SEMESTER I, 2007/2008 SESSION
AHMAD IBRAHIM KULLIYYAH OF LAWS
Programme : Bachelor of Laws Level of : Fourth
Reading Time : 2.30 p.m. – 2.45 p.m. Date : 5.11.2007
Duration : ( 15 minutes )
Answering Time : 2.45 p.m. – 5.45 p.m. Section(s) : All Sections
Duration ( 3 hours )
Course Title : Public International Law II Course Code : LAW 4611
This Question Paper Consists of 6 Printed Pages With 6 Questions.
INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES
DO NOT OPEN UNTIL YOU ARE ASKED TO DO SO.
Answer FOUR (4) Questions Only.
Basic Documents in International Law
Any form of cheating or attempt to cheat is a serious
offence which may lead to dismissal
Statutes should be free from any form of annotation.
Mr. Know All, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Marine Matters for State A, attends a
multilateral conference to end marine pollution, held at State B. He is authorised to attend
the conference by his government, but only as an observer. At the end of the conference,
a Pact to End Marine Pollution is drawn up and opened for signature. Article 42 of the
Pact requires any State that has engaged in marine dumping to (a) clean it up and (b) pay
a fine into the Marine Conservation Fund. Article 63 of the Pact makes the Pact binding
upon “acceptance.” The requisite number of States becomes parties to the Pact and it
immediately comes into force. Mr. Know All is so excited about the Pact that he signs it
on behalf of State A and personally thanks the Prime Minister of State B for hosting the
When he returns home to State A, he shows his President a copy of the Pact. The
President is furious with him because he has ordered a cargo vessel to dump a shipment
of toxic waste into the high seas at the request of a neighbouring State. If the waste is not
dumped as agreed he will have to return the new Mercedes Benz he received as a gift.
The President decides to ignore the Pact for another month and go ahead with the toxic
State B witnesses this act of dumping with its spy satellite and brings a claim against
State A to the ICJ for breach of the Pact. In the alternative, State B claims that Article 42
of the Pact has created binding customary international law. Both States have accepted
the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ.
Advise the Court as to whether State A will be liable, and if so, upon what basis.
Ahmad was born in Malaysia in 1956 and lived here until he was 43 years of age. On
reaching that age, he went to work as a civil engineer in Moldavia. In 2006, the
Moldavian government nationalised, without giving any compensation, the assets of a
company in which Ahmad held 83 % of the shares. Although the company carried out its
business in Moldavia, it was for fiscal reasons incorporated in Aristonia.
In an attempt to resist the seizure of the assets, Ahmad sustained injury at the hands of
two Moldavian police officers who subsequently arrested him. Following his arrest, he
was imprisoned without trial for two years. Throughout his detention he was held in a
small cell and all his requests to have access to an English-speaking lawyer were denied.
The Malaysian Consulate in Moldavia was not informed of his detention. On his release
from prison, Ahmad has written to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Malaysia,
requesting the Malaysian government to initiate an international claim against Moldavia
on his behalf.
You are a legal adviser with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Advise the Minister in
respect of the issues to be addressed on the basis of the law of State responsibility.
The Five Star, a ship registered in State A, leaked oil all the way while passing through
the Malaysian territorial sea, which resulted in the pollution of the sea waters and the
death of a large quantity of fish. A Malaysian Naval Patrol vessel approached The Five
Star and two naval officers got onboard the vessel. When the naval officers declared that
the ship and crew were under arrest on ground of violation of the Malaysian laws, the
crew resisted, punched and pushed the two officers overboard and raced their vessel away
from the Malaysian shore.
The Malaysian naval officers pulled themselves out of the water, got onboard the naval
vessel and gave chase. They caught up with The Five Star on the high seas and signaled
the same to stop. After the crew gestured rudely, the naval vessel fired warning shots
across The Five Star’s bow. Unfortunately, one of the shots hit the starboard side of the
vessel, caused damage to it and injured three members of the crew. The naval vessel gave
up the chase when The Five Star entered the territorial sea of State A.
In accordance with the Extradition Treaty concluded between Malaysia and State A, the
Malaysian government now wants to request the latter to extradite the crew of The Five
Star for offences in violation of the Malaysian laws. State A also would like to make an
international claim against Malaysia for the unlawful exercise of hot pursuit and for the
excessive use of force which resulted in damage to the Five Star and injury to its crew.
Advise the Wisma Putra as to the legal position.
(a) “International Human rights law has evolved over the years to protect human beings
everywhere. However, the effectiveness of this law depends on its enforcement
which is often neglected by the States.”
(b) “The current United Nations Security Council’s membership and institutional
structures, replicating the outdated geopolitical realities shaped by the world of
1945, do not reflect the reality of today’s world. The present world, which is torn by
war and violence, needs a far better Security Council to promote international peace
and security and defend international law.”
By what means and subject to what conditions may States express their consent to the
exercise of jurisdiction by the International Court of Justice? Support your answer with
reference to the relevant provisions of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and
One of the central features of the classical system of international law was the right of
States to use force and go to war as this was considered part of their sovereignty and
equality. Nevertheless, the prohibition of the use of force has been enshrined in the
Charter of the United Nations as a cardinal principle of the contemporary international
law. How do you understand this principle of the non-use of force? Are there any
exceptions to it?
Support your answer with reference to the relevant provisions of the UN Charter and
international judicial decisions.