Please answer the following questions in no more than 300 words each:

1. In the North Sea Continental Shelf Case, how did the ICJ conclude that the principle of equidistance is not required by customary international law? That is, what was the reasoning behind its decision?

2. What are peremptory international laws, and how are they different from other types of international laws? According to Mary Ellen O’Connell, how should jurists identify which laws are peremptory?

3. In the Pinochet case, the UK court concluded that Augusto Pinochet was not immune from prosecution for the crime of torture. What was the reasoning behind the court’s decision in this case?

4. In the South China Seas case, what were China’s arguments with respect to the ninedash line, and how did the tribunal in The Hague respond to their claims?

5. In Nicaragua vs. the United States, how did the ICJ respond to the U.S. argument that it was justified in using force in Nicaragua? What was the reasoning behind the ICJ’s conclusion? Please answer one of the following questions in no more than 1,500 words. International Law and Anticipatory Uses of Military Force: Although states have a general obligation to refrain from using military force, customary law and the UN Charter do recognize that states have the right to individual and collective self-defense against armed attacks. Yet, there is significant debate concerning when states may use force in anticipation of an armed attack that has not yet occurred. The controversy surrounding the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq reflects these debates. Using any case that you like, and using the relevant reading materials, please answer the following questions: Is it legally permissible for states to use military force in anticipation of an attack that has not yet occurred, and if so, under what conditions? What is Michael Walzer’s view on the ethics of anticipatory uses of force, and how does his account relate to the norms of international law? Finally, which view do you find the most compelling (i.e. Walzer’s view or international law), and why?

Solution PreviewSolution Preview

These solutions may offer step-by-step problem-solving explanations or good writing examples that include modern styles of formatting and construction of bibliographies out of text citations and references. Students may use these solutions for personal skill-building and practice. Unethical use is strictly forbidden.

In the North Sea Continental Shelf Case, the court identified that the International Law Commission had not proposed the principle of equidistance as an emerging customary International Law rule. The court supported its stance by claiming that any state was free to make reservations based on Article 6 of the Geneva Convention, however on signing, acceding, or ratifying to the convention. In addition to this, the jury clarified that other provisions of the conventions were also not set apart from the power of reservation. However, all the provisions related to the general maritime rules of law, hence coming before the Convention, which was only secondary to continental shelf rights. Furthermore, the institution argued that the provisions had been mentioned in the Convention only with the aim of ensuring that they were not subject to prejudice owing to the fulfillment of continental shelf rights.

Nonetheless, Article 6 was more concerned with the continental shelf rights. Since the article was regulated by the faculty of regulation, it implied legitimately that it did not reflect the emergent international customary law. The court also referred to a claim that had been presented before it on behalf of two aggravated countries, namely, Netherlands and Denmark. According to the jury, it had been claimed that even if no rule for customary international rule had prevailed at the date of creating the Geneva Convention in favor of the equidistance doctrine, such a rule had come into existence after the Convention. While this is the case, the court held out that for such a claim to be valid, Article 6 of the Convention ought to be a norm-creating character. Therefore, the article was framed in such a way that the mandate to use equidistance methods would come right after a primary obligation to affect delimitation through an agreement....

By purchasing this solution you'll be able to access the following files:

for this solution

PayPal, G Pay, ApplePay, Amazon Pay, and all major credit cards accepted.

Find A Tutor

View available Government and Politics - Other Tutors

Get College Homework Help.

Are you sure you don't want to upload any files?

Fast tutor response requires as much info as possible.

Upload a file
Continue without uploading

We couldn't find that subject.
Please select the best match from the list below.

We'll send you an email right away. If it's not in your inbox, check your spam folder.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Live Chats