THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

AT THE PEACE PALACE, THE HAGUE

THE NETHERLANDS

2023

CASE CONCERNING THE CLARENT BELT

THE KINGDOM OF AGLOVALE (APPLICANT)

V.

THE STATE OF RAGNELL (RESPONDENT)

PHILIP C. JESSUP INTERNATIONAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

MEMORIAL FOR THE APPLICANT

Contents
Table of Contents
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES...........................................................................................................2
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION.....................................................................8Treaties and Conventions
......................................................................................................................................................2
United Nations Documents..................................................................................................................2
Books and Articles................................................................................................................................2
Cases and Arbitral Decisions...............................................................................................................7
QUESTIONS RAISED............................................................................................................................8
1.. Whether ragnell violated its treaty obligations in launching “Operation Shining Star” and in
its attacks on both Nant Gateway and Compound Ardan, and must pay reparations to Aglovale
for the deaths of the eight Aglovalean nationals?.............................................................................8
2.......Whether Ragnell violated its treaty obligations by employing captured uac fighters in the
transportation of contaminated plastic waste, and by detaining them in Camlann Correctional
center?....................................................................................................................................................8
3...........Whether Aglovale acted in accordance with the treaty in imposing unilateral sanctions
against Ragnell and Ragnellian nationals, and has no obligation to withdraw the sanctions, to
return any property, or to compensate Ragnell for their impact?....................................................8
4.......Whether Ragnell violated its treaty obligations in transporting hazardous plastic waste to
Etna, whereas Aglovale complied with the treaty in conditioning cooperation regarding
treatment of the waste on the termination of Ragnell’s aggression ?..............................................8
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION..................................................................................................8
STATEMENT OF FACT....................................................................................................................8
SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS.............................................................................................................11
ISSUE I.................................................................................................................................................11
WHETHER RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN LAUNCHING
“OPERATION SHINING STAR” AND IN ITS ATTACKS ON BOTH NANT GATEWAY AND
COMPOUND ARDAN, AND MUST PAY REPARATIONS TO AGLOVALE FOR THE DEATHS
OF THE EIGHT AGLOVALEAN NATIONALS ?..............................................................................11
ISSUE II................................................................................................................................................11
WHETHER RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS BY EMPLOYING CAPTURED
UAC FIGHTERS IN THE TRANSPORTATION OF CONTAMINATED PLASTIC WASTE, AND
BY DETAINING THEM IN CAMLANN CORRECTIONAL CENTER?...........................................11
ISSUE III...............................................................................................................................................12
WHETHER AGLOVALE ACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREATY IN IMPOSING
UNILATERAL SANCTIONS AGAINST RAGNELL AND RAGNELLIAN NATIONALS, AND
 HAS NO OBLIGATION TO WITHDRAW THE SANCTIONS, TO RETURN ANY PROPERTY, OR
TO COMPENSATE RAGNELL FOR THEIR IMPACT?....................................................................12
ISSUE IV...............................................................................................................................................12
WHETHER RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN TRANSPORTING
HAZARDOUS PLASTIC WASTE TO ETNA, WHEREAS AGLOVALE COMPLIED WITH THE
TREATY IN CONDITIONING COOPERATION REGARDING TREATMENT OF THE WASTE
ON THE TERMINATION OF RAGNELL’S AGGRESSION?............................................................12
ADVANCED PLEADINGS...................................................................................................................13S
ISSUE I.....................................................................................................................................................13
RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN LAUNCHING “OPERATION SHINING
STAR” AND IN ITS ATTACKS ON BOTH NANT GATEWAY AND COMPOUND ARDAN, AND
MUST PAY REPARATIONS TO AGLOVALE FOR THE DEATHS OF THE EIGHT AGLOVALEAN
NATIONALS............................................................................................................................................13
1. RAGNELL HAS VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL LAW LAUNCHING OPERATION SHINING
STAR.....................................................................................................................................................13
A.THE USE OF FORCE BY RAGNELL AMOUNTED TO THE VIOLATION OF THE
PROVISIONS OF THE U.N. CHARTER ON THE USE OF FORCE..............................................13
B. THE USE OF FORCE AND MILITARY ATTACKS BY RAGNELL VIOLATED THE
SOVEREIGNTY AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF BALAN................................................14
2. THE ATTACKS ON NANT GATEWAY AND COMPOUND ARDAN RESULTED TO ATTACK
ON CIVILIAN OBJECTS.....................................................................................................................14
3. RAGNELL HAS VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS........................................................15
4. RAGNELL IS LIABLE FOR THE REPERATION OF DEATH OF 8 AGLOVALEAN
NATIONALS........................................................................................................................................15
ISSUE II....................................................................................................................................................15
RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS BY EMPLOYING CAPTURED UAC
FIGHTERS IN THE TRANSPORTATION OF CONTAMINATED PLASTIC WASTE, AND BY
DETAINING THEM IN CAMLANN CORRECTIONAL CENTER.......................................................15
1. ILLEGAL ACT OF EMPLOYING CAPTURED UAC FIGHTERS IN THE TRANSPORTATION
OF CONTAMINATED PLASTIC WASTE.........................................................................................15
2. RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS OBLIGATIONS WHEN IT TRANSFERRED THE CAPTURED
UAC FIGHTERS OF FORT CAERLEON TO CAMLANN CORRECTIONAL CENTER.................16
3. RAGNELL HAS VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS........................................................16
ISSUE III...................................................................................................................................................17
AGLOVALE ACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREATY IN IMPOSING UNILATERAL
SANCTIONS AGAINST RAGNELL AND RAGNELLIAN NATIONALS, AND HAS NO
OBLIGATION TO WITHDRAW THE SANCTIONS, TO RETURN ANY PROPERTY, OR TO
COMPENSATE RAGNELL FOR THEIR IMPACT................................................................................17
1. THE SANCTIONS IMPOSED DO NOT AMOUNT TO ECONOMIC COERCION.......................17
 2. ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ARE JUSTIFIED AS A COUNTERMEASURE UNDER
INTERNATIONAL LAW.....................................................................................................................18
3. RAGNELL HAS NO OBLIGATION TO WITHDRAW THE SANCTIONS, TO RETURN ANY
PROPERTY, OR TO COMPENSATE RAGNELL FOR THEIR IMPACT.........................................18
4. AGLOVALE ACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREATY..................................................19
ISSUE IV..................................................................................................................................................19
RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN TRANSPORTING HAZARDOUS
PLASTIC WASTE TO ETNA, WHEREAS AGLOVALE COMPLIED WITH THE TREATY IN
CONDITIONING COOPERATION REGARDING TREATMENT OF THE WASTE ON THE
TERMINATION OF RAGNELL’S AGGRESSION.................................................................................19
1. RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN TRANSPORTING HAZARDOUS
PLASTIC WASTE TO ETNA..............................................................................................................19
2. AGLOVALE COMPLIED WITH THE TREATY IN CONDITIONING COOPERATION
REGARDING TREATMENT OF THE WASTE ON THE TERMINATION OF RAGNELL’S
AGGRESSION......................................................................................................................................20
CONCLUSION AND PRAYER FOR RELIEF........................................................................................21

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Treaties and Conventions
 The Charter of United Nations
 Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Article 3(7) ,
Protocol III to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Article 2(1) 
 Customary International Humanitarian Law
 The 2000 draft of the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and
Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian
Law
United Nations Documents
 ILC Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Act, (2001),
U.N. Doc. A/56/10 [ILC Articles]
 UNGA, Economic Measures as a means of Political and Economic Coercion against
Developing Countries, UN Doc A/38/535 (25th October (1993)
Books and Articles
 BROWNLIE, USE OF FORCE, p. 364
 D J HARRIS, CASES AND MATERIALS ON INTERNATIONAL LAW, LONDON
SWEET & MAXWELL, p. 890 (6th ed., 2004)
 H. STEINBERGER, ‘SOVEREIGNTY’, IN MAX PLANK INSTITUTE OF
COMPARATIVE PUBLIC LAW AND INTERNATIONAL LAW, ENCYCLOPEDIA
FOR PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW, OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, Vol. 10
(NORTH HOLAND, 1987) p. 609
 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law
 LOWENFELD, INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW, p.698 (2nd Edition, Oxford
University Press, (2002)
 ILC Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Act, (2001),
U.N. Doc. A/56/10 [ILC Articles] Article 1
 Malcolm Shaw, International Law 709 (2005)
 Richard D. Porotsky, Economic Coercion and the General Assembly: A Post-Cold War
Assessment of the Legality and Utility of the Thirty-Five-Year-Old Embargo Against
Cuba, 28 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 901, 918 (1995)
 William H. Kaempfer& Anton D. Lowenber, A Public Choice Analysis of the Political
Economy of International Sanctions, in Sanctions as Economic Statecraft 162 (Steven
Chan & A. Cooper Drury eds. 2000)
 CF. SHAW, 6 INTERNATIONAL LAW 1039 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
( 2003)
 STEIN/VON BUTTLAR, VOLKERRECHT 243 (Heymanns, Auflage, (2000).

Cases and Arbitral Decisions

 United Kingdom v. Albania, Merits [1949] I.C.J. Rep. 4
 DRC v. Uganda (Case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of Congo)
Judgement, ICJ Rep 2005, ¶42- 165 and 345 [Hereinafter referred as DRC v. Congo]
 Nicaragua v. U.S. (Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua), Merits,
ICJ Rep 1986
 Oil Platforms Case ¶ 51
 ICJ, Nuclear Weapons case, Advisory Opinion
QUESTIONS RAISED
A
WHETHER RAGNELL RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN LAUNCHING

“OPERATION SHINING STAR” AND IN ITS ATTACKS ON BOTH NANT GATEWAY AND

COMPOUND ARDAN, AND MUST PAY REPARATIONS TO AGLOVALE FOR THE DEATHS OF THE

EIGHT AGLOVALEAN NATIONALS?

B
WHETHER RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS BY EMPLOYING CAPTURED UAC

FIGHTERS IN THE TRANSPORTATION OF CONTAMINATED PLASTIC WASTE, AND BY DETAINING

THEM IN CAMLANN CORRECTIONAL CENTER?

1. WHETHER AGLOVALE ACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREATY IN IMPOSING

UNILATERAL SANCTIONS AGAINST RAGNELL AND RAGNELLIAN NATIONALS, AND HAS

NO OBLIGATION TO WITHDRAW THE SANCTIONS, TO RETURN ANY PROPERTY, OR TO

COMPENSATE RAGNELL FOR THEIR IMPACT?

2. WHETHER RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN TRANSPORTING

HAZARDOUS PLASTIC WASTE TO ETNA, WHEREAS AGLOVALE COMPLIED WITH THE

TREATY IN CONDITIONING COOPERATION REGARDING TREATMENT OF THE WASTE ON

THE TERMINATION OF RAGNELL’S AGGRESSION ?

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
Parties to the case, the Kingdom of Aglovale (i.e., Applicant) and the State of Ragnell (i.e.,
Respondant) presents the disputes concerning the Clarent Belt and others matter before the
International Court of Justice (i.e., the Court) pursuant to Article……… The Kingdom of
Aglovale accepts any judgement of court as final and binding, and shall execute it in its entirely
and in good faith.
STATEMENT OF FACT
Aglovale a constitutional monarchy of The Gais Peninsula, is the most economically advanced
country in the region. Aglovale is bordered by Balan to the north and east and between Aglovale
and the Dozmary Sea lies the Clarent Belt. In 1915, Aglovale and Balan concluded an agreement
whereby Aglovale paid for the construction of a seaport and built the Eamont Thruway and made
it possible to transport heavy freight between Tintagel Coast and the rest of the Peninsula. In
June 1952, the standoff between the two states escalated into “the Clarent War” as the heaviest
fighting was centered near Tintagel park, which was bombed repeatedly. At the outset of the
fighting, King Norton IV of Aglovale proclaimed that his country would remain neutral, so long
as its use of the port facilities and the Eamont Thruway was not threatened.After the demise of
King, Queen Clarine convened a first round of peace talks between Ragnell and Balan in
Stirling, Aglovale’s capital and after the negotiation of two years, on 16 september 1958, at the
Queen’s invitation,the leaders of Ragnell and Balan met at her Royal Residence to sign the
“Trilateral Treaty of Lasting Peace” and the treaty was registered with and published by the
United Nations Secretariat. The three parties committed to “demilitarization of the Clarent Belt,”
"cessation of hostilities,” and restoration of “friendly relations” among them. After the withdrew
of troops of Ragnell from the Belt, Aglovale deployed 1400 lightly armed peacekeeping forces
and they were routinely renewed by all Parties in accordance with Article 6.2 of treaty until
2018. Aglovale subsidized infrastructure development and environmental projects on Tintagel
Coast and paid for a major expansion and the only tunnel mouth within the Belt,”Nant
Gateway,” was modernized. In 2003Balan ratified the Basel Convention on the Control of
Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal but neither Ragnell nor
aglovale has ratified those conventions. According to reports from aglovale’s monitoring
forcesin the Belt,UAC members carried out at least 233 raids between 2019 and 2021,causing
increasingly serious damage where more than 40 people were killed and 35 injured in these
incidents. On july 2021, UAC members carried out attacks on three Ragnllian factories in the
Belt causing a a degree of seriousness. And after that, the following week, Vortigern announced
the launch of “operation shining star”, a limited and temporary military campaign” with the
declared aims of “wiping out the UAC terrorist cells on Tintagel Coast, saving lives, and
restoring regional prosperity” and armored vehicles and Ragnellian military battalions entered
the Belt for the first time since the end of the Clarent War. And after that Queen Clarine
appeared on national television, imploring Vortigern to end the operation and calling on both
sides to “commit to a prompt diplomatic resolution, preventing further violence and bloodshed.
The next day, Foreign Minister Laudine announced that by the increasing risks for the
Aglovaleins ,peacekeepers will return home from the ClarentBelt immediately and will not be
redeployed until further notice.” In early December, Ragnell made several requests to transfer
the waste for processing in Aglovale, the location of the only other suitable facility in the
Peninsula. Representatives from Ragnell and Aglovale met in Stirling on 12 December 2021 to
negotiate a transfer arrangement. They failed to reach agreement, but committed to resuming
talks on 27 December. She pointed out that Aglovale had used the Thruway safely and
peacefully for decades, and that itsdestruction “took the conflict to a dangerous new level.” The
Minister noted that dozens of Aglovalean civilians, as well as Balanis and Ragnellians, who had
not been able to escape from the Park, were “now isolated and extremely vulnerable,” and that
“transporting basic necessities and humanitarian aid to [them] has been rendered nearly
impossible.” She concluded, “The attack on the humanitarian corridor was an act of collective
punishment that is unacceptable under international humanitarian law. The following day
Aglovale’s Parliament enacted sanctions legislation against Ragnell, which included: a. Freezing
bank accounts belonging to Vortigern, his cabinet ministers, and senior RPP members and
financial supporters, and seizing the assets of anyone of Ragnellian or other nationality engaged
in direct or indirect attempts to circumvent these sanctions; b. Imposing travel bans on those
same individuals; c. Freezing the funds of Ragnell’s central bank and ten other major Ragnellian
banks operating in Aglovale’s territory; and d. Prohibiting companies incorporated in Aglovale
and Aglovalian citizens from entering into new contracts with, providing goods or services to, or
receiving goods or services from, business enterprises operating in Ragnell’s industrial, aviation,
transportation, or security sectors.In light of the sanctions, many companies registered in
Aglovale voided contracts with their Ragnellian partners. On 4 May 2022, Aglovale seized
Prydwen Place, the Aglovalean summer home of Kay Ector, a Ragnellian national and a primary
donor to the RPP. In a press release, Aglovale’s Justice Department noted that the move fully
complied with the sanctions resolution and was justified by credible reporting that Ector was
utilizing his connections with third-country nationals to evade the sanctions. Ector denied these
allegations and filed suit in civil court in Aglovale to overturn what he called “this act of
expropriation.” On an emergency appeal, the Aglovalean Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal.
Aglovale announced that it would not resume its monitoring presence in the Belt unless and until
it determined that its peacekeepers would not be at risk of harm from continuing violence. On 21
July 2022, Aglovale indicated its intention to file counterclaims, also invoking the Treaty as its
jurisdictional basis. On 15 August 2022, the Court entered an Order recommending that the
parties draft a Statement of Agreed Facts. The parties stipulated that Aglovale would appear as
Applicant and Ragnell as Respondent, without prejudice to any question of burden of proof.
SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS

ISSUE I

WHETHER RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN LAUNCHING “OPERATION

SHINING STAR” AND IN ITS ATTACKS ON BOTH NANT GATEWAY AND COMPOUND ARDAN, AND

MUST PAY REPARATIONS TO AGLOVALE FOR THE DEATHS OF THE EIGHT AGLOVALEAN

NATIONALS ?
OR

Pleading 01
The loss of life caused by the Military Campaign of Ragnell has been recognized as constituting
an act of Aggression violated territorial integrity and sovereign equality of the Nations by
launching Operation Shining Star. Ragnell violate the international law by not demarcating
military objects and civilian objects by attacking in Nant Gateway and Compound Ardan. It
breaches of such obligation, so Aglovale is have an inherent right to get compensation due to
international wrong full act So it gives rise to compensation.

ISSUE II

WHETHER RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS BY EMPLOYING

CAPTURED UAC FIGHTERS IN THE TRANSPORTATION OF CONTAMINATED
PLASTIC WASTE, AND BY DETAINING THEM IN CAMLANN CORRECTIONAL
CENTER?

As conflict in Clarent Belt considering an International Armed Conflict they got the protected
status of prisoners of war. Rangnell has violated its treaty obligations by employing them in a
forced labor and dangerous labor as prescribed by international law . Protected persons accused
of offences shall be detained in the occupied country so it shouldn’t be transferred forcefully
without any due process.

ISSUE III

WHETHER AGLOVALE ACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREATY IN

IMPOSING UNILATERAL SANCTIONS AGAINST RAGNELL AND RAGNELLIAN
NATIONALS, AND HAS NO OBLIGATION TO WITHDRAW THE SANCTIONS, TO
RETURN ANY PROPERTY, OR TO COMPENSATE RAGNELL FOR THEIR
IMPACT?

Aglovale has acted as per treaty obligations where the Ragnell has violates the treaty provisions
of basic principles of it, Where it just a counter measure. Unilateral sanctions are just a counter
measure rather than any economic or commercial gain. It is just an act of counter measure which
is justified under the international law. Thus Aglovale doesn’t have any obligation to withdraw
the sanctions and their property with no question of compensation.

ISSUE IV
WHETHER RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN
TRANSPORTING HAZARDOUS PLASTIC WASTE TO ETNA, WHEREAS
AGLOVALE COMPLIED WITH THE TREATY IN CONDITIONING COOPERATION
REGARDING TREATMENT OF THE WASTE ON THE TERMINATION OF
RAGNELL’S AGGRESSION?

Ragnell has violated the international humanitarian law, Customary international law, principle
of human rights and environmental law while transporting the hazardous plastic waste to Etna .
As a result, Aglovale has complied with treaty conditions and takes a refuse of waste for a
counter measure of act of Aggression which ultimately shows the complied with the treaty.
 A.

B.

C. ADVANCED PLEADINGS

D. ISSUE I

E. RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN LAUNCHING

“OPERATION SHINING STAR” AND IN ITS ATTACKS ON BOTH NANT
GATEWAY AND COMPOUND ARDAN, AND MUST PAY REPARATIONS TO
AGLOVALE FOR THE DEATHS OF THE EIGHT AGLOVALEAN NATIONALS

1. Ragnell Has Violated International Law Launching Operation Shining Star

i A.The Use Of Force By Ragnell Amounted To The Violation Of The Provisions Of The
U.N. Charter On The Use Of Force.

Aglovale and Ragnell, being a member country of the U.N. 1 are under an obligation to act in
accordance with the U.N. Charter. The U.N. Charter has various provisions prohibiting the use of
force.2 It is submitted that the threat to use of force, and the use of force by Ragnell violated the
provisions of the U.N. Charter. The art. 2(4) of the U.N. Charter prohibits the threat of use of
force as well as the use of force by its members 3. Further art. 2(3) states that the international
disputes between members shall be settled by peaceful means4 . The ICJ, in the Congo case5 and
the Nicaragua6 Case, has highlighted that the use of force, without valid defense, violates art. 2
(4).
1
Moot Proposition , Para 64
2
U.N. Charter Preamble, Art. 1(1), 2(4), 42.
3
BROWNLIE, USE OF FORCE, p. 364
4
U.N. Charter art. 2(3)
5
DRC v. Uganda (Case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of Congo) Judgement, ICJ Rep 2005, ¶42-
165 and 345 [Hereinafter referred as DRC v. Congo]
6
Nicaragua v. U.S. (Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua), Merits, ICJ Rep 1986
[Hereinafter referred as Nicaragua Case]
In the present case, the use of military campaign by initiating operation shining star and the use
of bomb with military action by Ragnell led coalition forces amounted to a series of armed
attacks. Thus, the series of armed attacks amounted to use of force by Ragnell is against the
principle of equal sovereignty.

B. THE USE OF FORCE AND MILITARY ATTACKS BY RAGNELL VIOLATED THE

SOVEREIGNTY AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF BALAN
The states must avoid the threat to use of force and the use of force against the territorial
integrity of another state.7It is the duty upon states to refrain from ‘military …...or any other
form of coercion aimed against the political independence or territorial integrity of any state’ as
reaffirmed in the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law 8. In the case of Nicaragua9
v. U.S., court, court found in its verdict that the United States was “in breach of its obligation
under customary international law not to use force against another states”, “not to intervene its
affairs”, “not to violate its sovereignty”.

2. THE ATTACKS ON NANT GATEWAY AND COMPOUND ARDAN RESULTED TO

ATTACK ON CIVILIAN OBJECTS
This rule is codified in Articles 48 and 52(2) of Additional Protocol I, to which no reservations
have been made. The prohibition on directing attacks against civilian objects is also set forth in
Amended Protocol II and Protocol III to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.10 In
addition, under the Statute of the International Criminal Court, “intentionally directing attacks
against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives”, constitutes a war
crime in international armed conflicts. International Court of Justice in the Nuclear Weapons
case, several States invoked the principle of distinction between civilian objects and military
objectives.11 In its advisory opinion, the Court stated that the principle of distinction was one of
the “cardinal principles” of international humanitarian law and one of the “intransgressible
principles of international customary law”.12

7
Art 2(4)
8
1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law
9
Nicaragua v. U.S. (1986)
10
Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Article 3(7) , Protocol III to the
Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Article 2(1) 
11
ICJ, Nuclear Weapons case, Advisory Opinion
12
Customary IHL - Rule 7. The Principle of Distinction between Civilian Objects and Military Objectives (icrc.org)
As far as Case is concerned Ragnell’s military leadership, Attacked on Nant Gateway,
Compound Ardan and Warehouse having concluded that there were no civilians in or around the
Compound, authorized a bombing raid on the four buildings and on Warehouse 15 which
resulted to death of 76 civilians which clearly shows they did not distinct between Civilian
Object and Military Objects.

3. RAGNELL HAS VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS

The Preamble to the Trilateral Treaty of Lasting Peace states the significance of the notion of
achieve Just, Lasting, and Comprehensive Peace in Gain Peninsula whereas Ragnell has acted
against the preamble of it and violated the treaty and not bound it in good Faith. State of Ragnell
has Violated maintain Peace and Order in the Clarent Belt where it has attacked the compound
ardan, Nant Gateway which resulted to the death of 76 civilians.

4. RAGNELL IS LIABLE FOR THE REPERATION OF DEATH OF 8 AGLOVALEAN

NATIONALS
By attacking on Compound Ardan by Ragnell, 8 Aglovalean Nationals were killed so according
to Part II.3 (c)13, (d)14 of the Basic Principles of Guidelines under Right to a Remedy and
Reparations for victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Services
Violations of International Humanitarian Law, Ragnell has to paid reparations to Aglovale.

13
Provides those who claim to be victims of human rights or humanitarian law violations with equal and effective
access to the state, as described below, irrespective of who may ultimately bearer of responsibility for the
violation.
14
Provide effective remedies victims, including eeperations.
ISSUE II

RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS BY EMPLOYING CAPTURED

UAC FIGHTERS IN THE TRANSPORTATION OF CONTAMINATED PLASTIC
WASTE, AND BY DETAINING THEM IN CAMLANN CORRECTIONAL CENTER

1. ILLEGAL ACT OF EMPLOYING CAPTURED UAC FIGHTERS IN THE

TRANSPORTATION OF CONTAMINATED PLASTIC WASTE
Ragnell violated its obligation under Article 49 of Geneva Convention III when employing
captured UAC fighters in the Fort Caerleon for transportation of contaminated plastic waste as
their employment was not beneficial to their physical or mental health. Ragnell violated its
obligation under Article 52 of the Geneva Convention III by employing UAC fighters on
dangerous labor of transportation of contaminated plastic waste. The work done by the prisoner
of war was hazardous to their health due to the presence of bacterial pathogens “Clostridioides
difficile” and methicillin-resistant “Staphylococcusaureus” in the waste which is
transferred.15Clostridioides difficile is a bacterium that is well known for causing serious
diarrheal infections, and may also cause colon cancer 16 and Staphylococcus aureus can cause
various skin and soft-tissue infections, 17 which proves it is dangerous for prisoners of war which
is against of Art 49 and Art 52 of Geneva Convention III.

2. RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS OBLIGATIONS WHEN IT TRANSFERRED THE

CAPTURED UAC FIGHTERS OF FORT CAERLEON TO CAMLANN
CORRECTIONAL CENTER
The Transfer of UAC Fighters were from of fort Caerleon to Camlann correctional center which
is situated to the north of the Ragnell. It has been transferred the UAC Fighters from occupying
power area Clarent Belt to Ragnellwith out any due notice. Article 76 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention also states that "Protected persons accused of offences shall be detained in the

15
Moot Proposition , Para 38
16
Drewes, Julia L.; et al. (5 August 2022). "Human Colon Cancer-Derived Clostridioides difficile Strains Drive
Colonic Tumorigenesis in Mice". Cancer Discovery. 12 (8): 1873–1885. doi:10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-
1273. PMC 9357196. PMID 35678528.

17
Tong SY, Davis JS, Eichenberger E, Holland TL, Fowler VG (July 2015). "Staphylococcus aureus infections:
epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and management". Clinical Microbiology Reviews. 28 (3):
603–661.
occupied country, and if convicted they shall serve their sentences therein." This means that if a
civilian is accused of a crime, they should be detained in the occupied territory and if they are
convicted, they should serve their sentence in the occupied territory as well. This provision is
intended to ensure that civilians are not removed from the protection of the Fourth Geneva
Convention by being transferred to another country.

3. RAGNELL HAS VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS

The Preamble to the Trilateral Treaty of Lasting Peace states the significance of the notion of
achieve Just, Lasting, and Comprehensive Peace in Gain Peninsula whereas Ragnell has acted
against the preamble of it and violated the treaty and not bound it in good Faith. State of Ragnell
has Violated Art 28 of Trilateral Treaty of Lasting Peace which violates the protection of human
health by using transportation of contaminated plastic waste. Whereas it violates the basic
principles of Trilateral Treaty of Lasting Peace Art 2 violating all the applicable principles of
human rights law and international humanitarian law.

ISSUE III

AGLOVALE ACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREATY IN IMPOSING

UNILATERAL SANCTIONS AGAINST RAGNELL AND RAGNELLIAN NATIONALS,
AND HAS NO OBLIGATION TO WITHDRAW THE SANCTIONS, TO RETURN ANY
PROPERTY, OR TO COMPENSATE RAGNELL FOR THEIR IMPACT

1. THE SANCTIONS IMPOSED DO NOT AMOUNT TO ECONOMIC COERCION.

Economic sanctions can be defined broadly to include measures of an economic character, as
distinguished from military character taken to express disapproval of the acts of the target or to
induce that target (state) to change some policy or practice or even governmental structure. 18

18
LOWENFELD, INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW, p.698 (2nd Edition, Oxford University Press, (2002)
Economic sanctions are differentiated from Economic Coercion in that fact that the former are
not usually measures taken for economic gain, and often at commercial sacrifice. 19The sanctions
imposed by Aglovale have been imposed only as long as Ragnell refuses to comply with
International Law20 and are thus clearly not motivated by economic or commercial gain.
Furthermore, such sanctions expressly reflect Aglovale disapproval of the acts of Ragnellwith a
view to maintain international peace. Hence, the sanctions imposed by Aglovale do not amount
to Economic Coercion.

2. ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ARE JUSTIFIED AS A COUNTERMEASURE UNDER

INTERNATIONAL LAW.
It is humbly submitted that even the economic sanctions imposed by the Aglovale are conformity
with the international law, they are justified as a countermeasure, since international law justifies
an act of countermeasure in such cases. Wrongfulness of an act is precluded if and to the extent
that it constitutes a countermeasure. 21 A lawful countermeasure can be taken in response to a
prior wrongful act and directed against the State committing the wrongful act. There is no
requirement that countermeasure should be with regard to the same obligation breached by the
State acting wrongfully.22 Action carried out by Aglovalean is also lawful under the doctrine of
countermeasures.

3. RAGNELL HAS NO OBLIGATION TO WITHDRAW THE SANCTIONS, TO

RETURN ANY PROPERTY, OR TO COMPENSATE RAGNELL FOR THEIR IMPACT
It is well settled that customary international law does not prohibit economic sanctions. 23In a
program of unilateral economic sanctions, the sending State determines whether the economic

19
Ibid
20
Moot Proposition , Para 52
21
ILC Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Act, (2001), U.N. Doc. A/56/10 [ILC
Articles] Article 1
22
Malcolm Shaw, International Law 709 (2005).
23
Richard D. Porotsky, Economic Coercion and the General Assembly: A Post-Cold War Assessment of the
Legality and Utility of the Thirty-Five-Year-Old Embargo Against Cuba, 28 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 901, 918
(1995)
sanctions are justified or not.24A violation of international law is a justification for the enactment
of economic sanctions, which can be take any shape where the act of Aglovale and Balan have
collectively declared that due to the war of aggression. There is no clear consensus in
International Law as to when coercive measures are improper, despite relevant treaties,
declarations and resolutions adopted in international organizations, which try to develop norms
limiting the use of such measures25. Thus we humbly submit to the court that there is no any clear
provision for the unilateral sanctions in international where burden of proof lies to Ragnell due to
contention and it need to be prove beyond Reasonable doubt.

4. AGLOVALE ACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREATY

Art 2 of Trilateral Treaty of Lasting Peace states that Parties shall apply amongst themselves the
provisions of the Charter of the United Nations as far as case is concerned Ragnell has acted
against the Provision of Art (2) UN Charter constituting an act of aggression. Ragnell has
violated its treaty obligations including the motive of the treaty and friendly Relations in Gais
Peninsula as a result Balan and Aglovale stated as a act of aggression. A lawful countermeasure
can be taken in response to a prior wrongful act and directed against the State committing the
wrongful act of Ragnell. Thus, it proves that the act of Aglovale were accordance with the treaty
of Lasting Peace.

24
William H. Kaempfer& Anton D. Lowenber, A Public Choice Analysis of the Political Economy of International
Sanctions, in Sanctions as Economic Statecraft 162 (Steven Chan & A. Cooper Drury eds. 2000)
25
UNGA, Economic Measures as a means of Political and Economic Coercion against Developing Countries: Note
by the Secretary General, UN Doc A/38/535 (25th October 1993)
ISSUE IV

RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN TRANSPORTING

HAZARDOUS PLASTIC WASTE TO ETNA, WHEREAS AGLOVALE COMPLIED
WITH THE TREATY IN CONDITIONING COOPERATION REGARDING
TREATMENT OF THE WASTE ON THE TERMINATION OF RAGNELL’S
AGGRESSION

1. RAGNELL VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN TRANSPORTING

HAZARDOUS PLASTIC WASTE TO ETNA
As case is concerned Ragnell has violates treaty obligations with the transferring hazardous
waste to Etna. It has been violated obligations where it will impact to the whole environment
system of Gais Peninsula. It causes harms to the human health and also the marine environment.
The International Landfill Solutions Alliance (ILSA), a global not-for-profit specializing in
research into safe methods of hazardous materials disposal, issued a report on 22 February 2022.
Entitled Waste Wars: The Environmental Impacts of the Situation in the Clarent Belt, the report
stated that which is unsustainable and environmentally harmful practices, including incineration
and dumping of potentially infectious plastic waste into open landfills and the ocean.26

Art 2 of Trilateral Treaty of Lasting Peace states that Parties shall apply amongst themselves the
provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of conventional and customary
international law governing friendly relations among states. The Parties shall adhere to and be
bound by all applicable principles of human rights and international humanitarian law and shall
take all necessary measures to prevent violations of those principles. As case is concerned
Ragnell has violated its obligations towards the Gais Peninsula through the interference and
violated the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Balan.

26
Moot Proposition , Para 45
2. AGLOVALE COMPLIED WITH THE TREATY IN CONDITIONING
COOPERATION REGARDING TREATMENT OF THE WASTE ON THE
TERMINATION OF RAGNELL’S AGGRESSION
As a matter of law, Aglovale claims that Ragnell has acted in violation of Article 2(4) of the
United Nations Charter27, and of customary law obligation to refrain from the threat or use of
force. The principle of territorial integrity of states is well established and protected by a series
of consequential rules prohibiting interference within the domestic jurisdiction of states as for
example Article 2(7).28 The prohibition on intervention between states has its foundation in
customary law and is based on the principle of sovereignty of the states.29 International law
prohibits intervention in conflict with civil war within another country, supports incitement to
subversive, terrorist or armed activities intended to lead to overthrowing power relationships. 30

As an act of Aggression done by the Ragnell has violated the treaty obligations. Where
asAglovale has negotiated with Ragnell for transfer of the waste management, but it couldn’t
reach to the conclusion.31 The waste management negotiations scheduled is Cancelled whereas
Ragnell government doesn’t seems to be responsible for military activities in the Clarent Belt.
After this event they never tried for the renegotiation where Aglovale just acted as a counter
measure rather than any gain or motive behind the decision not to breach the treaty obligations.
Negotiations doesn’t reach to conclusion it doesn’t mean to violation of treaty obligations. Thus,
there is not any sufficient nexus to prove that Aglovale has violated its treaty obligations.

27
Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, 1945
28
The Charter, Id., Article 2(7)
29
CF. SHAW, 6 INTERNATIONAL LAW 1039 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003)
30
STEIN/VON BUTTLAR, VOLKERRECHT 243 (Heymanns, Auflage, (2000).
31
Moot Proposition , Para 39
CONCLUSION AND PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Kingdom of Aglovale respectfully requests this Court to declare:Wherefore, in the light of
the facts of the case, issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, this Court may be
pleased to adjudge and declare that:

1. Ragnell has violated its Treaty obligations in launching “Operation Shining Star” and in its
attacks on both Nant Gateway and Compound Ardan, and must pay reparations to Aglovale for
the deaths of the eight Aglovalean nationals,

2. Ragnell violated its Treaty obligations by employing captured UAC fighters in the
transportation of contaminated plastic waste, and by detaining them in Camlann Correctional
Center,

3. Aglovale acted in accordance with the Treaty in imposing unilateral sanctions against Ragnell
and Ragnellian nationals, and has no obligation to withdraw the sanctions, to return any property,
or to compensate Ragnell for their impact,

4. Ragnell violated its Treaty obligations in transporting hazardous plastic waste to Etna,
whereas Aglovale complied with the Treaty in conditioning cooperation regarding treatment of
the waste on the termination of Ragnell’s aggression.

Respectfully submitted.

Agents for the Kindgom of Aglovale

All of which is Respectfully Submitted