CRM – MAY 30, 2021

ANSWERED; ANSWERED AND EMPHASIZED; UNANSWERED; UNANSWEREDD AND EMPHASIZED

RESPONDENT

GENERAL COMMENTS FOR RESPONDENTC:

1. Use other fillers that are not awkward, etc.

2. Conclusions do not tie back.

RESPONDENT 1 – HARVEY

1. Personal Note: Specify that the Batavians are also combating the Assurian Govt.
2. Are the facts the persuasive part of the ruling?
a. ANSWERED: Different facts as a result cannot
3. Which court ruled in L.H. v France? Don’t you think that the principle motatus motandi, that the
essence of the case would apply instead of the particularity of the facts?
a. ANSWERED: Facts are material due to the procedural nature.
b. MARC: There is no stare decisis in international law. What should be looked at is the
merits.
4. Personal Note: The communication aims to include all children in the camp; maybe this can be
used. They are forcing Albion to support all children, including non-Albion citizens.
5. Form of Consent?
a. Personal Note: Consent from the actual victims maybe overlooked if they cannot give
their own consent.
6. Domestic Remedies – Definition.
7. Article 29, VCLT, are they signatories?
a. No, but they are considered as codification of customary international law and thus
are binding even to non-signatories.
8. Basis of Two Test.
a. Personal Note: It is really not a test established by courts, it is merely through analysis of
several instances in decisions that extraterritorial jurisdiction was applied (control of an
9. Does the ETHC have the same jurisdictional requirements in this case?
a. Look for proof that the UNCRC considers other courts; FACTS.
10. We are talking about jurisdiction, it is written in a different convention.
a. We are saying how jurisdiction may be interpreted in other circumstances.
11. Personal Note: Specify that Qin has jurisdiction; much more easier to establish its control than
of Assur’s to show the fact that Albion has no control over area.
12. What can constitute as a national security in international law?
a. ANSWERED: The volatility of the region constitutes as a threat to NatSec.

WARM BENCH
 CRM – MAY 30, 2021

b. Personal Note: There is no known standard of establishing what is a threat to national

security; it depends solely on the state invoking it. Given that there is no standard,
personally, I think it might be wise to invoke this ARSIWA, or at least invoke it as an
alternative argument with ARSIWA solely as the basis.
13. Are you alleging bad faith on the applicant [in application for interim measure]?
a. ANSWERED: No.
b. MARC: Generally answer no since bad faith is hard to prove. Instead, answer that
there is a deviation to the standard procedure.
14. Is there a supporting fact that it is an interim judgment?
a. ANSWERED: Upon the given facts, there hold no other facts to further that submission.
b. Personal Note: Yes, the fact that it is irrevocable is another kind of interim judgment.
Their single act of instituting repatriation as an interim measure would constitute both
kinds of interim judgments.
15. Pag-nirepatriate sina Kara, baka mag-radicalize sila ulit. Wala ba kayong power to detain them?
a. Personal Note: I think you can concede this, pero you can say that retrieving them is a
threat since the area is volatile.
16. Remove the “m-hm” before answering a question. It is a bit disturbing.
17. Your speech, sobrang dependent yung isang didiscuss mo sa preceding paragraph. Wag
masyado dependent yung second part ng speech mo sa unang speech.
18. Time management, substance is not equally distributed. Mas mahaba yung first part. Allocate
areas.
19. Responsiveness to the question. If the questions asks if there is a provision supporting
something, answer yes and provide. If no, provide a justification.
20. Absence of alternative submissions.
21. Awareness of what was already cited. Avoid repetition, don’t forget what you had already cited.
22. Case citation: No need to cite cases if it is merely providing examples. Check if the judges are
particular to facts, numbers, and the like, include it; otherwise omit.

RESPONDENT 2 – PATTY

1. Basis for that exception?

a. ANSWERED: Yes, Art. 25 of the Convention on freedom of expression.
2. Personal Note: threats to national security can also constitute from interaction of states. In
this case, Albion might damage its relationship with Assur, if it aids Batavian-run camps.
3. Has not Albion already sent diplomats to the area?
a. ANSWERED: Yes, however the area is volatile. [Couldn’t note the political question
answer].
4. Personal Note: Batavians are fighting both Assur and Avengers.
5. How do you define necessity under international.
a. ANSWERED: Necessity is defined under ARSIWA, when [a bit unclear on my part, bad
internet].
6. In the record that Batavians are willing to repatriate foreign nationals, wouldn’t that diminish
the threat to national security?

WARM BENCH
 CRM – MAY 30, 2021

a. ANSWERED:
7. Are you citing a precedent from other courts that accepts necessity as an [x] circumstance?
a. ANSWERED: There is no current case that invokes necessity.
8. Is there another alternative submission supposing that ARSIWA is not accepted?
a. UNANSWERED.
9. What is your basis for these two requisites?
a. ANSWERED: Practice in general international law in application of the jus sanguini
principle. Birth registration is still required for the acquisition of their nationality.
10. In response to the applicant’s appeal to the minister of Albion, the minister referred to them as
Albion nationals, but had no obligation to help them. Would this estop Albion?
a. ANSWERED: The minister presented an “even if” argument. There was no valid
admission to begin with.
11. Basis of interpretation of the VLCT.
a. ANSWERED: Publication; could not answer which one.
12. Don’t say “going back to my speech”, better use “proceeding to”.
13. Say “that concludes the submissions of the respondents.”
14. Careful kayo dun sa point na nagpadala kayo ng diplomat sa qin kasi baka mag result sa estoppel
questions.
15. Tas at the same time careful na sabihin na wala power yung Qin/Azur kasi pagnangyari yun,
parang mawawala yung argument na dapat sa Azur nagfile ng case. Kasi yun dapat last question
ko na "as a committee, need namin makita kung sino yung nag wrong, so sino sisisihin namin
kung sinasabi nyong walang power yung qin sa lugar and at the same time wala kayong power
sa lugar"
16. Necessity should be a last level argument. Start with disqualifications, then go to Necessity. Its
an argument kapag wala ka nang ibang argument.
17. In the presentation of evidence, put up a shopping list in order to answer effectively when asked
by the judge.
18. Weak conclusions, substance are a bit insufficient or not fully utilized.
19. Mannerwise, good and okay.
20. Mastery in questions is insufficient, but training would fix this.

WARM BENCH