I. Read and translate the text.

When does a state violate International Law?

A state violates international law when it commits an “internationally wrongful act", a breach
of an international obligation that the state was bound by at the time when the act took place.
A state is bound to act according to international treaties it signed.

Are there any exceptions or justification for violating the law?

There are a number of exceptions when an act that normally would be a violation of
international law, does not create responsibility of the state involved, such as cases of
consent, self-defence or necessity (ILC, Articles 20-26). These exceptions do not apply to
violations of IHL and IHRL: Due to the nature of human rights and international
humanitarian law as setting out minimum protections, such exceptions do not play a role,
otherwise the entire system of IHL and IHRL would be undermined.

Consent - Under certain sets of international law, it is possible for a one state to consent to a
violation of international law of another state. A state may allow another state to use its air
space or waters, and the invasion would not be considered an act of aggression.

Necessity - If an act by a state (that may be considered illegal) was the only way for a state to
safeguard an essential interest against a grave and imminent danger (and it does not damage
another essential interest) - that state does not violate its international responsibilities.

Self-defence - A state cannot be held responsible if it acted in self-defence, in the with UN

Charter's rules on when the use of force can be used in self-defense (article 51 of the UN
Charter).