CONSEQUENCE ARISING OUT OF STATE RESPONSIBILITY

A Rough Draft made by:

Sachin Kumar

Roll No: 2145

Course: B.A.LL.B. (Hons.)

Semester: 5th

Submitted to:

Ms. Sugandha

FACULTY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

Chanakya National Law University

A research proposal submitted in partial fulfilment of the course

INTERNATIONAL LAW

for attaining the degree B.A.LL.B. (Hons.)

AUGUST, 2021

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Nyaya Nagar, Mithapur, Patna (Bihar)-800001

 INTRODUCTION
State responsibility is incurred when one State commits an internationally wrongful act against
another. For instance, Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits dictatorial non-intervention by
stating that every State is under a legal obligation not to use or threaten to use force against
others. However, non-intervention is not merely limited to the prohibition of the usage of force.
Any form of coercive interference in the internal affairs of a State would invite State
responsibility. As Oppenheim’s international law puts it, “the interference must be forcible or
dictatorial, or otherwise coercive, in effect depriving the State intervened against of control
over the matter in question. Interference pure and simple is not intervention”.

There are three factors employed to determine the liability of a State. Firstly, the State must
be under a legal duty not to commit the act. Secondly, the State must commit the act. And
finally, the act must cause injury (loss or damage) to another entity. If these factors are
satisfied, the State is bound to make reparation to the injured parties.

However, a State is considered responsible only for the wrongful acts which constitute
international delicts. State responsibility for international crimes is not clear. In its 1996 draft
on State responsibility, the International Law Commission (ILC) distinguished between
international delicts and international crimes. The question of State responsibility in cases of
international crimes has been highly controversial. While some state that criminal liability of
States holds no legal value, others are of the view that there has been a whirlwind change in
the attitude of States against international crimes since 1945, and that States could be held
responsible for such acts. Examples of international crimes include apartheid, genocide,
slavery, colonial domination, aggression, and massive pollution of the atmosphere.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

1. To find out problem involved in state responsibility.

2. To analyse practical approach of state responsibility.

 HYPOTHESIS
The researcher hypothesizes that current rules on state responsibility have
clarified and given precision to a number of previous controversial rules: for
instance, the question of whether fault is necessary, the nature of the damage
required for a state to be considered ‘injured’ by the wrongful act of another
state, the circumstances precluding wrongfulness, etc.

TENTATIVE CHAPTERISATION
1. Introduction
2. Principle of state responsibility
3. General rule of state responsibility
Concept of state responsibility
Responsibility for private act
4. Kinds of state responsibility
• Direct
• Indirect
5. Legal consequence of
• Cessation
• Reparation
6. Important case law
7. Conclusion
8. Bibliography