PIL Ch10-end (FINALS)

Public International Law Bernas + Cruz + Brownlie Reviewer & Atty. Gatdula Notes

JURISDICTION OF STATES

Jurisdiction, in general This denotes the authority to affect legal interests. According to Brownlie, it refers to particular aspects of the general legal

competence of states often referred to as “sovereignty”. Refers to judicial, legislative and administrative competence.

Civil Jurisdiction In order to satisfy international law standards in regard to the treatment of

aliens, a state must normally maintain a system of courts empowered to decide civil cases (Brownlie). However, civil jurisdiction is more properly a subject for private international law.

Criminal Jurisdicition Five principles where jurisdiction may be reckoned:

(1) The territorial / territoriality principle This principle states that the fundamental source of

jurisdiction is sovereignty over territory. A state has absolute power to prescribe adjudicate and enforce rules of conduct that occurs within its territory (Bernas).

Often applied is the objective territorial principle according to which jurisdiction is founded when any essential constituent element of a crime is consummated on state territory (Brownlie).

Example: firing a gun across a frontier causing homicide on the territory of a state.

Case Illustration:The Lotus caseThis case originated in a collision on the high seas between a French steamer and a Turkish collier in which the latter sank and Turkish crew members and passengers lost their lives. The French steamer having put into port in Turkey, the officers of the watch on board at the time of the collision were tried and convicted on involuntary manslaughter. France contended that the flagstate of the vessel alone had jurisdiction, while Turkey argued that the vessels on the high seas formed part of the territory of the nation whose flag they fly. Issue: whether Turkey had acted in conflict with international law by instituting proceedings.Held: Turkey had not acted inconsistently with international law by exercising criminal jurisdiction. The Turkish penal code provided for punishment of acts abroad by foreigners against Turkish nationals and involved the protective principle of jurisdiction.

(2) The nationality principle Nationality as a mark of allegiance and an aspect of sovereignty

is generally recognized as a basis for jurisdiction of extra-territorial acts. This principle thus states that every state has jurisdiction over its nationals even when those nationals are outside the state territory.

(3) The protective principle This principle states that a state may exercise jurisdicition over

conduct outside its territory that threatens its security as long as the conduct is generally recognized as criminal by states in the international community.

(4) The universality principle This principle recognizes that certain activities, universally

dangerous to states and their subjects require authority in all community members to punish such acts wherever they may occur, even absent a link between the state and the parties or acts in question. This principle started with piracy.

What is meant by piracy in international law? Piracy is any illegal act of violence or depredation committed for private ends on the high seas or outside the territorial control of any state. It also covers crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, aircraft piracy and terrorism, as provided and defined in the Statute of the ICJ.

(5) The passive personality principle According to this principle, aliens may be punished for acts

abroad harmful to nationals of the forum.

What are the legal consequences of a wrongful exercise of jurisdiction?Answer: In principle, excess jurisdiction gives rise to state responsibility even in the absence of an intention to harm the other state. Moreover, the state of which the accused is a national has locus standi in respect of the proceedings which involve a breach of existing standards protecting human rights.

Extradition- Definition: the surrender of an individual by the state within whose

territory he is found to the state under whose laws he is alleged to have committed a crime.

- This process results in a co-operation between states to obtain a surrender of suspected or convicted criminals which rests on a procedure of request and consent and regulated by certain principles.

Katrina Hirang-OlaveKat Aguila


- However, in the absence of a treaty, surrender of an alleged criminal cannot be demanded as a matter of right.

Are there instances where extradition is effected even without a treaty?Yes. There has been a practice of informal extradition. When this takes place with the consent of the State from the territory of which the transfer of custody takes place, there is deemed to be no transgression of international law.

What is the principle of double criminality?Answer: this mandates that the act charged must be criminal under the laws of both the state of the refuge and the requesting state. Such a principle is invoked in cases of informal extradition, where some courts have abstracted from existing treaties and municipal provisions.

Immunity from jurisdiction

- General rule: Jurisdiction of a state within its territory is complete and absolute.

o Exceptions:(1) Sovereign immunity

- Enjoyed by the head of state and the state itself

- Immunity ratione materiae applies to all state officials who have been involved in carrying out official functions.1

- Republic of Indonesia v. Vinzon: Whether the Republic of Indonesia, represented by Chief of Administration, Minister Counsellor Kasim, enjoys immunity in a case concerning a maintenance agreement. Ruling: The Court ruled in favor of Indonesia, and stated that international law is founded on principles of reciprocity, comity, independence and equality of States. The existence alone of a paragraph in the maintenance agreement allowing for certain actions to be tried in a venue does not constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity from suit.

- State immunity: the principle that the state may not be sued without its consent.

- State immunity may also appear as a doctrine of inadmissibility or non-justiciability rather than immunity in a strict sense. In other words, the national court has no competence to assert jurisdiction.2

- Two principles of sovereign immunity:(1) par in parem non habet jurisdictionem

- This principle is concerned with the status of equality attaching to the independent sovereign: legal persons of equal standing cannot have their disputes settled in the courts of one of them. - This principle is satisfied if the sovereign states waives its immunity because consent upholds the status of equality.

(2) non-intervention in internal affairs

(2) Immunity of the representative of states - Diplomatic immunities

1 Pinochet Case. The Court in that case said that Pinochet was not acting in any capacity which gives rise to immunity ratione materiae.2 Brownlie.


Nicaragua vs US case: Whether the US was involved in the revolution in Nicaragua to the extent of providing direct support for the contra forces as well as laying mines in Nicaraguan ports, among other allegations. The Court, in determining the closeness of the relationship between the US government to the contras would be enough to equate their actions with one another, ruled that there was a partial dependency may be inferred but not enough that the US actually exercised a degree of control to justify the contras as acting on its behalf. For the US to be responsible, it would have to be proved that the State had effective control of the operations during the course of the alleged acts.


- Official representatives of a state are given immunities and privileges when they are within the territory of another state.

- The purpose is to allow them to perform their functions properly.

- The codification of the law on the subject is found in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), as discussed below.

- consular immunitiesi. Consuls are not concerned with political

matters but with administrative and economic issues, such as the issuance of visas.

ii. The receing State has the duty to protect the consular premises, archives and interest of the sending State

Act of State Doctrine Local courts cannot pass upon the validity of the acts of a

foreign state; Judicial restraint in domestic law in deference to the executive who is the principal architect of foreign relations.

All acts concerning the act of State doctrine concern political and legislative acts, but never judicial.

Underhill v. Hernandez: Whether Underhill is entitled to damages from

Hernandez based on the latter’s refusal to grant him a passport to leave the country and on the assertions that he had been kept in detention by Hernandez. Ruling: Underhill is not entitled to damages because of the “act of state doctrine” Courts of one state will not sit in judgment on the acts of the government of another, done within its own territory.

Dunhill v. Cuba: Whether Cuba’s failure to return the

overpayment made by Dunhill on cigars can be considered as an act of state. Ruling: No, it is not an act of state. An act of state cannot extend to include the repudiation of a purely commercial obligation.


The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic RelationsRights and Priveleges – Some Salient Provisions

Art. 22 – The premises of the mission which are the buildings or parts of the buildings used for the purpose of the mission is considered as inviolable. The State has a special duty to protect the premises of the mission. Art. 23 – exemption of sending State and head of the mission from all national, regional or municipal dues and taxes wrt to the premises of the mission.Art. 24 – inviolability of the archives and documents of the mission. Art. 29, 30 – The person of the diplomatic agent as well as his private residence shall be inviolable, and shall not be liable for any form of arrest or detention. Art 31 – The diplomatic agent also enjoys immunity from the criminal jurisdicyion of the receiving State/

Waiver of Immunity Immunity is not mandatory. No fundamental principle

prohibits the exercise of jurisdicition. The immunity can be waived by the state concerned either

expressly or by conduct. Waiver may be done by treaty or in a diplomatic communication.

Under the State Immunity Act of 1987, immunity is denied where there is prior written agreement to submit to the jurisdiction or a written agreement to submit to arbitration.


State Responsibility

I. Basis and Nature of State Responsibility The nature of state responsibility is not based upon delict in the municipal

sense, and international responsibility relates both to breaches of treaty and to other breaches of a legal duty.3

Individuals are generally considered as “objects” and not “subjects” of international law. Any wrongs committed against them can only be redressed by states with international personality.

They possess no international legal rights to assert on their own. However, individuals may be the subject of state v. state litigation.

There is a distinction that must be drawn between original and vicarious state responsibility.4

o Original state responsibility – flows from acts committed by or with the authorization of the government of a state

o Vicarious state responsibility – flows from unauthorized acts of the agents of the state.

II. Protection of aliens General: As an aspect of sovereignty, no state is obliged to admit aliens

into its territory unless a treaty requires it. However, practically speaking, it is difficult to deny admission to all. Therefore, what a state does is to impose legal standards for admission.

Once an alien is admitted into a state, he/she cannot be expelled without due process.

Proper treatment of aliens: o

Various forms of ill-treatment: Mistreatment by judicial or police authorities, unlawful expropriation of property, failure to prosecute those who attack foreign nationals, or a denial of justice (denial of due process of the law).

3 Brownlie4 Kelsen. Principles of International Law, 2nd ed.

Diplomatic Protection: Well-developed customary law which is based on the traditional notion that the individual is an inappropriate subject of international law and must

have recourse to his state for protection. Another applicable theory is that injury to the state national is injury to the state itself. This keeps individuals at the mercy of their state, because the latter enjoys discretion as to whether or not to prosecute the claims of its national. This doctrine requires the satisfaction of the “effective national link” between the national and the state.

Corporations and shareholders: It is the state of nationality of the corporation who has the right to protect the corporation and not the state nationality of its shareholders. Barcelona Traction Case (Belgium v. Spain): WON

Belgian nationals/shareholders of a company incorporated in Canada could claim reparation for damages against Spain when the latter state declared it to be bankrupt. The Court held that the Belgians lacked legal standing to exercise diplomatic protection of their shareholdings in Barcelona Traction, which was incorporated in Canada, because the breach (if any) was committed against the corporation and not against the shareholders, and only the company could protect its own interest. To be different, the act must be directed against the rights of the shareholder as such.

III. Doctrine of State Responsibility In General: When an injury has been inflicted, there is need to

determine whether the state can be held responsible for it. What is an internationally wrongful act ?

Answer: If a state violated a customary rule of international law or a treaty obligation, and the act is attributable to the State under international law, it has committed an “internationally wrongful act.” Every internationally wrongful act of a State entails the international responsibility of that State

Requisites: The elements of an internationally wrongful act, the attributability of the wrongful act to the state, and the enforcement of the obligation that arises from the wrongful act. The characterization of an act of a State as internationally wrongful is governed by international law.



Legal obligations: When a state consents to be part of an international legal system, it also accepts corresponding legal obligations. It must accept responsibility for actions

which have effect on other international legal persons. No state can avoid responsibility when once it has committed an act which satisfies the requirements of an “internationally wrongful act.”

An internationally wrongful act consists of a subjective and an objective element.

Subjective: The act must be attributable not to persons or agencies who performed it but to the state itself.

Objective: A violation of an international obligation. It may be either an act or an omission.

State attribution: Acts of state organs, acts of other persons, or the acts of revolutionaries.Acts of State Organs: Any State organ (who is accorded that status according to internal law) which conducts itself in that capacity, entities empowered by law to exercise elements of governmental authority even if not considered an organ of the state, persons or a group of persons acting under the instructions of the State or carrying out acts of a State in the absence of official authorities, and attribution to the state of the conduct of organs placed at its disposal by another state, even if they exceeded authority.

International Human Rights Law

Definition of human rights: Rights which are inalienable and fundamental and essential for life as human beings.

o Western tradition developed from the Natural Law view that some rights are higher than positive/man-made law and flows from the nature of man himself, which demands immunities or liberties..

International Bill of Human Rights Emergence of an International Bill of Human Rights: Started

to rise after World War II, because of the recognition that the way nations treat persons under their jurisdiction has become an international concern, not just domestic. It is said to do away at the old concept of sovereignty and recognizes that individuals can be made the subject of international law, and that they can find protection and remedies within the international community against their own state.

UN Charter: Breaking ground for the development of the new international human rights law. The Charter set down a fundamental premise of “faith in fundamental human rights in the dignity and worth of the human person in the equal rights of men and women.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights: First significant milestone in the internationalization of human rights. It was adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948, not as law but as a “common standard” for nations to attempt to reach. Its authority is mostly political and moral.

What is the difference between covenant and declaration?Answer: An international covenant is the meeting of the minds of the contracting parties on specific duties and obligations they intend to assume, and the agreement that the undertakings must be effectively performed. It leaves no doubt about the legal nature of the provisions it contains. A declaration admits the presumption that something less than full effectiveness in terms of law is intended.

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights


Corfu Channel Case:The Court in this case held that the passage of two cruisers and two destroyers, through a part of the North Corfu Channel constituting Albanian territorial waters was an innocent passage. As to the laying of mines which damaged the destroyers Saumarez and Volage, the Court looked for evidence of knowledge on this on the part of Albania. The Court in this case said that it cannot be concluded from the mere fact of the control exercised by a State over its territory and waters that the State necessarily knew or ought to have known of any unlawful act perpetrated therein.


The Covenant’s provisions on the right to life do not go beyond what the Philippine Bill of

Rights guarantees. However, it does not say when protected life begins while the Philippines protects the life of the unborn child from conception.

There is no right to property in the Covenant, even if there is one in the Universal Declaration. A respected author states that it would be difficult to draft a right to property which could gain universal and general acceptance.

Some key concepts: Torture, Ill-treatment and Prison Conditions: The Covenant

prohibits torture and other forms of ill-treatment that offend bodily integrity and personal dignity. The UN Human Rights Commission says that imprisonment in conditions detrimental to a prisoner’s health constitutes violation of the Covenant.

Freedom of Movement: The Covenant guarantees the rights to travel within the country, to leave the country, and to change one’s residence. These are limited by law, public health, national security or the rights and freedoms of others, and those inconsistent with the other rights in the present Covenant.

Legal Personality, Privacy and Right to Family: Difference between “legal personality” and “capacity to act.” Legal personality belongs to all, whether citizens or aliens. Capacity to act may not be available to some by reason of infancy, minority, or insanity.

Thought, Conscience, Religion, Expression, Political Freedom : The limits on exercise of the aforementioned rights found in the Covenant are “to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights of others.” The Covenant has express protection of the right of parents in the matter of religion for their children.

Associations and Unions : The Covenant has a detailed set of provisions protecting the right to form associations and unions. It is silent about the right of government employees to form unions.

Minorities : Minorities are accorded the right to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion or to use their own language. There is no right to secede.

Self-determination of peoples : Self-determination covers two important rights:

The right freely to determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development;

The right for their own ends, to freely dispose of the natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international cooperation based upon the principle of mutual benefit and international law.

Optional Protocol on the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Supplement to the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Philippines has ratified the Protocol and it entered into force in March 1976.

Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural RightsRights guaranteed:1. To work2. To favorable conditions of work3. To form free trade unions4. To social security and insurance5. To special assistance for families6. To adequate standard of living7. To the highest standard of physical and mental health8. To education including compulsory primary education; and9. To the enjoyment of cultural and scientific benefits and international contacts.

International Criminal Court Significance and Goal:

o The International Criminal Court was created in 1998 by the Rome Statute. The treaty came into force in April 2002 when the 60th country needed to establish the ICC submitted its ratification. The US and the Philippines have not ratified it.

Prior to the establishment of the ICC, international crimes were prosecuted in ad hoc criminal courts. These tribunals were undermined and weakened by the charges of politically motivated investigations and selective justice.



Unlike temporary tribunals, the ICC will be established without any specific country in mind. Besides being permanent, it will be neutral. Gradually too, it will be able to establish precedents. Its goal is individual and not collective accountability.

Jurisdiction:o limited to the most serious international crimes: genocide,

crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression.

What is the principle of complementarity? The court is a court of last resort. It must await referral of a crime by a state party or by the Security Council. The court cannot act when the local judicial system is able to prosecute. Once a state has taken the initiative to investigate a crime, the ICC cannot intervene. Because of the principle of complementarity, the effective functioning of the court will depend very much on the cooperation of state parties. The crimes over which the ICC has jurisdiction must first be punishable in domestic law.

Settlement of International Disputes

When does a dispute exist?A dispute exists when one state claims that another state should behave in a certain manner and that claim is rejected by the latter.5

International dispute An international dispute is an actual disagreement between states

regarding the conduct to be taken by one of them for the protection and vindication of the interests of the other.

According to Atty. Gatdula, conflict is the general term denoting some form of disagreement, while dispute is the areas why the conflict exists.

In order for there to be a proper dispute, should the dispute be justiciable?Answer: YES. The same requisites for the justiciability of an issue in domestic law applies.

5 Kelsen.

METHODS OF SETTLING DISPUTES Remember that: Art 2 of the UN Charter states that disputes are

required to be settled by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security are not endangered.

However, it is not uncommon for their mutual demands to exacerbate rather than resolve their dispute, thus leading them to employ less amicable means.

Two ways of settling disputes:

I. Pacific settlement of disputes(1) Negotiation

- generally the first step taken in the settlement of international disputes

- discussion undertaken by the parties themselves about their respective claims and counterclaims with a view to their just and orderly adjustment

- Treaties now require that negotiation be undertaken first before the case is submitted to arbitration

i. Note, however:If the contract is in bad faith – disregard negotiation and proceed with the case.

Is it absolutely required that negotiations fail before resorting to other modes?Answer: At least one of the parties should enter negotiations in good faith. If still, negotiations fail, the case may be proceeded against. There is no need to negotiate forever. (Atty Gatdula).

(2) Inquiry or fact finding- an investigation of the points in question on the theory

that their elucidation will contribute to the solution of the differences.

i. However, findings are not conclusive upon the disputing states


The Dogger Bank Case:Russian vessels fired in a fog on the English fishing fleet off Dogger Bank during the Russo-Japanese War and caused the death of two fishermen, injuries to others and considerable destruction of property. Russia maintained that the firing was due to approach of the Japanese torpedo boats. The finding: There were no torpedo boats present at the time of the incident and as a result, Russia agreed to pay to Great Britain.


(3) Good offices- a method by which a third party attempts to bring the

disputing states together in order to enable them to discuss the issues in contention and arrive at an agreement.

- Employed when the parties are no longer in speaking terms.

(4) Mediation- a third party does not merely provide the opportunity

for the antagonists to negotiate but also actively participates in their discussions in order to reconcile their conflicting claims. - Suggestions of the mediator are merely persuasive

(5) Conciliation(6) Arbitration

- solution of a dispute by an impartial third party, usually a tribunal created by the parties themselves under a charter known as the compromis.

i. The compromis provides for the composition and manner of selection og its members.

(7) Judicial settlement- decisions are binding- disputes submitted are legal rather than political

Difference between Judicial Settlement and ArbitrationJudicial settlement Arbitration

The judicial tribunal is a pre-existing and permanent body

Arbitral is an ad hoc body created by the parties to the dispute

Jurisdiction is usually compulsory VoluntaryLaw applied is independent of the will of the parties

Law applied may be limited by the parties.

(8) Resort to regional and international organizations- may be resorted to by the parties out of their own

volition or taken by the body itself at its own instance if allowed by agreement of the members.

- i.e. ASEANII. Hostile Methods

(1) Retorsions- any act taken in retaliation where the acts complained

of do not constitute a legal ground for offense but are rather in the nature of unfriendly acts.

- Examples: severance of diplomatic or consular relations, suspension of commercial dealings, boycott, stoppage of travel, and denunciation of treaties.

(2) Reprisals- an act of self-help on the part of the injured state,

responding after an unsatisfied demand to an act contrary to international law on the part of the offending state.

- Has the effect of suspending momentarily in the relations between the state the observance of the rule of international law.


The WTO Dispute Settlement Body Arbitration, as a method of settlement of disputes is more clearly shown through the WTO-DSB. When disputes regarding trade arise between the parties, they agree to the constitution of a Panel pursuant to the Dispute Settlement Understanding (Art 4). The Panel then renders a finding, and the adverse party may appeal such a decision to the Appellate Body. For instance, in the dispute between the European Communities and the US about the import prohibition imposed upon hormone-treated beef, the case was submitted for decision. The Panel Report and subsequently, the Appellate Body Report ruled on the consistency and applicability of certain provisions of the SPS Agreement, subject to the Terms of Reference of both parties.

The Naulilaa Incident ArbitrationDuring WW1, a part of German officials and officers crossed into the neutral Portugese colony of Angola to discuss the purchase of food supplies from the Portugese. Due to the misunderstanding caused by language difficulties, an altercation arose during the discussion. As a result, three of the Germans were killed and another was interned by the Portugese. When the matter was subsequently submitted for arbitration, it was held that the death of the Germans in Naulilaa was not a consequence of acts contrary to international law imputable to either parties but was purely fortuitous, hence not in the character of a reprisal.


(3) intervention

WAR

I. Definition War is defined as an armed contention between the public forces

of states or other belligerent communities implying the employment of violence among the parties as a means of enforcing their demands.

i. However, war may exist even without the use of force as when one states normally refuses to be governed by the laws of peace in its relations with another state.

II. Outlawry of war The Charter of the UN is categorically committed to the

outlawry of war, as evidenced by the Preamble. Two instances where the use of force is allowed:

o Exercise of the inherent right of self-defense under conditions laid down in Art 51

o In pursuance of the so-called enforcement action that may be decreed by the Security Council under Art 42.

III. Laws of war The Declaration of Paris of 1856 – warfare at sea The Hague Conventions of 1899 – use of expanding bullets and

asyphynxiating gases The Hague Conventions of 1907 – opening of hostilities, et al The Geneva Convention of 1925 – use of poisonous gases and

of bacteriological methods of warfare The Geneva Convention of 1929 – treatment of the sick and the

wounded and of prisoners of war The declaration of London – use of submarines against merchant

vessels The Geneva Convention of 1949 The most commonly accepted sanctions:

i. Protest lodged by one belligerent against the unlawful acts of other belligerents.

ii. Reparation for damagesiii. Punishment of war criminals.

IV. Commencement of War Art I, Hague Convention of 1907: hostilities must not

commence without a previous and explicit warning in the form of either a reasoned declaration of war or an ultimatum.

o War should commence at the date specified in the declaration or the date it is communicated to the enemy.

o However, several wars have broken out even without notice (i.e. Pear Harbor)

In such cases, the rule is: war is supposed to commence from the moment the first act of force is committed by one state.

V. Effects of the Outbreak of War The laws of peace cease to regulate the relations of the

belligerents and are superseded by the laws of war. Diplomatic and consular relations between the belligerents are

terminated. Treaties of a political nature are automatically cancelled. Enemy public property found in the territory of the other

belligerent states at the outbreak of hostilities is subject to confiscation.

VI. Combatants The following are regarded as combatants:

o Members of the armed forceso Irregular forces such as the guerillaso Inhabitants of unoccupied territory

NEUTRALITY

I. Neutrality, generally.When is a state said to be neutral?A state is said to be neutral if it does not take part directly or indirectly in a war between other states.

What is the difference between neutrality and neutralization?The most significant difference between these two terms is in terms of time. Neutrality obtains only during war while neutralization is intended to operate in time of peace as well as in times of war. Neutrality is dependent solely on the



attitude of the neutral state, while neutralization is the result of a treaty.

II. Laws of neutralityThe most important laws of neutrality are found in: customary law of nations conventions:

i. Declaration of Paris of 1856ii. Hague Convention of 1907

iii. Declaration of London 1909 (unratified)III. Relations of belligerent states and neutral states

A neutral state has the right and duty to:o abstain from taking part in the hostilities and from

giving assistance to either belligerento Prevent its territory from being used in the conduct of

hostilities by the belligerentso Acquiesce in certain restrictions and limitations that

the belligerents may find necessary to impose especially in connection with international commerce.

The belligerents are bound to respect the status of the neutral state.

IV. Use of Neutral Territories Neutral territory is inviolable and cannot be used by the

belligerents for the movement of troops, etc.o However, the territory may be used for the passage of

sick and wounded troops.o The neutrality of a state is also not affected by the

mere passage through its territorial waters of warships or prizes belonging to belligerents.

V. Right of Visit and Seacrch Belligerent warships and aircraft have the right to visit and

search neutral merchant vessels on the high seas for the purpose of determining whether they are in any way connected with the hostilities.

o Such vessels, if found to be connected with the hostilities may be captured as prize.

VI. Contraband

The term applied to goods which although neutral property may be seized by a belligerent because they are useful for war and are bound for a hostile destination.

i. Absolute contraband- necessarily useful for war in ALL circumstances i.e.

riffles and ammunition- subject to seizure as long as they are bound for enemy

or enemy-held territory.ii. Conditional contraband- has both civilian and military purposes i.e. food and

clothes- may only be seized when it can be shown that they are

destined for the armed forces or the authorities of the belligerent government.

-What is the doctrine of ultimate consumption?Answer: goods intended for civilian use which may ultimately find their way to and be consumed by the belligerent forces are also liable to seizure on the way.

VII. Termination of Neutrality(a) when the neutral state itself joins

the war(b) upon the conclusion of peace

International Environmental Law

I. Environmental concerns- Expressions of environmental concern in the Philippine Constitution: Article II, Section 16, which states that “the State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.”

Environmental concerns: Not just limited to atmosphere, land, sea, flora and fauna but also includes the preservation of the cultural heritage of mankind as found in archaeological and artistic remains. The goal of environmental protectionists is the rational use of the elements which make up the environment through control, reduction and elimination of the causes of environmental degradation.

II. Environmental rights The real objects of protection are persons capable of having

rights, so trees and other inanimate objects cannot be said to have any rights except in the metaphorical sense..

III. Sustainable Development



Encourages development in a manner and according to methods which do not compromise the ability of future generation and other states to meet their needs. According to Justice Douglas, it is the recognition that the voice of the inanimate object and the existing beneficiaries of environmental wonders not be stilled.

IV. Emerging Principles

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW

I. International Economic Law Definitions: Distinct part of international law which is related to

the regulation of interstate trade, the creation of international economic institutions, the formulation of definite rules covering a wide range of economic matters and the establishment of methods of dispute resolution.

90% of international law is economic because it includes all the international law and international agreements governing economic transactions that cross state boundaries that have implications for more than one state, like those governing movement of goods, funds, persons, intangibles, technology, vessels and aircrafts.

Characteristics of International Economic Law:

1. International economic law is a part of public international law

2. International economic law is entwined with municipal law and is balanced accordingly with it.

3. International economic law requires multidisciplinary thinking because it involves many other disciplines such as history, political science, anthropology, geography, et cetera.

4. Empirical research is important for understanding its operation.

Important economic institutions: Bretton Woods Conference of 1944: Objectives were

to advance the reduction of tariffs and other trade barriers, and to create a global framework designed to minimize economic conflicts.

International Monetary Fund (IMF): To provide short-term financing to countries in balance of payments and difficulties

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank): To provide long-term capital to support growth and development

International Trade Organization (ITO): Intended to promote a liberal trading system by proscribing certain protectionist trade rules.

General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (GATT) World Trade Organization (WTO) – These are the two most important trade-oriented institutions because they shape import and export laws which impact international trade and services.

Key principles of International Trade Law: Agreed tariff levels: Each state agrees not to raise

tariff levels above those contained in the schedule. The schedule is open to renegotiation.

Most favored nation clause/principle: Embodies the principle of non-discrimination. Any special treatment given to a product from one trading partner must be made available for like products originating from other contracting partners. AKA tariff concessions.

Principle of national treatment: This prohibits discrimination between domestic producers and foreign producers. Once foreign producers have paid


Stockholm Declaration (Summary): Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality, and adequate conditions of life, and has a responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generations. It is for the benefit of future and present generations. Earth’s capacity to sustain life must be maintained, in addition to the preservation of wildlife and their habitats, of current environmental resources and the prevention of discharge of toxic substances or fumes and pollution.

Rio Declaration (Summary): Human beings are at the center of concerns for sustainable development. While there is a recognition of their sovereign right to exploit their own resources, they have the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction do not cause damage to the environment of other States. The right to development must be fulfilled to meet developmental and environmental needs.


border charges, no additional burdens may be imposed.

Principle of tariffication: Prohibits the use of quotas on imports or exports and the use of licenses on importation or exportation. Prevents the imposition of non-tariff barriers.

Exceptions to Key Principles: General: Public morals, public health, currency

protection, products of prison labor, national treasures of value and protection of exhaustible natural resources.

Specific: Security and regional trade exceptions, such as exception for developing nations.

Tanada v. Angara: WON the GATT is going to be detrimental to local industries and constitutes grave abuse of discretion in its implementation. The Court ruled that it was not going to be detrimental because of the exceptions it provides to developing nations because of its view towards raising standards of living and optimal use of world resources for sustainable development, and lets the developing countries have a share in economic trade through reciprocal or mutual advantages. For example, the WTO gives developing countries a more lenient treatment by aiding and protecting their domestic industries.

Dispute resolution: A Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) is established by the WTO Agreement. Each state has a right to the establishment of a Panel. The DSU provides for a permanent appellate body, consisting of persons with recognized expertise in law to handle appeals from a Panel decision.

Expanded scope: IEL now includes intellectual property, services, sanitary and physiosanitary measures and investment, as well as strengthening of the rules on subsidies, countervailing duties and anti-dumping. It has become a very specialized field and it is now affecting the sovereignty of states and their capacity to give force to national objectives.


Documents

PIL Ch10-end (FINALS)