• Save
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 2  SEM II 07.08
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 2 SEM II 07.08

on

  • 416 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
416
Views on SlideShare
416
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 2  SEM II 07.08 PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 2 SEM II 07.08 Document Transcript

  • END-OF-SEMESTER EXAMINATION SEMESTER II, 2007/2008 SESSION AHMAD IBRAHIM KULLIYYAH OF LAWS Programme : Bachelor of Laws Level of : Fourth Study Reading Time : 9.00 a.m. – 9.15 a.m. Date : 23.3.2008 Duration : ( 15 minutes ) Answering Time : 9.15 a.m. – 12.15 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. REFERENCE ALLOWED 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. APPROVED BY
  • 2 QUESTION 1 States A, B, C and D ratify the Treaty to Combat Terrorism by Any Means Necessary. This Treaty creates a Counter-Terrorism Unit. Each state is required by the Treaty to dedicate 20 elite military officers to work permanently for the Counter-Terrorism Unit. The latter’s mission is to disable terrorist operations wherever they may be located, and its personnel are required to use whatever means necessary to do so, including torture. The Treaty permits reservations. States A, B and C ratify the Treaty without reservations. When ratifying the Treaty, State D appends the following statement to its ratification: "State D understands that this Treaty does not require its elite military officers to engage in torture." State C objects to this reservation as going against the object and purpose of the Treaty and further states that the treaty shall not enter into force between the two States. State B just objects to the reservation. State A says nothing. The Treaty is now in force. A wave of terrorist attacks occurs in State D. The terrorists announce that more attacks will take place in five days. The terrorists are identified as State B’s nationals and some of them are caught by the Counter-Terrorism Unit in State B. The Unit’s special torturers, who are elite troops from State C and State B, are at a special training conference and so the terrorists are not tortured. More terrorist attacks follow in State D.
  • 3 State D brings a claim against both States B and C. State D alleges firstly, that both states breached the Treaty when their elite troops did not torture the terrorists. Secondly, it alleges that both states violated a rule of jus cogens character by not preventing further acts of terrorism. Critically assess the allegations of State D as well as the possible defences of States B and C. (15 marks) QUESTION 2 State A is a major naval power with a large merchant fleet, a broad, oil-rich continental shelf and a well-managed 200-mile exclusive fishing zone. It imports eighty percent of the minerals required by its highly developed heavy industries. So far, State A has neither signed nor acceded to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 but is now considering the possibility of acceding. Advise the Government of State A on what you consider to be the principal provisions of the Convention, which would be relevant to State A’s interests. (15 marks)
  • 4 QUESTION 3 In the wake of a military coup in State A, a large number of people were killed and others were apprehended and detained without trial. The police and supporters of the new government tortured the detainees. The majority of the victims were nationals of State A, although a few were nationals of State B who had settled permanently in State A, and a few were tourists from State B and other States. At the height of the coup, the Embassy of State B was taken over by students of State A and the embassy staff held hostage. To date the government of State A has failed to obtain the release of the embassy hostages. Advise the government of State B on the issue of the international responsibility of State A for the actions of the police, its own supporters and the students. (15 marks) QUESTION 4 (a) Compare and contrast the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). How do the two Covenants differ in the obligations they impose on States parties? (8 marks)
  • 5 (b) “The Security Council is …subject to certain constitutional limitations, however broad its powers under the constitution may be…. In any case, neither the text nor the spirit of the Charter conceives of the Security Council as legibus solutus (unbound by law). (Appeals Chamber of the Yugoslavia Tribunal in Tadic case) In the light of the above statement, critically discuss, with reference to the relevant provisions of the UN Charter, the limitations on the power of the Security Council. (7 marks) QUESTION 5 “Unlike a domestic court’s mandatory jurisdiction, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice is entirely dependent on the consent of States. In practice, this means that it cannot hear any case involving any State which has not accepted its jurisdiction.” In the light of the above statement, explain the principal means by which a State can accept the Court’s jurisdiction under Article 36 of the ICJ Statute. (15 marks)
  • 6 QUESTION 6 “The 21st Century witnessed the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon on 11 September 2001. The US reactions to these attacks were far-reaching. First, the US and its allies used military force in Afghanistan (2001), alleging that the de facto government of Afghanistan (Taliban) harboured and gave safe havens to Al Qaeda terrorists who were responsible for the September 11 attacks. Secondly, the US invaded Iraq (2003), alleging that with stockpiles of weapons of mass destructions, Iraq was a dangerous threat to the US and its allies.” In view of the two major incidents mentioned above, critically consider the legality of the attempts to widen the scope of the right of self-defence under international law. (15 marks)