International Law

www.studymafia.
org
International Law
Defining International Law
Traditional: the rules determining the conduct of states in
their dealings with one other
Increasingly, though, individuals and corporations – not just
states – viewed as subjects of international law
Newer: the body of rules and principles, formal and
informal, operating at the international rather than national
level
Sources of International Law
Explicit agreements (Treaties, conventions, protocols)
UN Charter
Geneva Convention
Kyoto Protocol
Customary Law (like “common law”)
Widespread, representative and consistent practice of states
Norms (general principles of morality and justice)
 UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Objectives
To understand the obligations imposed on India
To understand how these instruments are
implemented in India
Areas of International Law
diplomacy
war
environment
human
rights
War
When is it legal?
“just wars” versus wars of aggression
What conduct is legal?
No chemical or biological weapons; no land mines
Non-combatants should not be targeted
Excessive force should be avoided
POWs
Diplomacy
Diplomatic recognition and immunity
Embassies as sovereign territory

Human Rights
 New and controversial area
 How do you define it?
 Infringes on national sovereignty
 Broad political rights
 Helsinki Accords (1970s)
 U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
 U.N. Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966)
 U.N. Convention Against Torture (1984)
 Rights of threatened groups
 U.N. Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (1965)
 U.N. Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women/CEDAW
(1979)
 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989)
 Genocide (1948 convention)
 Rwanda
 Bosnia
 Sudan?
U.S. and Human Rights
Champion?
Led campaign for rights in Soviet Union, then China
Hypocrite?
U.S. trained torturers during Cold War; and used torture at
Guantanamo and in Iraq
Targets counter that U.S. itself has largest number of
prisoners; a vast population of poor and homeless; persistent
racism
U.S. hasn’t ratified many human rights conventions
 Economic, social and cultural rights
 Elimination of discrimination against women
 Rights of child
Superpower Exceptionalism
Not just on human rights conventions
U.S. also has not ratified
ILO conventions on labor rights (1950s)
CTBT
Convention on the Law of the Seas
Land Mine treaty
Global Warming (Kyoto) protocol
Question Two:
How is it enforced?
Well, no … not really
Option #1
International Court of Justice
ICJ = World Court
A branch of the UN
meets in The Hague (Netherlands)
15 judges
serving nine-year terms
selected by UN
Hears cases brought by states against other states
Example: border disputes (Honduras v. El Salvador)
Jurisdiction? Shaky
U.S. and mining of Nicaragua’s harbor (1986)
Option #2
National Courts
U.S. courts
Individuals can play, too
High jury awards
Greater enforcement power
Belgian courts
Human rights cases (Geneva conventions)
Spanish courts (Judge Baltasar Garzón)
The Pinochet case
Option #3
The Court of Public Opinion
This is also called “shaming”

NGOs
International media
And it often works!
An Example of Shaming:
Canada and Harp Seal Pups
Realists or Liberals?
Realists are Right
The powerful prevail
Especially on security issues
Example: International Criminal Court
New permanent court (2003) in The Hague
18 judges
Will replace ad hoc war crimes tribunals, hearing cases
brought against individuals for crimes against humanity
U.S. won’t participate
U.S. and the ICC
U.S. secured U.N. resolution exempting U.S.
nationals from ICC jurisdiction for crimes committed
during UN operations
U.S. demanded that other states enter into bilateral
agreements promising not to surrender U.S. nationals
to the ICC
Clinton signed treaty on 12/31/2000; Bush took
unusual step of “unsigning” on 3/6/2002
Then again …
maybe the Liberals are right
To back out of the ICC, GWB actually followed

another international treaty
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties requires
signatories to “refrain from acts that would defeat the
object and purpose” of a treaty.
Bush’s “unsigning” (by announcing U.S. intent not to
ratify) cleared the U.S. from the obligations of the
Vienna Convention
References
THANKS

International Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

www.studymafia.

Diplomatic recognition and immunity

Embassies as sovereign territory

This is also called “shaming”

To back out of the ICC, GWB actually followed

You might also like