Anda di halaman 1dari 14
UNIV ERSITY OF PUNE DEPA RTMENT OF LAW Ganeshkhind Pune 411 007 Phone 020:25601304 (O) Telefax

UNIV ERSITY OF PUNE

DEPA RTMENT OF LAW

Ganeshkhind Pune 411 007 Phone 020:25601304 (O) Telefax : 25692 879

________________________ ___________________________________

_____________

LATE. PRO F S.K. AGRAWALA P OST GR ADUATE MOOT COU RT COMPETITION

N ame of the parties (FEDERAL S tates of USHER/ REP UBLIC O F PARKINSON

De partment of Law U niversity of Pune Department of Law, University of Pune.

Copy Right © 2012 All Right Reserved

Facts of the case

The Federal States of Usher (FSU) is a powerful Western country and considered as a major power in international relations of the World. It is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. It always has a number of friends in various parts of the world especially in the Asian region due to its aggressive trade and diplomatic relations with its counter parts in the world.

Republic of Parkinson is a developing country in the South East Asian region, and born out of carving a territory of its neighbor Indikisthan during the period of decolonization. Parkinson has number of issues to be sorted out with its counterparts in the region ranging from territorial disputes, terrorism and nuclear issues. It is also a member of the United Nations and at present a Non-Permanent Member of the Security Council.

The Republic of Parkinson to address its disputes and to develop its economy has good diplomatic relations with major western powers apart from some of its major states in the region to counter Indikisthan. Among the various powers that are friends with The Federal States of Usher, it has excellent relations. To establish its influence in the region The Federal States of Usher had extended 100,000 Donna of its currency to Parkinson, apart from supplying Nuclear materials and other help. Both have a number of bilateral trade treaties with each other on various commercial activities. Both are parties to a number of international agreements.

In the year 2000, Parkinson to develop its economy and trade with some of its counter parts in the region, opened up its economy and permitted foreign firms to establish in its territory with 100% Foreign Investment. Considering this as an important step, The FSU permitted its top companies to invest in the territory of Parkinson. Basing on this around 400 companies from FSU established firms leading their business into billions of Donnas.

In 2002 Salami, a neighboring territory of Parkinson witnessed a revolt in its territory. It terrorist regime had overthrown the elected Government and established a Military Government. Parkinson since has number of problems with Indikisthan encouraged terrorist regime and Military Regime. It has also permitted the terrorist groups to establish secret campus in its territory. It terms these groups as freedom fighters and describes them as a group fighting to establish the religious culture in the world. Hence it regards them as terrorists and support their activities. The terrorist group informed Parkinson that permitting FSU and its Western culture spoils its religious culture and requested Parkinson to halt the FSU interference in its territory. Parkinson disregarded the request but assured that it will take care of protecting its religious culture. It allowed the terrorist group to continue its activities and to extend all the help including providing space for construction of permanent bases in its territory.

FSU and a number of its Western allies have a lot of interest in the region to promote their business, which has a biggest consumer market in the world. In view of their business interests, most of them joined to counter the attacks of terrorist in Salami. Accordingly, they

promised the dethroned government to restore it and to promote the human rights in Salami. Under the leadership of FSU, they sought the help of Parkinson. to continue its trading relationship and to counter its neighbor Indikisthan, Parkinson permitted to use its territory. FSU led groups succeeded in arresting the terrorist campus and installed a democratic government in Salami.

The terrorist groups expressed their anger towards the Western Attack and asked the Government of Parkinson to cut its diplomatic and other trade relations with the Western Allies especially with that of the FSU. Parkinson though promised the terrorist groups, continued its support to FSU to counter its neighbor. The terrorist groups could not tolerate the Western states dominance in the Asian region and attacked the FSU territory. In the continuous aerial and bomb attacks in FSU more than half a million people of FSU died and billions of its Donna business suffered. The Security Council responding to the terrorist attack passed a resolution condemning the attacks and authroised the FSU and its western allies to take all steps to end terrorism as per the provisions of the charter. However, the resolution has not mentioned anywhere authorizing a war in the region.

Apart from Parkinson, Indikisthan is also a friend of FSU. Indikisthan is also affected by the terrorist activities harbored by Parkinson. Indikisthan also joined in the restoration of government in Salami and extend its cooperation to the Western allies to counter terrorist activities in the Salami territory. Aggrieved by the Acts of FSU and the Indikisthan and other allies, the top leader of the terrorist group zhagama took a vow to end the Government of FSU and its citizens.

The activities of Zhagama led widespread criticism in the FSU and the government of FSU was under pressure to kill him. It requested Parkinson to help to catch zhagama. In return it promised to wipe out half the debt of Parkinson to FSU and assured supply of military equipments at a cheaper rate. To this extent they have entered a bilateral agreement. However, the agreement has a condition, that if the Government of Parkinson violates its promise, and thus endorse its terrorist activities, FSU will have no obligation to continue its promise.

After the agreement, FSU with the help of Parkinson killed the Famous leader of the terrorist group in its territory itself. In retaliation, the terrorist group killed a number of people in Parkinson in serial bombings. In the Attack a number of FSU citizens and military personnel died. Apart from the bombings, the terrorist group captured a number of companies belongs to FSU and their assets. FSU requested Parkinson to end the activities of terrorists in its territory. Since Parkinson playing a double game, Parkinson promised FSU all help and at the same time, extending its help to terrorist groups too. FSU approached the Military organisation of the Western Allies NASCO to extend help to attack the terrorist groups in Salami. Taking into consideration of the significance of the request NASCO decided to extend all help in its general council. It also passed a resolution to extend military help in all possible means and to use the Air force. Accordingly since most part of the Salami is under rocks and mountains, they

launched aerial attacks against the terrorists hiding in various parts of Salami near the territory of Parkinson under the authority of Parkinson. During the Air raids, some bombs were fallen in the territory of Parkinson and a number of people died in the incident. Parkinson expressed its protest with FSU and NASCO in a strong manner. It termed the attack is a blatent violation of its territorial sovereignty and integrity. It demanded a public apology from both and compensation.

FSU and NASCO Members expressed their deep concern. However, they refused to apologies in private or public for the incident. Further they argued since the terrorist were trying to hide in the territory of Parkinson to escape from the serial bombings of Salami territory, they had no alternative except to drive their hunt to end the terrorists. The People of Parkinson expressed their anger for the incident, and demanded their government to take a stern action including stopping of supplies to the forces of FSU and NASCO. The opposition parties took this as an opportunity to overthrow the government and to establish real democratic government that try to wipe out the Western domination from its territory.

To gain the support of people, to counter the opposition parties and to win the forthcoming elections, the Government of Parkinson asked the FSU to pay a compensation amounting to 200,000 Donnas. It further, asked the FSU to remove all its military bases in its territory with immediate effect. It prevented the NASCO forces and held a number of NASCO commanders’ as hostages. The Government of FSU refused to pay any amount and asked the Government of Parkinson to extend support to release the companies that were confiscated by the terrorist groups in its territory .It further demanded to release the NASCO commanders who were arrested by the Government of Parkinson. Parkinson refused to adhere to the request; instead it said if the government of FSU is not going to pay the amount, it would expropriate the companies in its territory. In fact, the Government of Parkinson cancelled some of the Patents, licenses that were granted to the companies of FSU. It further argued that as a sovereign, it has a right to nationalize the companies and the foreign money that has been invested in its territory under the principle of Act of State. It further stated that since the NASCO bombings were intentional and has a right to try the offenders, especially the Military Generals for their alleged crimes according to its criminal law. It further argued that the bombing violated the principle of Art 2 (4) of the Charter of the UN and principles of territorial sovereignty of international law.

In retaliation the Government of FSU demanded that the Government of Parkinson has to repay its entire loan amount with interest which has accrued to the tune of 200,000 Donnas. It also claimed damages from the Government of Parkinson to a tune of another 200,000 Donnas. It threatened that if the Government of Parkinson is not going to pay the amount, it has to face the consequences, and the matter will be dealt sternly according to the principles of international law.

In this situation, the Government of Parkinson requested the Security Council to address and resolve the issues.

It raised the following before the council.

The aerial incident took place in its territory was a blatant violation to the principle of sovereignty as guaranteed by the Principles of international law and the Charter of the UN.

The bombing in its territory without its permission is a blatant violation of the established customary principles of international law of territorial sovereignty.

It requested the council to consider its request for compensation as claimed and to try the military personnel according to its criminal law.

It also requested the council that FSU through a bilateral agreement agreed to wipe out its debt to half. Hence the question of compensation does not arise and it has to wipe the debt as promised.

Any kind of intervention is not permissible in international law. The aerial attack in its territory is nothing but a violation of its territorial sovereignty. Hence, for such violation, the FSU and NASCO has to pay the compensation for the breach of territorial sovereignty and loss of lives of its citizens.

The FSU in its counter to the council requested the council’s intervention for the following:

Expropriation without compensation amounts to unjust enrichment.

Act of State is an outdated principle of international law. According to the general Principles of International Law commercial activities does not form part of sovereign activity. Hence the confiscation of its citizen’s properties has no basis and justification under International Law. The terrorists be punished and Parkinson may be directed to pay the compensation for the terrorist acts against its citizens and property.

The acts of NASCO were only acts to condemn the terrorist acts that cause a threat to peace and security and the acts were as per the authorization of the Security Council.

The NASCO operations are undertaken in Salami only with the permission of Parkinson. Parkinson also extended its full cooperation in the military operations. They expressed regret for the incident of bombing in the territory of Parkinson and said it was only misfortune and not an intended act. Hence no violation of territorial sovereignty has been committed.

The wiping of debt to Parkinson cannot be considered as a part of the bilateral agreement, since Parkinson has violated the terms of the agreement and confiscated the property of its citizens and kept hostage of the NASCO forces unnecessarily.

AS both are parties to Geneva Conventions 1949, the hostages amount to violation of a general principles of IHL and Human Rights.

It requested the council, peace being the utmost aspect of international law and the UN, the Government of Parkinson be ordered to release the hostages with immediate effect, as they involved only in preventing terrorism.

It also requested the council to take necessary steps to release its nationals and the confiscated property and to see that Parkinson has to pay the Debt to it.

It also requested to permit the NASCO to continue its activities through the territory of Parkinson to completely eliminate terrorist activities in the region.

The Security Council instead of discussing the matter advised the parties to refer the same to the International Court of Justice, which is the proper authority to seek a remedy according to the principles of international law.

Basing on the advice, the parties entered into an agreement to refer the matter to the International Court of Justice and agreed to abide by the decision of the court with utmost sincerity. The parties in their agreement referred to same issues that were referred to the council as the issues for adjudication by the court.

The matter is placed for submission of memorials by both the parties February 28, 2012, and for final arguments and hearing during March 8-10, 2012.

on or before

ANNEXURE I

1)

All the relevant Laws of International Law may be referred for arguing the case.

2)

All the international conventions on to which the States are Parties may be referred.

ANNEXURE II Rules and Regulations of the competition

  • 1. The Competition is open only to the regular (internal) PG (LL. M/ML) students of Law those who are on roles at present in the respective institution.

  • 2. The Participating teams should submit registration form in the enclosed format only.

  • 3. TA/DA may be obtained from the respective institution by the participating teams.

  • 4. The teams will be provided with the accommodation. If accommodation is required specific request must be made in the registration form itself.

  • 5. All the institutions should send the names of the participating teams on or before 20th Feb.
    2012.

  • 6. All the mooters appearing for the competition should wear black coat and a tie for gents; and a coat for the lady mooters.

  • 7. All the participating teams should send the memorials within the prescribed deadline prior to on or before 28 th February 2012.

  • 8. The final round of the competition will be judged by Eminent experts in the field of International law and Human Rights including the Hon’ble Judges of Supreme Court/High Courts// Senior Advocates/ Senior Academician/diplomats.

  • 9. The memorial should be around 25 pages.

    • 10. The memorial should be prepared in the format of guidelines specified. (Refer Annexure III)

    • 11. Among the memorials the memorial adjudged as the best by the judges will be declared as the Best Memorial.

    • 12. There shall be following prizes :

      • a) The best mooting team as Winners with a trophy.

      • b) The second best team will be given Runners trophy.

      • c) The Best Advocate mooter will be given a memento and a certificate.

      • d) The Best Memorial will receive a memento and a certificate.

      • e) All the participants will be given certificates.

  • 13. Apart from the members of the participating team one teacher of the respective institution or department may accompany the team. However they have to claim TA/DA from their respective institution.

  • 14. The Decision of the Host Institution is final in all respects. All disputes if any are only to the jurisdiction of the Department of Law, University of Pune whose decision shall be final and binding on the parties concerned and no further appeal is allowed.

  • 15. The names of the participating teams will be kept confidential from the purview of the judges till the end of the competition.

    • 16. The names of the teams should not be written on the memorials.

    • 17. The marks will be awarded as follows:

    Marks Allotted

     

    Areas

    • 40

     

    Memorial (Presentation and arrangement of arguments; Research Skills, Drafting skills; comparative approach).

    • 20

    Knowledge of the facts Framing of the issues

     

    Familiarity with International Authorities

    • 20

    Knowledge of substance and process of International Law Knowledge of legal principles applied to the facts

    • 10

    Response to the questions Convincing ability

    • 10

     

    Language and Court Etiquettes

    100

     

    TOTAL

    ANNEXURE III Guidelines for Memorial Preparation

    The Memorials should adopt the following pattern of the methodology.

    Contributions should be made in both electronic (floppy/ CD) and hard copy, and should be in MS-Word. Memorials once submitted will not be returned under any circumstances. After acceptance, it will not be possible to amend texts. Spelling should follow the British pattern as in the Oxford English Dictionary. Referencing style for footnotes: The first reference to any book, article or document should be mentioned in the following way:

    Book: . A. Shearer, Starke’s International Law, 11 th Edition (Butterworth’s, London, 1994), p.

    10.

    Article appearing in an edited book: T.S.N. Sastry: “Good Governance and Right to Health” in Good Governance and Development, (ed. K.K. Bagchi) (Abhijeet Publications, New Delhi, 2009) Pp370- 386 at p 374

    Article appearing in a Journal: A. Jayagovind, “Legality of Unilateral Measures in

    International Trade Law”, Indian Journal of International Law, vol. 40 (2000), pp. 14-27 at p.

    18.

    Full name of the Journal should be provided where it is being referred to for the first

    time, thereafter; in subsequent references its abbreviated name should be mentioned.

    Article in News magazines: Kuldip Nayar, “Where the NHRC has Failed”, World Focus (New Delhi), vol. 22 (January 2001), pp. 17-18 at p. 17.

    Article from Newspapers: C. Raja Mohan, “Another Sino-Indian Bid to Generate Trust”, The Hindu (New Delhi), 17 th May 2001, p. 1

    ICJ Reports: Appeal Relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council (India v. Pakistan), ICJ Reports 1972, pp. 46-179 at p. 70.

    UN documents: United Nations Millennium Declaration Adopted by the General Assembly on 8 September 2000 at its Fifty-fifth session, UN Doc. A/RES/55/2.

    Judicial decisions of the National Courts: Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011- 17, at p. 3015.

    Reference from websites: References from websites should consist of the full address of the web page browsed with the date of browsing. For example:

    http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/educational_exchange.html (browsed on 3-09-2009)

    ANNEXURE IV Registration Form University of Pune Department of Law LATE PROF S.K. AGRAWAL A PG

    ANNEXURE IV

    Registration Form

    University of Pune

    Department of Law

    LATE PROF S.K. AGRAWAL A PG Moot Court Competition 2012

    1.

    Name of the Institution ____

    ____________________________________

    • 2. Address of the Institution

    _

    ____________________________________

    __

    ____________________________________

    __

    ____________________________________

    __

    ____________________________________

    • 3. Names of the Mooters: i)

    ______________________________

    (M

    |

    F)

    ii)

    ______________________________

    (M

    |

    F)

    • 4. Name of the accompanying Teacher:

    ____________________________

    ( M | F)

    • 5. Contact Details of the Moote rs:

    • 6. Date & Time of Arrival and Departure:

    • 7. Any other information: whe ther Accommodation required (Yes/No)

    Signatures of the Participants

    Signature of the Sponsoring Authority with seal

    ANNEXURE V

    CERTIFICATE TO BE ANNEXED WITH THE MEMORIAL

    This is to certify that

    Mr/Ms.

    ______________________________________ are the bona fide mooters and researcher

    _________________________________________ of our Institution. They are the students of LL M/ ML regular students. The memorial

    prepared by them is a bona fide research work for the LATE PROF S.K.AGRAWALA Post Graduate National Moot Court Competition 2012 conducted by the Department of Law, University of Pune. To the best of my knowledge, the memorial has not been submitted for any other competition, or award of any degree/course to any other institution.

    Place:

    Date :

    Signature of the

    Vice Chancellor/Dean/Head/Principal

    Official Seal of the Institution

    U NIVERSITY OF PUNE D EPARTMENT OF LAW Ganeshkhind Pu ne 411 007 Phone 020:25601304 Telefax

    U NIVERSITY OF PUNE

    D EPARTMENT OF LAW

    Ganeshkhind

    Pu ne 411 007 Phone 020:25601304 Telefax : 2569287 9 (O)

    _____________________ _______________________________

    __________

    Dr. T.S.N.Sastry Professor & Head,

    tsnsastry@ gmail.com

    Date : 20- 12-2012

    To Vice Chancellor/Head of the

    Department/Principal.

    Respected Sir,

    I am glad to bring to y our kind notice, the Department has named t he annual POST GRADUATE MOOT COMPET ITIION on the name of LATE PROF S.K. A GRAWALA, the founder Head of the Departmen t of Law, University of Pune, as a token of ap preciation for his contribution to the field of inter national law and Human Rights, and to the De partment of Law University of Pune. The contrib ution and dedication of Prof. Agrawala, no dou bt brought laurels to the Department and the Unive rsity both internationally and nationally.

    The untiring efforts of Pr of. Agrawala earned the reputation, the rare dis tinction of rating the department as the Fifth Be st Law Department by the Commonwealth of Nations long

    ago. In the fitness of things,

    to acknowledge the academic contribution

    of the doyen of

    international law, the Departme nt named the Post Graduate Moot Court Comp etition to express its concern and to toe the line sh own by Prof. Agrawala. The Competition is sch eduled to be held

    in March, 8-10, 2012. As you ar e well aware, this being only Post Graduate Mo ot Competition in

    the history of Post Graduate Le gal Education in the country, to equip among

    the post graduate

    students that the techniques of r esearch skills learnt by them will be of immen e help in joining

    the legal profession apart from teaching and research or the corporate world, kindly support the event by spon soring a team.

    I request you to

    A copy of the Moot prob lem and the rules of the competition is enclose d to be displayed in your campus and to bring to the knowledge of the PG students of your este emed institution.

    For the Moot Court problem and

    the rules and regulation, students may visit th e official website

    of the University. (www.unipune .ac.in).

    I solicit your cooperation

    in bringing the same to the attention to the fac ulty and students

    and in sending a team from your institution to make the event a grand success.

    Thanking you and with r egards.

    Yours faithfully,

    U NIVERSITY OF PUNE D EPARTMENT OF LAW Ganeshkhind Pu ne 411 007 Phone 020:25601304 Telefax

    (T. S. N. Sastry) Head, D ept. of Law

    University of Pune

    Department of Law

    University of Pune Department of Law Late Prof. S.K. AGRA WAL Post Graduate National Moot Court

    Late Prof. S.K. AGRA

    WAL Post Graduate National Moot Court Co mpetition

    T o be held on 08 -10 March 2012

    PROGRAMME

    • 1. REGISTRATION ON 8.03.2012 FROM 4.30 P.M. ONWARDS

    • 2. INAUGURAL AT 5.3 0.P.M. TO 7.00. P.M. AT PUMBA HALL

    • 3. PARTICIPATING TEAMS

    BRIEFING TO THE

    • 4. MPETITION TO BE HELD FROM 10.00 A.M. TO EVEN ING ON 9.03.2012

    MOOT COURT CO

    • 5. WILL BE H ELD ON 10.3.2012 FROM 11.30.A.M. TO 1.30.P.M.

    FINALS

    • 6. VALEDICTORY FUN CTION FROM 4.00.P.M. TO 5.30 P.M. ON 10.3.201 2