unit 1-8

Question 1

Definitions of INTL LAW

Answer 1

According to Oppenheim
“Law of Nations or international law is the name for the body of customary and conventional
rules which are considered legally binding by civilized States in their intercourse with each other.”

Modern definitions:
Schwarzenberger: International law is the body of legal rules which apply between sovereign States
and such other entities as have been granted international personality.
According to him, international law, if and when grants international personality to any entity, or
when international law would be capable of regulating rights and duties of any entity, its rules shall apply to them.

Question 2

is it a real law or not

Answer 2

Not a real law- john austin and hobbes= code of moral force and rules of conduct only, no sanction or real authority. some believe that “Command, Sanction and Sovereign” are required to make it a true law, and since intl law has none of the three- its not true law.

not invested with true legal force, and no command of superior

IS LAW BUT IS WEAK
;s of the view that international law is a weak law for which he has given various reasons like
* the rules made by treaties and customs are not as effective as municipal legislations
* no adjudicating authority in the true sense
* weak enforcement measures
* frequent violations of the rules
* sovereign states being the units hampers its effectiveness.

Question 3

positive or consensual theory

Answer 3

They believed that the binding force of international law comes from the consent of the states.
* Customs (implied) and treaties (express) constitute the primary sources of international law.
*They denied and criticized the law of nature as a source of law

Critics:
oConsent of new states cannot be found in already existing customs and treaties
oConsent of 3rd parties where some treaties create an obligation on them
oDonotrecognize the significance of natural law theor

Question 4

Law of Nature Theory

Answer 4

According to this theory, international law is a part of law of nature (reason based law, higher law,
moral law, etc.).
* Grotius believed there is morality and divine justice in the nature of things, and both men and
nations are ought to be governed by this universal principle.
*Naturalists denied custom and treaties to be a source of international law.
* Influence of this theory can be seen in the recognition of human rights at an international level.
* Supporters- Pufendorf, Thomasius
* Criticism
oIts basis is idealistic moral principles and not the actual ground reality
oDonotrecognize the significance of customs and treaties

Question 5

Groatian or Eclectics Theory

Answer 5

They have adopted a middle position between positivists and naturalists.
* They treat natural law as well as positive law of treaties and customs on equal footing.
* Two kinds of law- voluntary (based on customs and treaties) and necessary (natural law)

Question 6

theory regarding subjects of intl law

Answer 6

becoming a subject of intl law=
a. An incumbent of rights and duties under international law
b. The holder of procedural privileges of prosecuting a claim before an international tribunal.
c. The possessor of interests for which provision is made by international law.

oRealist theory- States alone are subjects of international law
a state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:
1. a permanent population;
2. a defined territory
3. a government; and
4. capacity to enter into relations with other states
CRITICISM: the limitations of the realistic theory is the trials of Nazi war criminals after the Second World War. The Charter of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg explicitly made individuals subject to international rules relating to crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. At Nuremberg and in other war trials, thousands of war criminals were tried and convicted; hundreds were executed. Nuremberg re-established plainly and forcefully that the rules of international law should and do apply to individuals.

oFictional theory- Individuals alone are subjects of international law
CRITICIMS: The fictional theory’s attempt to portray individuals as the subjects of international law proves futile because in reality even individuals derive their rights from a state, and the role of a state in international law is of paramount importance .
oFunctional theory- States, individuals, and certain non-state entities are subjects.

Question 7

relationship between intl law and municipal law

Answer 7

1. Dualism
   Under the dualistic approach, municipal law and international law are considered separate and
   distinct legal systems. They operate independently
2. Incorporation- Many states incorporate international law into their domestic legal systems through various means such as legislation, treaties, or constitutional provisions
3. Conflict and Hierarchy:
   Conflicts may arise between municipal and international law when there is a contradiction or
   inconsistency between their provisions
4. Harmonization:
   States often seek to harmonize their domestic laws with international obligations to ensure
   compliance and consistency.
5. ) Influence and Interpretation:
   International law can influence the interpretation and development of municipal law.
   Courts and legal practitioners may refer to international legal principles, treaties, and customary practices when interpreting domestic laws or resolving legal disputes
6. Enforcement and Compliance:
   States are responsible for enforcing both municipal and international law within their territories.
   While international law primarily relies on state compliance and cooperation, violations of
   international law can sometimes result in international legal consequences, such as diplomatic protests, economic sanctions, or even military intervention

Question 8

Monistic theory

Answer 8

Under this theory, there is only one system of law- law in general.
International law and municipal law parts of the same system- law in general, there being no
real difference between the two systems of law.
All laws are single unity- whether binding on individuals, states or other entities.
The followers of this theory are of the view that international law and municipal law are both
part of a universal body of legal rules binding all human beings, collectively or singly

Question 9

• Dualistic Theory

Answer 9

According to this theory international law and municipal law are two separate legal systems with
different inherent characteristics.
According to Triepel, subjects of municipal law are individuals and subjects of international law
are States solely. Additionally, according to him the juridical origin of the two systems are
different. (municipal law- will of the state itself, international law- common will of the states
called Gemeinwille

Question 10

• Specific Adoption Theory and transformation theory

Answer 10

Specific adoption theory: International Law applies to a State when it is specifically adopted in its municipal law.
This is done to apply customary international law into the sphere of municipal law

Transformation theory:
ules of International Law must undergo transformation to be applicable in municipal law.
The treaties signed by the states at an international level must be transformed into the provisions of the municipal law.
The municipal law maybe amended or enabling legislations shall be passed to give affect to such treaties

Question 11

Features of Customary Law

Answer 11

State practice to give rise to** binding rules **of customary International Law, that practice must be **uniform, consistent and general **and must be coupled with a belief that the practice is
obligatory rather than habitual.

In the North Sea Continental Shelf cases
the ICJ stated that there is no precise length of time during which the practice must exist. It is simply that it must be followed long enough to show that other requirements of custom are satisfactory

In the Lotus case, opinio Juris was seen as an essential
element of customary international law and this was
affirmed in North Sea Continental Shelf Cases as well.

Question 12

Pacta sunt servanda

Answer 12

Pacta sunt servanda is a Latin phrase that means “agreements must be kept” and is a fundamental principle of international law. It states that parties to a contract or treaty must abide by the terms of the agreement they made. This principle is considered the foundation of international law and is directly referenced in many international agreements. Without it, no international agreement would be binding or enforceable.

Question 13

Sources of international law

Answer 13

According to Lawrence and
Oppenheim there is only one source of International law and that is the consent of nation. Brierly considers customs and reasons as the main sources of international law.
Article 38(1) of the statute of the International Court of Justice is widely recognized as the most authoritative statement as to the sources of International law. On the basis of Article 38
of ICJ Statute five distinct sources can be identified. They are International
1. conventions/treaties,
2. International customs,
3. General principles of law,
4. Judicial decisions
5. and Reason and equity.

Question 14

TREATIES

Answer 14

types of treaties:
1. Law Making Treaties
* ii) Treaty giving general principles.
- These treaties are signed by a majority of the State. For Example United Nation Charter.
* (i) Treaty giving the rule of Universal International Law
- These treaties are entered into and signed by a large number of countries giving
thereby general principles of International Like. Geneva Convention on Law of sea

2. Treaty Contracts - These are the treaties which are entered into by two or more States. The provisions of such treaties are binding only on the parties to the treaty

Strictly speaking a treaty is not a source of law so much as a source of obligation under law.Treaties are binding only on States which become parties to them and the choice of whether or not to become party to a treaty is entirely one for the State – there is no requirement to sign up to a treaty. Why is a treaty binding on those States which have become parties to it ? pacta sunt servanda

But many treaties are also important as authoritative statements of customary law. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969. Less than half the States in the world are parties to it but every court which has considered the matter has treated its main provisions as
codifying customary law and has therefore treated them as applying to all States whether they are parties to the Convention or not.
treaties can prove as evidence for customary law?

Question 15

is judicial decision a main force in international law?

Answer 15

According to Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, Judicial
Decisions are subsidiary sources of International Law
**Article 59 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice expressly provides that the
decisions of the court have no binding force except between the parties and in respect of that particular case. This means that the judicial decisions are binding only on the disputed States.
Under the provisions of this Article, the Court is specifically required not to apply precedent or doctrine of stare decisis in its decisionsDecisions of International Court of Justice are to have only persuasive value.**

Question 16

Subjects of intl law

Answer 16

States:- The moment an entity becomes a state, it becomes an international legal person and acquires an international legal personality
Non-State Actors:- There are certain Non-State actors with international legal personalities that include, individuals, armed group involved in conflicts and international organizations like the EU, UN and African union who are deemed to be subjects of international law.- Member of the Composed States or federal states, Insurgents and Belligerents, National Liberation movements, International territories.

Special Case entities are the subjects of International law and Special case entities are granted special unique status under International law and they are the Sovereign Order of Malta, and the Holy See and the Vatican City.

International organizations:- an international organization is also an important subject of international law, it is defined as an organization established by a treaty or other instrument governed by international law and possessing its own legal personality. The United Nations and World Trade Organizations are examples of international organizations.

It can be said that states have original personality and non-state actors have derived personality. This is attributed to the fact that states are considered to be international personalities the moment they are identified as a sovereign state **on the other hand, non-state actors like international organizations derived their personality through other means. **
For example, the rights and duties maybe described in their constitutions, charters, and treaties that establish such organizations.

Question 17

Rights and Duties of Subjects of International Law

Answer 17

bring claims before international and national courts and tribunals to enforce their rights. have the ability or power to come into agreements that are binding under international law (for example, treaties).
enjoy immunity from the jurisdiction of foreign courts (for example, diplomatic immunity). be subject to obligations under international law (for example, obligations under international humanitarian law).

Question 18

Debate between theories of relation between intl law of monoistic theory and dualistic theory

Answer 18

dualists: intl law and muni law are disticnt and govern different areas. international law is weaker than dom law and is only part of domestic law becausr the state chose to incorporate it.

Monoists: one system of law and both parts (intl+municipal) are bindig and arise from the concept of law. they see intl law as superior and stronger representing the systems highests rules and values. if domestic law anywhere conflicts with international law that is the State’s fault, and will not excuse the State’s obligations

international law will apply to a state regardless of its domestic law and that a
state cannot in the international forum plead its own domestic law, or even its domestic constitution, as an excuse for breaches of its international obligations.

some states incorp intl law into municpl law
:

Question 19

APPLICATIOn of intl law into municipal law:

Answer 19

1. Specific Adoption, Specific Incorporation or Transformation Theory:
   in order for intl law to applied into municpl law, it must be SPECIFICALLY adopted
2. Delegation Theory:
   Delegation theory argues that states delegate authority to their constitutions through international treaties. It does not have a superiority concept, and states can decide how to implement international law without considering whether it is superior to national law ???

Question 20

Convention as a source of International Law

Answer 20

Treaties and conventions are one of the most important sources of International
Law.
* These conventions can be multilateral or bilateral.
* Multilateral conventions relate to the treaties which formulate the universal or
general application of the law.*
On the other hand, bilateral conventions are those which is formed exclusively by two states to deal with a particular matter
concerning these states.
* Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty 1969, the codified law for contracting
treaties, Treaties act as a direct source of rights and obligations for the states, they codify the existing customary source of law.
They are voluntary and cannot bind non-signatory to it** Exception:f any rule forms part of the Jus Cogens norm as they are part of the accepted principles of International law and every state has a
peremptory duty of not breaching them due to their **erga omnes* obligations.
(owed to the whole world

Question 21

Anglo Norwegian Fisheries Case?

Answer 21

Norway’s Decree: In 1935, Norway enacted a decree that established baselines from which to measure its territorial sea. These baselines were drawn around Norway’s coastline, including numerous fjords, bays, islands, and islets.
UK’s Claim: The UK argued that Norway’s baselines were drawn in a way that violated international law, particularly the “10-mile rule” that limited the distance between baselines. The UK contended that Norway’s claims to the waters surrounding its coast were excessive and encroached upon the high seas.

COURT: appears to support the idea that an existing customary law rule would not apply to a State if (1) it objected to the application of the rule to itself (2) at the initial stages and (3) in a consistent manner. Furthee there was no objection from other countries
he Court held that the fact that this consistent and sufficiently long practice took place without any objection to the practice from other States (until the time of dispute) indicated that these States did notconsider the Norwegian system to be “contrary to international law”.

Question 22

The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases

Answer 22

series of legal disputes between several European countries over the delimitation of their respective continental shelves in the North Sea. These cases involved Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.

The 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf established the principle that coastal states have sovereign rights over the resources of their continental shelf.
However, the Convention did not provide specific rules for delimiting continental shelves between neighboring states.

this put germany at a disadvantage due to the shape of its coastline

The Court concluded that the equidistance principle was not binding on Germany by way of treaty or customary international law.
In the case of the latter, the principle had not attained a customary international law status at the time of the entry into force of the Geneva Convention or thereafter. As such, the Court held that the use of the equidistance method is not obligatory for the delimitation of the areas concerned in the present proceedings

Question 23

SS LOTUS CASE

Answer 23

Collision: The SS Lotus collided with a Turkish ship, resulting in the deaths of several Turkish citizens.
Turkish Arrest: Turkish authorities arrested the French officer responsible for the collision and charged him with manslaughter.
HELD
Presumption of Sovereignty:The PCIJ ruled that states have a presumption of sovereignty within their own territory, meaning that they have jurisdiction over all persons and events within their borders unless there is a clear rule of international law to the contrary.
Absence of Prohibited Rule: The Court found that there was no explicit rule of international law prohibiting Turkey from exercising jurisdiction over the French officer.
Exercise of Jurisdiction: Therefore, the PCIJ concluded that Turkey was entitled to exercise jurisdiction over the case, provided that its actions were not in violation of any international law.

Question 24

jus cogens norms

Answer 24

Jus cogens are the most fundamental principles of international law that are considered to be universally binding upon all states, regardless of their consent. These are norms that cannot be derogated from by treaties or other sources of international law.

In essence, jus cogens are the “non-negotiable” rules of the international legal system.

Examples of Jus Cogens Norms:
Prohibition of Genocide:
Nuremberg trials These crimes were considered to be so fundamental violations of international law that they were deemed to be jus cogens norms, and the individuals responsible were held accountable regardless of their national origin or the laws of their own countries.

Question 25

recognition of state meaning

Answer 25

* Recognition of state means acknowledgement as an international political entity by another state. Simple announcements cannot do it. * According to **Article 1 Montevideo convention, 1933,** four qualifications must be gained for a state to be recognized in international law: ** 1. A permanent population. 2. A defined territory. 3. Government to rule. 4. Ability to make new relations with other states.** * A state is acknowledged by other existing states only when these qualifications are met

Question 26

Forms of Recognition

Answer 26

**Express recognition**: When an existing state recognizes the new state by announcing the intention of recognition. When a state is recognised by expressed ways, it is a de jure recognition unless provided otherwise by the recognising state in the declaration. *** Implied recognition:** It results from any act that implies recognizing the new state **Conditional recognition:** It implies that the recognition granted is subject to the fulfilment of certain conditions of the recognized state, in addition to the normal requirements of statehood. he conditions attached varies from state to state such as religious freedom, the rule of law, democracy, human rights etc. example: ***International Community and Israel:*** Israel's establishment in 1948 was met with mixed reactions from the international community. Many countries recognized Israel immediately, while others, particularly Arab states, delayed or withheld recognition. Some countries, such as the United States, conditioned their recognition on Israel's commitment to certain principles, such as the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Reasons for Conditional Recognition: **Political Pressure**: Recognizing states may use conditional recognition as a tool to exert political pressure on the recognized entity. **Domestic Considerations, International Norms:** **Premature or precipitate recognition:** It is granted even when a state does not possess all the attributes of statehood.

Question 27

Theories of Recognition

Answer 27

1. **Consecutive Theory:** A state becomes recognized when already present states recognize it, not when it meets the essential criteria of statehood. only after recognition a State gets the status of an International Person and becomes a subject to International Law. So, even if an entity possesses all the characteristics of a state, it does not get the status of an international person unless recognised by the existing States. **a state only gets the exclusive rights and obligations and becomes a subject to International Law after its recognition by other existing States.** CRITICISM: criticisms of this theory are: This theory is criticised because unless a state is recognised by other existing states, rights, duties and obligations of statehood community under International Law is not applicable to it. This theory also leads to confusion when a new state is acknowledged and recognised by some of the existing states and not recognised by other states. 2. **Declaratory Theory:** This theory says states exist before recognition and that recognition is just a formal acknowledgement CRITICISM: The decision to recognize a new state is often influenced by political factors, such as geopolitical interests, human rights concerns, or domestic pressures. This can undermine the purely legal and objective nature of the declaratory theory. Subjectivity: The determination of whether a state meets the internal criteria can be subjective and open to interpretation. For example, the definition of a "government" can vary widely

Question 28

Legal Effects of Recognition

Answer 28

1. It acquires the capacity to enter into diplomatic relations with other states. 2. It acquires the capacity to enter into treaties with other states. 3. The state is able to enjoy the rights and privileges of international statehood. 4. The state can undergo state succession. 5. With the recognition of state comes the right to sue and to be sued. 6. The state can become a member of the United Nations organisation

Question 29

Doctrines of Recognition

Answer 29

Tobar Doctrine: According to Carlos Tobar, a state or government is only recognized if its managing system is granted this recognition by democracy. * Estrada Doctrine: A government must be only recognized based on whether it is in de facto existence. * Betancourt Doctrine: This doctrine expresses its disagreement on a state’s recognition by military means. * Stimson Doctrine: This doctrine suggests a region cannot be recognized as a state if a new state combines international territories without peace. | Not that important i guess

Question 30

De facto recognition

Answer 30

**1.Informal acknowledgment:** De facto recognition refers to the informal acceptance of a state or government by another state. This recognition does not involve a formal declaration or legal endorsement. **2.Practical relations:** De facto recognition usually occurs when a state engages in practical relations with the entity in question, such as trade or diplomatic communication, treating it as a legitimate state or government without an official statement. **3.Provisional nature:** De facto recognition often serves as a provisional acknowledgment before granting de jure recognition. It allows states to establish working relationships with the entity while reserving the right to withhold full, formal recognition. **4.Limited legal implications:** De facto recognition has limited legal implications compared to de jure recognition. While it allows for some interactions between states, it does not grant the same level of rights and privileges as de jure recognition, such as diplomatic immunities and access to international courts

Question 31

De jure recognition:

Answer 31

De jure recognition: **1.Formal acknowledgment:** De jure recognition is a formal, legal acknowledgment of a state or government by another state. This recognition is usually expressed through diplomatic statements, official communications, or resolutions. **2.Legal endorsement:** De jure recognition implies a legal endorsement of the entity in question, confirming its legitimacy and status as a subject of international law. **3.Permanent nature:** Unlike de facto recognition, de jure recognition is generally considered permanent, meaning that the recognizing state has fully accepted the entity as a legitimate state or government with no reservations. **4.Full legal implications:** De jure recognition carries significant legal implications for the recognized entity. It allows for the establishment of formal diplomatic relations, participation in international organizations, accession to international treaties, and access to international courts

Question 32

Withdrawal of recognition

Answer 32

**Withdrawal of De Facto Recognition** * Under International Law, when a State having De Facto recognition but fails to obtain or fulfill the essential conditions then the recognition can be withdrawn. * The recognition can be withdrawn through declaration or through communicating with the authorities of the recognized State. It can also be **withdrawn by issuing a public Statement.** *** Withdrawal of De Jure Recognition** *Withdrawal of De Jure recognition is a debatable topic under International Law. * This recognition can be withdrawn when a State loses the essentials elements or other circumstance

Question 33

Luther vs. Sagor

Answer 33

* British citizen Luther used to run the timber business in Soviet Russia. * then, Mr Luthers business was nationalised by russia and he left russia and retured to UK. Then agents of the Russian Soviet Government seized and confiscated them. The Russian nationalization business and Mr. Sagor from England came to an agreement for the acquisition of certain wood. The plaintiff (Mr. Luther) filed a lawsuit seeking a determination that they had a right to the wood after the defendants carried it into England. Accordingly, the company dispatched the wood. But when the timer got to the UK, Mr. Luther insisted that it was his wood. He emphasized that the British Civilization Court could not validate Russian legislation because the UK had never acknowledged that the government **HELD:**they could not interfere in the internal affairs of another country because, at the same time, Russia acquired de facto recognition, and the court also proclaimed the retroactive entry into force of the 1917 recognition form. The nationalization of Russia is legitimate and successful as a result. Therefore, recognition confers rights, privileges, and obligations; it might be de jure or de facto. This case established the principle of public international law that: Once a government is recognized, its acts will be granted as valid (by De-Facto recognition), even those prior to its recognition, known as the retrospective effect.

Question 34

Arantzazu Mendi case

Answer 34

Arantzazu Mendi was a Spanish ship which was registered under the Bilbao area of Spain.- civil war broke in spain between republicans and nationalists. -The UK recognized de jure the Republican government of Spain, on the other hand, they also recognized de facto the rebel government (the Nationalists). Republicans (DJ) nationalised all registered ships of that area and at the time the Mendi ship was anchored at UK port and **The De Facto Nationalist government of Spain who was recognized by UK**appeal to the UK that as The United Kingdom gave them the legal recognition the Arantzazu Mendi ship legally belongs to the Nationalist government and therefor UK should cease the ship and handover to the Nationalist government. HELD: It was held: A de facto government has control over state assets within the territory it controls. A de jure government has control even overstate assets abroad. Reasoning: It was held by the House of Lords that since the Nationalist was a de-facto recognized sovereign ineffective contract over a large portion of Spain, it was immune from the jurisdiction of the local courts of other sovereigns.

Question 35

The Gur Corporation v. Trust Bank of Africa

Answer 35

Recognition of States: The United Kingdom had a policy of not recognizing governments but only states. This meant that while the UK could recognize a new state as independent, it would not necessarily recognize its government. Ciskei's Status: Ciskei was declared an independent state by South Africa in 1981, but it was not recognized as independent by the UK. Legal Proceedings: Gur Corporation, a construction company, entered into a contract with the Ciskei government and obtained a bank guarantee from Trust Bank of Africa. When the Ciskei government defaulted on the contract, Gur Corporation sought to enforce the guarantee.   Question of Standing: The key legal question in the case was whether the Ciskei government had standing to sue or be sued in English courts. This depended on whether it was considered a recognized government.   Court's Ruling: The Court of Appeal ruled that the Ciskei government could not sue or be sued in English courts. The Court held that the UK government's policy of not recognizing governments was relevant in determining whether a foreign government had standing in English courts.   The Court concluded that as Ciskei was not a recognized government, its officials could not sue or be sued in English courts. Significance of the Case: The Gur Corporation v. Trust Bank of Africa case clarified the English law on the recognition of states and governments. It established that the recognition of a government by the UK government is a key factor in determining whether that government can sue or be sued in English courts. The case also highlighted the potential complexities that can arise in international legal disputes when dealing with unrecognized states or governments.

Question 36

. Withdrawal of De facto or de jure recognition in International Law

Answer 36

-Under international law when a state having de facto recognition fails to fulfils conditions for statehood then recognition can be withdrawn. The recognizing state through declaration or through communicating with the authorities of the recognized states. The withdrawal can also be done by issuing a public statement. . Withdrawal of De Jure recognition in International Law - . Withdrawal of a de jure recognition in International Law is a very exceptional event. If strictly interpreted, the de jure recognition can be withdrawn. evocation of de jure recognised states can be withdrawn only when a state loses the essential characteristics of statehood or any other exceptional circumstances. This type of revocation can be done expressly by the recognising state by issuing a public statement.

Question 37

Recognition of Belligerency

Answer 37

When civil war takes place in a state in such a dimension that other states that treating it as a real war between rival powers, it is said that the state of belligerency exists, Starke says that before belligerency is recognized by other States, certain conditions must exist.¹ such as: 1. rebels or insurgents must be in control of substantial part of national territory and basically justitfy that they represent a rival power in the nation 2. hostilities should be in general character and not localised to one area 3. Both parties must act in accordance with the laws of war. 4. The rebels must have an organised force under a proper command if all three conditions are qualified then other states may recognise it as belligerency

Question 38

mode and result of recognition

Answer 38

- formal proclamation of neutrality = unequivocal act of recognition - result of recognition of belligerency = both the rebels and parent govt are entitled to excersise belligerent rughts and are subject to obligations imposed on them as belligerents - Rules of hostilities apply to such warfare and civil confliict is tansformed into a war governed by international law in all aspects. ○ This means that the Geneva Conventions of 1949 with other aspects of international humanitarian law will apply Recognising states, after recognition of belligerency, may declare neutrality

Question 39

Recognition of Insurgency

Answer 39

Insurgencies and civil wars are treated in International Law as internal matter of a State and it is upto municipal law of that State to deal with them. - it is an internal matter and ohter states are required to stay aloof and if they take some action it may amount to interventin. HOWEVER: when in a civil war, rebels or insurgent forces start operating in such a way that they occupy a large part of the territory formerly governed by the parent government, and they constitute de facto authority over it, the rebels or insurgents may claim some measure of international subjectivity = ● If the rebels are defeated, recognition granted to them falls to the ground. if they win then the recognition is deemed as the first step towards recognizing them as a new state = Recognition of insurgency only in extreme conditions (condition a) as otherwise it is considered as unnecessary and even illegal interference within the domestic policy

Question 40

Before recognition of insurgency, The recognizing State must consider the following conditions:

Answer 40

Firstly, insurgents have occupied control over a considerable part of the territory. ○ Secondly, insurgents have support from the majority of the people inhabiting the territory. ○ Thirdly, when the rebel forces act under the command of an organised authority in possession of considerable territory, ○ fourthly, when they comply they accepted rules of war if the rebels dont fulful the recognizing mentioned above a 3rd state may support th erebels financially or materially without recognizing them

Question 41

Difference Between Insurgency and Belligerency

Answer 41

Insurgency: Insurgency refers to an organized rebellion or uprising against an established government or authority, typically involving armed resistance but lacking the formal recognition of international law. Insurgents are not considered lawful combatants, **and are treated as rebels or criminal by the state** recognition: does not require formal recognition in intl community BELLIGERENCY: Belligerency refers to a situation where an armed conflict between a state and organized non-state actors reaches a scale and intensity that qualifies it as a "state of war" under international law. they may recieve limited recognition as lawful combatants Belligerents: Once recognized, belligerents are afforded certain rights under IHL, such as treatment as prisoners of war if captured, and they are subject to laws of armed conflict Recognition of belligerents may impact alliances, trade, and may implicitly validate the belligerents cause