INTERNATIONAL LAW

- “Rules and principles of general application

dealing with the conduct of states and of PUBLIC IL VS PRIVATE IL
international organizations and with their
relations inter se, as well as with some of their PUBLIC IL PRIVATE IL
relations with persons, whether natural or SOURCE
juridical.” Based on: Based on:
International Domestic Laws
1) Rules and principles of general application conventions Municipal Laws
2) Dealing with the: International custom (it includes the
a) Conduct of states General Principles of Law constitution and statutes
recognized by civilized adopted by individual
b) International organizations and their
nations countries.)
relations inter se
Judicial decisions and
c) Some of their relations with persons
teachings of the most
(whether natural or juridical) highly qualified publicists
of the various nations.
SUBJECTS
INTERNATIONAL LAW States and international Individuals and
- Branch of law the deals with the relationship organizations corporations
of states as well as the relationship of
individuals of different states.
ABDULLLAHI VS PFIZER
PUBLIC CHARACTER PRIVATE CHARACTER
When international When individuals, Facts
subjects are involves domestic or laws, or Pfizer had an experimental antibiotic, TROVAN,
local events intermingle which it administered to young patients in Nigeria
with each other without getting the informed consent of the
necessitating a children nor their guardians.
determination of the
applicable law. Some patients died while others became blind,
Ex. When 2 or more Ex. When laws of state A
deaf, paralyzed, or brain-damaged.
countries have territorial are different with the
disputes that are laws of State B.
Plaintiffs alleged that Pfizer violated
governed by
international treaties or international law for non-consensual medical
When there is an
conventions. experimentation.
invocation of the
doctrine of forum non
conveniens. Pfizer moved to dismiss for failure to state a
claim under the ATS and on the basis of forum non
(Forum is not conveniens.
convenient)
Issues

1) WON Pfizer violated int’l. law on non-

BRANCHES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
consensual medical experimentation?
1) Public International Law
- Yes
- Governs the relationship of states and
international entities
2) WON Nigeria offers an adequate forum for the
adjudication of plaintiff’s claims?
2) Private International Law
- No.
- It deals with conflict of laws among the laws of
2 or more states and necessitates a
Ruling
determination of which municipal law applies to
a case.
A. The Prohibition of Nonconsensual Medical
Experimentation on Humans

The appellants ground their claims in 4 sources

of international law that categorically forbid
medical experimentation on non-consenting
human subjects:
 1) Nuremberg Code
o “The voluntary consent of the human
subject is absolutely essential.”

2) World Medical Association’s Declaration of

Helsinki
o It sets forth ethical principles to guide
physicians world-wide and provides
that human subjects should be
volunteers and grant their informed
consent to participate in research;

3) Council for International Organizations of

Medical Services
o It requires the voluntary informed
consent of a prospective subject.

4) Article 7 of the International Covenant on

Civil and Political Rights
o “No one shall be subjected without the
free consent to medical or scientific
experimentation.”

I. Universal and obligatory

II. Specific and definable
III. Mutual concern

UNIVERSALITY
The prohibition on nonconsensual medical
experimentation on human beings meets this standard
because it is specific, focused, and accepted by nations
around the world without significant exception.

Military Tribunal 1 promulgated the Nuremberg

Code as part of the tribunal’s final judgment against 15
doctors who were found guilty of war crimes and
crimes against humanity.

“No one shall be subjected without his free

consent to medical or scientific experimentation.”
This prohibition became part of Article 7 of the ICCPR,
which entered into force in 1976, and is legally binding
on the more than 160 States Parties that have ratified
the convention without the reservation to the
provision.

SPECIFICITY
SOSA requires that we recognize causes of
action only to enforce those customary international
law norms that are no “less definite in content than the
historical paradigms familiar when the ATS was
enacted.” The norm prohibiting nonconsensual medical
experimentation on human subjects meets these
requirements.

MUTUAL CONCERN