PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

FACTS FOR THE WORKSHOP

Brod Pott, a United States of America citizen, was a manager of an international

outsourcing company based in Manila. During one of his visits to a night spot in Malate,
Manila, he met Angie, a guest relations officer of Pegasus. They were together the whole
night and up to the early morning of the following day. It turned out that Angie was only 17
years old. Two days after, there was already a complaint for rape against Brod Pott and he
was arrested by the Manila police. His trial lasted for five years and he was convicted by the
Regional Trial Court of Manila. His sentence was reclusion perpetua. His appeal was
rejected by the court. In 1986, at the height of the EDSA Revolution, many inmates of
Manila City Jail staged a riot and many detainees were able to escaped including Brod Pott.
He was able to return to the United States.

There is a treaty between the United States and the Philippines which provides that
designated claims against the Philippines and the U.S. (and vice versa) for losses or
damages suffered by persons or by their properties that had been presented to each
country for interposition between the countries and that had remained unsettled shall be
submitted to a commission consisting of three members for decision in accordance with the
principles of international law, justice and equity.

Brod Pott filed a complaint against the Philippines, and in assessing Brod Pott’s
claims, the U.S. argued that the arrest of Pott was illegal, that he was mistreated while he
was in prison, that his trial was unreasonably delayed, and that there was irregularities in
the trial. It claimed that Brod Pott suffered injuries worth 10 million dollars.

1. Do a research on the Chattin Case.

2. Do a research and understand the International Law Commission’s Articles on

Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001).

Answer the following questions:

a. Under the Doctrine of State Responsibility, should the Philippines be held liable
for what happened to Brod Pott? Why or why not?

b. If you are to compare the case of Brod Pott with the case of Chattin, what
significant differences can you point out that are present in one and absent in the other? Or
there is no difference at all.

c. What is the meaning of international standards of justice? Who or which body or

entity should determine whether a particular standard already conforms to the
international standard of justice?

d. Would it be easier to decide the case of Brod Pott if you are going to apply the
Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts? Why or why not.

NOTE: This is an individual work to be submitted through my CPU email address on

or before 12 midnight of April 30, 2022.

JOSE EDMUND E. GUILLEN

Professorial Lecturer