International & Comparative Law

This document discusses various aspects of international and comparative law, including international offenses, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), treaties, and the role of the International Court of Justice. It also explores the legality of using force to protect against atrocities and the provisions for referring matters to the International Court of Justice. The document provides insights into the subject of international law and offers guidance for assignments and essays.

LL5304 – INTERNATIONAL &
COMPARATIVE LAW
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Question 1..................................................................................................................................3
Question 2..................................................................................................................................5
Question 3..................................................................................................................................8
Question 4................................................................................................................................10
Bibliography.............................................................................................................................13
2

QUESTION 1
International law identifies many international offences for instance genocide, war crimes,
violence and offences against humanity. Among all these crimes, genocide grabs more
attention. Further, when the accusations related to genocide takes place, the world picks up its
ears1.
Subsection 4 of section 2 of United Nations, forbids excersing force against defensive
integrity or political independence of nations. Further, article 2 (3) obliges that all interstate
quarrels are to be resolved in a peaceful manner2.
International legal practices restrain swift action and oblige extensive consultation,
particularly in the United Nation Security Council, prior to taking steps. It is argued that the
international legal system involves some benefits that are it may confer authenticity and assist
in synchronizing the efforts of the military as well as non- military in order to avert
atrocities3. There are some measures to enhance the current legal regimes. In order to
implement the same sturdy but nuanced support is required to prevent as well to work with
other permanent associates of UN Security Council to discourage the utilisation of vetoes in
mass atrocities.
The primitive goal of internatioanal law is to foster international coorporation, peace secutirty
and cordial relations among different nations across the globe. Howerver, conflicts taking
place internally poses the risk to international order and growth globally4. Recently, the
Responsibility to Protect (R2P) gets recognition as an budding norm of international law that
1NoëleCrossley. Evaluating the Responsibility to Protect: Mass atrocity prevention as a
consolidating norm in international society.(Routledge, 2016).
2JohnQuigley. The genocide convention: An international law analysis. (Routledge, 2016).
3ChristineGray. International law and the use of force.( Oxford University Press, 2018).
4Charles AndertonH., and JurgenBrauer,eds. Economic aspects of genocides, other mass
atrocities, and their prevention. (Oxford University Press, 2016).
3

enjoins the international community to interfere in the cases when nations are not protectinf
their citizens from mass atrocity.5
Furthermore, clashes taking place within the country brings threat to the international order
and worldwide growth. Hence, the responsibility to protect (R2P) principle gets identification
as a budding norm of international law which directs the international community to
intercede when nations not succeeds to prevent their inhabitants from mass atrocity. The
same can be observed in the present case as President of Gulin called the DFD that is Dotas
for democracy as a dangerous and organisation. He promised that he would find all the
members of DFD, house by house and torturing them and their members of the family to such
an extent which results in death.
Further, the legality of using force to protect the offences related to atrocity falls under the
governing body of law when states might reinstate to force that is just and bellum6. The same
is established from state practice to the modern day U.N. Charter framework. It is broadly
held as an issue under international law, employing military force against or in other states is
not allowed except for in self-protection or when approved by the UN Council. It is
considered that preventions can save many individuals from going through the horrors of
atrocity crimes as well as in saving the money.
Moreover, the International law must continue to forbid the intercession absent UN Security
Council authorization. At the same time it is considered that in a few exceptional situations,
interference without that endorsement has to be acceptable by ethically as well as politically.
Thus, considering the same in the present case, Dotas does not have the right to break with
Gulin as the mass atrocities are done with the approval of the president. Persuasive power of
legality connects the international law and norms to political will; all viewers recognise as
crucial in dealing with mass atrocities. Furthermore, it assists in synchronising the diplomacy
by which the policies related to deterrence are established as well as executed. In formulating
global or regional security forums, such as law assists in determining the procedures by
5Ekkehard Strauss. "The UN Secretary-General’s Human Rights Up Front Initiative and the
Prevention Of Genocide: Impact, Potential, Limitations." Genocide Studies and Prevention:
An International Journal 11.3 (2018): 8.
6Cristina Badescu G. "The Responsibility to Protect: embracing sovereignty and human
rights." Negotiating Sovereignty and Human Rights. (Routledge, 2016).pp- 93-110
4

which states make mutual decisions and individual states plan for emergencies based in part
on patterns of diplomacy and decision-making created or strengthened by law7.
Coercive military measures to avert mass atrocities involve a broad range of activities, most
far short of attack and a direct assault on the authority of government8. The threat of force is
used in cases related to genocide and mass atrocities too, among other things, prevent
susceptible inhabitants, guard relief efforts, humiliate executors’ capacity for suppression and
indicate an eagerness to protect and to stop mass atrocities9. In the present case also since
there are mass atrocities and to prevent the members of Dotas threat of force can be utilised
in order to stop it. With the assistance of military measures, ongoing atrocities could be
protected, for instance introducing forces among conflict faction or humiliating the abilities
of state for suppression.
QUESTION 2
Treaty refers to a legal binding contract or other written document which formulates
responsibilities among two or more subject matter related to international law. Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) has defined rules and regulations regarding treaties
between the states. Along with this, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between
States and InternationalOrganisations or Between International Organisations (1986)
stipulates the rules between the states and international organization10.
7JessGifkins. "R2P in the UN Security Council: Darfur, Libya and beyond." Cooperation and
Conflict 51.2 (2016): 148-165.
8Ted RobertGurr. "Preventing genocides and mass atrocities." Preventing Mass Atrocities:
Policies and Practices (2018).
9 Garrett WallaceBrown, and BohmAlexandra. "Introducing Jus ante Bellum as a
cosmopolitan approach to humanitarian intervention." European journal of international
relations 22.4 (2016): 897-919.
10GerhardVonGlahn, and TaulbeeJames Larry. Law among nations: an introduction to public
international law.(Routledge, 2017).
5

Furthermore, the commercial treaties are bilateral treaties of public international law, having
the aim of administering conditions, creating common rights to, trade and other commercial
activities between parties. The relevant foundation of international economic law is offered
by them, which significantly based on treaty law11. Further, other sources of international law,
specifically customary international law are of restricted relevance, possibly with the
exemption of customary technical rules, State responsibility.
A treaty is usually negotiated among diplomats offered through their relevant government
along with the complete authority in order to cease a treaty within the scope of their
directions. It is to be considered that the country’s signature is adequate to manifest its
purpose to be bound by the contract, particularly at the occurrence of bilateral treaties. On the
other hand, multilateral or general treaties, a country’s signature is obliged to acquire legal
approval of administration unless and until it explicitly has relinquished this right.
Apart from the express provision, until the ratifications are exchanged parties are not bound
by the contract. Moreover, the multilateral treaties truss only those nations which are parties
to them as well as experiences after a specific number of ratifications have been
accomplished. Subsequent to the speicification regarding signing of treaty, states might
become parties to treaty through the procedure called accession. It can be observed in the
present case that since the ramifications are exchanged between both the parties that are
Gulin and Bepo, due to which treaty is legally binding both of them.
The treaties do not have to follow any special form. Treaty often obtains the form of
agreement, although it might be a mutual declaration or an exchange of notes. Furthermore,
significant treaties usually follow a fixed plan. The preamble offers the name along with the
types of contracting parties and is a statement of the treaty’s general purposes. It is generally
followed through the articles including the agreed-upon conditions12.
11VermeulenMathias, and MartinScheinin. "Unilateral Exceptions to International Law:
Systematic Legal Analysis and Critique of Doctrines that Seek to Deny or Reduce the
Applicability of Human Rights Norms in the Fight against Terrorism." Challenges in
International Human Rights Law.(Routledge, 2017). 154-204.
12OliverDörr, and SchmalenbachKirsten, eds. Vienna convention on the law of treaties.
(Springer, 2018).
6

In the cases when treaty is terminated for a particular period of time, statement of period
follows, or if is for long period of time, there should be provision regarding the same that
party can condemn that is providing notice to conclude the treaty13. Any reservations that can
affect the provisions of treaty for concerned state might then appear; the article has to follow
the one which offers ratification of treaty along with the time and place for exchange of
ratifications.
In addition to this, treaties might be concluded using the provision specified in there (if there)
or by consent of parties. Since there is no provision in the treaty of the present case due to
which it cannot be terminated until the purpose behind establishing the same is completed14.
In the cases of material breach i.e. impermissible dissent of treaty or breach of provision vital
for the purpose of treaty, the guiltless party of bilateral treaty might cite the same as a reason
for expiring the treaty15. The same will be applied in the present case. Along with this, when
there is a breach by one party, it will have an effect on other parties to the treaties. Due to the
same other parties can terminate the whole agreement or a part of it.
Thus, in the present case,Bepo is legally bound by the contract,and it cannot be terminated.
Further, it cannot ignore its obligations under the TEOS that is Treaty on the Exchange of
Soil against Sugar.
13MitsuoMatsushita,. "Treaty Interpretation under the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties: A New Round of Codification." (2018): 269.
14TaslimOlawaleElias. "Problems concerning the validity of treaties." The Law of Treaties.
(Routledge, 2017) 401-475.
15AlinaKaczorowska. Public international law.(Routledge, 2015).
7

QUESTION 3
Referring matter to International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice builds through Charter of United Nations works as the
fundamental judicial organ of UN. It must be constituted and should exercise according to the
rules of the current statute16.Furthermore, judges of the nationality of every party should
retain their right to sit in the case prior to the court. A nation can file the case in international
court if same is part of the UN charter. In the present case as q1` Hence, the Bepo can refer
the International Court of Justice as both Bepo and Gulin are the part of UN Charter.
Retaliate in order to regain control of Lake Unity and support of UN General Assembly
and NOTA
The fundamental purpose of UN is to take appropriate actions in order to maintain and restore
international peace17. In the presentcase, as Gulin did not accept the request of Bepo to
ascertain another less odorous method for production of cheese. Further, when another state
Checho decided to support Gulin and moved punitive force against Bepo’s territory, the same
resulted into loss of control over Lake Unity which was previously held jointly by Gulin and
Bepo. Thus, as Bepo is part of UN, it could ask for the support of UN General Assembly and
NOTA (inter-governmental regional military alliance) in order to take back control over Lake
Unity, as the main purpose of UN is to maintain peace over the states which are part of
United States18. Further, it is legal to take support from UN General Assembly and NOTA,
and intergovernmental regional military alliance.
16Thirlway, HughThirlway. The International Court of Justice.(Oxford University Press,
2016).
17 Jorge MoralesPedraza, and RezapourSahar. "A POSSIBLE NEW MECHANISM TO
ACHIEVE NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: THE LEGAL
CASE OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS AGAINST THE NUCLEAR
POWERS IN THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE." International Journal of
Terrorism & Political Hot Spots 11 (2016).
18 Steven Ratner . The thin justice of international law: a moral reckoning of the law of
nations. OUP (Oxford, 2015).
8

The provision relating to the cyber attack
The U.N General Assembly has passed various resolutions related to the issues of cyber
attacks. However, these resolutions are unclear and do not oblige any special action by the
member of U.N. In addition to this; recently NATO starts to concentrate on the threats related
to cyber attacks. The primary goal of the Cyber Defence Management Authority is to
integrate cyber defence abilities across NATO members. Hence, Bepo cannot exercise the
cyber attacks directly against Gulin since both the UN assembly and NATO are trying to
remove the cyber crimes and no specific norms which provide the same permission legally
are available.However, the framework of jus in the bell is available which forcyberattack,but
it should assure that cyber attack does not quell legitimate expressive activities in cyberspace.
A cyber attack could be initiated after considering the norms along with limits regarding
same.
The utilisation of Nuclear Weapons
The treaty relating to Non – Proliferation of Nuclear is known as an international treaty for
Nuclear weapons. The main objective of the treaty is to encourage the peaceful application of
nuclear energy19. Thus in accordance with the above-specifiedtreaty, complying according to
International law as well as with International Humanitarian Law is significant. It has been
specified in judgment of International Court of Justice that in International law there is no
specific permission or rule regarding application of nuclear weapons20. But same cannot be
ruled out as lawfulness application of nuclear weapon for self-defence.
Provision for financial support and military training regarding vicious rebel group
In the present scenario, international law has enhanced its responsibility relating to armed
groups along with the fortification of a victim of non-international armed conflicts.
International law prohibits states from intervening in the events of other states which
19RobJohnson. "UK Defence Policy: The ‘New Canada’and ‘International by Design’." The
United Kingdom’s Defence AfterBrexit. (Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2019). 33-57.
20NazaninBaradaran, and HabibiHomayoun. "Cyber warfare and self-defense from the
perspective of international law." J. Pol. & L. 10 (2017): 40.
9

comprises both direct interventions through the application of states arms and training to
opposition forces21. The exception to this rule is the action which is taken for self –defence
and under authorization of UN Security Council. In order to attain the same, it is necessary to
justify the action as the right of unilateral humanitarian intervention. Thus, if the UN Security
Council is satisfied with the justification of Gulin than same can provide financial support as
well as military training to GPaC a vicious rebel group in Gulin
QUESTION 4
The present study reflects on the issue of placing the geostationary orbit over the own
territory. In this study, Gulin wanted to place the geostationary orbit, and for the same, Gulin
applied to international telecommunication unit for allocation of the slot. However,
international telecommunication unit denied to Gulin because all slot are already booked by
other countries. Gulin raises the issue that according to international law, every state exercise
national sovereignty and jurisdiction on everything that is both directly underneath and above
its land.
According to the outer space treaty, other nations cannot make a claim on universe and
cosmic bodies; still, provision is not clear how it is applied on the nation’s territory.
Geostationary orbit generally places above 26000 miles from the equator and have the same
rotation as the earth22. A satellite in GEO stays over a certain point on the shallow of the
earth. These slots are regulated by the international telecommunication unit and are limited.
In 1976, eight states tried to gain the ownership on the equator under the Bogota Declaration.
These states think that, according to the outer space treaty 1976, article II, outer space which
includes the moon and other cosmic area are not matter to country wide adoption, which
leads to reducing the right of control over the natural resources in an unjustifiable manner23.
21FranklinKramer. Robert and Catherine LotrionteButler. Cyber, extended deterrence, and
NATO.(Atlantic Council, 2016).
22Gennady Danilenko."International law-making for outer space." Space Policy 37 (2016):
179-183.
23RamJakhu,."International law governing the acquisition and dissemination of satellite
imagery." Commercial Satellite Imagery and United Nations Peacekeeping.(Routledge,
2017). 27-46.
10

To get around with the declaration by the outer space treaty that outer space is not subject to
national appropriation, geostationary orbit declared by the Bogota as natural resources.
Actually, they claimed that the uniqueness in the features of the geostationary orbit, it is built
by the earth itself. By classifying the orbit as a natural resource, these states could call on the
Jus cogens principle that refers that states have the full and complete control over the natural
resources.
Geostationary orbit is the very scare natural resource as there are only 360 degrees of the
orbit can be implemented, and satellites must be many degrees apart to exclude the intrusion.
Satellite positions are referred to as orbital slots in GEO are limited. Moreover, a section that
includes the landmasses plays a significant role. Therefore, equatorial states have
manyreasons to make the comment that they can control the sections of GEO.
However, the declaration by the Bogota has been excluded by the public international law.
Article II of the outer space treaty has approved into customary international law,
subsequently by accepting the view of the declaration on GEO would violate the well-
established limits on the state sovereignty24. In 1910, vertical limits of the states are
determined by the legal professionals. Undeniably, public international law safeguards the
the unlimited practice and improper use of the ouetr space in the sixty years of working by
the states. Moreover, due to the significant importance of the GEO in the era of
communication and navigation, it is not practical to deteriorate to state sovereignty which is
based on the allocation system25.
Notwithstanding of the valid concern given in the declaration by the Bogota, there are two
ways by which the developing states can protect their interest –
 The ITU (international telecommunication union) is responsible for implementing
slots in the geostationary orbit competently.
 The COPUOS (committee on the peaceful uses of outer space functions on the
agreement.
24MarcoAliberti, andKrasnerStephen D. "Governance in Space." Yearbook on Space Policy
2014.(Springer, Vienna, 2016). 143-166.
25FrancisLyall,, and LarsenPaul B. Space law. (Routledge, 2016).
11

A legal subcommittee of the COPUOS contained the outer space treaty,and it leads to the
concession or cooperation from several years. Since the COPUOS operates as an agreement
in which the issues have been stated, therefore it is acceptable to all parties. It does not matter
whether all the parties are in favour of the agreement; there is at least no rival of the party.
Subsequently in the treaty article II that is the non-appropriation clause saved the significant
support and assistance from the states which involved at the time of drafting.
Along with this, International telecommunication union sets out geostationary orbit slot in the
direction of the efficient use of the limited space.
By considering the above analysis, it can be cited that implementing the Bogota declaration
the orbit above the territory is considered as an integral part of the state. In the present study,
Gulin by above two prescribed ways can save their interest.
12

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aliberti, M.and Stephen D. Krasner. "Governance in Space." Yearbook on Space Policy
2014.(Springer, Vienna, 2016). 143-166.
Anderton, C, and Jurgen B., eds. Economic aspects of genocides, other mass atrocities, and
their prevention.(Oxford University Press, 2016).
Badescu, C., "The Responsibility to Protect: embracing sovereignty and human
rights." Negotiating Sovereignty and Human Rights.(Routledge, 2016).pp- 93-110
Baradaran, N., and Homayoun H., "Cyber warfare and self-defence from the perspective of
international law." J. Pol. & L. 10 (2017) 40.
Brown, G., and Alexandra B., "Introducing Jus ante Bellum as a cosmopolitan approach to
humanitarian intervention." European journal of international relations 22.4 (2016): 897-
919.
Crossley, N., Evaluating the Responsibility to Protect: Mass atrocity prevention as a
consolidating norm in international society. (Routledge, 2016).
Danilenko, G., "International law-making for outer space." Space Policy 37 (2016): 179-183.
Dörr, O., and Kirsten S., eds. Vienna Convention on the law of treaties.(Springer, 2018).
Elias, T., "Problems concerning the validity of treaties." The Law of Treaties.(Routledge,
2017).Pp-401-475.
Gifkins, J., "R2P in the UN Security Council: Darfur, Libya and beyond." Cooperation and
Conflict 51.2 (2016): pp-148-165.
Gray, C., International law and the use of force.( Oxford University Press, 2018).
Gurr, T. "Preventing genocides and mass atrocities." Preventing Mass Atrocities: Policies
and Practices (2018).
Jakhu, R., "International law governing the acquisition and dissemination of satellite
imagery." Commercial Satellite Imagery and United Nations Peacekeeping.(Routledge,
2017).27-46.
Johnson, R., "UK Defence Policy: The ‘New Canadaand ‘International by Design’." The
United Kingdom’s Defence AfterBrexit. (Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2019). Pp-33-57.
Kaczorowska, A., Public international law. (Routledge, 2015).
Kramer, F., Robert J. Butler, and Catherine L., Cyber, extended deterrence, and NATO.
(Atlantic Council, 2016).
Lyall, F., and Paul B. Larsen. Space law.(Routledge, 2016).
Mathias, V., and Scheinin M., "Unilateral Exceptions to International Law: Systematic Legal
Analysis and Critique of Doctrines that Seek to Deny or Reduce the Applicability of Human
Rights Norms in the fight against Terrorism." Challenges in International Human Rights
Law.(Routledge, 2017). Pp-154-204.
13

Matsushita, M.. "Treaty Interpretation under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties:
A New Round of Codification." (2018):pp- 269.
Pedraza, J., and Sahar R., "A POSSIBLE NEW MECHANISM TO ACHIEVE NUCLEAR
DISARMAMENT IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: THE LEGAL CASE OF THE REPUBLIC
OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS AGAINST THE NUCLEAR POWERS IN THE
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE." International Journal of Terrorism & Political
Hot Spots 11 (2016).
Quigley, J., The genocide convention: An international law analysis. (Routledge, 2016).
Ratner, S., The thin justice of international law: a moral reckoning of the law of nations.
OUP (Oxford, 2015).
Strauss, E., "The UN Secretary-General’s Human Rights Up Front Initiative and the
Prevention Of Genocide: Impact, Potential, Limitations." Genocide Studies and Prevention:
An International Journal 11.3 (2018): pp-8.
Thirlway, H., The International Court of Justice. (Oxford University Press, 2016).
Von Glahn, G., and James Larry T., Law among nations: an introduction to public
international law.(Routledge, 2017).
14

15