PIL Transcript (1)

download PIL Transcript (1)

of 87

Transcript of PIL Transcript (1)

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    1/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    In the feld o la! the course should start ith a discussionon the nature o the sub"ect. It is #ublic international la so

    e begin ith the nature and meaning o #ublic internationalla. This is di$erent rom the a% e stud% our domesticlas.

    &e begin ith the 'uestion! %ou must ha(e encountered in%our readings that #ublic international la is actuall%described as a )ind o legal s%stem that is horizontal ratherthan (ertical so e start ith that. I %ou anal%ze our nationallegal s%stem e described it as (ertical in character hile PI*is a horizontal legal s%stem.

    W#$ % %" &!'%(e)e( * * #!)%+!'"*l le,*l $"e W#$% %" H!)%+!'"*l %' *)*&"e)/ #*" *e %" C+ unli)e the (ertical legal s%stem! it is agreed u#on b% thestate so it is not im#osed b% a higher authorit%.

    S! "#e)e '! #%,#e) !l%"%&*l *"#!)%"$ %!%', PILC+ Yes.

    !'" e #*e 7!) e8*le "#e UN !e %" '!" e)e* "#e #%,#e) !l%"%&*l *"#!)%"$C+ ,o. It is an international organisation that is com#osed odi$erent states herein the% come u# ith con(ention andagreements to im#lement and enorce rules and #roceduresto go(ern the relationshi# o the states. But it doesn-t ser(eas higher authorit%! it is merel% an organization thatcom#rise o the states that agree ith each other.

    I7 PIL % * #!)%+!'"*l le,*l $"e/ #*" *)*&"e)%e* #!)%+!'"*l le,*l $"eIt is horizontal because unli)e the command theor% o ohnAustin or e/am#le! e learned in Philo o la! unli)e in a

    #ositi(ist #ers#ecti(e herein the la is im#osed b% a higherso(ereign! PI* is more on consensus based rather than

    command. That is hat A)ehurst mentioned in his boo). Thisis based more on consensus agreed u#on b% states rather

    than im#osed u#on states.

    S! #*" *)*&"e)%+e %" W#*" )!9le !l( %"9)%',C+ Being horizontal! it means that it o#erates ith the statesagreeing among themsel(es o the la to come u# ith!there might be a #roblem ith the #rocess.

    T#e )!&e %"# &!%', .. S! #*" $! *)e "ell%', % ee' %' "#e 7!)*"%!' !7 %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*/ %" %)!9le*"%&. W#$ !l( %" 9e )!9le*"%& T#e7!)*"%!' !7 %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*C+ it is because the states are orced! the% constantl% #ursuetheir on interest so it could be that i the la o#eratesagainst them or i it is disad(antageous the% ma% notconcede to it.

    Rle "#*" #*e '!" 9ee' *,)ee( !' (! '!" 7!)*)" !7 PILC+ not necessaril% sir.

    S! PIL % '!" )e*ll$ :" 9*e( !' *,)eee'"Yes.

    Defnitel% o course i it is based on agreement! it is eas% tos#ot the #roblem e ill encounter there. Precisel% i it isbased on agreement there is disagreement then that is the#roblem.

    B" #*" *9!" "#e 7!)*"%!' !7 %'"e)'*"%!'*l l* "#*"% '!" 9*e( !' &!'e'"%!'/ *)e "#e)e %' "#e ;)" l*&el* '!" 9*e( !' &!'e'"%!'

    C+ Yes! customar% international la.

    0

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    2/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    I %ou )no! ho is customar% international la ormed since%ou alread% introduced one #roblem in international la! but

    %ou o#ened u# the issue on the #roblem o ormationbecause I confrm that through e(en in the ormation ointernational la it is also #roblematic unli)e in our nationallegal s%stem there ouldn-t be a #roblem es#eciall% in are#resentati(e democrac% or go(ernment here o coursethe go(erned ill sim#l% be as)ed to obe% las #assed b% there#resentati(es. In the case o states tr%ing to come u# ithan international rule! the #roblem i it is based on con(entionould be #recisel% the (%*,)eee'" 9e"ee' "*"e. Butin so ar as Customar% International *a is concerned hichis not based on con(ention generall%! still there-s a #roblemith CI*.

    W#*" (! $! "#%' % "#e )!9le %"# "#e 7!)*"%!'!7 CILC+ I thin) it ould be the substance or the la itsel as ellas1

    Hold on! ala #a ta sources.

    &hen e stud% the sources o international la e ill learnthat one o the elements o CI* is a uniorm and consistentstate #ractice and basicall% because e re'uire some sort ogeneralit% o state #ractice here state #ractice is notconsistent or generall% in regard to a #articular norm thenthat norm can hardl% become customar% international la!the other #roblem o course is that this norm is consistentl%uniorml% #racticed b% states ith the belie that the norm islegall% binding! e call it "#e !%'%!' :)%re'uirement andthat itsel is #roblematic because its a mental element.

    Ho to tell hether the obser(ant o this #articular norm or

    "ust or reasons o con(enience but states do belie(e that thenorm is reall% legall% binding norm! it is di2cult. But o

    course! hen e reach that cha#ter e ill learn ho todetermine hether these elements are com#lied ith. But o

    course I confrm that e(en in the ormation o CI* is reall%#roblematic.

    ,ot onl% in the ormation o International la! e(en in theenorcement o international la.

    C*' $! e8l*%' "#*" W#$ !l( "#e)e 9e )!9le%"# %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*C+ Because sir! a state has its on authorit% li)e or hat ecall indi(idual so(ereignt%. A state ma% sa% that this la! thate ill not adhere to this customar% international la! so echoose to de(iate rom all other nations.

    I said enorcement o International la! not com#liance.Because hat %ou are tr%ing to tell us is+ Sir theres aproblem as well on whether states do obey internationallaw! that #robabl% ould be m% ne/t 'uestion but I entdirectl% to the #roblem o enorcement.

    &hat it means is! or e/. There-s a "udgment o aninternational tribunal li)e in the Case o ,icaragua (s the 34.,icaragua claimed around hat5 67 or 06 Billion e(en u# tothe #resent although sometime in 0880 %ou )no o course,icaragua as aarded in the ,icaragua (s 34 case! butdon-t %ou )no that e(en u# to the #resent the "udgment hasnot %et been satisfed. 9 course there is this contention onthe #art o the 34 that it has not been enorced since in 0880the administration o ,icaragua a##arentl% ai(ed the claime(en i ,icaragua had been a(ourabl% aarded. 4o trul%"#e)e % * )!9le !7 e'7!)&ee'".4o its still #roblembut I-m not tal)ing about the #roblem here states ma% notactuall% obe% international la! that-s another stor%.

    Assuming states belie(e that international la and hen one(iolates international la then there is liabilit% or

    :

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    3/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    res#onsibilit%. The #roblem is ho to enorce liabilit% andres#onsibilit%5

    ! $! '! #$ "#e)e * )!9le %' "#ee'7!)&ee'" !7 %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*C+ I thin) it-s because o the inde#endence o the state itsel4ir that %ou can-t "ust interere ith their rights.

    Ye*# 9" %" %' "#e *e *$ "#*" e* !'e !7 %!e(l$ *"!'!!. I e*'/ %'(%%(*l $e" e*)e &!elle( !e#! 9$ )le %' !) le,*l $"e.W#$ (!'" e *l$ "#e *e %' !) %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*C+ I don-t thin) it o#erates li)e that in International la sir.Because or the reason that the states ha(e their onso(ereignt%..

    This is or e/am#le! I-m thin)ing about a situation herethere is a a(ourable "udgment b% the International court o

    "ustice. Is it not the IC ma% not be able to actuall% enorce itson "udgment unli)e in the case o our regular courts hereit can issue rits o e/ecution! non com#liance also ouldamount to aground or contem#t and i e are tal)ing aboutcrim la then the indi(idual ma% be sent to "ail b% orce. Butthat is not or that cannot be done in international la.

    S! #*" "#e )!9le %"# "#e IC< 7!) e8*leC+ I thin) sir the a% the% im#lement the "udgment it isregulated. I mean it has..

    S! "#e)e * *$ "#*" "#e IC< %ll %lee'" "#e%)(e&%%!'C+ B% im#osing sanctions.

    T#e IC< %ll %!e *'&"%!' U'l%e "#e &*e !7 "#e

    &!)" 9" "#e IC

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    4/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    e(er%thing is ala%s based on consent. 4o "urisdiction o theIC is based on consent.

    B" (! $! '! "#*" "#e IC< #%le l*),el$ 9*e( !'&!'e'"/ "#e)e % *l! #*" e &*ll "#e &!l!)$

    :)%(%&"%!' !7 "#e IC

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    5/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    4o %ou can sa% that the "urisdiction o the IC is #roblematicand the other o course #roblem that e encounter in

    international la is the enorcement o international la. Theanser5 ,ot onl% do e lac) a orld court e also don-t ha(einternational #olice. uch less international tanods! ala na.

    B" (%9* S%) "#e)e % * e&)%"$ &!'&%l &*' e '!"l%e' %" "! *' %'"e)'*"%!'*l !l%&eHa(e %ou not obser(ed it in the nes that i a statemisbeha(es! more oten than not the 4ecurit% council illha(e to send troo#s #re(ent an% atrocities committed b% amisbeha(ing state li)e 4%ria or e/am#le.

    S!/ #$ &*'" e l%e' "#e Se&)%"$ &!'&%l "! *'%'"e)'*"%!'*l !l%&e #*" )!', %"# "#e e&)%"$&!'&%l0. legall% and #oliticall% limited.

    W#$ !l%"%&*ll$ l%%"e(9 course #olitical realit% hether %ou li)e it or not there-sorld #olitics. It-s a act.

    E8.Remember hat ha##ened to 3)raine! in(ol(ing Crimeaand in relation to Russia. 4o Russian militar% orces in(adedand occu#ied Crimea hich is a #art o 3)raine! the 34resisted that because that-s hat the 34 ill do almostala%s. You-re big brother image! it anted to o course as)or the consentauthorisation o the securit% council to useorce against Russia. But o course it did not e(en botherbecause the securit% council consist o #ermanentmembers and one o the #ermanent members is no less thanRussia.

    W#$ % "#*" %!)"*'"

    It is im#ortant because a singular (eto b% one o the illnot result to a #ositi(e action or ill not authorise or

    a2rmati(e action on the #art o the 4ecurit% council. That isa single (eto o the securit% council it has to be unanimous.

    4ame thing ith hat ha##ened to 4%ria.

    &hen nes eru#ted that someho the go(ernment o 4%riaused some sort o biological ea#ons e(en against its oncitizen (iolating thereore human rights la the 34 antedto ta)e action! it as)ed the securit% council to authorise the34 because actuall% %ou can use that. Its either %ou as) thesecurit% council to ta)e militar% action b% the securit%account or %ou can as) or authorisation. You can tell the4ecurit% council+

    dont worry you dont need to deploy your !" troops# yourblue beret troops. We can do it on our own# just authorise us

    The use o orce ill be "ustifable! o course that as not ano#tion because 4%ria as a good all% o Russia and R%*%ll 'ee)gi(e its (ote in a(our o such militar% account b%the 34 since 4%ria is an all% because o oil! as a main su##liero Russia. 4o #olitics reall% is or)ing there.

    We (!'" #*e *' %'"e)'*"%!'*l !l%&e )e&%el$9e&*e !7 "#e #*" $! &*ll le,*l *'( !l%"%&*l)!9le ))!'(%', "#e %'"%""%!' !7 "#e e&)%"$&!'&%l.

    A= W#*" *9!" "#e &*e !7 A7,#*'%"*' %( "#eSe&)%"$ &!'&%l *"#!)%e "#e (el!$e'" !7 US")!!

    Yes o course. 4o it-s either the securit% council itsel. .. hich#art o the histor% o Aghanistan ere %ou tal)ing about5

    &ell that-s one o the areas o #ublic international la.

    3nilateral use o orce or militar% inter(ention hen is itreall% "ustifable. You get to understand this later hen e

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    6/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    tal) about the use o orce discussed in ,icaragua.

    ,ot onl% in the ormation are there #roblems but also in theenorcement o international la! e don-t ha(e a orldcourt! %ou ha(e the IC but its "urisdiction is largel% based onconsent. I e(er #arties ha(e submitted themsel(es to its

    "urisdiction an% "udgment can hardl% be enorced because edon-t ha(e an international #olice. &e ha(e the securit%council %es but there are #roblems in the institution itsel

    both #olitical and legal. >e"! )le or e/am#le is a#roblematic institution in the securit% council.

    ?(en i there-s a #roblem in the ormation o International laand the #roblem o enorcing international la! e as) the'uestion is it not the act that des#ite these obser(ed#roblems states do obe% PI*. And so e as) the 'uestion+

    W#$ (! "*"e !9e$ %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*P+ although there are #roblems ith international la thestates ould #reer to abide b% the las to ha(e unit% or

    #lace ithin the communit% o states.

    W#$ A)e $! l!!%', *" "*"e %"# !e !)" !7*l")%"%& 7eel%', T#e$ *'" e*&e %' "#% !)l(

    P+ I thin) sir! the outloo) o these so(ereign states is tolessen an% #roblems to encounter ith other so(ereign statesso the% conorm to more or less so that it ould discourage#roblems to be encountered.

    C*' $! &!'"e8"*l%+e "#*" S! 7!) e8*le #$#!l( "*"e A !9e$ * *)"%&l*) %'"e)'*"%!'*l '!)Be&*e %" *'" e*&e *'( !)(e)P+ Yes 4ir.

    S! $!)e l!!%', *" "#e "*"e * !e"#%', "#*"

    ")*'&e'( el7 %'"e)e" "#*" %" !l( )e*ll$ *'"l*"%', e*&e %' "#e !)l( I ingana #alang class thenorld #eace! that-s hat e mean. Its li)e a 'uestion in abeaut% #ageant. But it ma% be true! o course! the good thingabout international la is (er% e rules are f/ed and e(en ithe% are f/ed someho the% e(ol(e! the% de(elo#. Then#robabl% %es. But to be realistic about it! !" "*"e *)e%'"e)e"e( %' "#e%) !' %'"e)e" "#*' "#e %'"e)e" !7"#e e'"%)e &!'%"$. That e/#lains h% e ha(e the#roblem on climate change. Because i e are res#onsibleand all e ant is to sa(e mother earth! then there ould beno climate change. But the thing is that all o our acti(itiesare geared toards #romoting our on sel interest.De(elo#ment or e/am#le s a ma"or concern o e(er% state.

    The #reser(ation o the en(ironment is a secondar% interest.That ould ta)e a lot o altruistic eelings rom the state.That-s di2cult because %ou can-t e(en e/#ect altruism romindi(iduals states #a. Ho man% o us are seless5 Its humannature to be selfsh. not less %ou become a buddha underbuddhism! the enlightened one! )ana #ede.

    T#e !"#e) )e*!' e)&e%e( * * )e*!' #$ "*"e (!

    E

    Problem with the formation of international law:

    1. So theres: enforcement you have the problem offormation because one if it is conventional law,disagreement,!. "f it is #"$ the problem of consistency, uniformity,generality.%. &he problem of identifying exactly opinion 'uriselement is complied with because it is a mentalelement. (hether or not in fact states observe aparticular norm because of the belief that it islegally binding.

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    7/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    !9e)e %'"e)'*"%!'*l l* % "#*" %" % * )e&%)!&*l"#%',. The% obe% international rules ith the e/#ectation

    that other states too obe% international la and that oulda(our all states ali)e.

    For e/am#le i to states are entering into a treat% oe/tradition. 4tate A has citizens in 4tate B. A citizen is to be#rosecuted in 4tate A -s countr%! o course %ou cannotorcibl% abduct. &hat %ou can do is %ou enorce it throughthe usual #rocess o e/tradition assuming there is ane/tradition treat%. 4o under the #rinci#le o #acta suntser(anda! agreements or sti#ulations o treaties must becom#lied ith in good aith. Pacta sunt ser(anda.

    4o i e ha(e or e/am#le a treat%! international lamandates that 4tate G should com#l% ith that obligation. B%entering into an e/tradition treat%! 4tate G-s obligation is tohonour 4tate B-s re'uest or e/tradition. &hen B ma)es are'uest that G e/tradite B-s citizen so that he ill be#rosecuted in %our countr% I ill be obligated to a(ourabl%grant the re'uest because o the obligation that i it ha##ensto our state and e ma)e the same re'uest in %ougo(ernment e also e/#ect %ou to obe%. 9 course this illbe in the best interest o this state. Diba selfsh si%a giha#on5

    There-s nothing rong ith that because it is #art o humannature. That-s li)e alling in lo(e! #art o human nature. ustma)e sure it alls in the right #erson.

    T#*" !'e/ #*" (! $! "#%' *)e !"#e) !%9le)e*!' 7!) !9e)%', !) &!$%', %"# %'"e)'*"%!'*ll*/ !"#e) "#*' el7 %'"e)e"P+ I there are an% misunderstandings or conicts beteenstates it ould also a$ect their econom%..

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    8/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    state ill com#l% international la or hate(er reason.

    B" le" *e %" (!e '!" 9el%ee %' %'"e)'*"%!'*ll*/ %" %ll '!" )e*ll$ &!l$ %"# %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*/#*" *)e "#e !"#e) *$ 9$ #% e &*' &!el"*"e "! !9e$ %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*/ "#% % #e)e "#e(!&")%'e !7 el7 #el *l%e&e can-t sanction the in"uring state through a higherauthorit% because there is no higher authorit%. Ree9e)"#*" %'"e)'*"%!'*l l* % 9*e( !' &!'e'. 4o e#olice oursel(es in a a%. 4o the doctrine o sel hel#com#lements the theories on h% states obser(einternational la.

    P+ the other #art% asn-t able to get the "udgment itdeser(es4+ but not onl% that! e(en i there is no "udgment %etsomeho com#liance to! obedience to international la canbe demanded o a state li)e hat 34 did to ,icaragua. &henthe 34 #ercei(ed ,icaragua as ha(ing su##orti(e logisticall%!fnanciall% and militaril% the rebels or guerrillas in ?l4al(ador! an all% o the 34.

    The 34 had some sort o a mutual deense treat% ith ?l4al(ador. The go( o ?l 4al(ador as fghting against rebelsand ?l 4al(ador didn-t ha(e a riendl% relationshi# ith,icaragua. ,icaragua as accused o su##orting the rebels in?l 4al(ador because ,icaragua at that time became acommunist state! and ?l 4al(ador on the other hand asca#italist. That is h% all% o 34. 4o this communist go( o,icaragua su##orted allegedl% to the rebels in ?l 4al(ador.

    The 34 disco(ered that! the 34 sometime in anuar% 08M0!sus#ended its economic aid because ,icaragua as areci#ient o economic aid rom the 34.

    You )no that oreign #olic% o 34 is a)in to a merchant!

    maa%o )aa%o manghatag! generous )aa%o h%5 Becausethat-s good or business. 4o sometimes be careul ith

    #ersons that are too generous! I-m not sa%ing that sus#iciousta all the time but it-s a act o lie! there are #eo#le hoould do that because o some e/#ectations that-s in theuture. The oreign #olic% o the 34! economic aid becausema%be sooner or later! that reci#ients o these grants or aidsma% be o use to 34 interest. And The Phil is one o those.&ho are unluc)% in the radar o the 34 because o ourstrategic location in the #acifc. There-s no a% the 34 illgi(e u# the Phil no a%.

    4o ,icaragua as one o the reci#ients o economic aid! so

    hen 34 disco(ered that sus#ended ni%a and e(entuall%cancelled it in the third 'uarter o 08M0 because there areusuall% to orms o sel hel#+0. Retorsion = is a laul act hich is designed to in"ure therongdoing state =or e/am#le cutting o$ economic aid.:. Re#risal = are acts hich ould normall% be illegal buthich are rendered legal b% a #rior act committed b% theother state.

    %"%',%#Retorsion is a laul act so i %ou do that no internationallegal conse'uences. &hat-s an e/am#le o a retorsion5=cutting o$ o economic aid.

    9 course because no one is com#elled to be generous. I %oucut o$ economic aid that is #erectl% legal so hen the 34sus#ended and e(entuall% canceled its economic aid thatas actuall% tr%ing to tell ,icaragua+ hey "icara$ua obeyinternational law# do not intervene with the a%airs of &lSalvador. 4o that-s ho states tell other states to obe%international la.

    T#e %'"e'e 7!) !7 el7 #el % )e)%*l.

    M

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    9/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    Illegal e/#ro#riation b% some states. There is such a thing ase/tra"udicial e/#ro#riation. ,o court #roceeding. A #ro#ert%

    or business is ta)en b% a oreign countr% ithout due #rocesso la! no com#ensation and all and so the in"ured state canalso do the same to the com#anies or hate(er in theterritor% o the in"ured state. 4o that-s illegal because %oucannot as a general rule e/#ro#riate ithout "ustcom#ensation. Due #rocess is an international acce#ted#rinci#le o international la so that is hat %ou call re#risal.

    &e-re loo)ing the #roblem o enorcement! %et e are loo)ingat the a%s b% hich! des#ite the #roblem! states ma% becom#elled to obser(e international la. Don-t orget the

    doctrine o sel hel#.

    A7"e) *ll "#% (%&%!' (! $! #!'e"l$ 9el%ee "#*"%'"e)'*"%!'*l l* % * ")e l*This 'uestion should besettled frst on agreeing on certain assum#tions and this canbe done b% using se(eral lenses #ers#ecti(es or (ies ohat la means.I Austin-s command theor% is used! international la canne(er be a true la because there is no higher authorit% tos#ea) o. But that is not the onl% lens.

    I our idea is la is la because it is binding! then theconce#tion o la in accordance ith H*A Hart. Case theor%on #rimar% and secondar% rules that the #rimar% rules arebinding onl% hen the% are in accordance ith secondar%rules. 4o la can be #ercei(ed on the basis on hether it isbinding or not. I it is not biding then it ma% not 'uali% as ala or that #ers#ecti(e but here! international la can bebinding. Yes5N+ PI* can be considered as true la since an%thing thatcoerces the states to beha(e in a #articular manner is to beconsidered as a la.

    And e ha(e alread% studied the (arious reasons h% states

    obser(e international la.

    "n brief:

    (hy do States obey)

    1. "t is a reciprocal thing.

    !. *ear of sanctions

    II

    E!l"%!' !7 I'"e)'*"%!'*l L*

    To )no ho it e(ol(ed! e loo) at ho it is defned b% theauthorities o the matter and (ieed rom the aus#ices outilitarianism as e learned last time here internationalcommunit% had (ieed states as the onl% #artici#ants ininternational la and thereore at that time o course thenconsidered the onl% sub"ects o PI*. 4o %ou add the traditionaldefnition o Brierl% himsel hen he said that PI* is a bod% orules and #rinci#les o actions hich are binding u#onci(ilised states in their relations ith one another.

    &raditional +enition: .$ Brierly 1//1-102: 3thebody of rules and principles of action which arebinding on civili4ed states in their relations with oneanother5.

    As I ha(e said! utilitarian belie ha(e contributed to suchthin)ing and e(en in the Phili##ines e started to (eer aa%rom the idea o utilitarianism e(en onl% u#on the ado#tion o

    the 08M6 consti.

    8

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    10/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    For e/am#le! hat did the 08

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    11/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    modern defnition o PI*. I %ou loo) at the defnition! thatould no include not "ust states! or not "ust international

    organizations but e(en #ersons hether natural or "uridicalso this is here rom %our readings o A)ehurst he mentionedabout multinational com#anies! ,O9s a#art rom the 3, ocourse! &T9! and the (arious organs o the 3, includingindi(iduals.

    4o i I ma% as) this 'uestion! a (er% good 'uestion a #ossiblegood 'uestion in the bar! and i e are to tal) about thosethat #la% acti(e role in the ormation o International la! tobe go(erned b% international la! e call them sub"ects ointernational la. 4o a (er% good 'uestion in the bar ould

    be+

    H! (! $! ")e*" %'(%%(*l 9:e&" !) !9:e&" !7PIL E8l*%'DC+ treated as ob"ects o international la because the% don-tha(e the legal #ersonalit%.

    W#*" (! $! e*' 9$ le,*l e)!'*l%"$ T#e)e #!l(9e *((e( "! "#*" "*"ee'". T#e$ (!'" #*e le,*le)!'*l%"$ "! #*"C+ the% don-t ha(e the ca#acit% to fle cases directl% tointernational courts.

    S! %'&l(%', )%*"e &!)!)*"%!' "#e$ (!'" #*ee)!'*l%"$C+ Yes.

    Are %ou sure5 I a oreign in(estor in the Phili##ines ore/am#le is (ictimized b% certain go( regulations as hen ore/am#le unreasonabl% e/#ro#riates or ta)es assets o that#ri(ate cor#orations in the territor% o the Phil! are %ou notaare or e/am#le that that Pri(ate com#an% can actuall%

    sue the Phil go(ernment or damages at the internationalle(el because the Phil has agreed to be sued actuall% beore

    hat e call the IC4ID I don-t )no unsa ni but! sounds li)eso it ma% ha##en reall% that indi(idual can e(en bring a claimat the international le(el.

    C+ hen it comes to #ersons! the% don-t ha(e legal#ersonalit% because the% ill frst see) the assistance to thedomestic la beore going to the international and it ill betheir countr% ho ill fle a case to the international court o

    "ustice.

    I "#e)e * "e) "! "#*" )!&e A)e $! 7*%l%*) %"#

    "#e "e) !7 (%l!*"%& )!"e&"%!' !) e!*l !7 &l*%)!&e W#*" *' e8*le !7 "#*"C+ hen the "a#anese #eo#le! the comort omen att% in the#hili##ines! hen the% fled cases and suits because o theabuses that as done to them b% the a#anese #eo#le the%cannot go directl% to the international court o "usticebecause the% ha(e to see) relie rom the Phil go(ernment.

    W* "#*" "#e )l%', !7 "#e SC "#*" "#e$ &*''!" O)"#e)e * '! 9*% *%', "#e ,!e)'e'" "!)e)ee'" "#eThat-s a rele(ant obser(ation indeed! ellsince %ou ha(e mentioned it. It as not because the comortomen could not but it as sim#l% because the 4Ccharacterized the #ercei(ed o$ences committed b% the

    a#anese orces at the rele(ant time! ra#e or e/am#le asconstituti(e o ar crimes among the ar crimes as not %etconsidered as CI* or "us cogens norms at that time o courseit as not CI* or "us cogens #rohibition then the go(ernmentmight bail in re#resenting the comort ea#on although ocourse the% recei(ed a lot o criticism because it as notsu##osedl% or the go(ernment to ma)e that "udgment! ellit could ha(e #robabl% "ust ell! the% could ha(e the guts tosa% that ell "ust test this at the international le(el.

    00

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    12/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    W#*" $! *)e "ell%', %'(%%(*l *)e !9:e&" !7

    %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*.

    &hat she as telling us class is this+ true! the IC ould onl%allo states as #arties to it.

    &hat it means is that hen indi(iduals are (ictims obeha(iour o states li)e oreigners not treated "ustl% and airl%because understand that e ha(e a rule in PI* that amoment a oreigner is admitted in the territor% o anotherstate! that recei(ing state is go(erned b% at least the%'% "*'(*)( !7 ")e*"%', "#e 7!)e%,'e) 7*%)l$ *'(

    :"l$. &e call it the air and "ust treatment o oreigners.&hen it ha##ens that the recei(ing state (iolates e(en thatminimum standard it ma% gi(e rise to state res#onsibilit%. Theo$ence is not against the oreigner maltreated b% therecei(ing state but the o$ence is against the state o hichthe oreigner is a national and it ma% be a case o di#lomatic#rotection.

    W#*" $!)e ")$%', "! *$ % "#*" %'&e *' %'(%%(*l&*''!" (%)e&"l$ )ee'" * &l*% *" "#e %'"e)'*"%!'*lleel/ "#e' *' %'(%%(*l &*' 'ee) 9e * 9:e&" !7%'"e)'*"%!'*l l*.

    &ell i %our #ers#ecti(e or idea o sub"ect is on the basis ohether it can maintain a claim at the international le(elthen indi(iduals ma% be considered reall% as generall%ob"ects o international la! but the anser to this 'uestion isthat indi(iduals are actuall% generall% ob"ects ointernational la but it doesn-t mean that the% ill ne(er besub"ects o international la.

    4o the a##roach ould be+

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    13/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    A'!"#e) e8*leas mentioned b% A)ehurst is a situationhere in an armed conict or e/am#le it %'!le ,)!

    e8e)&%%', "#e )%,#" "! el7 (e"e)%'*"%!n and hencertain grou#s in an armed conict e/ercise the right to seldetermination and the% become hat e call nationalliberation mo(ements because the% ha(e been sub"ect tosome racist regimes colonial occu#ation and more or lesssimilar discrimination then the armed conict ischaracterized or is considered an international armed conicthere normall% hen there is no oreign state in(ol(ed theconict ill be characterised onl% as internal armed conictand not international armed conict. The result ould besince it is an international conict then some #ro(isions o

    the 08@8 O?,?A con(entions ill be a##lied es#eciall%common article < o the our O?,?A con(entions on the#rotection o ca#tured combatants here the% are generall%a$orded certain rights as #risoners o ar. eaning! %ouha(e a situation here there is actuall% no third state ororeign state in(ol(ed. Conict is sim#l% beteen the regulararmed orce o 4tate A and an armed grou# in the same statein the same territor% but e/ercising the right to seldetermination under the international humanitarian la! thatis to be go(erned b% International armed conict rule andthereore under the O?,?A con(entions the combatantsca#tured b% one o the belligerents ill ha(e to be treated oraccorded #risoners o ar #ri(ileges e/. #risoners o ar issic) then he has to be gi(en medicine or ould be alloedaccess to reasonable medical treatment and other li)esa##urtenant to #risoners o ar.

    4o %ou notice mostl% o the humanitarian la #rinci#les#rotect indi(iduals and so to that e/tent e can sael% arguethat indi(iduals ma% be considered also as sub"ects ointernational la. There is thereore good reason to ado#t thisdefnition as reected o the modern or rather contem#orar%defnition o PI*.

    &e need also to distinguish beteen Pri(ate and Public

    international la or #ur#oses o #ro#er rameor) o hate are stud%ing. Do not e(er thin) that "ust because a#roblem or e/am#le in(ol(es se(eral states it is alread% aPI* #roblem it de#ends on hat e are tr%ing to tal) about.4o it is #ublic international la i e are tal)ing about therelationshi#s o international #ersons! states and otherinternational #ersons inter semeaning as beteen them. A#ri(ate international la is also )non as conict o las.

    P9l%& P)%*"e I'"e)'*"%!'*l L*

    P9l%& I'"e)'*"%!'*l L*go(erns the acti(ities o statesand other international #ersonsentities in relations to eachother. It go(erns Qrelationshi#s o international #ersons interse.

    P)%*"e I'"e)'*"%!'*l L* go(erns the acti(ities oindi(iduals! cor#orations! and other #ri(ate entities henthe% cross national borders and in contro(ersies in(ol(ingoreign element. It resol(es conict o las.

    It is Pri(ate international la #roblem i the ocus o the stud%ould be to loo) or the la a##licable to a contro(ers% thatin(ol(es oreign element. 4o e ha(e an e/am#le here+

    G a citizen o state A is the ambassador to 4tate B and Go2cial archi(es and documents as ceased b% the #olice o4tate B and he as subse'uentl% sub"ected to 4tates#onsored torture in 4tate B. 4tate A fled a suit orcom#ensation beore the IC. Is 4tate B liable5

    This is go(erned b% PI* because this #ertains to the allegedliabilit% o 4tate B to state A.

    0

    I' "#e &*e !7 N%&*)*,* #*" &"!*)$ %'"e)'*"%!'*ll* )%'&%le e)e (%&e( 9$ "#e IC

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    20/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    But the 'uestion here is "ust li)e in the Pa'uette Habanacase! %ou need to )no1.*et us not tal) about the state

    #ractice or a hile! let us tal) about the o#inio "uris. Hodid the IC conclude that the Princi#le o ,on Inter(ention hadbeen #racticed b% states ith the understandingbelie that itis a legall% obligator% conduct5

    W#*" * "#e e%(e'&e !7 "#e ;'(%', !7 !%'%! :)%"#*" )%'&%le !7 '!' %'"e)e'"%!' % CILIt is not di2cult to reall% locate state #ractice! e ha(ecertain acts o the state that ill indicate that the certainstate do #ractice a #articular norm so that-s not di2cult!though it ould be 'uite a #rocess o determination. But the

    more #roblematic element ould be #s%chological orsub"ecti(e element because it is a mental element.

    It-s hard to distinguish hether a #articular beha(ior o astate is such that it adhered to a norm because o the beliethat it is a legall% binding norm or it is sim#l% or the sa)e ocon(enience. &e ha(e to fnd a a% to establish o#inio "uris.And the reason h% e are reading ,icaragua case is eant to see ho the IC ound out o#inio "uris in the #rinci#leo non inter(ention including the #rinci#le on the #rohibitiono the use o orce.

    W#*" "#e 9e" *$ "! )!e !%'%!' :)%It must be #ro(en that the state actuall% ollos1.

    Are e "ust ocusing on the 345 ?(en in this case d ba! gidebun) man gani na na contention. &e are not "ust to loo) atthe #ractice o the states in(ol(e in the case but e ha(e toloo) at the #ractice o the other states. ,ot "ust the #arties tothe case1so! again! e loo) at hat5 It is gi(en that the%#ractice the norm out o the belie that the% are legall%binding norm.

    The 'uestion is ho do e establish that5

    9ne a% o loo)ing at o#inion "uris is b% loo)ing at the acts ostates through numerous declarations es#eciall% i it statesabout general assembl% resolution general assembl% gud naclass that-s a #lenar%. It is a resolution agreed to b% themember states o the 3,. Imagine there are 08< members othe 3, and all 08< signed the 3, declaration! declaring thatthe use o orce is to be #rohibited! isn-t it an indication thatthese states do belie(e that the obser(ance o the norm isreall% out o the belie that is a legall% binding norm or hoelse ould the% sign the resolution1hat else5

    W#*" *)e "#e )!!7 !7 !%'%!' :)% **)" 7)!(e&l*)*"%!' W#*" *9!" ")e*"%e/ &!'e'"%!'In #articular or e/am#le i %ou tal) about o#inion "uris on the#rohibition against the use o orce and non inter(ention#rinci#le! number one #roo o that o#inion "uris is generalassembl% resolution :E:.

    W#*" % %" W#*" (! $! ;'( %' %"It-s a list o certain #rinci#le or declarations o riendl%relations o the state. I thin) the frst our declarations i %ou

    ha(e time ta)e a loo) at :E: it reall% s#ea)s o the#rohibition on the inter(ention o the internal a$airs o othersstates! not to inter(ene in the #olitical inde#endence o otherstates and not to interere ith the so(ereignt% o otherstates.

    There as a #rohibition on the use o orce! so hat e areloo)ing at is a resolution signed b% a large number o statesas #roo o that o#inion "uris. Conerences! and e(en theonte(ideo con(ention on the rights and duties o states#ro(ide mandates on the #rohibition on non intererence! noninter(ention as ell as the use o orce. 4o ith all o these

    :7

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    21/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    included o course in the list are other numerous relatedgeneral assembl% resolutions! then IC concluded that states

    do obser(e this out o the legal obligation and thereore thereis o#inion "uris.

    ust to gi(e %ou a list o the #rinci#les in(ol(ed in the,icaragua case. ust so %ou ill ha(e an idea! the momente ill tal) about this! e-ll reer bac) to ,icaragua (s 34. 4oma)e this as %our rameor)! the moment e tal) about the#rinci#le o non inter(ention1the #rohibition against(iolation o so(ereignt% o another states! the #rohibition onthe use o orce against another state! the right o seldeense hich ould re'uire the threshold o armed attac)

    against the in(o)ing state! that-s also another im#ortant#rinci#le discussed b% the IC that-s h% e(en i it is ratherlong case it does not matter because it co(ers se(eral#rinci#les an%a%. In act i %ou ha(e studied ,icaragua case%ou ha(e alread% studied the entire discussion o CI*. T#e)e% * Fe"%!' (e;'%"el$ %' "#e %("e) e8*. This isim#ortant! and it as as)ed in the bar e/am se(eral times.

    Oeneral CI* has been determined o course b% the frstelement! general #ractice o the states and as I-(e said! not

    "ust b% the states #art% ho are in dis#ute beore the IC!

    because the 34 as adamant that it as not #racticing hatother states has been #racticing. And o#inion "uris ma% bereduced rom the attitude o the #arties concerned and thato states to certain general assembl% resolution.*i)e or e/am#le! i %ou ill be as) in the bar e/am! theremight be a 'uestion di2cult or beginners in PI* S W#*" %"#e '!)*"%e *le !7 ,e'e)*l *e9l$ )e!l"%!'&hile general assembl% resolutions are not binding becausethese are "ust resolutions! these are hoe(er reecti(e o theo#inion "uris o a state. &hile not legall% binding the% ha(enormati(e (alue! that is "#e e"*9l%#e'" !) )!%', !7!%'%!' :)%.

    W#*" % *' *&&ele)*"e( CIL

    Those customs or #ractices hich did not go through a long#eriod o time but are ado#ted b% the states des#ite non#assage o time.

    I don-t ant to use the term ado#ted i it is CI*! I thin) thebetter term here is #ractice.

    S! "%e % '!" )ele*'" %' (e"e)%'%', CIL,o sir.

    S! * CIL &*' e8%" ee' 7!) * 9)%e7 e)%!( !7 "%e

    Yes 4ir.

    I don-t ant to reall% sa% that long #eriod o time is irrele(antbecause actuall% %ou can ma)e use o long #eriod o time ase(idence o o#inion "uris because that-s e(idence o re#eatedact! that-s e(idence o generalit%. I )no hat %ou are tr%ingto dri(e at! hate(er case %ou ha(e read in relation to this!I-m sure %ou are tal)ing to north sea continental cases! andit-s called instant CI* la in A)ehursts and its also calledaccelerated CI*.

    &hat it means onl% is that a short #eriod o time ill notnecessaril% bar the ormation o CI*. But that is not the sameas sa%ing that long #eriod o time is irrele(ant. I" %l$e*' "#*" * #!)" e)%!( !7 "%e %ll '!" 'e&e*)%l$9*) "#e 7!)*"%!' !7 CIL! and so there is a #ossibl% oinstant CI* or accelerated CI*. ,ormall% it ha##ens henthere is a undamental change in the international situation.,ormall% instant CI* de(elo#s because o some im#ortantsignifcant e(ents ha##ening in the international communit%.And I thin) I made an e/am#le last time about terrorismbecause o 800. 4o the orld #ercei(ed terrorism di$erentl%ater 800 com#ared to beore 800. 4o hat used to be

    :0

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    22/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    #robabl% not acce#table uni(ersal criminal "urisdictiona##licable to terrorism! it ma% I-m not sa%ing it is at #resent!

    but it ma% be a good basis or sa%ing that e(en uni(ersal"urisdiction can be e/ercise in relation to terrorism. Andthereore! terrorists ma% be #rosecuted an%here regardlesso here the crimes had been committed. It is no emergingCI* but o course e can onl% surmise that that-s the caseuntil and unless it ill be a2rmed o course in a #ublicationo most highl% 'ualifed #ublicists and decision o tribunal.

    W#$ * %" )ele*'" %' "#e &*e !7 "#e '!)"# e*&!'"%'e'"*l #el7 W#*" #*e'e( "#e)e *'( #*" *"#e %e

    Oerma% as in an agreement ith Holland and Denmar) ithregards to the delimitation o the continental shel.W#*" % * &!'"%'e'"*l #el7 9$ "#e *$

    The sea is not #art o the continental shel that is go(ernedb% a di$erent regime! it is go(erned b% the e/clusi(eeconomic zone. Beneath the su#er"acent ater is continentalshel and hen it e/tends urther hen it is not slo##ingalread% then that becomes the seabed or subsoil it isgo(erned b% di$erent regime. 3# to :77 nautical miles! thesu#er"acent ater is go(erned b% e/clusi(e economic zone

    regime. 4o )anang fshing rights and other li(ing resourcesabo(e the continental shel it is go(erned b% e/clusi(eeconomic zone regime. Beneath the seabed or subsoil or thecontinental shel o course there are minerals! that-sgo(erned b% another regime! continental shel regime. And ocourse e started ith that regime in 08M ith the 08Mcon(ention on continental shel.

    &e ha(e this 'uestion on delimitation on continental sheloccurs here to states are o##osing each other ith bothcontinental shel. illustration &hat i the to states ha(eo(erla##ing continental shel5 It can go as ar as

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    23/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    the con(ention is "ust a reection o CI*! then %ou ill still bebound. Oerman%-s counter=argument! is that ho can it be a

    CI* hen it as onl% in 08M! and e are no arguing aboutit and it has been < ! @ or %ears. It is im#ossible ore'uidistance #rinci#le to ha(e ri#ened into CI* or that short#eriod o time.

    S! #*" (%( "#e IC< *$9n that #oint! e sa% that the short #assage o time is notnecessaril% a bar to the ormation o CI*. It is a di$erent#ers#ecti(e in sa%ing that #eriod is not rele(ant or longduration o time is not rele(ant. It is still rele(ant but ocourse not conclusi(e. That is not the onl% test. Precisel% the

    best a##roach is that duration o time is not conclusi(e and itis not re'uired! but it has signifcance! because in a a% itcan #ro(e the act that the #ractice has been re#eated o(ertime and because it has been re#eated o(er a long #eriod otime it-s a good indication also o o#inion "uris. &e are notsa%ing it is alread% e(idence o o#inion "uris but it can hel#.9n the other hand! short #assage o time ill not necessaril%bar the ormation o CI*. Although e(entuall% o course theIC did not sa% that it should be e'uidistance #rinci#le! itshould still be e'uitable! but on that #oint there is alread% a#ronouncement rom the IC.

    I l!', e)%!( !7 "%e )ele*'" *'( %!)"*'" %'(e"e)%'%', 7!)*"%!' !7 CIL&ell it is rele(ant but not that im#ortant although e can sa%that it is not that indis#ensable but defnitel% a short #eriodo time ill not necessaril% bar the ormation o CI*. It is themeaning o instant CI*.

    In *ib%a ( alta. There as also a discussion on the nature othe 08M: con(ention on the la o the sea. All %ou need tounderstand is that the 3,C*94 = united nations con(entionon the la o the sea is also a codifcation o alread% e/isting

    CI*. There are #rinci#les that had been carried o(er! #racticebeore and no ound their a% in the #ro(isions o the

    3,C*94.

    Le" "*l *9!" "#e *$l &*e. W#*" "#e)ele*'&e !7 "#% &*eFor the CI* to a##l% it must be in accordance ith theconce#t and uniorm usage #ractice b% the state in 'uestionsuch as the Colombia and Peru in this case. In this case Delatorre re(olted against his go(ernment and as grantedas%lum in the embass% in *ima. Peru reused to gi(e sae#assage to dela torre to go out o the countr%. That-s h%Colombia brought this matter to the IC because Colombia

    contended that it as 'ualifed or com#etent to grant#olitical as%lum to Delatorre.

    S! #*" * "#e IL %' "#% &*e Y! '! #*"*$l %In act it is CI* that state should res#ect the grant o as%lumbut Peru 'uestioned the grant o as%lum b% Colombia. Delatorre as a rebel in Peru! he re(olted against Peru. Peru alsoargued that he committed crimes not related to rebellion! sohat Dela torre did as that he sought as%lum in theembass% o Colombia stationed in Peru. 9 course it granted

    the as%lum.

    I as%lum had been granted! it is CI* that all states mustres#ect because it is #art o CI*. As a matter o course the#erson granted as%lum ould ha(e also be granted the sae#assage. eaning he should be alloed to lea(e the territor%o that state not being sub"ected to #rosecution! arrest! anddetention. It as disagreed on the basis that it-s not orColombia to characterize or to 'uali% the o$ense as #olitical.Because the onl% a% %ou can as) or as%lum is to sa% that%ou ha(e been the sub"ect o #olitical #ersecution. But i %ouare an ordinar% criminal and has committed common crimes!

    :ENTION

    The act that the #resent Con(ention does not a##l% tointernational agreements concluded 9e"ee' S"*"e *'(!"#e) 9:e&" !7 %'"e)'*"%!'*l l* !) 9e"ee' !"#e)9:e&" !7 %'"e)'*"%!'*l l*/ !) "! %'"e)'*"%!'*l*,)eee'" '!" %' )%""e' 7!)/ #*ll '!" *?e&"=

    7a8The legal orce o such agreementsL

    7b8The a##lication to them o an% o the rules set orth in the#resent Con(ention to hich the% ould be sub"ect underinternational la inde#endentl% o the Con(entionL7c8 The a##lication o the Con(ention to the relations o4tates as beteen themsel(es under internationalagreements to hich other sub"ects o international la arealso #arties.

    Calling it a treat% is one thing! calling it as binding is another.?(en i it is oral it might not be considered treat% or#ur#oses o the C*T because in C*T it re'uires in riting

    but it does not mean it is not binding. It is still bindingbeteen the #arties concerned.

    I

    J*$ "#e )le 7!'( %' "#e >CLT 9e *l%e( %' "#e ?=

    1.A (%"e %'!l%', * ")e*"$D 9e"ee' S"*"e A *'(

    IJ W!)l( B*' I'"e)'*"%!'*l O),.

    The term treat% can actuall% be used to an% internationalagreement entered into b% international #ersons or entitiese/cluding o course indi(iduals so %'"e)'*"%!'*l

    !),*'%+*"%!' &*' 9e *)"%eto a treat%

    QT)e*"$Q means an international agreement concludedbeteen 4tates in ritten orm and go(erned b%international la! hether embodied in a singleinstrument or in to or more related instruments andhate(er its #articular designation Article :! C*T.

    The onl% signifcance o the #hrase Vconcludedbeteen states- in the defnition o a treat% in the 08E8C*T is onl% or the #ur#ose o a##l%ing the #ro(isions

    o the C*T.

    4o all other treaties that are not ithin the defnition oa treat% under C*T ill be go(erned b% other regimeincluding customar% international la on treaties ando course other regimes.

    The #resent Con(ention a##lies to an% treat% hich isthe constituent instrument o an internationalorganization and to an% treat% ado#ted ithin aninternational organization %"#!" )e:(%&e "! *'$

    @

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    46/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    )ele*'" )le !7 "#e !),*'%+*"%!'. Article !C*T.

    &T9! there are #arties to the &T9 i let sa% all 4?Amembers o the &T9 ill enter into a #articular treat%dealing ith a #roduct #eculiar onl% to the 4outh ?astAsian ,ation! unsa )aha na5 banana X1. That#articular treat% ma% be go(erned b% the rele(ant#ro(isions o the &T9 itsel. 4o %ou notice that thereare (oting re'uirements or e/am#le or the ado#tiono the treat%. That ma% be go(erned not b% the C*Tbut b% the rele(ant #ro(isions o the organization. Atreat% ma% be go(erned b% another regime in other

    ords. ,ot necessaril% b% the C*T.

    T#e e !7 "#e "e) ")e*"$ "#e)e7!)e % )!e) %'

    "#% &*e ee' %7 %" % e'"e)e( %'"! 9$ S"*"e A *'("#e IJ W!)l( B*' #% % *' %'"l !),.

    Article E: o the C*T that-s undamental change ocircumstance. You )no that 'ebus Sic Stantibusis the#recursor to the undamental change o thecircumstance #rinci#le is a rule on the la treaties anda CI*.

    S! *$ S"*"e A %'%" "#*" "#e )!%%!' !7 "#%")e*"$ 9e"ee' S"*"e A *'( IJ !)l( 9*' %ll

    9e e'(e( 9e&*e !7 !e 7'(*e'"*l*',e %' "#e &%)&"*'&e&ell i the elements are #resent then that #rinci#lema% be a##lied. 4o e(en i e are tal)ing about aninternational organization because e are not a##l%ingthe rule o the C*T as a rule o C*T but as a #rinci#leo la.

    2.A (%"e %'!l%', 1@60 T)e*"$ 9e"ee' S"*"e A

    *'( S"*"e B

    &a% #roblema #uro man ni states. *et us assume inriting si%a! let us assume urther that both 4tatesintended the treat% to be go(erned b% internationalla. The concern no is the date hen this asentered into b% 4tates A and B. It as entered intobeore the e$ecti(it% or beore the C*T entered intoorce in 08M7. er% sim#le 'uestion! sir i the rule thate-re tal)ing about #arta)es o the nature o CI* thenthat rule ill still be a##lied to that treat% e(en i thereis a #rinci#le on non=retroacti(it% on Article @ o the

    C*T. The C*T shall be a##lied onl% to treaties thatha(e entered into orce or rather that ha(e beenenacted u#on the entr% into orce o the C*T. ,onretroacti(it% o the #resent con(ention ithout#re"udice to the a##lication o an% rules set orth in the#resent con(ention to hich treaties ill be sub"ectunder international la inde#endentl% o thecon(ention.

    N!'-Re")!*&"%%"$ !7 "#e P)ee'" C!'e'"%!'.

    &ithout #re"udice to the a##lication o an% rules setorth in the #resent Con(ention to hich treaties ouldbe sub"ect under international la inde#endentl% othe Con(ention! the Con(ention a##lies onl% to treatieshich are concluded b% 4tates ater the entr% intoorce o the #resent Con(ention ith regard to such4tates Article @! C*T.

    4o i e a##l% or e/am#le! o course I am sure in an%international agreement o)a% both states ill ha(e tobe go(erned b% the #rinci#le o pacta sunt servanda

    noh that the treat% must be com#lied ith in good

    @E

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    47/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    aith. A breach o a treat% ill engage 4tateRes#onsibilit% or hich reason the breaching! not

    bretch! 4tate ill ha(e to be liable or some orms ocom#ensation or an% other sco#e o res#onsibilit%e(en i this as concluded beore the C*T. It isinternational la in general that is a##lied in this )indo treat%.

    3.A (%"e %'!l%', * 1@@5 ")e*"$ 9e"ee' S"*"e A*'( S"*"e B #% *)e '!" *)"%e "! "#e >CLT/ !

    "#% * &!'&l(e( *l)e*($ *" "#e "%e "#e >CLT

    e'"e)e( %'"! 7!)&e 9" !7 &!)e "#e$ *)e '!"*)"%e "! "#e >CLT.

    4ame anser i the rule that %ou are tal)ing about isCI* it is still a##licable to the 4tates e(en i the% arenon #arties to the C*T.

    4.I *' *,)eee'" #% #* "#e '*")e !7 * ")e*"$9" % '!" )e(&e( "! )%"%', * ")e*"$ I %" 9%'(%',

    "! "*"e *)"%e "! "#e *,)eee'"

    I %ou loo) at Article

    hoe(er be binding.

    The act that the #resent Con(ention does not a##l% tointernational agreements concluded beteen 4tatesand other sub"ects o international la or beteensuch other sub"ects o international la! or tointernational agreements not in ritten orm! shall nota$ect+

    a The legal orce o such agreementsL

    b The a##lication to them o an% o the rulesset orth in the #resent Con(ention to hich

    the% ould be sub"ect under international lainde#endentl% o the Con(entionL

    c The a##lication o the Con(ention to therelations o 4tates as beteen themsel(es underinternational agreements to hich othersub"ects o international la are also #arties.Article

    The onl% conclusion here is that this )ind o treat%because it is not in riting ill not be go(erned b% the

    C*T. 4o i 4tate #arties or a state #art% to a treat% ore/am#le ould ant to ithdra rom the treat% itcannot in(o)e the grounds #ro(ided or in the C*Tbecause it cannot in(o)e the C*T. Because the C*Tdoes not a##l%. ,ot unless the ground or ithdraal#arta)es o the nature o CI*.

    H!ee)/ % %" 9%'(%',

    Article < sa%s the act that the international agreementdoes not conorm to the defnition o a treat% under

    the *CT ill not a$ect the legal orce o suchagreement.

    In the

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    48/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    %ll le*e P#%l. G!e)'e'" *")%!'%*l )!e)"$ %'

    S9%& 7!) %" N**l *'( J%l%"*)$ E8e)&%e %' "#e

    P#%l. 7!) 5 $e*) %' "#e *!'" !7 10 %ll%!'. I "#%* ")e*"$

    I thin) the better 'uestions is Is this a treaty underthe >C1:+*et-s sa% that this is in riting beteenstates! it is an international agreement. &hat-s theourth element5 To be go(erned b% international la.

    4o e as) the 'uestion! is this a )ind o treat% that isto be go(erned b% international la or an% otherregime5 9 course the other regime other than

    international la! that ould be the domestic la.

    I %ou loo) at the nature o the agreement it seems li)ethat this is more o a contract than a treat%. 4o this#arta)es o a nature o hat international la callsQContract Treat% in a a%! h%5 &hat are thecharacteristics o contract treaties as o##osed to lama)ing treaties hich can thereore be sources ointernational la and contract treat% shouldn-t betreated as generating a conduct that ill orm as basisor CI*.

    %"%'&"%!' 9e"ee' C!'")*&" T)e*"$ *'( L**%', T)e*"$

    ost lama)ing treaties are more or less#ermanent in character hereas contract treat%on the other hand is more or less tem#orar%.

    A la ma)ing treat% binds or demands rom a#art% to a treat% the #erormance o an act orconduct regardless o the #erormance o the

    obligation o the other #art%. I9&! more or less it

    is not o#erating under the #rinci#le oreci#rocit%. I it is a la ma)ing treat% 4tate A is

    reall% bound to #erorm the obligations underthe treat% regardless o &9, the other #art%#erorms its on. 9therise i the #erormanceo the obligation b% the one #art% ould de#endlargel% on the #erormance also o the obligationa##urtenant to the other #art% then there is this#rinci#le o reci#rocit% a##lied to the treat%. Inmost cases i there is reci#rocit% or the#erormance o obligation. The obligation isde#endent u#on the #erormance o the other

    #art%-s obligations then it is more or less acontract treat%.

    &ell o course e still ha(e to chec) hat-sinside the agreement hether it ill bego(erned b% international la or contract la5In this cases the la on lease. 4o obligationsand contracts ang a##licable in this case notunless i the #arties ha(e intended that thisagreement be go(erned b% international la.,o i it ill be go(erned b% I* unsa nga

    international la a##licable to the lease ooreign territor% not unless this in(ol(esen(ironmental concerns. 4o more or less this isto be go(erned b% munici#al la and then. It isnot a treat% under the C*T i %ou are going tore#hrase the 'uestion to Qis this a treat% underthe C*T

    6.W#*" % "#e (%?e)e'&e 9e"ee' * %,'*"!)$ "! *

    *)"$ "! * ")e*"$

    a. As to meaning

    @M

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    49/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    b. As to obligation

    W#*" % "#e (%?e)e'&e 9e"ee' * &!'&l(e(

    ")e*"$ *'( * ")e*"$ "#*" #*( e'"e)e( %'"!7!)&e

    > A signator% to a treat% ill ha(e a di$erent!9l%,*"%!'rom a #art% to a treat%. There is alsoa (ariance in the a% a signator% ill ithdrarom the treat% and here a #art% ithdrasrom a treat%.

    A. A "! e*'%',(e;'%"%!'

    a signator% to a treat% is one ho has or hichhas o course si$ned that treat% other term inContinental=?uro#ean language is ?si$nalled.

    * PARTY % !'e #! % *l)e*($ 9!'( 9$"#e ")e*"$hile a %,'*"!)$ % %l$ !'e#% #* %,'e( "#e ")e*"$ 9" '!" $e"9!'( 9$ "#e 9"*'"%e )!%%!' !7 "#e

    ")e*"$.

    4ignature is "ust a #ossible e/#ression o

    consent to be bound. 4ee article 0: or a%s toe/#ress consent to be bound. 9ne a% oe/#ressing consent to be bound remember thatit-s not that the state is alread% bound it issim#l% an e/#ression o consent to be bound.ost common a% o e/#ressing consent to bebound is 4ignature. ,ormall% a mere signatureill not %et bind a #art% to the treat% because othe #ractice o domestic ratifcation not unlessthe treat% itsel #ro(ides that the signature itsel

    ill alread% amount to a legall% bindinginstrument. It is (er% seldom.

    R*"%;&*"%!'

    W#*" % "#e )!e !7 )*"%;&*"%!' W#*" (! $! e*'

    9$ * ")e*"$ % )*"%;e(

    In the Phili##ines or e/am#le! ho ratifes our treaties53nder ?9 @8 The #resident. &hat-s the role o the 4enate5Concurs ith the ratifcation. In some "urisdictions! the% don-t#ro(ide or that mechanism. The onl% e/ce#tion hereratifcation ma% not be re'uired an% urther #robabl% ill gostraight to concurrence is hen it is the #resident himselho signs the treat% but more oten than not the #residentdoes not go to a conerence and sign the treat%. The#resident ill sim#l% send a re#resentati(e.

    Ratifcation enables the head o state or hoe(er isem#oered to enter into treaties the o##ortunit% to in'uireinto the sco#e o the authorit% e/ercised b% there#resentati(e or e/am#le i the re#resentati(e asauthorized to sign a treat% or let sa% 7 %ears but there#resentati(es signed a treat% or 88 %ears.

    9r let-s sa% the re#resentati(e as authorized under its ull#oers in rench it is calledplaines pervau. I the authorit% isto enter into a treat% in a #articular industr% let-s sa%automoti(e industr%! n%a gi#ang a#il ang uban industr% notco(ered b% the authorit% so the #resident has still theo##ortunit% to chec) the e/ercise o the #oer o there#resentati(e hether it is in accordance ith the authorit%gi(en.

    @8

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    50/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    It is (er% im#ortant because at the end o the da%treat% ma)ing is the #oer o the #resident not b% the

    re#resentati(e.It also enables o course the state concerned to #onder

    urther on its decision hether or not it ill be bound b% thetreat%.

    4o the time rom 4ignature until ?ntr% into orce o thetreat% ill also gi(e enough time or the leaders to considerhether or not it ill be bound b% the treat% ith fnalit%.

    4o or e/am#le! the case o the 34 hen it signed theRome 4tatute creating the International Criminal Court in%ear :777 the senate! congress in general! conducted se(eralseries o discussions! debates and the #re(ailing sentimentthen that onl% b% ahhh..ait Rome statue creating the ICC!indi(iduals ma% be charged ith certain international crimes.3nder the Rome 4tatute #ede )a charge.an ug genocide!ar crimes! crimes against humanit% and acts o aggressionun%a one o the (er% contro(ersial #ro(isions in the ICC is thecom#ulsor% surrender o indi(iduals made res#ondent in theICC. so )ung #art% )a sa Rome 4tatue or ICC %ou are boundb% the ICC to surrender indi(idual charged beore the ICC and

    ound in %our territor%.

    ?/am#le+ 4o i Former Oeneral uan dela Cruz is beingcharged or ar crime and ound in the Phili##ines! the Phils.being a #art% to the Rome 4tatute is bound to surrenderOeneral uan dela Cruz. Dili man ana ang 34 because ingunang 34 but an%here %ou go in the orld %ou ill seeAmericans )ahiba na )a anang America conglomerationman na o so man% races Asians! Blac) Americans! &hite!Brunettes5 [uhuh so an%here %ou go. It-s eas% to become

    an American citizen because o the Jus soli #rinci#le o

    Americans mmm #ara )ita #a hilas: ta ug Jus San$uinismurag mga ga#o diba.. )anang mag Jus San$uinis)atu ra

    nang mga ga#o )aa%o nga nihit )aa%o ug mga itsura.4o : %ears ater 34 ithdre their signature because

    o the #re(ailing sentiment. That-s the )!e !7)*"%;&*"%!'. 4o hat I-m tr%ing to sa% is * PARTY % !'e#! % *l)e*($ 9!'( 9$ "#e ")e*"$hile a %,'*"!)$ %%l$ !'e #% #* %,'e( "#e ")e*"$ 9" '!" $e"9!'( 9$ "#e 9"*'"%e )!%%!' !7 "#e ")e*"$.

    K*'.* *, e'")$ %'"! 7!)&e ', 9%'(%', '**', ")e*"$

    It de#ends on the te/t o the treat%. In most cases thetreat% ill sa%. Ater the signature the treat% illundergo the #rocess o domestic ratifcation. 3#on thesubmission o a #articular member state. For e/am#lemu ingun si%a ug Q 3#on the submission o the E7 th

    instrument o ratifcation! the treat% ill no enter intoorce

    I9&! let-s sa% nag sign ta ug treat% )ita tanan mgare#resentati(es. ,ag sign tag treat% #ag :777 and

    then e #ro(ided in our te/t o the treat% that thistreat% ater ha(ing been signed b% all the negotiatingstates ill enter into orce u#on the submission o theinstrument o ratifcation b% the let-s sa% :7th

    signator%.

    ?/am#le si r. Oocuan ni de#osit sa i%ang instrumento ratifcation on :77. 4o rom :777=:777 ala #a nienter into orce ang treat% e(en i nag una )a #ag:777. &ala #a na ni enter into orce as nimu ala #a.)a% e are aiting or the :7th instrument o

    7

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    51/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    ratifcation #ag abot sa :7th instrument o ratifcationmu enter into orce na si%a )a% mao ma% na)a butang

    sa treat%.I ala #a ni enter into orce dili #a na s%a legall%binding nga instrument.

    B. A "! O9l%,*"%!'

    W#*" "#e (%?e)e'&e 9e"ee' * %,'*"!)$

    7)! *)"$ %'!7*) * !9l%,*"%!' % &!'&e)'e(Wung ni sign )a but ala #a )a ni rati%! are %oualread% bound b% the substanti(e content o thetreat%5 A'e)= If a state is a si$natory to a treatythat state is EC& @&: bound by the substantivecontent of the treaty. If the treaty has entered intoforce# the party will now be bound by thesubstantivecontent of the treaty.

    But that does not mean that there is noobligation at all on the #art o the signator%because o Article 0M o the C*T.

    A)"%&le 1. 9B*IOATI9, ,9T T9 D?F?AT TH?9B?CT A,D P3RP94? 9F A TR?ATY PRI9R T9IT4 ?,TRY I,T9 F9RC?

    A 4tate is obliged to rerain rom actshich ould deeat the ob"ect and#ur#ose o a treat% hen+

    a It has signed the treat% or hase/changed instruments constituting thetreat% sub"ect to ratifcation! acce#tanceor a##ro(al! until it shall ha(e made its

    intention clear not to become a #art% tothe treat%L or

    b It has e/#ressed its consent to bebound b% the treat%! #ending the entr%into orce o the treat% and #ro(ided thatsuch entr% into orce is not undul%dela%ed.

    ?(en i the treat% has not %et entered into orceall negotiating states are bound to rerain rom#erorming acts hich ould deeat the ob"ect and#ur#ose o a treat%. Pag sign #a lang sa treat% mu

    a##l% na ang article 0M.Article 0M is an e/am#le o a CI* codifed. The

    reason or this is It is customar% #ractice o states thathen the% ha(e alread% signed the treat% and hileaiting or the time that it ill enter into orce the%must act in good aith because o the #rinci#le thathen e negotiate or the terms and conditions o thetreat% e should negotiate in good aith as ell. 4o theidea o good aith also is im#ortant in the hole#rocess o treat% ormation.

    An act (iolates article 0M i the act alread%renders the #art% concerned %'&**9le !7e)7!)%', "#e !9l%,*"%!' '(e) "#*" ")e*"$#e' "#*" ")e*"$ %ll e'"e) %'"! 7!)&eb% Anthon%Aust.

    4o the basis o state res#onsibilit% is not(iolation o the treat% because it has not %et enteredinto orce but it is a (iolation o the CI* o negotiatingin good aith as ound in Article 0M o the C*T.

    0

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    52/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    Remember this is CI* and thereore this is bindinge(en to non #arties to the C*T.

    ?/am#le+ 4tates A and B entered into a treat%hereb% 4tate A ill cede a #ortion o its territor% butthe treat% has not %et entered into orce but 4tate Anonetheless in the meantime cede the same territor%to a third state so b% the time that treat% beteen4tate A and 4tate B ill enter into orce ala na si%a%ma cede )a% gi cede naman ni%a earlier. 4o there isinabilit% to #erorm the obligation.

    THRESHOL+ i that act ill render the 4tate

    inca#able o #erorming the obligation under thetreat%.

    ?/am#le o an act that ill ,9T necessaril%deeat the ob"ect and #ur#ose o the treat%5 *et-s gobac) to the W%oto #rotocol e/am#le! all de(elo#edstates 0=07 under anne/ A signed but the treat% hasnot %et entered into orce in the meantime instead oreducing gas emissions nag increase na nuon sila nagh%#er industrialize na nuon sila so instead o loeringnag increase sila. Is that a (iolation o the CI* on

    negotiating in good aith5 4o the threshold .. ca#able#aman si%a to reduce b% :7 #ercent in the ne/t ten%ears i%a lang gi taas daan nag#a tu)od na si%a ugdaghan nga mga actories )noing that b% the timethe treat% ill enter into orce it is no bound toreduce its gas emission.

    I7 "#e ")e*"$ #* e'"e)e( %'"! 7!)&e/ "#e *)"$

    %ll '! 9e 9!'( 9$ "#e 9"*'"%e &!'"e'" !7"#e ")e*"$.

    !)*"%!' !7 ")e*"%e

    1.P)!!*l "! ()*7" * ")e*"$

    can be done b%+ 4tates! International ,on=Oo(ernmental 9rganizations! Oo(ernmental9rganizations.

    can be done b% 4tates=== to a%s+ in a bilateraltreat%! both states can seat together and drat thetreat%! or one state alread% drated the treat%sub"ect onl% to the signature o the other state ocourse ater it had studied it.

    can be done b% international non=go(ernmentalorganization

    ?G. 08@8 Oene(a Con(ention had been dratedbecause o the e$orts o an ,O9! guess theinternational org.. I'"e)'*"%!'*l C!%""ee!' Re( C)!leading to the drating o one othe im#ortant con(entions regulating armedconict the @ Oene(a Con(ention.

    can be done b% a go(ernmental organization li)e

    the 3, con(ention+ initiated b% the 3,.

    2.Ne,!"%*"%!'

    Ha(ing studied obligations and contracts! %ou)no that there are di$erent stages in theormation o a contract! diba duna% #re#arator%stage! duna% negotiation! and then %ou ha(e#erection! and then %ou ha(e consummationand then ne/t litigation hahaha

    W#*" "#e )ele*'&e !7 'e,!"%*"%!'

    :

    C O O S| GO 03 20 20 6

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    53/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    To )no the intent o the #arties. Pre#arator%&or)s. Article

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    54/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    *&&e%!' W%ll *&&e%!' 9e *ll!e( !)

    '!" H! &*' e "ell

    &e can tell b% loo)ing at the T?GT o the treat%.eaning the%!)"*'&e !7 "#e *(!"%!' !7"#e "e8" !7 "#e ")e*"$ % "#*" "#e "e8" !7 "#e")e*"$ '! ,!e)' "#e 9eFe'" "*,e

    !7 "#e 7!)*"%!' )!&e

    4o once ado#ted na b% all negotiating #artiesmao na na ang mu go(ern sa subse'uentstages. That-s the im#ortance o theauthentication o the te/t o the treat%

    A&&e%!'= a third state has not #artici#atedin the negotiation stage but ants to "oinan%a% so #ede si%a mu accede to a treat%

    Y! '! #$ % %" %!)"*'" "! (%"%',%# *

    %,'*"!)$ 7)! * *)"$

    There are at least our areas here this ma% be rele(ant. Inthe bar e/am or e/am#le! it is im#ortant or %ou to be aareo the ording used b% the e/aminer. I the e/aminer ore/am#le sim#l% states 4TAT?4 A and B are signatories to Gcon(ention but are not #arties thereto. &hat do %ouunderstand b% that5

    Ans+ ma%lon I belie(e sir ! a signator% reers to are#resentati(e rom the state ho signed a treat% herein

    4ir+ You mean a signator% is a #erson5

    Ans+ %es sir

    4ir+ 4tates A and B are signatories! meaning %ou are reerringto the state

    Ans+ o)a% sir. The% signed to the treat% but ith regards to a#art% sir! I thin) it reers to being bound to the terms andconditions o the treat% sir because as hat I ha(eremembered not so long ago sir! %ou could be a signator% but

    not a #art% since there are instances here it should beratifed frst b% a or e/am#le li)e hat e discussed a %earago sir that there is a bac) door and ront door.

    4ir+ naa gud ratifcation5 4o hat %ou are sa%ing is+ I a treat%or e/am#le had been signed b% Ambassador G! anambassador o the Phili##ines or e/am#le last ul% :70. ThePhili##ines! being a signator% to that con(ention in ul% :70but the Phili##ines is not %et a #art% until and unless suchsignature made b% the re#resentati(e! ambassador G hadbeen ratifed b% the #resident and concurred b% the senate.Is that %ou #oint.

    Ans. Yes sir.

    4ir+ 4o e can distinguish a signator% rom a #art% onl% ithregard to the meaning o ho is a signator% and ho is a#art%5 Aside rom that! hat other distinctions can %ou ma)e!a#art rom the meaning5 49 let us tal) about obligations ore/am#le. I a state is a mere signator% to a con(ention or atreat% hat are the obligations o that signator% state ascom#ared to a state ho is alread% a #art% to that treat%5

    @

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY LARGO EH 403 2015 2016

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    55/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    %)" *)e* !7 (%"%'&"%!'= JEANING

    A "*"e % * %,'*"!)$ "! * ")e*"$ %7 "#*" "*"e "#)!,#

    #% )e)ee'"*"%e #* %,'e( "#e ")e*"$ 9" #* '!"$e" e8)ee( #% &!'e'" "! 9e 9!'( #)*e e( %'>CLT/ #e)e* * "*"e % &!'%(e)e( * *)"$ "! *

    ")e*"$ !) * &!'e'"%!' %7 "#*" "*"e #*( *l)e*($e8)ee( %" &!'e'" "! 9e 9!'(.

    You ma% as) this+ Inig sign nimo! di d % na e/#ression o %ourconsent to be bound5 That is a legitimate 'uestion. Indeed!e/#ression o %our consent to be bound actuall% can come in(arious orms. I as)ed %ou to read the content o the (ienna

    con(ention o the la on treaties. You ant to understand thela o treaties5 9 course %ou need to learn b% heart the#ro(isions o the C*T.

    &h%5 Because the C*T is a codifcation o customar%international la on the la o treaties and a #rogressi(ede(elo#ment o customar% international la. There ma% besome #rinci#les outside o the C*T a$ecting treaties butmore oten than not! these #rinci#les someho deri(e theirbinding character rom the basic #rinci#les o the C*T. 4o5&here ill %ou fnd it in the C*T5 Ho does the state

    e/#ress its consent to be bound5

    W#*" *)e "#e *$ T#e)e *)e ee)*l *$=

    0. 4ignature:. ?/change o instruments o ratifcation

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    56/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    onl% reason h% the state ma% dis#ense ith the

    ratifcation )a% onl% i ang #resedient mismo ang

    musign.

    b. Because the% also ant to consult the #olls o its

    on #eo#le. ost o the time! i musign ang

    Phili##ines ug treat% outside and then manes

    lang! then #eo#le ould tr% to react. At least!

    muingon ang President + buanga nu! un#o#ular man

    ang mo(e sa Phili##ines in signing such a treat%!

    then murag nagrall% nman ni sila. 4o meaning! it

    ill gi(e the state a chance to dee#l% thin) about

    its decision and #robabl% e consider i the #eo#leould #ro#babl% not a(our the decision o the

    e/ecuti(e branch and thereore! the #resident

    ould not rati% and o course the senate ould not

    also concur because there is nothing to concur.

    eaning it gi(es su2cient #eriod or deliberation

    and decision ma)ing on the #art o the states.

    Wanang mga signature! as alread% an e/#ression o

    consent to be bound )ung (er% sim#le siguro!

    nondis#utable na mga treaties or con(entions.

    O"#e) 9*% !7 (%"%'&"%!'= O THE OBLIGATION

    I7 * "*"e % e)el$ * %,'*"!)$ "! * ")e*"$ !) *

    &!'e'"%!'. I "#*" "*"e *l)e*($ 9!'( 9$ "#e

    9"*'"%e &!'"e'" !7 "#e ")e*"$9 course not. It is not %et bound b% the substanti(e contento the treat%. Hoe(er! does it mean a mere signator% has noobligation to obser(e under the international la5 Yes or ,95Is there an obligation o mere signator% lang5 &hat is theobligation5

    Pede ra daganan ug "us cogens or customar%. Chec) mansad #ud na. But other than that. &hat is the dut% re#osedu#on a mere signator%5

    It is not %et bound b% the substanti(e content but bound s%ato hat5 &e go to article 0M o the ienna Con(ention o thela o treaties.

    8rticle 1/. CB$"ay, if signature is not a form of expressing the

    consent to be bound. "s that clear)

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY LARGO EH 403 2015 2016

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    57/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    Part o customar% international la is the re'uirement thathen %ou negotiate. ,aa #man ta sa negotiation stage in the

    sense na di #a s%a binding ang treat% in so ar as substanti(econtent is concerned that states should negotiate ith eachother in good aith.

    Precisel% article 0M #ro(ides that in the meantime hileaiting or ratifcation as #robabl% the re'uired e/#ression oconsent to be bound! a signator% must rerain rom#erorming an% act that ill deeat the ob"ect and #ur#ose othe treat% until that state maniests its intention not to bebound b% the treat%. 9)a%5

    Waremember mo hat the 34 did to its signature ater itsigned the Rome statute #rior to :777! i I am not mista)en.

    You )no hat the Rome statute is5 That is the statute thatcreated international criminal court and unsa man "urisdictionsa international criminal court5 4ir! it is the court that has

    "urisdiction o international crimes. 4a)to #ud but in#articular the crimes o genocide! ar crimes! crimes againsthumanit% and acts o aggression. The our crimes consideredas international crimes.

    W#*" % "#e %!)"*'" *e&" !7 "#e R!e S"*""e "#*"9!"#e)e( "#e USWung mamemeber or ma#art% )a to theRome 4tatute!the state commited itsel to surrender anaccused beore the ICC ho is ound ithin the territor% o a4tate #art%! otherise ala% teethmao gud naa sarecording ang ICC. Re'uired b%a ang "urisdiction o(er the#erson. 4o the idea o com#ulsor% surrender o the #erson othe accused beore the ICC. ao d % na niana ang 34. ,ganoman5 &here(er %ou go )a% daghan Americans. Hinuon angmga Pili#ino sad. Ang mga #ino% nuon naa all o(er the orld

    )a% tungod sa trabaho. Ang mga Americans )a% or)!business or as tourist! etc. 3n%a concerned ang 34 )a% basin

    iuse n%a ang #rocess to harass its on citizens. That is h%hen the 34 signed the rong statute in :777! ang mgaAmericans )a% in(oice out sa ila concern about it. That is h%I ha(e said that this is the #eriod hen %ou decision ill ha(eto be considered more brie% di m)laro. That is h% the 34decided ater to %ears #ag :77: not to be bound b% therong statute and so it maniested beore the 3, that it is nolonger intending to be bound b% the rong statute.Oiithdra ni%a i%ahang signature. Ater hich! unsa giingonsa 345 You are not amiliar ith the non=surrender agreement

    entered into beteen the Phili##ines and the 34 in %ourconsti :5 &ell at least in consti 0! e ere distinguishing atreat% rom e/ecuti(e agreement. The RP=34 non=surrenderagreement as signed b% the 34 and the Phili##ines ithoutthe concurrence o the 4enate. 9 course! our 4u#reme Courtsaid there as no need or 4enate concurrence because itas a mere e/ecuti(e agreement.

    &h%5 Because the RP=34 non=surrender agreement actuall%said that )ung ang Americans or e/am#le ound in theterritor% o the Phili##ines is accused o a crime beore theICC! the Phili##ines committed itsel not to surrender theAmerican to the ICC. Reci#rocal sad na. Wung Fili#ino ound inthe American soil charged beore the ICC. The 34 committeditsel not to surrender the Fili#ino to the ICC.

    The 'uestion here is+ It ma% be a little bit com#licated butthere is a #rinci#le in the ICC la that sa%s! e call it thecom#lementarit% #rinci#le hich sa%s the ICC-s "urisdictionhoe(er ill onl% be a##ro#riate here the domestic courtails to #rosecute at the domestic le(el the accused or

    6

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY LARGO EH 403 2015 2016

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    58/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    unilling di ma)laro :

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    59/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    I su##ose %ou ha(e encountered rom %our readings!describe as #art o thedi ma)laro 7+76 treat% itsel! but

    being the ord o the international la commission! %ou)no o course the rule on the international la commission.You can ta)e it rom there.

    4o %ou )no o course the tas) o the international lacommission. ILC * "*e( "! &!(%7$ &"!*)$%'"e)'*"%!'*l l* but o course since it ould not be#ragmatic to "ust codi% customar% international la! the I*Calso #ut in the ienna Con(ention o the la o Treaties.Certain #ro(isions that the% considered air! reasonable andthat h% e are not %et customar% international la since

    the% are e/#ected to be olloed b% states. Then e sa% it isa #rogressi(e de(elo#ment o CI*.

    I thin) that is something that %ou ha(e encountered in %ourreadings that the C*T is a codifcation o both CI*customar%international la and at the same time! the #rogressi(ede(elo#ment o CI*. In act! some o the #ro(isions that arenot codifcations o CI* and thereore onl% #rogressi(ede(elo#ment o CI* ma% in act ha(e ri#ened into CI* at thistime. Imagine! this as drated in 08E8 and entered into

    orce in 08M7! so since 08M7 u# to the #resent! the% had beenolloing international communit% o this #rogressi(ede(elo#ment o customar% international la! hen statesentered into treaties! the% had com#lied ith #rogressi(ede(elo#ment o international in C*T and so #robabl% onecan argue that this time these #ro(isions ha(e ri#ened intoCI* but those are "ust obser(ations though. It could re'uireconfrmation o either an international tribunal or a mosthighl% 'ualifed #ublicist.

    &e ill see later on in the course o stud%ing the te/t o theC*T! hich #ro(isions are codifcations o CI* and hich are

    not.4o! there is an instrument that ill hel# us understand betterthe #ro(ision o the C*T. The C*T itsel is an e/tensi(edocument that %ou ha(e to stud% but i %ou ant to stud%urther! es#eciall% i %ou ant to stud% the bac)ground oho a #articular #ro(ision came into being! %ou ma% ant toread the commentaries o the I*C international lacommission on the C*T. Because o course! the I*C oulde/#lain the de(elo#ment o a #articular #ro(ision and onh% the% ended u# on this #ro(ision. And the% ill hel# %ou

    understand i it is CI* or not. You )no also the im#ortanceon )noing on hether it is CI* or not. Because i in the#roblem in the bar or e/am#le. Iintrigue )a ba.

    4tates A and B entered into a treat%! hoe(er! states a and Bare ne(er #arties to the ienna con(ention o the la otreaties! hen 4tate A (iolated an essential #ro(ision on thetreat%. 4tate B accused 4tate A o material breach and antsno to terminate the treat%. But 4tate B has not submitted orcommunicated his intention to terminate the treat%. It sim#l%

    declared that the treat% had been terminated and so 4tate Ano claims! %ou cannot "ust get out o the treat% sim#lebecause o an allegation that e ha(e breached the treat%and then the other #art% ma% sa% that I am not re'uired toobser(e some #rocedural rules because e am not a #art% tothe C*T and the Procedures are ound in the C*T ere not#arties to it.

    T#e Fe"%!' !l( 9e= #*" *9!" "#e )!&e()*l

    )eF%)ee'" %' "e)%'*"%', ")e*"%e A)e "#% CIL

    8

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY LARGO EH 403 2015-2016

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    60/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    4o hether a #articular #rocedure is re'uired to be obser(edin a the termination o the treat%. &e ha(e o course in theC*T a re'uired #rocedure. But is that CI*5 49! e ma% beable to understand hether a #ro(ision is CI* or not b% tr%ingto loo) at the commentaries o the I*C.

    ust a ca(eat class! hen %our read the commentaries! thecommentaries or me I thin) around 08E7s or 08E0 man%%ears beore the fnal drat. It ma% ha##en that ane/#lanation o b% the I*C o a #articular #ro(ision. *et-s sa%art :0. The fnal drat ill not reect the e/act article number.Art 0: in the 08E8 C*T is not art 0:! it is article somethingbut the #ro(ision is more or less the same. I thin) in no

    #articular time! e ha(e discussed about a defnition o atreat%.

    I thin) e learned that the defnition in the C*T does notmean that that is hat a treat% reall% means. It sim#le meansthat or the C*T to be a##licable! then that treat%! sub"ectmatter o an in'uir% should all under this defnition. It is aninternational agreement concluded beteen 4tates in rittenorm and go(erned b% international la! hether embodiedin a single instrument or in to or more related instrumentsand hate(er its #articular designation. I did mention that

    treaties come in (arious names. 4ome carr% the name+ act!understanding! #rotocol. I thin) I e/#lained this alread%.

    C!'&l%!' *'( e'")$ %'"! 7!)&e !7 ")e*"%e P*)" II/>CLTProcess of conclusion of a treatyH =ow formed:,. Aroposal to draft a treaty.B. "e$otiation and draftin$ of the terms.4. doption and authentication of the te3t of the treaty bythe ne$otiatin$ states.

    uthentication is optional; it is usually done much alter

    :he le$al si$nificance of steps , to 4 is the way the te3t of

    the treaty should be adopted# that is# how states are to bebound when the treaty enters into force. 2ow+

    a.

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    61/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    the conduct o arare. 4o the #ro(isions on ho to conductarmed conict! international humanitarian la! naa na sa08@8 gene(a con(ention. That as inititiates b% ICRC not b%states.

    O7 &!)e/ *7"e) )!!*l/ *'$ 'e,!"%"*"%!' *'(()*7"%', !7 "e). I %" %!)"*'" 7!) !'e "($%', **)"%&l*) ")e*"$ "! '! #*" ")*'%)e( ()%', "#e'e,!"%*"%!'

    Yes. &hat is the im#ortance o )noing hat trans#iredduring the negotiation5

    and the #usil begins

    Donna+ I thin) sir it is )no the intent o the #arties.

    4ir+#$ (! e 'ee( "! '! "#e %'"e'" !7 "#e *)"%e%' e'"e)%', %'"! * ")e*"$

    Donna+ di m)laro

    4ir+ ! $! "#%' "#*" '!%', #*" ")*'%)e( ()%',"#e 'e,!"%*"%!' !l( 9e ('"7l(% l*)! 1=4 %'

    %'"e))e"%', "#e ")e*"%e W#e)e &*' e ;'( %"

    Donna+ Di )laro

    4ir+ %'(l$ l!&*"e 7!) "#e )!%%!' %' "#e >CLT #%"*l *9!" %'"e'"/ %'"e))e"*"%!'. S!e"#%', l%e "#*"....... !*$ A)"%&le 31. H! (! $! %'"e))e" * ")e*"$

    Donna+ di m)alro

    SECTION 3. INTERPRETATION O TREATIES

    8rticle %1, GENERAL RULE O INTERPRETATION

    0. A treat% shall be inter#reted in good aith in accordanceith the ordinar% meaning to be gi(en to the terms o the

    treat% in their conte/t and in the light o its ob"ect and#ur#ose.:. The conte/t or the #ur#ose o the inter#retation o atreat% shall com#rise! in addition to the te/t! including its#reamble and anne/es+a An% agreement relating to the treat% hich as madebeteen all the #arties in conne/ion ith the conclusion othe treat%L7b8 An% instrument hich as made b% one or more #artiesin conne/ion ith the conclusion o the treat% and acce#tedb% the other #arties as an instrument related to the treat%.

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    62/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015-2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    ato sugaton! inter#retation man gud ni s%a so #arehas#arehas ra gud ni s%a sa inter#retation o statutes orconstitution.

    W#*" (%( e le*)' %' !) %'"e))e"*"%!' !7 "#e&!'"%""%!' H! (! e %'"e))e" "#e &!'%"%""%!'Francisco r. s. House o Re#. In %our const 0! %ou eretaught that based on the case that e should loo) at frst thete/t o the ords o the constitution and gi(e these ords its#lain and ordinar% meaning. &e call this verba le$is= the laas e/#ressed in their ords.

    Hoe(er! i gi(ing the ords their #lain and ordinar%

    meaning! still %ou do not get the correct meaning o the#ro(ision! then e go to the ne/t method o inter#retation.&e sa% e go to the ne/t because as said in Fransisco r.hen it e/#lained verbal le$is! it said this is here e shouldstart. 4o naa d % #reerence o treat% inter#retation. 4tart usasa te/t beore mu go sa intent. &e call this ratio legis etanimaSmeaning the intent o the la as e/#ressedmaniested in the intent o the ramers.In inter#reting the treat%! e don-t necessar% ollo that. Ininter#reting a treat%. 3suall%! there are three a##roaches+

    0. There is this te/tualist a##roach here e loo) at theords and gi(e these ords their #lain and ordinar%meaning.:. There is also the intent o the #arties! the intent theor%!similar to our ratio legis et anima.

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    63/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015 2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    necessaril% been com#atible ith the conte/t andor itsob"ect and #ur#ose. In hich case! the court should not orceitsel! o course it ill ha(e to tr% to a##l% article

  • 7/24/2019 PIL Transcript (1)

    64/87

    PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW NOTES| ATTY. LARGO EH. 403 2015 2016|Selfe N!"e|

    Alegre.Barcenas.Cabahug.Calumba.Canda.DelaPena.Honoridez.Regalado.Tunacao.Yongco

    #a gni ni signature. For e/am#le. &e ha(e here a #articulartreat% and e ha(e ado#ted the te/t o the treat% . &hen illthat treat% enter into orce5 Ho ill the states e/#ress theirconsent to bound. There are a lot o a%s o e/#ressing theconsent to be bound such as signature! etc. &hich o these isthe mode o e/#ressing the consent to be bound in the treat%our e/am#le5 Are other states alloed to become #arties b%accession5

    Donna+ %es sir

    4ir+ I' "#% ")e*"$ "#*" e *)e "*l%', *9!" H! (!e *e )e "#e *&&e%!' % *ll!e( A)e "*"e

    *ll!e( "! *e )ee)*"%!' %' "#e ")e*"$ "#*" e#*(

    Donna+It de#ends sir i it is #ro(ided in the treat%

    4ir+ It is #ro(ided in the treat% because the treat% can #ro(idethat reser(ation be not alloed. Can %ou gi(e an e/am#lehere reser(ation cannot be alloed5 The Rome statuteallos no reser(ation.

    &hat I am tr%ing to sa% is all those 'uestions that I ha(eas)ed can be ansered b% loo)ing at the te/t o the treat%.

    &hat it means hen e sa% ado#tion and authentication othe te/t o the treat% is that i e ado#t the te/t o thetreat%! then hat ill go(ern the ne/t stages ill be inaccordance ith the te/t o the treat%. Because this treat%!this assumed treat% that e ha(e alread% ado#ted sa%se/#ression o consent to be bound shall be b% ratifcation andnot "ust b% signature. Then the ne/t stages o ratifcation andother stages ill ha(e to be in accordance ith hat is#ro(ided or in the te/t o treat%. &hen ill this enter intoorce5 9 course %ou cannot anser that because %ou ha(e

    to see the te/t o the treat%. Does it sa% that it ill h(e toenter into orce at a #articular da% or one %ear ater the E7th#art% ill rati%5 &e ill ne(er )no because it is #ro(ided inthe te/t. That is h% it is im#ortant to limit sometimes theauthorit% o certain re#resentati(es.

    II

    I!)"*'&e !7 "#e *(!"%!' !7 "#e "e8" !7 "#e ")e*"$

    The te/t o the treat% ill no go(ern the subse'uentstages o the treat% ormation so this