Top Banner
IMBA 571 IMBA 571 PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS Abu Shouk refugee camp in Sudan Photo by US Representative Frank Wolf
20

3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

May 13, 2022

Download

Documents

dariahiddleston
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

IMBA 571IMBA 571PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

& ORGANIZATIONS

Abu Shouk refugee camp in Sudan

Photo by US Representative Frank Wolf

Page 2: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

PUBLICPUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

• “A rule of international law is one that has been accepted as such by the p yinternational community of states:a. in the form of customary international law;a t e o o custo a y te at o a a ;b. by international agreement; or c by derivation from general principlesc. by derivation from general principles common to the major legal systems of the world.”

Page 3: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

CASE: The Paquette HabanaCASE: The Paquette Habana175 U.S. 677 (1900 U.S. Sup. Ct.)

• FACTS:– During Spanish-American War, 2 vessels g p

sailing under Spanish flags were seized by the US as part of the 1989 Cuban blockade

– Spanish owner of vessels (living in Cuba) sued for damages in Florida

• LOWER COURT DECISION:– Upheld seizure of ships as war prizes

Page 4: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

CASE: The Paquette HabanaCASE: The Paquette HabanaSupreme Court Ruling

• ISSUE:– whether the ships were subject to capturewhether the ships were subject to capture

by the US during the war• REASONING:REASONING:

– “. . . ancient usage . . . gradually ripening into a rule of international law . . . fishing gvessels . . . Have been recognized as exempt . . . From capture as prize of war.”

Page 5: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

CASE: The Paquette HabanaCASE: The Paquette HabanaSupreme Court Ruling

• REASONING (cont.):– Doctrine that exempts fishing vessels from p g

capture has been known to US– “International law is part of our law . . . “– “Where there is no treaty. . . [we look to]

the customs and usages of civilized nations…”

• RULING:– US must pay owner for damages

Page 6: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

The Law of TreatiesThe Law of TreatiesVienna Convention, in force 1980

• Codified some customary int’l law• Applies to bilateral or multilateralApplies to bilateral or multilateral• Not all nations are signatory

A t 26 “P t t d ”• Art. 26 “Pacta sunt servanda”:– “Every treaty in force is binding upon the

ti t it d t b f d bparties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.”

Page 7: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

The Law of TreatiesThe Law of Treaties• Treaty termination allowed ifTreaty termination allowed if

– fundamental change in circumstance, or if treaty violates jus cogens (premptory– if treaty violates jus cogens (premptory norm of general international law)

Page 8: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

CASE: United States v Alvarez-CASE: United States v. AlvarezMachain, 504 US 655 (1992)

• FACTS:– Alvarez-Machain abducted to US for arrest

and trial for murder and torture of DEA agent

– Mexico protested a violation of the extradition treaty between Mexico & US

• LOWER COURT DECISIONS:– Indictment dismissed since abduction

i l t d t tviolated treaty

Page 9: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

United States v. Alvarez-Machain, Supreme Court RulingSS• ISSUE:– Whether criminal defendant abducted to

US f ti ith hi h US hUS from nation with which US has an extradition treaty acquires a defense to US jurisdictionjurisdiction

• REASONING:To infer from the Treaty that it prohibits all– To infer from the Treaty that it prohibits all means of gaining the presence of an individual outside of its terms goes beyondindividual outside of its terms goes beyond established precedent and practice

Page 10: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

United States v Alvarez-United States v. AlvarezMachain, Supreme Court Ruling

• RULING:– Treaty does not obligate statesTreaty does not obligate states

to refrain from abduction, but only provides a mechanism where no other exists

– Treaty is NO defense– US jurisdiction exists

Page 11: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

Impact of Treaties on BusinessImpact of Treaties on Business

• Treaties impact private individual rights p p gsince State’s obligation becomes a citizen’s obligationg

Page 12: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

Example: Montreal ProtocolExample: Montreal Protocol• Title: Montreal Protocol on Substances

That Deplete the Ozone Layer– US ratified in 1988; entered into force 1989;– Implemented in the US through the Clean

Air Act: auto emissions limits, inspections, catalytic converters, fuel ingredients…

– “Perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date...“ Kofi Anan

Page 13: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

Example:L f th S C tiLaw of the Sea Convention

St ll d til 1994 ( ff ti d t )• Stalled until 1994 (effective date) because of North-South debate re: “ h it f ki d” &“common heritage of mankind” & resource interests

S– Progress made when Deep Seabed Mining agreement applied free market principles rather than common heritage principlerather than common heritage principle

• US signed; Senate has never ratified

Page 14: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

Commerce of the Oceans• > $700 B in goods

shipped through U.S. ports annually

• >25% of US oil & gas produced comes from offshore wellsoffshore wells

• U.S. fisheries landings exceeded $3 B in 2002

Photo: Yang Ming Lines ship at Wilmington Port

exceeded $3 B in 2002• Telecom industry uses

submarine cables

American Petro. Inst., Nat’l Ocean Industries Assoc., & Int’l Assoc. of Drilling Contractors support ratificationsubmarine cables Contractors support ratification

Page 15: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONSINTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

• Most via the United NationsMost via the United Nations– FAO, ILO, UNESCO, WHO, WIPO

• Commissions est for special purposeCommissions est. for special purpose– UNCTAD, UNICITRAL, UNIDROIT…

Page 16: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

BRETTON WOODS ORGS.

• Int’l Monetary Fund (IMF)y ( )– 181 states– lends money to developing

nations to assist with problems of economic development

• World Bank• World Bank – assists member states, rich or

poor, with balance of payment •Controversy d th

p p yproblems and finances development projects in developing nations

surrounds these organizations•Photo: Kyrgyz citizens protest developing nations pWorld Bank in ‘06

Page 17: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS & TRADE (GATT)

• Grew out of post-WWII economy– Purpose was to commit member states to

principles of nondiscriminatory trade– Eventually led to more formal WTO body

• World Trade Organization– now the dispute resolution body for GATTy

Page 18: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

Role of UN in Public International Law

• Current issues are many, including peace & security, economic & social p y,development, human rights, humanitarian affairs, international law, , ,and the environment

Peace Palace at The Hagueg

Page 19: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

Example:International Court of Justice

• Formed in 1945 under UN charter, ICJ sits at The Hague & bases decisions on gStatute of International Court of Justice

• ICJ use rare: only states may bring anICJ use rare: only states may bring an action, no compulsory jurisdiction, and decision binding only on partiesdecision binding only on parties

Great Hall of Justice, ,The Peace Palace

Page 20: 3.Public Intl Law & Intl Orgs.IMBA 571

Next Time:Next Time: Role of Contracts in Int’l Commerce &

International Trading of GoodsInternational Trading of Goods