Pereja, Jannie Rosella J.
1. What are the rules considered to be jus cogens?
-Jus cogens norms serve as a kind of legal hierarchy in international law, and they are considered
to be part of the jus gentium, the common principles shared by all nations. These norms are
considered to be inherent to the international legal order and are not subject to the consent or
agreement of states. Some example are:
a. Principle of Non-Intervention - The principle of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of
other states is considered a jus cogens norm, though its application can be complex in certain
situations.
b. Right to Self-Determination - While the right to self-determination is generally accepted, its
scope and application can vary. However, the principle of self-determination is considered
fundamental in international law.
c. Prohibition of Genocide - The Genocide Convention establishes the prohibition of genocide as
a jus cogens norm. Genocide involves acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in
part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.
2. Who has authority to terminate the treaty?
- A treaty is a formal and legally binding agreement between two or more sovereign states or
international entities. Treaties are also sometimes referred to as conventions, accords, protocols,
or pacts. Treaties can cover a wide range of subjects and purposes, including establishing rules of
conduct, regulating the relationships between states.
In U.S. law, a treaty typically allows for its termination through a notice provided by one
of the parties, usually after a specified time following the date of the notice. Alternatively, treaties
may be concluded through the mutual agreement of the parties, due to a breach by one of the
parties, or by other means. The authority to terminate a treaty is a subject of debate, with arguments
suggesting it lies solely with the President, with the President and Senate jointly, or with the
Congress. Presidents often assert their foreign relations power granted by Article II and the
inherent powers argument presented in Curtiss-Wright. Given that the Constitution mandates
Senate consent for treaty-making, one can logically argue that Senate consent is also required for
treaty termination.
3. When one state ceases to exist and is succeeded by another on the same territory, is the new
state is bound by the commitments made by its predecessor?
- The matter of the persistence of states and the responsibilities of the succeeding state is regulated
by international law principles. In most cases, when a state ceases to exist and is replaced by
another on the same territory, the new state is not inherently obligated by the agreements made by
its predecessor. The determination of the successor state's obligations depends significantly on the
specific circumstances and the approach adopted by the international community.
Some states follow the the doctrine of ‘State Succession’, where a successor state may
automatically inherit the rights and obligations of its predecessor. and Continuity of Obligation’,
where the new state is a distinct legal entity and is not automatically bound by the commitments
of its predecessor. Instead, the successor state must expressly agree to inherit the obligations.
4. What are the modes of acquisition of sovereignty over territory?
- Some modes of acquisition of sovereignty over territory which involves the establishment of a
state's authority are:
a. Discovery and Occupation - involves the actual physical possession and administration of the
territory by a state.
b. Conquest - Sovereignty over territory can be acquired through military conquest, where one
state captures and establishes control over another's territory.
c. Cession - voluntary transfer of territory from one state to another through a formal agreement
or treaty. (negotiation, diplomatic agreements)
d. Accretion - gradual increase in territory through natural processes, such as the deposition of soil
or the shifting of riverbanks.
e. Prescription - involves the acquisition of sovereignty through long and continuous possession
or use of territory, often recognized by other states.
f. Secession - when a part of a state declares independence and establishes itself as a new sovereign
entity.
5. Discuss the following:
a. Immunity from jurisdiction - refers to the protection or exemption granted to certain individuals,
entities, or states from the jurisdiction of a particular court or legal system. This concept is often
invoked in the context of international law and diplomatic relations, as well as in certain domestic
legal contexts. Example of this immunity includes:
- Sovereign Immunity - States are generally immune from the jurisdiction of other states'
courts, reflecting the principle of sovereign equality.
- Diplomatic Immunity - This immunity ensures that diplomats can carry out their functions
without fear of harassment or interference by the host state's legal system.
b. Immunity of head of state - Heads of state and government officials often enjoy immunity from
the jurisdiction of foreign courts for acts carried out in their official capacity. This immunity is
intended to promote international relations and prevent the legal harassment of leaders for their
official actions. There are two main aspects of immunity for heads of state:
- Personal Immunity - protects the head of state from legal proceedings in a foreign country
for acts committed in their official capacity. It extends to both criminal and civil matters
and is considered absolute and unconditional during the head of state's term in office.
- Functional Immunity - protects the head of state for acts performed in the course of their
official duties and it covers actions taken in the exercise of official functions, and the
immunity may extend beyond the head of state's term in office.
c. Diplomatic and Consular Immunities - Diplomatic and consular immunities are legal principles
that provide protection to diplomats and consular officials, allowing them to perform their official
functions without interference from the legal processes of the host country. These immunities are
crucial for the effective conduct of international relations.
The purpose of diplomatic immunity is to ensure the smooth functioning of diplomatic
relations by granting protection to diplomats from legal harassment and interference in the host
country. Diplomatic immunity extends to accredited diplomats, their families, and certain staff
members of diplomatic missions. It covers both criminal and civil jurisdiction and provides
immunity from arrest, search, and legal process. Diplomatic immunity can be waived voluntarily
by the sending state or the diplomat. This is often done in cases where the diplomat wishes to assert
their rights or when a serious crime is involved.
Consular Immunity serves similar purposes to diplomatic immunity but is specifically
designed for consular officers who represent the interests of their country and its citizens. Unlike
in diplomatic, the scope of consular immunity is generally more limited, this immunity only
applies to consular officers, consular employees, and, in some cases, consular family members.
Similar to diplomatic immunity, consular immunity can be waived voluntarily, and it may end with
the termination of the consular officer's functions or the withdrawal of immunity by the sending
state.
6. What is the international standard for the protection of aliens?
- The protection of aliens, or foreign nationals, is a fundamental aspect of international law. The
international standards for the protection of aliens are primarily governed by customary
international law, treaties, and conventions. The key international instruments that establish
standards for the protection of aliens include:
a. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) - guarantees various rights and
freedoms, including the right to life, liberty, and security of person, the prohibition of torture and
cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and the right to a fair trial. These rights apply to all
individuals, regardless of nationality.
b. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) - Many of its provisions, such as the right to
life, liberty, and security of person, are considered customary international law and apply to all
individuals, including aliens.
c. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (1963) - governs consular relations between states
and provides certain protections to foreign nationals, including the right to communicate with
consular authorities when detained.
d. International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members
of Their Families (ICMW) - establishes the rights of migrant workers and their families. It includes
provisions related to equality before the law and protection against arbitrary expulsion.
7. What is the difference between a Declaration and a Covenant?
- Declarations and covenants are both types of international instruments, but they serve different
purposes and have distinct legal characteristics.
DECLARATION COVENANT
a statement or expression of intent by a state or is a formal and legally binding agreement or
an international organization. It is not a legally treaty between states or international entities.
binding treaty or agreement in itself. It creates legal obligations for the parties
involved.
generally considered non-binding, meaning are legally enforceable, and states that become
they do not create legal obligations for the parties to a covenant are obligated to comply
parties that make them. with its provisions.
often articulate the principles, values, or are typically more detailed and comprehensive
intentions of the states or entities making them. than declarations. They specify the rights and
They may convey a commitment to certain obligations of the parties, as well as
ideals or goals without imposing specific legal mechanisms for implementation, monitoring,
obligations. and enforcement.
Ex: The Universal Declaration of Human Ex: The International Covenant on Civil and
Rights (UDHR) Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (ICESCR)