Descripted study on international law it's introduction and sources

1. www.studymafia.org
International Law

2. Defining International Law
 Traditional: the rules determining the conduct of states in
their dealings with one other
 Increasingly, though, individuals and corporations – not just
states – viewed as subjects of international law
 Newer: the body of rules and principles, formal and
informal, operating at the international rather than national
level

3. Sources of International Law
 Explicit agreements (Treaties, conventions, protocols)
 UN Charter
 Geneva Convention
 Kyoto Protocol
 Customary Law (like “common law”)
 Widespread, representative and consistent practice of states
 Norms (general principles of morality and justice)
 UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights

4. Objectives
 To understand the obligations imposed on India
 To understand how these instruments are
implemented in India

5. Areas of International Law
war
human
rights
diplomacy
environment

6. War
 When is it legal?
 “just wars” versus wars of aggression
 What conduct is legal?
 No chemical or biological weapons; no land mines
 Non-combatants should not be targeted
 Excessive force should be avoided
 POWs

7. Diplomacy
 Diplomatic recognition and immunity
 Embassies as sovereign territory

8. Human Rights
 New and controversial area
 How do you define it?
 Infringes on national sovereignty
 Broad political rights
 Helsinki Accords (1970s)
 U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
 U.N. Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966)
 U.N. Convention Against Torture (1984)
 Rights of threatened groups
 U.N. Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (1965)
 U.N. Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women/CEDAW
(1979)
 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989)
 Genocide (1948 convention)
 Rwanda
 Bosnia
 Sudan?

9. U.S. and Human Rights
 Champion?
 Led campaign for rights in Soviet Union, then China
 Hypocrite?
 U.S. trained torturers during Cold War; and used torture at
Guantanamo and in Iraq
 Targets counter that U.S. itself has largest number of
prisoners; a vast population of poor and homeless; persistent
racism
 U.S. hasn’t ratified many human rights conventions
 Economic, social and cultural rights
 Elimination of discrimination against women
 Rights of child

10. Superpower Exceptionalism
 Not just on human rights conventions
 U.S. also has not ratified
 ILO conventions on labor rights (1950s)
 CTBT
 Convention on the Law of the Seas
 Land Mine treaty
 Global Warming (Kyoto) protocol

11. Question Two:
How is it enforced?

12. Well, no … not really

13. Option #1
International Court of Justice

14. ICJ = World Court
 A branch of the UN
 meets in The Hague (Netherlands)
 15 judges
 serving nine-year terms
 selected by UN
 Hears cases brought by states against other states
 Example: border disputes (Honduras v. El Salvador)
 Jurisdiction? Shaky
 U.S. and mining of Nicaragua’s harbor (1986)

15. Option #2
National Courts
 U.S. courts
 Individuals can play, too
 High jury awards
 Greater enforcement power
 Belgian courts
 Human rights cases (Geneva conventions)
 Spanish courts (Judge Baltasar Garzón)
 The Pinochet case

16. Option #3
The Court of Public Opinion
 This is also called “shaming”
 NGOs
 International media
 And it often works!

17. An Example of Shaming:
Canada and Harp Seal Pups

18. Realists or Liberals?

19. Realists are Right
 The powerful prevail
 Especially on security issues
 Example: International Criminal Court
 New permanent court (2003) in The Hague
 18 judges
 Will replace ad hoc war crimes tribunals, hearing cases
brought against individuals for crimes against humanity
 U.S. won’t participate

20. U.S. and the ICC
 U.S. secured U.N. resolution exempting U.S.
nationals from ICC jurisdiction for crimes committed
during UN operations
 U.S. demanded that other states enter into bilateral
agreements promising not to surrender U.S. nationals
to the ICC
 Clinton signed treaty on 12/31/2000; Bush took
unusual step of “unsigning” on 3/6/2002

21. Then again …
maybe the Liberals are right
 To back out of the ICC, GWB actually followed
another international treaty
 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties requires
signatories to “refrain from acts that would defeat the
object and purpose” of a treaty.
 Bush’s “unsigning” (by announcing U.S. intent not to
ratify) cleared the U.S. from the obligations of the
Vienna Convention

22. References

23. THANKS