MOJEED AGBOLAHAN IBRAHIM

20232434
LAW 869
OIL AND GAS LAW 1

QUESTION; UNDER THE VANTAGE CONTEMPORARY THESIS IN

NATURAL RESOURCES LAW AND POLICY, THERE SEEMS TO BE A
CONTEST OF JURIDICAL SUPREMACY BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE
OF PACTA SUNT SERVANDA AND STATE SOVEREIGNTY.
DISCUSS.
The theory of pacta sunt servanda and state sovereignty are often intricately
intertwined in contemporary natural resources law and policy.
A basic tenet of international law known as "Pacta sunt servanda" states that parties
have a duty to respect and uphold the agreements they voluntarily participate into. It
highlights the inviolability of contracts and agreements, suggesting that once they are
made, they should be upheld and maintained.
State sovereignty, on the other hand, refers to a state's autonomous right to self-
govern without external intervention. States are able to exert control over their
territory, resources, and internal affairs thanks to this principle, which has been a
cornerstone of international relations and law.
It emphasizes the sanctity of contracts and agreements, implying that agreements
should be kept and respected once they are made. This principle has been a
cornerstone of international relations and law, allowing states to exercise control over
their territories, resources, and internal affairs. In the context of natural resources law
and policy, conflicts may arise between these two principles. For instance, a state
might enter into agreements or contracts with other states, international organizations,
or private entities concerning the exploration, exploitation, or management of natural
resources within its territory.

The doctrine of pacta sunt servanda would uphold the importance of honoring these
agreements as legally binding. However, in cases where honoring these agreements
conflicts with the state's sovereign rights or public policies, tensions can arise. States
might face dilemmas when contractual obligations clash with their sovereign authority
to regulate or manage their natural resources for the benefit of their citizens or in
accordance with their domestic laws. Disputes may arise when a state perceives that
honoring agreements could compromise its sovereignty, especially if these
agreements were entered into under circumstances that are deemed unfair, coercive,
or against the state's fundamental interests.
The interaction between pacta sunt servanda and state sovereignty is a fascinating
aspect of natural resource law and policy.

Pacta sunt servanda is a fundamental principle of law which emphasizes the sanctity
of agreements once states voluntarily enter into a treaty an agreement, they are bound
to respect its terms. This principle helps to maintain stability, predictability and trust
between nations.
On the other hand, state sovereignty refers to the supreme authority of a state over its
territory, recognizing its and its autonomy to make decisions without interference This
sovereignty often extends to natural resources located on the borders of a country,
giving states the right to regulate and control these resources as they see fit. Tension
arises when international agreements or treaties on natural resources come into
conflict with a nation's perception of its sovereignty. States may be inclined to
prioritize their sovereignty over their treaty obligations if they believe compliance
with international agreements threatens their autonomy or vital interests.

This struggle between pacta sunt servanda and sovereignty of often gives rise to legal
and political debates Sometimes, states attempt to balance these principles by
renegotiating treaties or seeking exceptions, in order to maintain their sovereignty
while respecting their commitments to international agreements.
The evolution of contemporary natural resource law and policy involves finding ways
to harmonize principles, possibly through flexible agreements that give States some
margin maneuver in resource management while respecting their international
commitments.
Striking this balance is crucial to meeting challenges such as conservation of the
environment, sustainable use of and equitable distribution of resources while
respecting the rights and sovereignty of nations.

However, state sovereignty is also a principle of international law , asserting the

authority and autonomy of a state within its borders. The sovereignty of the State
gives it power over its own affairs, including the management and its natural
resources. Competition or tension arises when there is conflict between respecting
international agreements and the sovereign of a state to manage its resources as it sees
fit.
This conflict can manifest itself in various ways:

1. Resource management: international agreements often contain provisions

concerning management, exploitation and conservation of resources. These
 agreements may impose certain obligations or restrictions on how a state can use
its resources, limiting its sovereign control.
2. Dispute resolution: disputes can arise between internationals and the sovereignty
of a state, particularly when one accuses the other of not respecting the terms of
an agreement. This may lead to arbitration or litigation to resolve the dispute.
3. Changing priorities: States may prioritize their sovereign rights over their
international commitments due to changes in circumstances, economic interests
or considerations which results in tensions with the pacta servanda principle.
4. Environmental Concerns: With global awareness of environmental issues, there is
increasing pressure for international agreements to protect natural resources.
Balancing these agreements with state sovereignty can lead to implementation
and compliance issues.

Resolving this conflict often involves negotiations, diplomacy and sometimes legal
arbitration. States may seek compromises or adjustments agreements to better align
them with their sovereign interests in honoring their international obligations.
International courts or tribunals could also intervene in agreements and find solutions
that establish a relationship between pacta sunt servanda and the sovereignty of
States.
Ultimately, managing this tension involves a balancing act between respecting the
sanctity of countries and respecting a state's right to autonomy and sovereignty over
its resources. natural.