle of international law that the Court
France, UK, USA, Albania and other states signed the could not exercise its jurisdiction over a State without the
Agreement on Reparation from Germany (14 January 1946), latter’s consent. In the present case, Albania’s legal
on the Establishment of an Inter-Allied Reparation Agency interests would not merely be affected but would form the
and on the Restitution of Monetary Gold in Paris in 1946. very subject matter of the decision. Hence, any decision of
Italy adhered to its provisions by a Protocol in 1947. The the Court would not be binding upon any party (even upon
Agreement provided that the monetary gold found in States which submitted to its jurisdiction i.e., France, UK,
Germany should-be pooled for distribution among the USA, Italy). Likewise, Italy’s second submission (that priority
countries which can establish that a definite amount of should be given to her over the UK) cannot be resolved by
monetary gold belonging to them “was looted by Germany the Court as it is predicated on the determination that as
or, at any time after 12th March, 1938, was wrongfully between Albania and Italy, the gold should go to Italy.
removed into German territory”. The implementation of the
Agreement was entrusted to France, UK, and the USA, which
formed a Tripartite Commission. CERTAIN EXPENSES OF THE UNITED NATIONS
(ARTICLE 17, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE CHARTER)
Albania and Italy claimed that the gold belonged to them (ADVISORY OPINION)
thus the Tripartite Commission, by signing the Washington ICJ Reports 1962, p. 151 (1962), supra.
Statement in 1951, decided to submit to an arbitrator the
issue of whether the gold belonged to Albania or to Italy or (This section deals with the jurisdictional aspect of the case.
to neither. The Arbitrator opined that the gold in question For a discussion on the merits of the case, refer to p. 22)
belonged to Albania and the opinion was communicated to
the Commission and to Italy and Albania. However, Albania Jurisdictional issue: Whether or not the Court had jurisdiction
made no application. Therefore, Italy, within the ninety-day to entertain this request for an advisory opinion.
period, made an Application to the ICJ instituting
proceedings against France, UK and USA, submitting that: 1) The Court agreed to give an advisory opinion. It held that its
the Governments of France, UK and USA should deliver to power to give advisory opinions is derived from Art. 65 of
Italy any share of monetary Gold that may be due to Albania the Statute. It is of a discretionary character. However, the
in partial satisfaction for the damage caused to Italy by the Court can only give an advisory opinion on a legal question.
Albanian Law of 1945; and 2) it’s right to receive the gold
must have priority over the claim of UK.
WESTERN SAHARA (ADVISORY OPINION)
Five months after, Italy filed a document entitled ICJ Reports 1975, p. 12 (1975), supra.
“Preliminary Question” drawing the attention of the Court
to the fact that its first Submission invited the Court to pass
(This section deals with the jurisdictional aspect of the case.
upon the international responsibility of Albania to Italy
For a discussion on the merits of the case, refer to p. 34)
hence the jurisdiction of the Court to adjudicate such
question without Albania’s consent is doubtful. It submitted
Jurisdictional issue: Whether or not the Court had
that the Court had no jurisdiction. On the other hand, UK
jurisdiction to entertain this request for an advisory opinion.
submitted that: 1) in view of Italy’s Objection the Italian
Application does not conform or no longer conforms with
The Court has the competence to render an advisory
the Washington Statement and is accordingly invalid and
opinion in this case.
void hence there is no longer before the Court any
Application; and in the alternative; 2) the Italian Objection
Under Art. 65, Par. 1, of the Statute, it is stated that:
amounts to a withdrawal or cancellation of its Application
and disqualifies Italy from proceeding any further under the
Tripartite Washington Statement; and 3) therefore, it is
139
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
140
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
141
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Rights, has stated that these are present rights, not long-
whatever rights they contain and designate as human rights term aspirations. States are under immediate obligation to
are thereby human rights, at least for the ratifying parties. do what they can to provide these rights.
They may in time be reflected in customary international
law, and thus become human rights more generally. Others Collective Rights
say that human rights are vehicle for expressing the There is no reason why an entitlement held by a group
obligation and providing the detail about the way in which cannot be termed a human right. However, not all collective
the human right is to be guaranteed. It is an interaction of or third-generation rights are in fact rights. The right of
demands by various actors, and the state practice in peoples to peace seems indeterminate. The holders of the
relation thereto, which leads to the generation of norms rights are identifiable, but it is not clear upon whom the
and the expectation of compliance in relation to them. obligation lies and what duties are owed.
Civil and Political Rights Sources of Rights
Human Rights was traditionally viewed as limited to the Existence of treaties may not be the only test as to whether
field of civil and political rights. This view is supported by the a right exists. Rights may exist in customary international
principle that rights suppose a correlative obligation on the law. The claim that a right exists in customary law will need
part of the state. All states are in a position to comply with to be established by reference to the normal criteria of that
civil and political rights - ex. abstention from torture, source, including state practice, which may be expected to
toleration of free speech, liberty of religion. be evidenced in resolutions and declarations of
international bodies.
Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
Claims to education, paid holidays, food and housing are Human Rights
often not within the ability of the state to provide. This is The line between what human rights are and what are not
particularly true of poorer states. However, to say that such is more than academic. However the answer depends upon
inability would negate the view that such are human rights, one’s perception of what constitutes a human right. For
would be to define a right by reference to the ability of the some it is all civil and political rights. For others, the
party upon whom the obligation lies to provide it economic and social rights could be included on a basic
immediately. This echoes the aphorism that without a needs basis.
remedy, there is no right. This approach looks at things from
the perspective of the state, rather than of the individual. Identification and Articulation of the Right
Customary international law has had a role to play in this.
It is also claimed that such cannot be rights because “rights” There is an interplay between the standard-setting UN
implies something in respect of which, legal claims can be Declaration on HR and its acceptance in many national
brought and economic and social rights are not justiciable. constitutions and before may courts. The greatest push in
However, the absence of a possibility of recourse to third- the formulation of human rights has been through the
party judicial procedures is certainly not the test of whether treaty process. The international covenants on Civil and
the right exists or note. The existence of the right is tested Political Rights and on Economic, Social, and Cultural
by reference to the sources of international law. Rights provide instruments that deal with comprehensive
range of rights on a universal basis. The idea is that rights
It is further suggested that these are not real rights for they may be formulated on a basis that will allow command
are imprecise as to content, and they are mostly incapable confidence in the region, and that in turn will allow
of immediate delivery, and they must be recognized as mere effective enforcement measures. The universal and
aspirations. The real difference is that the state’s duties in regional instruments have been supplemented by
respect of civil and political rights are covered in terms of universal instruments directed towards the elaboration of
abstention from prohibited acts, whereas the economic and single rights.
social rights usually require specific action by the state.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In order to effectively guarantee rights, it is frequently The Commission is a body specifically mandated to deal
necessary for states to take positive measures. Problems with human rights questions. It is political, in that those who
remain as to economic and social rights. There remains the serve on it are representatives of states, but together with
underlying problem that, even if known what has to be the Subcommittee on Non-Discrimination and Minorities, it
provided, many states are not in a position to deliver the has laid down some important methods and procedures. It
right at the present. has also made significant contributions to fact finding
through the establishment of special rapporteurs.
The Committee on Human Rights, acting under the
International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Human Rights Committee
The HRC has considerable experience of state reporting and
of hearing cases. States are required to submit reports.
142
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Tadid was the first to be tried by the International Criminal Art. XIII of the Agreement stipulates that the Philippines
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). He was tried for consents that the United States shall have the right to
war crimes and was accused of committing atrocities at the exercise jurisdiction over any offense committed by any
Serb-run Omarska concentration camp in Bosnia- person within any base except where the offender and
Herzegovina in 1992. Trial Chamber II of the ICTY denied offended parties are both Philippine citizens (not members
Appellant's motion challenging its jurisdiction. Appellant of the armed forces of the United States on active duty) or
had launched a three-pronged attack: (a) illegal foundation the offense is against the security of the Philippines." The
of the International Tribunal; (b) wrongful primacy of the case not falling under any of the two exceptions, the offense
International Tribunal over national courts; and (c) lack of falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
jurisdiction ratione materiae.
Generally accepted principles of international law are
The ICTY was duly constituted under Chapter VII of the UN adopted as part of Philippine law. A foreign army allowed to
Charter. march through a friendly country or to be stationed in it, by
permission of its government or sovereign, is exempt from
The important consideration in determining whether a the civil and criminal jurisdiction of the place. Likewise, if
tribunal has been “established by law” is not whether it was bases may be validly granted to the U.S. under the
pre-established or established for a specific purpose or Constitution, there is no plausible reason while the lesser
situation. What is important is that it be set up by a attribute of the jurisdiction cannot be waived.
competent organ in keeping with the relevant legal
procedures, and should that it observes the requirements
of procedural fairness. The International Tribunal is
empowered to pronounce upon the plea challenging the
GUANTANAMO DETAINEES CASES
legality of the establishment of the International Tribunal.
143
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
RASUL v. BUSH
542 U.S. 466 (2004) Petitioner Hamdi, an American citizen whom the
Government has classified as an “enemy combatant”, for
allegedly taking up arms with the Taliban during the
Four individuals, British and Australian nationals, were conflict, was captured in Afghanistan and was detained.
detained by the US military in Pakistan and Afghanistan as Hamdi filed for a writ of habeas corpus. He asserted that he
a result of the War on Terror. The detainees were taken to went to Afghanistan to do “relief work” less than two
Guantanamo Bay military base in Cuba. Their families sued months before September 11 and could not have received
the government in federal district court seeking a writ of military training.
habeas corpus that would invalidate their detention. They
argued that the denial of the rights was tantamount to In an opinion backed by a four-justice plurality and partly
violation of the Due Process Clause. The government argued joined by two additional justices, Justice O'Connor wrote
that the federal courts lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter that although Congress authorized Hamdi's detention
because the prisoners were not American citizens, and they through its Authorization for use of Military Force (AUMF)
were not being held in the United States, but in Cuba, where in response to the 9/11 attacks, Fifth Amendment due
the U.S. did not maintain sovereignty. process guarantees give a citizen held in the United States
as an enemy combatant the right to contest that detention
The District Court has jurisdiction to hear petitioners’ before a neutral decision-maker.
habeas challenges, which authorizes district courts, within
their respective jurisdictions, to entertain habeas The plurality also rejected the government's argument that
applications by persons claiming to be held in custody in the separation-of-powers prevents the judiciary from
violation of the laws of the United States. Such jurisdiction hearing Hamdi's challenge.
extends to aliens held in a territory over which the United
States exercises plenary and exclusive jurisdiction, but not
“ultimate sovereignty.” HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD
548 U.S. 557 (2006)
The presumption, that legislation is presumed not to have
extraterritorial application, is not applicable to habeas
statute with respect to persons detained within the US In this ruling, the Court interpreted the provisions of
territorial jurisdiction. By the express terms of its the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 as being
agreements with Cuba, the United States exercises inapplicable to habeas cases pending at the time the
complete jurisdiction and control over the Guantanamo DTA was enacted.
144
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Petitioners designated as enemy combatants are entitled In response, the Government of Malta introduced to the UN
to seek the writ of habeas corpus. in 1967 the important concept of deep sea-bed resources as
being ‘common heritage of mankind’. This was different
Court held that the prisoners had a right to habeas corpus from the res nullius treatment of fish in the high seas in that
under the United States Constitution, and that the Military a resource termed a ‘common heritage’ in principle could be
Commissions Act of 2006 was an unconstitutional exploited by anyone – but only with the permission of the
suspension of that right world community an upon such conditions as the
institutions representing that community would lay down.
While the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 provides This difference in regime in treating different resources is
procedures for review of the detainees’ status, these compelled by many economic and political considerations.
procedures are not an adequate and effective substitute for
habeas corpus. Therefore Section 7 of the Military While the 1982 UNCLOS was not yet in force at the time this
Commissions Act of 2006, operates as an unconstitutional chapter was written, the author already noted that the
suspension of the writ. notion of ‘common heritage of mankind’ was by that time
an emerging norm due to repeated invocations before
The immediate impact of the Boumediene decision is various organs, repetition in the texts of various
that detainees at Guantanamo may petition a federal instruments, and analysis by scholarly writing. However,
district court for habeas review of the circumstances while the UNCLOS remained unenforced, various questions
of their detention. were still raised as to how deep sea-bed
CLASS NOTES
145
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
146
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
147
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
148
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The arbitrator first determined that the standards of Under the nationalization law passed by Libya, the State
international law applied in this case. He found that that the should pay compensation to BP Exploration which was to be
very fact that there was to be international arbitration determined by a committee established by the Minister of
‘internationalized’ the contract, making it inevitable that Petroleum. However, due to delays in the determination of
international law would have a role to play. This also meant the matter of compensation, the nationalization law already
that the case would be taken out of the ambit of domestic took effect without the issue being resolved. As a result, BP
law. Dupuy reasoned that this had to be the case because Exploration’s were brought to a complete halt and their staff
a foreign investor would be nervous to put himself solely at were immediately excluded from the premises as Arabian
the mercy of a domestic law, which definitionally a Gulf Exploration Company took over Concession 65.
government would be able to change; and that sole reliance
on domestic law was avoided by ensuring that the case Similar to the Texaco case, the concession contract in this
went to international arbitration. Internationalization of case also contained a governing law clause which says that
contracts therefore results in the protection of investors Libyan law would be applicable only to the extent that it
against the risks of contractual modification or abrogation coincides with international law.
resulting from changes in municipal laws or governmental
measures. The arbitrator in this case had to determine:
1. WON the injured party to a concession agreement
Dupuy then ruled that by unilaterally nationalizing the has the right to deem the contract as valid and
assets of the oil companies, Libya has breached its enforceable even after the alleged wrongful
obligations under the concession contracts which logically exploration, and
gave rise to a cause of action in favor of the oil companies. 2. WON the injured party may claim reparations in
According to him, although the right of the State to the form of specific performance or restitutio in
nationalize is recognized as an expression of the State’s interregnum.
sovereignty, the same is not an absolute recognition. There
are limits to such sovereignty, such as when a contract is Libya breached its obligation to BP Exploration by
internationalized which meant that the agreement will also expropriating the latter’s properties. However, BP
carry international consequences. The arbitrator found that Exploration was entitled only to damages and to specific
there is no established state practice of disregarding performance and restitutio in interregnum.
international commitments in favor of nationalization.
Thus, if a state bound itself to a contract
149
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
150
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
companies against Poland for the taking of the companies remedial award, as in the BP Exploration v. Libya case.
in violation of the Geneva Conventions. The continuing validity of this assertion is still a matter
of debate, and of course, although investor states do
Poland’s acts were made in violation of a treaty (Geneva settle in time to mere payment of compensation, it
Convention between the parties) and were therefore never hurts to have the Chorzow Standard as the
wrongful under international law entitling Germany to starting point of every negotiation as far as the
compensation. investor state is concerned.” (Karichi Notes,
2010)
In this case, it was held that the reparation of a wrong may CLASS NOTES
consist in an indemnity corresponding to damages which
the nationals of the injured state have suffered as a result
of the act which is contrary to international law (Germany in LIAMCO v. LIBYAN ARAB REPUBLIC
this case). Reparation is the indispensible complement of a 62 ILR 140
failure to apply a convention. Also, the taking of property
requires compensation. The ruling of the court in this case In 1973 and 1974, Libya nationalized both LIAMCO’s rights
also provided for the quantum of compensation required to under their concession agreements and the latter’s oil
be paid in cases of wrongful takings by the home state, also drilling equipment. Due to unsuccessful negotiations
known as the CHORZOW STANDARD in international law. regarding compensation, LIAMCO rejected the terms of the
The Chorzow Standard provides that the essential principle nationalization and initiated proceedings under the
contained in the actual notion of an illegal act is that arbitration clause. The sole arbitrator Mahmassani was
reparation must, as far as possible, wipe- out all the appointed and he was tasked to determine whether Libya
consequences of the illegal act and re-establish the situation was in breach of its obligation by pursuing its
which would, in all probability, have existed if that act had nationalization program and consequently, damages etc.
not been committed. were due to LIAMCO.
The principles which should serve to determine the amount Libya acted lawfully acted when it nationalized LIAMCO’s
of compensation due for an act contrary to international concession rights before the expiration of the term.
law are as follows: However, compensation must be duly paid to LIAMCO.
1. Restitution in kind, or if this is not possible,
payment of a sum corresponding to the value The arbitrator made it clear that the concessions were both
which a restitution in kind would bear; contractual obligations and incorporeal property. On the
2. Award of damages for loss sustained which would one hand, sanctity of contract is an integral part both of
not be covered by restitution in kind or payment international law and Islamic law. On the other hand, the
in place of it. dominant trend of international opinion allowed states
substantial rights over their natural resources.
General principle of law: reparation for the taking of
property requires compensation. Reparation is due Unlike in the cases above (Texaco v. Libya, etc.),
when there is a breach of obligation. Mahmassani took separately the remedies for premature
termination of contract and for the taking of property by
Where an expropriation is legal, the amount of the nationalization. In fully accepting that the nationalization
reparation is the logistical value of the property taken required compensation, he readily found that the damages
at the time of the expropriation. However, where should include, as a minimum, the damnum emergens,
there is an unlawful taking, the amount of reparation which he described as ‘the value of the nationalized
includes the intangible assets (loss of profits). (Karichi corporeal property including all assets, installations, and
Notes, citing Prof. Roque, 2010) various expenses incurred.
“The Chorzow Standard is often invoked by investor As to the more controversial question of whether the
states to justify their claims of compensation because compensation due should also include lucrum cessans or
it is sufficiently vague as to evade exact quantification the loss of profits, he felt that the answer would depend on
but sufficiently liberal and inclined towards investors’ whether the taking was lawful or not, and that lucrum
interests as to be adequately justificatory of claims of cessans might be payable if the nationalization was
full compensation (“full” meaning nearly everything - unlawful. However, since the evolution of international law
the value of the property, forgone profits, future meant that states had the sovereign right to nationalize
profits, incidental expenses, committed profits, and their natural resources, he concluded that it is lawful for
damages). However, the Chorzow Standard does Libya to nationalize concession rights before the expiry of
contemplate restitutio in interegnum as a remedy for the concession term, provided that the measure be not
unlawful expropriations, contrary to subsequent discriminatory nor in breach of treaty, and provided that
arbitral decisions precluding the propriety of any such compensation be duly paid.
151
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
152
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
153
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
154
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
manner and within such time as to satisfy the investor. case that in a lawful expropriation only ‘the just price
According to the ruling in this case, what would make an act of what was expropriated’, representing the ‘value at
of taking unlawful under international law would be the the moment of dispossession’ should be paid. Thus
absence of any provision for compensation. there would be damnum emergens (actual loss) but no
lucrum cessans (loss of profits).
This case is also instructive in relation to the issue of
discriminatory takings. In comparison to the BP Exploration Note however that Higgins herself does not agree with
v. Libya case, there it was held that there was discriminatory Professor Virally’s view. According to her, a state may
expropriation because it was undertaken by Libya only still engage in what it sees as actions in the public good
against BP Exploration and not against other similar that violate contracts; but there is no reason why the
ventures of other nationalities. However, in this case of foreign investor should underwrite
Amoco, the tribunal held that an expropriation is not per se this exercise in state sovereignty.
unlawful just because it is directed only against a particular CLASS NOTES
entity within a larger industry. According to the arbitration
tribunal, the act of expropriation is the prerogative of the
home state and may be undertaken in such manner as to be PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY IRAN v.
determined by the home state in pursuance of its policies. ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN
The non-expropriation of an entire branch of economic 21 Iran-US Claims Report
activity is not in itself discrimination, absent any evidence
of patent bad faith or discriminatory designs. It explained Phillips entered into a Joint Structure Agreement with Iran to
that reasons specific to the non-expropriated enterprise, or exploit oil. In 1978, Imam Khomeini sparked a revolution,
to the expropriated one, or to both, may justify such a which succeeded in toppling the former regime. The
difference of treatment. Furthermore, a coherent policy of revolutionary government decided to withdraw all oil
nationalization could anyway be reasonably operated contracts with foreign companies under the guise of
gradually in successive stages. nationalization. The foreign companies asked for just
compensation, citing the deprivation of their contractual
The tribunal also held in this case that stabilization clauses rights. Iran countered this by invoking the defense of force
must be clear in demanding from the home state majeure and that the workers’ refusal to work for foreigners.
obligations which the investor state can enforce against it.
Absent such unequivocal stipulation in the contract, the The court held that due to the lack of proof that workers
home state cannot be deemed to have been a party to the refused to follow the orders of Iranian authorities (which
contract and cannot therefore be held liable under its refusal forms the basis of Iran’s defense of force majeure),
terms. In this case, no clear obligation was imposed by the the foreign companies’ rights were not obliterated by force
concession contract on the Iranian government. There was majeure. As regards expropriation, the court held that an
no showing that the contract contained a “stabilization expropriation does not need to be in a specific form (by a
clause” that would have obligated Iran to insulate the law or de facto). It must be noted that the control over
contract from any change in domestic law that would affect property by a government does not automatically justify a
the contract’s operation. As such, the Iranian government conclusion that the property has been taken by the
cannot be said to have expropriated Amoco’s property in government. However, such a conclusion of a take-over by
breach of its obligations because no obligation exists on its the government is warranted when events demonstrate
part. The tribunal concluded that Iran’s expropriation was a that the owner was deprived of fundamental rights of
lawful on under international law which meant that only ownership and that the deprivation is not merely
compensation and not damages would be the consequence ephemeral. According to the court, “the intent of the
of its actions. government is less important than the effects of the
measures on the owner, and the form of the measures of
Professor Virally of the Anglo-Iranian Tribunal in this control or interference is less important than the reality of
case took the analysis several stages further from the their impact.”
LIAMCO case. Whereas Mahmassani, like every
arbitrator before him, had emphasized the sanctity of Because the court recognized that the foreign companies
contracts and had accepted that a nationalization were deprived of their contractual rights, it ruled that Iran
required compensation from a prematurely ended must pay just compensation from the point of deprivation
contract, Professor Virally simply rejected that (i.e., the date when it was said/declared that there was no
sovereign states are bound by contracts with private reasonable prospect of a return and that the Joint Structure
parties as, in his view, this would allow ‘private Agreement must be regarded as terminated). Note that the
interests to prevail over duly established public point of deprivation or taking, when the taking is through a
interest, making impossible actions required for the chain of events, is “when the interference has deprived the
public good. Professor virally also concluded in this claimant of fundamental
155
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
156
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Relations between States and Private Parties in Compensation due to developing states was for
respect of Property Matters “exploitation and depletion of and damages to their natural
Whether or not a State is entitled to interfere with foreign resources and all other resources.” International legal
property rights by virtue of its territorial sovereignty standards are deemed irrelevant on the ground that they
depends on the nature of the property and attendant are preferential. It is said that if domestic law chooses not
circumstances. to compensate nationals for a taking of property, then
foreign investment shall also not be entitled to
Acquired rights compensation, a point to which Higgins does not agree. It
Acquired rights are protected by international law. was also said that not all takings of property are in the form
Acquired rights include: of nationalizations or expropriations.
a) those acquired under municipal and international
law,; Act of State doctrine
b) Historic rights or historic title; The courts of the forum may be party to a deprivation of
c) In the context of intertemporal law: International property that may or may not have been lawful, but it is
tribunals have sought to identify whether at a incorrect for an international tribunal to offer as a reason
critical time sovereignty has been acquired [a for rejecting restitution the fact that nationalization is
juridical fact must be appreciated in light of qualified as an Act of State immune from control. Deference
contemporary law]; AND given by some courts to nationalization of foreign states
d) In context of succession of States: successor does not equate to immunity of nationalization in general
States must respect rights acquired under its to judicial or other control at the international level.
predecessor
Recent trends in the international law of
Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources petroleum concession and licenses
General Assembly Resolution 1803 (XVII): International law A State may in principle take the property of a foreign
and the national legislation in force shall govern capital private person within its own jurisdiction, provided:
imported to exploit and develop natural resources, as well - That it does so for a public purpose and in the
as the earnings on that capital. Profit-sharing shall be in absence of discrimination
accordance with the agreement of the investors and the
recipient state, and the state’s sovereignty over its natural
- That compensation is paid
Deeds of concession often have the appearance of a
wealth and resources must not be impaired. Par. 4 of this
contract, in which there is an agreed identification of
resolution states, among others, that nationalization,
mutual benefits and obligations between the State and the
expropriation or requisitioning shall be based on grounds
concession holder. Essential features of a concession are
or reasons of public utility, security or the national interest,
that
both domestic and foreign.
157
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
158
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
On Unjust Enrichment
159
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
160
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
161
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
Thesis: The formula used by international case law for Postwar cases:
lawful expropriations by the government of an alien’s LIAMCO cases (in relation to Libya’s
property, is the Hull formula or the “prompt, adequate, nationalization decrees confiscating foreign-
effective compensation” owned oil concessions in Libya as also discussed
The paper is in response to an Editorial Comment in Texaco v. Libya, BP v. Libya) – the nationalizing
written by Professor Schachter that the use of the state should pay full compensation for the loss
Hull formula is questionable and that the case law sustained based on the fair market value of the
actually uses a flexible standard that is not plant and properties. The Court also awarded an
necessary full compensation, so long as it is “just”. equitable compensation with some elements of
compensation for loss profits due to the
In analyzing the case law, Medelson first examined the confiscation of the concession.
prewar cases (also cited by Schachter in his Comment): AMINOIL case – taking for nationalization
Chorzow Factory case – contrary to Schachter’s purposes is not per se unlawful but the former
claims that the Court only required payment of owner is entitled to full compensation or the
“fair compensation”, a perusal of the decision depreciated replacement value of its assets
shows that the court required, as a matter of American International Group v. Iran – the
obiter dicta, that Poland should pay the “just price Tribunal did not decide on the applicability of the
of what was expropriated and the value of the Treaty of 1955 to decide the amount of
undertaking at the moment of the undertaking at compensation but held that customary law
the moment of dispossession provides for the standard of prompt, adequate
o (consistent with the full compensation and effective compensation. The Tribunal
standard) required Iran to pay the fair market value of the
o The Court here also differentiated the shares at the time of nationalization, including
pecuniary obligations in a lawful and loss of future profitability and good will.
unlawful taking
o if the payment is unlawful, if restitution
in integrum is impossible, then
compensation for consequential loss is WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
also necessary
Norwegian Shipowner’s Claims (1922) –
applicable standard used here is “just “THE PHILIPPINES AND THE WTO: SURVEY OF
compensation” but Medelson stressed that this CURRENT PRACTICES WITH EMPHASIS ON
just compensation is based on the notion of just ANTI-DUMPING, COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
compensation as used in the US. Based on the AND SAFEGUARD MEASURES”
Fifth Amendment of the US constitution, just by H. Harry Roque
compensation is the fair valuation of the property
based on what a willing buyer is willing to pay a Constitutional Framework
willing seller. Again, this is full compensation. The Philippines is the only World Trade Organization (WTO)
member whose Supreme Court has pronounced on the
In addition to these cases, Medelson also listed some constitutionality of the country’s entry into the WTO.
international cases that used the standard of full Tañada v. Angara: Petitioners contended that the
compensation: WTO provisions, such as the most-favored- nation
Administrative Decision No. 2 decided by US- (MFN) clause, the national treatment principle
Germany Mixed Claims Commission – Germany and the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment
Measures (TRIMS Agreement)
162
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
163
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
164
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
165
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
On TRIPS, most countries agreed that bringing it within the The Japanese Liquor Tax Law established a system of
ambit of a multilateral trading system will deter some internal taxes for all liquors at different rates based on
countries from resorting to unilateral trade measures to categories. This law taxed shochu lower than tax imposed
enforce their rights as intellectual property rights holders. It on whisky, vodka, cognac, and other alcoholic beverages.
was also agreed that developing countries should be given The European Communities (EC), Canada and the US
adequate time to adopt their intellectual property claimed that spirits exported to Japan were discriminated
regulations with the requirements of the TRIPS agreement. against under the Japanese Liquor Tax Law because of the
A multilateral discipline in TRIPS would afford is protection lower tax imposed on shochu as compared to other alcoholic
against the use of unilateral measures such as that provided beverages.
in the Trade Law of the US.
The Appellate Body in this case upheld the panel’s finding
The Final Act embodying the results of the Uruguay Round that the alcoholic beverages in question were taxed in
of Multilateral Trade Negotiations was signed in 1994, after excess of shochu, which violated Art. III: 2 of GATT (as
8 years of negotiations. The results referred not only to the regards the requirement that imported products must not
agreement establishing the WTO but also to ministerial be subjected to internal charges in excess of those imposed
decisions and understandings adopted on December 15, on like domestic products). The Appellate Body upheld the
1993, and at the Marrakesh Ministerial Meeting in 1994. It panel’s finding that shochu, and whisky, brandy, rum, gin,
is provided in the Final Act that the representative who genever and liquors were not similarly taxed, and such a
signed the Final Agreement agrees to submit to his move amounts to affording protection to domestic
respective competent authorities for approval, the WTO production, which is violative of Art. III. The Body said that 3
Agreement in accordance with his country’s procedures. issues must be considered to determine if a certain measure
is inconsistent with Art III, namely: 1) W/N the imported and
Our constitution sets a hierarchy of goals and aspirations for domestic products are directly competitive or substitutable
its nationals which must be taken into account in passing products; 2) W/N the directly competitive or substitutable
the implementing legislations. The choice of instruments in imported and domestic products are not similarly taxed; and
assisting Philippine industry, labor, and consumers are 3) W/N the dissimilar taxation of the directly competitive or
varied but they are not unlimited and one group of substitutable imported and domestic products is applied so
beneficiaries should not be sacrificed for the other. as to afford protection to domestic production.
Congress has to balance the economic objectives
enunciated in the Constitutions with the benefits of As regards the US’ application for binding arbitration to
extensive international economic relations free of determine the reasonable period of time for
unnecessary restrictions. implementation by Japan of the Appellate Body’s
recommendations, the arbitrator found that the
Summary of WTO Agreements
Agreement Establishing the WTO
166
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES The Appellate Body in this case held that imported and
AFFECTING ASBESTOS AND ASBESTOS- domestic gasoline were like products and as such, the
CONTAINING PRODUCTS (2001)
167
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW A2015
The panel in this case held that the EC did not comply with
articles of the Anti-Dumping Agreement when it considered
all imports from India, Egypt, and Pakistan as dumped in its
analysis of injury caused by dumped imports, in determining
the existence of margins of dumping on the basis of a
methodology incorporating the practice of zeroing, in failing
to evaluate all relevant factors having a bearing on the state
of the domestic industry, in considering information for
producers not part of the domestic industry as defined by
the investigating authority in analyzing the state of the
industry, and in failing to explore possibilities of constructive
remedies before applying anti-dumping duties.
168