CHAPTER 3 [Organizations]

3.1 Organizations Legal Status

Int.Org=a formal institution established by agreement of the affiliated members who created it; the common
feature of most IOs is that their members all benefit from an organization working toward common objectives
A. Introduction
Int. organizations operate in more than one country and may be an organization of States (Public), individuals
(Private), or affiliated with various governments
Public int. organizations (PIO) must have the following characteristics:
1. Established by some form of international agreement among states (usually with common
objectives) i.e. UN and EU created by treaty
2. Created as a new international legal entity that functions wholly or partially independent of State
sovereign control
3. Created under Int. Law
Provided with capacity to enjoy rights and incur obligations with member or nonmember states *legal
personality). Excludes mere transportation arrangements (French-UK Tunnel)
Number of PIOs have gone up considerably in recent years
B. Capacity under International Law
ICJ: Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the UN (Advisory opinion)
Damages sought for loss of life of UN Mediator during the course of mediating settlement between Palestine
and Israel
Can a state (i.e. Israel) be responsible to an international organization (in this case the UN), for injury to their
employees?
Court first determines whether the IO has the legal capacity to bring a claim, or international personality?
-The IO was intended and is enjoying functions and rights which can only be explained on the basis of
large degree of legal personality and capacity to operation the international plane. Members have
entrusted it functions, duties and responsibilities to be discharged
-Court determines that the IO is in fact an international person, a subject of international laws
Next, the court addresses whether the sum of the international rights of the IO comprises the right to bring
the claim for injuries of their employees
-the court states that the IO may in fact bring such suits for redress because the individuals are acting on
behalf of the interests of the IO, not on behalf of themselves as individuals
UN Article 7: UN and associated personnel, their equipment and premises shall not be made the object of
attack
UN Article 9: Member states must enact national law making it a crime to attack UN personnel (UK&US have)
UN can bring a lawsuit as a plaintiff in a US domestic court for damages
C. Organizational Responsibility
UN is currently defining the contours of organizational responsibilities arising under Int. Law
Focus on collective security, facilitated by State participation in organizational processes
Ford Foundations advocates for increased reliance on IO as vehicle for positive change (necessity of
internationalized global cooperation)

3.2 Organizational Classification
A. Traditional Model
Traditional Model is based on a functional approach
1. public or private
2. administrative or political
a. administrative tends to have far more limited goals (UN Int. Telecommunications Union)
b. political are intergovernmental entities which maintain military or political order
3. global or regional (least useful)
4. either possess or do not possess, supranational power (power over member States requiring them to act
or not act in particular ways). Not the UN because cannot dispatch forces without approval of the five
members of the security council
Governmental (UN) vs.Non-
governmental organizations
[IGO vs INGO]

-NGO is not created by means of international government
agreements/treateies, rather by private initiative (individuals, corporations,
Amnesty International, International Olympic Committee)
-UN Economic and Social Council may contract or make arrangements with
NGOs, excluding political parties and liberation movements which are contrary to
the aims and purposes of the UN Charter
-Often tension in relations between NGOs and States (especially with regards to
issues of human rights I.e. Russia)
Hybrid Organizations -consists of both IGO and INGOs. Often formed by governmental and private
corporations
-Communication Satellite Corporation (COMSAT) (no capacity)
-PLO. Red Cross. American Society of International Law (limited capacity, UN
observer status)
Purpose
(political vs. administrative )
UN is general, NAFTA is specific and more binding


B. Functional Shift
Global and regional alliances are shifting from political to economic orientations
Many US leaders opposed to US entanglement in economic IOs such as WTO and NAFTA which may transfer
US sovereignty to the IO

3.3 United Nations
A. Historical Backdrop
B. UN Entities
C. UN Assessment


CHAPTER 4 [Individuals and Corporations]
-Soldier Jones Hypothetical
-can State Y relatives directly negotiate with State X?
-No. As individuals, State Y relatives cannot negotiate with State X
-Can the State Y relatives pursue Soldier Jones in a State or international tribunal?
-No. They can try pursuing Soldier Jones in State Xs courts
-Agent Orange- US court dismissed claim made by Vietnamese citizens for damages against US
companies manufacturing Agent Orange
-Iran (on behalf of killed relatives) sues US in the ICJ for 1988 destruction of an Iranian
commercial jet. Iranian government would collect damages; recoveries given to victims at
governments discretion
-Darfur- UN Security Council takes action on behalf of victims of Genocide
-State X has obviously violated International Law. Has Jones?
-No. Individuals lack the legal personality or capacity to incur responsibility, unless:
a. individual commits genocide (Milosevic), not merely murder [DEF]
b. Individual is a pirate [DEF]

4.1 INDIVIDUALS STATUS
Individuals Status: Evolving
-Emergence of protection of human rights
-Nuremberg and Tokyo Military Tribunals- acknowledged the liability of the individual defendant for
genocidal conduct
-Corporations may also be charged with violations of human rights and laws of war
-UN Economic and Social Council established Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (2000)- Integrates
indigenous peoples and their representatives into the structure of the UN, giving these peoples parity in a
permanent representative body
-Right to petition- Individuals may bring State breach of individuals treaty-based rights to an
international enforcement body
-Certain treaties for individuals and corporations to access international tribunals designed to handle
their specific claims. (France UK Channel Treaty, NAFTA)

4.2 NATIONALITY, STATELESSNESS, AND REFUGEES
Nationality: Scope
-Nationalitylegal, political and social link between the individual and the State
-Reciprocal rights and duties
-Individual-Military service and taxes
-State- protection of individual in another State
-Granting or withholding nationality-subject to exclusive discretion of States unless a treaty obligation exists to
confer (or not) nationality under certain situations. Such preexisting treaty obligation trumps the States rights
re: issues of nationality
Nationality: Acquisition
-individual nationality (citizenship) is acquired in 3 ways: (1) passively, by parentage; (2) passively, by birth; or (3)
actively, by naturalization
-PARENTAGE
-Jus sanguinis, blood rule Europe, Latin America and many English speaking countries
-BIRTH
-Jus solis, soil rule
-Efforts through treaties/conventions to prevent statelessness
-1997 European convention- treaty party grants nationality to person having at least one parent
who is national of that state. If born abroad, obligation to facilitate acquisition of that States nationality. Only
Ireland in EU is automatic
-2006 European convention- relates to state succession. Under prescribed circumstances,
successor state should grant nationality to persons of the predecessor state to prevent statelessness. (prevents
new European states from withholding nationality on discriminatory basis, i.e. united Germany, Czech Republic,
Slovakia and Kosovo)
-May be limited by amendments to the constitution
-May be treaty-based: American Convection on Human Rights
-Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2005 determines that nationality is a fundamental
human right; party to treaty cannot deviate
-convention provides for right to nationality in two respects:
1. nationality must be granted to persons who establish a link between the state and individual
2. State parties must ensure that individuals are not deprived of their nationality in an arbitrary
manner
-Naturalization
-State makes decision regarding citizenship/naturalization requirements
-Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein V. Guatemala)
-German citizen residing in Guatemala who gets Liechtenstein nationality
-Guatemala, at war with Germany, seizes Nottebohms assets. Liechtenstein attempts to recover
damages on Nottebohms behalf
-ICJ establishes requirements for international recognition of citizenship by another state:
-Residence, center of interests, family ties, participation in public life, attachments
-ICJ dismisses Liechtensteins case. Under Liechtenstein national law, Nottebohm is a citizen.
Under international law, Lichtenstein cannot confer citizenship on Nottebohm for the purpose of requiring other
countries to treat him as if he were a citizen of Liechtenstein
Nationality: New Forms of Citizenship & Dual Nationality
OTHER FORMS OF CITIZENSHIP
-organizational Citizenship
European Union
-internet cyberspace; Information Age; Globalization
-Political passport
issuance of passports to individuals in other nations to achieve geopolitical objectives
DUAL NATIONALITY
-US does not allow, Mexico allows
-Pros: property rights, protections, employment
-Cons: burdens of two national (testimony, taxes, military service). Vienna Convention may not apply to provide
protections, expulsion during war
-Treaties attempted to relieve negatives of dual nationality
Statelessness
-Due to world wars, political persecution (Cuba, Vietnam), relocation (Diego Garcia)
-No travel documents and hence difficulties travel and work problems
-Treaty based remedies (no clear resolution):
-1930 Hague Protocol Concerning Statelessness (non-effective)
-1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (moral obligation discouraging UN members from
intentionally creating statelessness)
-1975 UN Convention of Reduction of Statelessness (obliges signatories to grant nationality to willing
stateless people in their borders and restricts deprivation of citizenship based on race, religion and political
beliefs)
-1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (right to birth certificate). Government policies (i.e. China
one child) may conflict
-1997 European Convention on Nationality (everyone has a right to nationality)
Refugees
Internally displaced persons (IDPs)

4.3 CORPORATE NATIONALITY
Corporate Nationality
-corporation is considered a legal person under national laws
-What is a corporation Shield against personal liability
-Issues specific to a corporation include taxation and nationalization without just compensation
-Links to a particular State is more complex
-Frequently impact State policy since multinational corporations often have stronger balance sheets than many
small States
-According to the UN International Law Commission, corporate nationality is either:
(a) the nation wherein the corporation was create and this incorporated; or
(b) that of another country, when the corporation consists of foreign nationals; and;
i. has no ties with the place of incorporation and
ii. the corporation is controlled in the other country
-If a corporation has ties with multiple nations, a tribunal must determine which nation best represents its
corporate personality. It is most often (but not definitively) the state of incorporation

-Barcelona Traction is incorporated in Canada and owns a power company in Spain, which was declared
bankrupt by a Spanish court. Shareholders (from Belgium, UK, US and Canada). Believing forced bankruptcy was
premature and for ulterior purposes, resisted seizure.
-Since 88% of shareholders were Belgium, Belgium filed suit against Spain at the ICI
-ICJ dismisses the claim, since country of incorporation (Canada) was unwilling to pursue the claim
-50 years of incorporation and registered office in Canada (accounts, share registers, board meetings)
-Canadian nationality of the company received general recognition by 3 other governments; Canadian
government exercised protection of the company by diplomatic representation
-States have freedom to determine whether to pursue claims for a corporation
-only the national State of the company can make claims
-Diplomatic protection of shareholders opens door to confusion
-CMS Gas vs. Argentina (ICSID, 2003)
-CMS attempts arbitration against Argentina, as a minority shareholder of TGN, for privatization
measures by Argentina against TGN in violation of a investment treaty between US and Argentina
-ICSID dismisses the case and the CMS claim could not be heard
CMS does not hold rights upon which it bases its claim; only TGN could claim for damages
suffered (CMS is only incurring indirect damages)
-While traditionally, only majority or controlling shareholders could be afforded protection separately
from the affected corporation, now courts are willing to hear claims by minority shareholders

4.4 INJURY TO ALIENS
A State may be held accountable for the acts of its agents, harming aliens in a way that treats them differently
from its own citizens
Not yet codified in a comprehensive multilateral treaty
Categories of injury
Which type of State conduct would trigger responsibility for injury to aliens
1. non-wealth injuries;
-injury inflicted by a State directly or indirectly through some failure to act
2. Denial of justice (wrongful arrest and detention, lack of due diligence)
-Discrimination against Alien (discriminatory application of local laws)
-less protections: inadequate time or representation to prepare defense
-International Minimum Standards
-Incarceration must not discriminate against aliens
-Incarceration should not exceed generally accepted procedures
-Lack of due diligence
3. Confiscation of property (right o nationalize, confiscation)
4. Deprivation of livelihood (prevention of work/occupation, discrimination)

CHAPTER 5 [Extraterritorial Jurisdiction]

5.1 DEFINITIONAL SETTING
-Sovereignty: typically involves situations of unacceptable intrusions by one State into another. Whereas
jurisdiction involves acceptable extensions of a States power to act or react to events occurring beyond its own
borders
-Sovereign states have the following characteristics:
-International capacity to exchange diplomats with other states
-International capacity to engage in treaty making
-Immunity from the jurisdiction of the courts of other states
-ability to act independently of the consent or control of other states
-includes freedom from external control of the UN
Article 2.7: Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the UN to
intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state
FRICTION points: Security Council involvement with Apartheid in South Africa, Milosevic
in Yugoslavia and Sudanese ethnic cleansing in Darfur
-Hot pursuit of Taliban targets inside Pakistan by US
-Recent modern diminution of traditional State centric notion of absolute sovereignty (other than geographic,
border compliant, territorial sovereignty which remains solid)
-Rogue state terrorist involvement, watering down of absolute immunity to restrictive immunity
(including for heads of state), environmental treaties such as Kyoto

Definition: jurisdiction
-states may make enact laws governing conduct occurring, at least in part, beyond their immediate borders
-Eg. 2000 Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act
-Unacceptable exercise of sovereign power in the territory of another State is a violation of Customary
International Law. (State has the right to control people and activities within its borders without interference of
other states)
-improvements in communications and infrastructures may create some erosion in this notion (situations of
governmental violation of human liberties may transcend borders and create a need to act)
Covert Applications
-covert activities undertaken on the basis of counter-terrorism thought may be a violation of territorial
sovereignty
-No international convention whereby States have agreed to prohibit spying
-International organizations (including UN entities, i.e. UN international weapons inspection team in Iraq) have
been used as venues for spying

5.2 JURISDICTIONAL PRINCIPLES
Jurisdictional Principles: Territorial
-Under Territorial Principle, the States jurisdictional authority is derived from the location of the defendants act
-The most widely accepted and least disputed
-Defendant may be prosecuted for violating laws of the State regardless of his nationality
-Conduct usually starts and ends within the State that is prosecuting the Defendant (subjective,
internal)
-Conduct may start outside the State and end (or have effect in) the State that is prosecuting the
Defendant (objective, external). Could start partially from outside and partially from inside the State
-S.S Lotus (France vs. Turkey 1927)
effects doctrine
-The French steamer Lotus collided with Turkish Ship. Upon arrival in Turkey, Turkish authorities
prosecuted French ships officer for involuntary manslaughter and property damage. France objects and brings
case to PCIJ for resolution.
-Criminal offenses are regarded having been committed in the national territory, if one of the
constituent elements of the offense, and more especially its effects, have taken place there.
-The French officers act of negligence originated on board the Lotus and had is effectives felt on board
the Turkish ship, therefore Turkey should be able to exercise jurisdiction and is not in conflict with international
law
-Court also acknowledges applicability of the passive personality principle (victims being Turkish
citizens), to be discussed later
-DISSENT: This event occurred in international waters. In the high seas, the law of the flag have authority
to the exclusion of all foreign law or jurisdiction
-Hot Pursuit
crossing into neighboring states in pursuit of criminals
-Major breach of International Law (Article 2 of UN Charter), unless there is prior treaty or ad hoc
concession
-Dramatic measures such as unilateral abduction or murder of fugitives abroad is rare
-Obstacles-insufficient military power and illegality of conduct per international and state laws
-Used by US Government in pursuit of suspected terrorists from Afghanistan into Pakistan, frequently
without permission
-Often justifications made in hot pursuit in the sea. Land/sea distinction under special conditions
Jurisdictional Principles: Nationality
-State regulation of conduct of its own citizens even when their acts occur entirely outside of that State.
(relatively unfettered legal control of its citizens)
-Invoked less frequently than the territorial principle
often conflicts with the territorial principle
-Eg. Bobby Fischer defiance of US legislation preventing travel to Yugoslavia in accordance with UN sanctions
-In the Lotus case, France could have prosecuted the French ships officer Demons for negligence in damaging a
French vessel
Jurisdictional Principles: Passive Personality
-Based on the nationality of the victim when the crime occurs outside of the prosecuting States territory
-Least used jurisdictional basis, because ripe for abuse
if used, used in conjunction with another applicable principle
-In the Lotus case, the court relied on this principle to support its prosecution of the French ships officer (in
additional to the primary territoriality argument) since the officer harmed Turkish citizens and property interests,
and it occurred outside of Turkey
Jurisdictional Principles: Protective
-If the act threatens the national security (Territorial integrity, political independence) of the State, the State
may prosecute its own citizens or other citizens for such relevant conduct outside its territory
-If the perpetrator does not enter the States whose laws have been violated, the State may seek his/her
extradition from a State where the offending individual is found
-Effect of the criminals conduct does not have to be felt within the territory of the offended State (as is the case
with the objective territorial principle) potentially adverse effect is sufficient -> potential abuse (UK and
Canada do not favor its unaccompanied with other jurisdictional factors)
-Modern application requires double criminality: This is that the crime also be a violation of the nation where
the act was perpetrated. (Sweden: no greater penalty than levied by the place of occurrence)
-E.g. US laws asserting jurisdiction over foreign accounting firms following Enron and Worldcom accounting
scandals
Jurisdictional Principles: Universal
-Certain crimes are crimes against the entire community of nations, and those perpetrators are enemies of
mankind
-Based solely on the nature of the crime
-Piracy, terrorism, slavers, war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity
-PIRACY:
-Usually committed on the high seas rather than in territorial waters (Somalia
-Includes aerial piracy (hijackings)
-TERRORISM:
-Inferred from UNs 2001 Security Council Resolution 1373 to be included
-No UN treaty on international terrorism due to differences in definition
-GENOCIDE:
-Belgiums universal jurisdiction statute
Curbed by US Universal Jurisdiction Rejection Act of 2003
Internet Applications
-States find it increasingly unmanageable
-US electronic surveillance of communications in the name of national security
-Terrorists (Al-Qaida) use of the Internet
-Pornography, gambling and addictive online video games
-2001 Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention
cooperation in the investigation and prosecution of Internet based offenses
-European Network and Information Security Agency
Help governments, businesses and consumers protect their computers and privacy interests
-Organizational involvement to control usage by certain groups by preventing computer sales and domain
names. Discourage racial threats and promote child safety
-Governments have restricted social networking (Iran, prior to presidential elections)

5.3 EXTRADITION
Extradition
-No global extradition treaty exists
-Only bilateral treaties exist regarding extradition
-Mutual interest of both states that crimes should not go unpunished. Reciprocity
-Treaties typically list the type of offenses (major) that warrant extradition
Japan/US: Those punishable by more than 1 year (murder, kidnapping, rape, bigamy, robbery,
inciting riots, piracy, drugs, bribery tax evasion, unfair business transactions, and export/import violations
-Certain State constitutions prohibit extradition (Russia, Slovenia)
-US cannot other than in rare situations, extradite an individual without a treaty in place
-E.g Mr. Ntakirutimanas extradition to the ICTR (Rwanda)
-Executive branch surrender of individuals without Congressional support si rare
-There is generally no duty to surrender an individual to another nation, absent an extradition treaty
-Exception: Internationally derived duty for extradition -> terrorists
-Increased cross border collaboration. Americans committing crimes in the US who flee to Mexico, can be tried
and serve time in Mexico
-Some states have resorted to kidnapping
-While this is a violation of sovereignty, most states will not initiate a diplomatic protests of irregular extradition
involving heinous criminals
-United States vs. Humberto Alvarez-Machain, (US Supreme Court, 1992)
-US police officers kidnapped Dr. Alvarez-Machain from Mexico to appear in a Los Angeles federal court
(doctor had tortured a DEA agent in Mexico)
-District Court and Court of Appeals (affirming) determined that the abduction constituted outrageous
government conduct in violation of the Mexico/US extradition treaty, and so the doctor could not be tried in the
US and should be repatriated
-Supreme Court reverses: US courts have jurisdiction to try him
SC looks to extradition treaty: it has no specific language preventing forced abduction, and also
has no implied prohibiting abduction
-United States vs. Toscanino (NY District Court, 1974):
-Italian citizen living in Uruguay abducted by Uruguay police, turned over to Brazilian police who
tortured him and sent to the US for trial
-Court: No jurisdiction where theres been deliberate, unnecessary and unreasonable invasion of the
accused constitutional rights. Cannot exert jurisdiction where presence secured by force or fraud
-State vs. Ebrahim(South Africa, 1991)
-South African citizen Ebrahim was abducted from Swaziland and taken to South Africa for conviction of
treason
-The court relies on Toscanino and makes a determination that the trial court had no jurisdiction to hear
the case
Avoiding Extradition
-States sometimes do not abide by extradition treaties when the laws of the requesting state violate
fundamental human rights (i.e. death penalty, persecution, torture)
-Extradition treaties usually, not always, determine extraditable offense as those that violate the laws of both
parties to the treaty
-(sometimes they need only violate the laws of one country, not the other)
-Political Offense exception
-a basis for refusing extradition on political grounds (when extradition would otherwise be required)
-most countries prefer not to define political offense in their extradition treaties
-little consensus on what constitutes a political crime. Purposely left vague
-Western European practice makes a distinction between crimes committed with or without a pure
ideological motive
-Anglo American practice relies on a narrow incidence theory
-offense must be incident to an uprising or other violent political disturbance, at the time of the
extraditable offense
-offense must be undertaken in the course of, or in furtherance of, that uprising
-US-UK extradition treaty: extradition shall not occur if.. made with a view to punish him on account of..
political opinions.
-Serious Crimes
-Extradition treaties will often exempt certain dangerous crimes from a political offense rescur (UK-US :
Terrorism)
-Australia: Murder will practically never be a political crime
-Rendition
-surrendering an individual to a foreign government in the absence of a treaty
-covert operation whereby a person (possibly innocent) may be forcibly transferred to a State
-Human rights groups, including Amnesty International, claim that rendition has been used extensively
by the US government post 9-11 on suspected terrorists, who have later been tortured
-In February 2007, 57 nations (Exclusive of the US) met in Paris to approve a ban on secret detentions
-US and conventional Against Torture
Does not apply to individuals outside the US territory
Standard is if it is more likely than not that a person would be tortured if returned to another
country.
-State Secrets privilege, the US government may prevent disclosure of information in a proceeding if
reasonable danger of disclosing military matters/ national security
-Judicial _____?: service of process

CHAPTER 6 [Range of Sovereignty]

6.1 CATEGORIES OF TERRITORY
Categories of Territory
-Sovereign Territory: States have the right to control land located within their territorial boundaries
-increase in number of states (new states) due to fragmentation, creation of new states
-Trust Territory: protected territory under care of an established state to promote the self determination of its
inhabitants. Usually lacks political infrastructure
-Terra Nullius : belonging to no nation but capable of being legally acquired
-1885 Conference of Berlin-most of Africa was declared terra nullius
-ICJ in 1971 determined that the Berlin Conference declaration was an injustice
-More than one state may attempt to control peoples in areas that are terra nullius
-Mere occupation is insufficient to justify a claim of sovereignty over an occupied area. The area must
have been a terra nullius
-Res Communis: incapable of ever being owned or controlled
-Entire community of nations must have unfettered access to this area
-examples include Antarctica, high seas, deep seabed, outer space

6.2 DOMINION OVER LAND
Traditional methods of Acquisition: Occupation
- (1) Occupation
o original vs. Derived
basis: exclusive occupation of a geographical area for an extended period of time
Derived basis: title is derived from a document, such as a treaty
o Medieval perspective- mere discovery, without actual possession, was sufficient basis for
establishing valid title
o Modern perspective- Countries have differing views whether discovery alone creates legal rights
(US: discovery only is insufficient, real occupation and possession required)
o Discovery should be followed by effective occupation
Physical occupation not required
Continual display of authority is required (PCIJ, 1933)
Intention and will to act as a sovereign; and
Some actual exercise or display of such authority
o Belligerent Occupation
Temporary in nature
Occupiers remain only until a final peace treaty establishes the fate of the occupied
territory
Bruges Declaration (2003, contemporary restatement)
Belligerent occupation does not transfer sovereignty over territory to the
occupying power
Occupying power can only dispose of the occupied territorys resources to the
extent necessary to administer the territory and meet essential needs of the
population
Occupying power assumes responsibility to maintain order and security for the
inhabitants and protect its culture, heritage and infrastructure
Occupying power must provide for basic needs and respect rights of the
inhabitants per international humanitarian laws
Examples include Turkish occupation of northern Cypress, Israeli occupation (conquest?)
of West Bank of Jordan, the Gaza Strip and Golan Heights
Israel builds settlements in opposition to the UN security council and in violation
of the 1949 Geneva Convention
The Wall, fencing in 6-18% of the West Bank. Israel Sup. Ct. /ICJ.
o Humanitarian Occupation
Control of a territory by a international organization, primarily for the purpose of
reforming its political institutions
Objectives:
Maintain existing States and their populations; and
Restrain further splintering of nations
Legality has not been fully established
In the case of Kosovo, international organization of States governed Kosovo for about 10
years
Traditional Methods of Acquisition
CONQUEST
o Acquisition of territory by forcefully taking it
o Outlawed by laws prohibiting use of force as a legitimate basis for ceding or claiming title to
State territory (UN Charter, 1945)
o How to handle situation where there is a perpetual state of war?
CESSION
o An international agreement that deeds territory from one nation to another
o Must first have proper title/possession to the territory before ceding it (Palmas)
o Difficulties in situations when cession is forced on the granting State because it lost a war
(German requirement to cede land to Poland after WWI)
PRESCRIPTION
o Acquisition of territory by occupying some part of it without objection by another party
o Accepted by most (but not all) states as a method for acquiring sovereign title
o Effective way of resolving long term border disputes (Cambodia vs. Thailand with regards to
areas surrounding a sacred temple; failure of Thailand to react to Cambodian seizure of the
temple served as tacit recognition) (judicial resolution did not resolve dispute in practice)
ACCRETION
o Increase of a States territory by new formations of land
Emergence of new islands
Changes in flows of rivers
o Change should be gradual and imperceptible
o Complex due to passage of time, and both gradual and sudden changes in geography
(Chamizal Arbitration)
In a situation of gradual movement of the Rio Grande River to the south and sudden
flooding, a 600 acre tract was disputed between the US and Mexico
Settled by diving the tract in accordance to accretion
New methods of territorial acquisition
Renunciation
o Voluntary or involuntary relinquishment of its territorial sovereignty
o No transfer of title, unlike the treaty cession formally ceding territory to the grantee nation
Joint Decision
o Determination by victors of war for transferring sovereignty over State territory
Adjudication
o Examination of title disputes by judges or arbitrators
o A means of providing a tribunal for interpreting an agreement or resolving a dispute
o Parties establish sovereign rights after the tribunal examines facts and renders a decision

6.3 LAW OF THE SEA
The 3 mile cannon shot rule was the old mindset, with the area beyond 3 miles characterized as res
communis
In 1994 the 1982 UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) came into force
- Historical regime did not incorporate interests of newer members of the international community
rather it served interests of large and economically powerful nations
- 162 countries and the EU have ratified UNCLOS
- The U.S. Senate has still not ratified UNCLOS, despite support of U.S> presidents Clinton, Bush,
Obama
Concerns that the treaty adversely impacts US sovereignty, particularly with regards to
administration of the deep seabed
Impact on U.S environmental policies
Limitation of U.S> businesses and concerns about taxation/fees imposed in deep sea bed
INTERNAL WATERS
States have the sovereign right to control its bays, rivers and other internal waters
PORTS
- States have the absolute right to control the internal waters contained within its ports
- Foreign war ships in internal waters with permission can not be boarded
- Merchant and private vessels have implied right to enter internal waters of another State without
express permission (can be boarded)
- Crimes committed at Port
Determined by treaty or customary international law
Customary international law
Historic rule: ships entering another States port became subject to that ports complete control
Modern rule: Crimes not impacting the ports tranquility would be under the jurisdiction of the flag
State. Crimes causing a significant intrusion on the ports tranquility would be under the jurisdiction of
the port state
- If the port State chooses not to assert jurisdiction, the flag state may then assert full authority over
the ship
BAYS
- Most bays consist of only internal waters, but larger bays may have both territorial and
international waters
- Article 10 of UNCLOS : A bay is a well-marked indentation *which must be+ as large as or larger
than that of a semicircle whose diameter is a line drawn across the mouth of that indentation
- State may exercise sovereignty up to 12 nautical miles from the coast. If the semicircle diameter of
the bay is less than 24 miles, its waters consist solely of internal waters
- If the semicircle diameter is more than 24 miles, the bay also contains high seas (international
waters) in the center of the mouth
- Exception: bays determined as historic bays may contain only internal waters even though the
mouth is wider than 24 miles. If other States do not dispute such a claim, they acquiesce to such
claims.
Ongoing dispute Hudson Bay, having a 50 mile wide mouth, disputed between U.S> and
Canada

TERRITORIAL SEA

Territorial Sea extends for 12 nautical miles from the national cost line
- Extends above and below to the airspace, the seabed and subsoil
States exercise complete sovereignty over the territorial sea to the same extent it exercises sovereignty
over its landmass
Possession of this territory is mandatory (not optional); States also incur duties/obligations in the
territorial sea
BASELINE
- Low water Line: Article 5 of UNCLOS, Normal baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial
sea is the low water line along the coast as marked on large scale charts officially recognized by the
coastal state
- Straight baseline method: 1951 Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries case. Due to rocks and small islets that
interrupted the natural course of its coastline, Norway drew straight baselines encompassing the
rocks and islets rather than tracking the contours of its irregular coastline. UK fishermen were upset
that Norway was claiming a greater share of the fishing area. The ICJ upheld the Norway straight
baseline method.

Innocent Passage
- Article 18.1 of UNCLOS defines passage as navigation through the territorial sea for the purpose
of: (a) traversing that sea without entering internal waters or (b) proceeding to or from internal
waters
- Article 19 of UNCLOS defines innocent passage that is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or
security of the coastal State
Ulterior motivations: spying or intelligence gathering (US navy vessels in the black sea, 1996
NK submarines in SK waters, 1968 US Pueblo seized 15.8 miles from NK, 2004 Chinese
submarine in Japan waters
Economic advantages
Dissemination of propaganda (Greenpeace leaflets)
- Article 24 of UNCLOS imposes a duty not to impair the innocent passage of foreign ships
Cannot impose navigational requirements denying right of innocent passage
Much publicize dangers to navigation (mines)
Cannot discriminate against ships or cargo of a particular nation, or ships carrying cargo to or
from certain nations
- Passing vessel must not stop unless incidental to ordinary navigation or undertaken for authorized
entry into a foreign port
- Vessels may render assistance to persons or craft requiring emergency assistance
- Commercial vessels must comply with promulgated innocent passage regulations related to
customs, immigration and sanitation matters
Passenger ships must comply with local tax laws on cargo, passport regulations and waste laws
- Military vessels when authorized to enter a foreign port should give notice of their arrival several
days in advance
- States cannot allow the use of its territory, even by private inhabitants, in a manner that yields a
cross boundary environmental interference
- Strait Passage
Straits which are wider than 24 miles are not so problematic, as they contain a strip of
international waters which are high seas, where ships are generally entitled to unrestricted
passage
Due to increase of territorial sea from 3 to 9 miles, 116 narrow straits which previously
contained high seas, now have territorial seas only
UNCLOS has articles specific to strait passage of special straits, where a coastal States
innocent passage rules do not apply. Military and commercial vessels are entitled to free
transit in them
Article 38.2 of UNCLOS: ships and aircraft may undertake transit passage through straits
containing territorial waters solely for the purpose of continuous and expeditious transit of
the straight between one part of the high seas and another part of the high seas
Example: the Bering Strait (19 miles wide)

HIGH SEAS
Historic: freedom of the seas was emphasized as being virtually absolute
The 1958 Law of the Sea determined the high seas to be all parts of the sea that are not included in
the Territorial Sea or the internal waters of a State
Modern: freedom of the high seas is not absolute, no longer considered res communis
- Territorial sea increased to 12 miles
- Doubling of the contiguous zone and creation of the 200 mile exclusive economic zone
- Establishment of the International Seabed Authority
Criminal Conduct
- To what extent can a State protect itself against criminal activities threatening its national interests
- US. Vs. Larsen (9
th
Cir. 1991). Larsen was convicted of aiding and abetting co-defendant Walter
Ulrich with intent of distributing marijuana. The marijuana was seized from a ship on the high seas
outside Singapore. Larsen claims charges are invalid because the US lacks extraterritorial
jurisdiction.
Court looks to congressional intent. The drug law and controlling illegal drug trafficking on the
high seas was consistent to Congress intent to halt drug abuse in the US. This includes
containing drugs by foreign suppliers.
Limiting application would curtail the scope and usefulness of the statute.
Drugs will have an effect within the US
- Initiatives against terrorists, limiting freedom of the seas
Search and seizure of weapons of mass destruction

Contiguous Zone
While the coastal state may exert exclusive jurisdiction over the 12-mile Territorial Sea, they may also
exert limited jurisdiction in the Contiguous Zone
The Contiguous Zone extends for 24 miles from the baseline
Article 33.1 of UNCLOS allows the coastal State to enforce customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws
in the Contiguous Zone
Nonexclusive and limited mostly for monitoring activities
California requirements that tankers switch from heavy crude to cleaner fuel
Originated from hovering laws which extended the coastal jurisdiction for violation of liquor laws
Contemporary concerns focus on drug trafficking that might occur right outside of the
12-mile Territorial Sea
Exclusive Economic Zone
Coastal state has exclusive Economic rights in the 200 miles beginning from the coastal baseline,
overlapping both the 24-mile Contiguous Zone and 12-mile Territorial Sea (Exclusive Economic Zone or EEZ)
The EEX covers one-third of all ocean space and 90% of global fishing
Meant to protect economic rights of lesser-developed countries from having resources depleted by
more powerful countries
According to Article 56 of UNCLOS, the coastal state enjoys sovereign rights in the EEZ for exploring and
exploiting, conserving and managing the natural resources.. of the waters superjacent to the seabed and its
subsoil..
Generally vague and open to interpretation
The coastal state may wish to license rights to their EEZ (i.e. fishing, mining, marine
research)
The coastal may enforce pollution control regulations
Conflicts arise with overlapping EEZ and areas where shorelines are less than 400 miles from one
another
Article 74 of UNCLOS indicates that states with opposing or adjacent coastlines are
expected to resolve their issues by agreement on the basis of international lawin
order to achieve an equitable solution
Some States have agreed on equidistance principle
Continental Shelf
The right to control natural resources in the continental shelf, which may cover a range of 350 miles
from the coastal baseline, pursuant to Article 76 of the 1982 UNCLOS
UNCLOS defines the coastal States CS as seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas that extend
beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural extension of its land territory
Situations where two or more coastal States share the same CS
These states must enter into an agreements with regards to their rights and obligations
(Article 83.1)
Deep Seabed
As technology for deep seabed mining advanced quickly, the UN General Assembly saw the need to have
the international community (rather than technologically advanced and wealthy states) govern the
management, exploitation and distribution of ocean resources in the seabed beyond the sovereign control
Covered by Part IX (Articles 136-153) of the 1982 UNCLOS. Article 136 states the Area and its resources
are the common heritage of all mankind. *Area being the ocean floor and its subsoil beyond the limits of
national jurisdiction]
UNCLOS prescribes the International Seabed Authority (ISA) to control all aspects of deep seabed mining
Review work plans for seabed exploration and exploitation
Monitor compliance with rules, regulations, and procedures for seabed exploration and
exploitation
Promote and monitor scientific research, data collection and development of
sustainable marine technology
Recommend mining standards for the protection and preservation of the marine
environment
While the US agreed to signing the UNCLOS, the Senate has not yet ratified the treaty
US felt it was in their security and economic interests to become a party to UNCLOS
ABA recommend that the rise of new regional powers after the end of the Cold War
warranted long term stability of rules related to the oceans
However, the industrialized maritime powers felt the original language in the 1982 Part IX of UNCLOS
was inconsistent with a free market philosophy and did not give the industrialized States sufficient influence
over the ISA regime that was commensurate with their interests
To accommodate the US and other maritime powers, the General Assembly agreed to modify the
original text of the 1982 Par IX in a July 1992 Special Agreement
The 1994 Special Agreement included language which removed:
Mandatory technology transfer (replaced with cooperation/joint ventures)
Production limitations
Burdensome financial obligations for private firms of powerful countries
The Enterprise (subsidized international entity to monitor commercial
production of all mineral resources), which would compete against private
enterprises

6.4 AIRSPACE ZONES
Airspace Zones: Domestic Airspace
International Air Law developed quickly due to rapid advancements in air travel technology
National legislation imposed limitations n international air travel and encouraged countries to enter into
international treaties
1919 Paris Convention- every Power has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above
its territory
1994 Chicago Convention
requires permission or authorization to operate international air service over or into a
territory (above landmass and territorial waters) [Article 6]
allows private aircraft (not engaged in scheduled international air service) the right to
make flights into or in transit non-stop across its territory and to make stops for non-
traffic purposes without the necessity of obtaining prior permission *Article 5+
pilot flight plan required
alternation of flight plan may be required if interferes with regulations or
security concerns
Commercial aircraft regulated by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), established by parties
to the Chicago Convention
International Air Transport Association (IATA) is a private organization created by commercial airlines to
avoid excessive competition (i.e. flight schedules)
Open Skies Agreement gives airlines of two or more countries the right to operate air services from
any point in one country to any point in the other
Many allegations of anti-competitive activity and predatory behavior in commercial flights
Governments subsidized airlines may provide unjust advantages and create artificial economic barriers
to normal market competition
1929 Warsaw Convention provides for the orderly disposition of claims against international air carriers
limits liability in case of accidents
outlines passenger rights in delays (but airlines not liable for all delays)
State Aircraft/ Public Aircraft are operated by military, customs and police authorities and are not
governed by the Chicago Convention
Government aircraft cannot enter another States national airspace without its express
prior consent
Airplanes in distress: Each contracting State undertakes to provide such measures of
assistance to aircraft in distress as it may find practicable *Article 25+
Power Case (USSR, 1960)
US flight of U-2 military aircraft and Soviet Union prosecution of US pilot for espionage
Argues that Powers was photographing key industrial and military sites
Claims that the craft violated the exclusive sovereignty of the Soviet Union per
international law and that the US was behind this aggression
Implicates other allies of the US via bilateral military agreements
Test firing an unarmed missile into an area of res communis would not be prohibited
Controversies:
Excessive Force: What constitutes excessive force in cases where nonmilitary aircraft
stray into national airspace? (KAL Flight 007 in 1983 triggered diplomatic protests)
Upper Limit. The height of international airspace is not defined in the Chicago
Convention and there is no clear consensus
US claims 80 km above sea level
Soviet Union and other states support Karman line of 110km above sea level,
where air becomes more astronautic than aeronautic
Airspace Zones: Airspace Abroad
Tokyo Convention establishes the framework for punishing individual committing violent crimes during
international flights
The jurisdiction of the aircrafts State of registration (flag State) prevails
Exception (per Article 4):
o The offense has an effect on the territory of such State (territorial
principle)
o The offense has been committed by or against a national or permanent
resident of such State (nationality and passive personality principles)
o The offense is against the security of such State (protective principles)
Hague Convention provides that certain crimes are atrocious enough to be considered crimes against al
States, allowing all States the jurisdiction to capture and punish or extradite the perpetrator (universality
principle)
Airspace Zones: Outer Space
Outer space is analogous to the historical maritime concept of res communis as it applied to the high
seas
Cannot be owned or controlled by any nations. Open to the peaceful use of all States
Moon Treaty
Manned or unmanned landings do not constitute sovereign rights
Universe may be explored for scientific purposes, not to expand national sovereignty
Purports to demilitarize outer space, preventing installation of weapons of mass
destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies. Use of military personnel for scientific
research is allowed
US missile shield programs (Star Wars, Strategic Defense Initiative) and
US/China destruction of satellites
Requires participants to bear international responsibility for activities in outer space,
including damage caused by spacecraft reentering Earths atmosphere
Controversial since ~18,000 orbiting earth and ~17,000 objects, radioactive or
not, have fallen to earth, creating damage to land and orbiting satellites (For
10,000 years) such as the International Space Station

CHAPTER 7 [Treaties]
CHAPTER 8 [Arbitration and Adjudication]




CHAPTER 9 [Use of Force]

9.1 DEFINING FORCE
Use of Force
What is Force?
Force is not specifically defined in the UN Charter
1970 and 1989 Declaration broadened definition by prohibiting specific types of force
1989 Declaration prohibits states from:
Organizing, instigating, or assisting or participating n paramilitary, terrorist or
subversive acts, including acts of mercenaries, in other States
threats against the economic elements of another State
Economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another State for
the purpose of securing advantages of an kind
UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 provides specific acts which constitute
aggression
Crimes of Aggression per the 1998 ICC treaty are not defined
Language related to definition of Aggression is open ended to allow for future
negotiation
What is Force?: variables affecting legitimacy
Economic and Political Force
Fine line between economic competition and aggression (intimidation)
Prohibiting investment, freezing accounts
Multinationally imposed economic sanctions may be deadlier than military force
(impacts civilians)
Aggressive vs. defensive force
Sword of shield. Determining acceptability of force can depend on whether it is
as an aggressor or in self-defense
State or organizational actor
Acting unilaterally or on behalf of an international organization promoting
peace
PGWI and PGWII
Force against Non-State Actors
States have started to target individuals after the Nazi atrocities of WWII,
including terrorists and financial bodies (under justification of self-defense and
War on Terror)
Categories of Force
Politics
Pursuit of certain political and economic ideologies
Economic coercion
Clandestine support of terrorism or anti-terrorist groups
Embargos
US embargo against Cuba, Iran, Nicaragua, North Korea and Vietnam
Boycotts
International boycott of South Africa in response to UN resolutions condemning
apartheid
Arab boycott of Israeli products (beginning in 1954)
o Primary, bared Arab nations from exporting goods to and importing
goods from Israel
o Secondary, banned trade between Arab League members and countries
that trade with Israel
o Tertiary, discouraged trade with Israel. League members could not deal
with companies that did any business with blacklisted countries
In 1988 the UN passes a resolution on the Elimination of Coercive Economic
Measures as a Means of Political and Economic Coercion (unilateral action)
Countermeasures
Countermeasures, or sanctions, respond to allegations of intentionally wrongful conduct
1970 UN Declaration prohibits reprisals, or retaliation via the government seizure of
property or person
public reprisals- those initiated by the state, often for injuries to its citizens
caused by foreign governments
Private reprisals- those initiated by individuals to seize property or citizens
Not used as commonly now as in the past
Modern use includes confiscation of goods and freezing of assets
Not justifiable unless for legitimate self defense
Constrained by necessity and proportionality principles (i.e. considerable civilian
causalities)
Gunboat Diplomacy
A states use of threatening conduct to intimidate another state
Military exercises, presence of military vessels, testing military equipment
Brinkmanship
Saber rattling- use of non violent force. Lighting the fuse without actually firing
US and North Korea
Turkey amassing troops on border with Iraq (2007)
US plans to place missile shield system in Poland and Czech (2008)
Israeli jets enter Syrias airspace and provoke/fire upon air defenses (2007)
Clandestine Support
A third-party state which supports one of the warring parties provides military or
financial support
Small arms- supply of small arms and ammunition to rebel groups
Suicide missions- financial support of suicide bombers (money to relatives) and
providing explosives (roadside Improvised Explosive Device or IED)
Low intensity Conflict
Emerged with increased frequency after the Cold War
US military definition:
politico-military confrontation between competing states or groups below
conventional war and above routine, peaceful competition among states
ranges from subversionto the used of armed force.
waged by combination of means, employing political, economic, informational,
and military instruments
often localized but may have larger case implications
War
Previously considered as necessity, just war
o Only effective means of enforcing international law since no other
mechanism or international organization to control uses of force
Modern, no more declarations of war or formal hostilities. Rather, the focus is
on whether or not a nation was the victim of armed aggression
The War on Terror

9.2 UN PRINCIPLES ON FORCE
UN PRINCIPLES ON FORCE
UN Charter contains directives related to use of force:
State may not use or threaten the use of force (Article 2.4)
States may use force defensively, when responding to an armed attack (Article 51)
Security Council has the sole legal capability on the use of force (Article 39, 41 & 42)
US Sanctions
Multilateral. Not so effective unless the sanction is initiated by neighbors of the targeted
nation or group
Unilateral. Tends to encourage escalation of situation and threats to peace
Protagonist backed by an international organization would be characterized as
furthering multinational objectives (President Carter sanctions against Iran during the
Hostage Crisis)
Smart sanctions initiated to minimize damage caused by UNs blunt sanctions policy,
which hurt people it was intended to protect
UN Security Council established a Sanctions Committee to facilitate refined
approach to design, application and execution of sanctions under Article 41
o Targeted sanctions froze assets and blocked wires of political elites, or
pursued specific groups responsible (diamond smuggling)
Regional initiatives often undertaken as well
Persian Gulf War I
Following Iraqs invasions of Kuwait in 1991, the UN Security Council passes Resolution
687, which breadth was unprecedented and authorized all necessary means to force
Iraqs withdrawal from Kuwait and stop hostilities
Demonstrates flexibility of Charter in giving SC powers to carry out its mandate
Security Council Activism
Post Gulf War, the UN seemed to emerge from its Cold War hiatus and concerned
smaller nations about potential UN dominance/hegemony (limited controls once
military operates ensue)
Application of Charter VII powers more aggressive (less concern of Article 2.7 qualifier)
Bosnia Herzegovina
The SC was more passive in this conflict where Bosnian Serbs initiated a full scale war
with ethnic cleansing against Bosnias Muslim and Croatians (regions of less significance)
Resolution 836 allowed for UN members to act through regional organizations or
arrangements involved NATO
Kosovo Administration. National building efforts by SC (transitional administration)
Prohibition of State Force
Article 2.4 is Controversial. Some believe it is too broad to have any meaning. Others
argue that it is broad to outlaw all types of aggressive force
The International Law Commission drafted Articles on State Responsibility to provide
more detail related to countermeasures
ICJ in Nicaragua vs. Untied States
Court goes beyond the UN Charter as the only means of determining conduct of
state behavior (non-intervention in matters within the national jurisdiction of
states)
ICJ rules against the US
ICJ reiterates opinion in future cases (Congo vs. Uganda)
Self Defense Provision
Articles 51 also Controversial. Debate about what circumstances trigger self-defense
Three phases
Armed Attack
Anticipatory Self-Defense
Pre-emptive first strike
Application of Self Defense
Nicaragua
US asserts collective self defense as legal justification, in preparation for future
armed attach by Nicaragua or OAS member. Court disapproves
Kuwait
Clear consensus about the existence of inherent right to collective self defense
Individual or collective self-defense without the participation of the SC would
not be condoned
Embassy Bombings
Missile attacks by US into Afghanistan and Sudan (1998) following bombings of
US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania
Necessity and proportionality?
Reprisal or self defense?
December 11,2001
Nuclear Weapons

9.3 PEACEKEEING OPERATIONS
Peacekeeping and limitations
Peacekeeping is also undertaken by other non-UN regional organizations
Peacekeeping budget constituted 70% of the UNs overall budget in 2006
UN institutes 2,500 member Rapid Reaction Team in 2006
Limitations
States are unwilling to provide requisite State sovereignty to the UN (Article 2.7 of the
UN Charter retains primacy of State sovereign power)
No standing UN army/military force
Insufficient funding
Patchwork (Inadequate) cooperation by States
1950 Uniting for Peace (UFP) Resolution 377
Allows the General Assembly its own ability to initiate measures to restore peace
(independently of the Security Council), including the use of armed force
In the even the SC is unsuccessful to maintain peace because of permanent
member vetoes
Basis for the first peacekeeping operation: 1956 Suez Canal Crisis
Required establishment of the UN Emergency Force
Concerns related to UN peacekeeper effectiveness in Bosnia, misconduct/rape cases in the Congo,
corruption and mismanaged funds

9.4 MULTILATERAL AGREEMENTS
Multilateral Agreements
Treaty based attempts to control use of force by States
The 1899 and 1907 Hague Conferences were international treaties negotiated at two separate peace
conferences at the Hague
First formal statements of disarmament, laws of war and war crimes, adopted by
military infrastructure in many countries
Established an arbitration system to settle international disputes (Permanent Court of
Arbitration)
Served as a basis for future treaties
Prohibitions on biological and toxic weapons are now frequently referenced
League of Nations
Prohibited war until three months after an arbitral/judicial decision regarding a
particular dispute
First collective security measure; war against one member of the League was equal to
war against all members of the League (leading to immediate severance of financial
relations)

9.5 HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION
Humanitarian Intervention
No specific language regarding humanitarian intervention is mentioned in the UN Charter Debate
regarding whether Article 56 provides a legal or moral basis for justifying human intervention: All Members
pledge themselves to take joint and separate action in cooperation with the Organization for the achievement
of the purposes set forth in Article 55. *universal respect for human rightswithout distinction as to race, sex,
language or religion.+
Pledge=legal obligation
Narrow view, only genocide warrants military intervention
Forms of Intervention
Military/ Nonmilitary
Unilateral/ Collective
Unilateral intervention may conflict with standards of territorial sovereignty and
use of force
Is there a right to humanitarian intervention? What cases are justifiable for intervention when they have
not been attacked or threatened with attack?
International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (2001)
Just cause threshold: military intervention requires serious and irreparable harm
occurring (or imminent to occur) to human beings
Large scale loss of life, actual or apprehended, with genocidal intent or not,
which is the product of deliberate state action, state negligence or inability to
act, or a failed state situation
Large scale ethnic cleansing actual or apprehended, whether carried out by
killing, forced expulsion, acts of terror or rape
Strictly humanitarian aid not regarded as unlawful intervention
Duty to intervene where gross violations of fundamental human rights (Genocide Convention)
Political domination vs. humanitarian intervention (contaminated?)
Collective intervention is more justifiable than unilateral intervention (makes Rescue difficult to justify)
Regional enforcement actions would require security council authorization, in accordance with Article
53
Case of Yugoslavia