FACULTY OF LAW

UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA

LIA3002
INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL
LAW
SESSION 2022/2023

TUTORIAL QUESTIONS

(Only for the use of the Faculty of Law, University of Malaya)

 I. NATURE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

1. Is public international law really law?

Discuss.

2. Discuss the salient features of public international law?

3. Explain how the international community evolved starting from the establishment
of the first modern states of England, France and Spain.

II. SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

1. “Article 38(1) of the statute of International Court of Justice is usually accepted

as constituting a list of the sources of international law. Some writers have
criticized it on the grounds that it does not list all the sources of international law,
or that it includes things which are not genuine sources.”
(Akehurst)
Discuss.

2. As a judge of the International Court of Justice, you are asked to decide whether
a rule of international law had developed into binding customary international
law. Discuss and elaborate on the factors that must be considered in order to
reach a decision on the matter.

3. Treaties are now the most important source of public international law.

8
 III. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND MUNICIPAL
LAW

1. With reference to established theories, explain the relationship between

international law and Malaysian law.

2. Discuss the case of PP v Narogne Sookpavit & Ors [1987] 2 MLJ 10.

3. A Malaysian court is asked to make a decision based on the international treaties

that it had ratified and jus cogens. Discuss with reference to decided cases.

IV. PERSONALITY, STATEHOOD AND RECOGNITION

1. States are solely and exclusively the subjects of international law.

Discuss.

2. Discuss the requirements of statehood.

3. “The legal significance of recognition is controversial. According to one view it has

constitutive effect; through recognition only a state becomes an international
person and a subject of international law … The better view is that … recognition
… is not a constitutive but a declaratory act, it does not bring into legal existence a
state which does not exist before.”

Discuss.

4. To what extent, if at all, may an international organization and an individual be

regarded as a subject of international law?

8
 V. TERRITORY

1. The Karatokai Islands were discovered by a sea captain of Coruscant in 1592. In

1764, Coruscant established a settlement on West Karakotai and a year
later Alderaan established a settlement on East Karakotai.  

In 1767, Alderaan sold their settlement to Corellia. Coruscant’s settlement was

conquered by Hosnian Prime in 1770 but returned the following year, after protests
from Coruscant. In 1775, Coruscant’s settlement was abandoned for economic
reasons, but a plaque asserting sovereignty was left behind. Corellia left the
settlement in 1812. 
 
In 1816, the United Provinces of Devaron, the territory on the mainland closest
to Karatokai, declared their independence from Correlia. Four years
later, Devaron took formal possession of Karatokai. In 1825, Coruscant protested.
Ten years later, Coruscant captured the islands and have been there since. 

Since Coruscant’s capture of the islands in 1835, Devaron has protested

intermittently. The population of Karatokai (very small, being only about 2,000) are
descendants of people imported from Coruscant after the capture of Karatokai in
1835 when the original inhabitants (of the same ethnic group as the inhabitants on
the mainland) were driven away. 

Who has sovereignty over Karatokai? 

8
 VI. JURISDICTION

1. It has been argued that universal jurisdiction is an established basis of jurisdiction,

for the criminal authorities of a State, to try someone present in its territory, with
crimes which are detrimental the international community as a whole, even if the
crimes did not take place in that territory.

Discuss with reference to case law and international treaties.

2. A bus was travelling up to Genting Highlands, carrying tourists who were mainly
from China. It was involved in an accident after colliding with a car bearing
Singaporean licence plate. All the passengers in the car and some in the bus were
killed while the survivors were sent to a nearby hospital.

The driver of the bus, Ah Suey, managed to survive and was held for questioning
for the collision incident. One of the survivors was discovered to be Joaquin Loera,
a notorious drug kingpin, said to be responsible for the largest drug trafficking ring
in the United States of America and England.

China wishes to bring an action against Ah Suey for the collision while the United
States of America and the United Kingdom wants Joaquin Loera for drug
trafficking. Malaysia, however, has refused both requests on the grounds that it
has claims over both individuals as well. The British Government vehemently
opposes the death penalty that Malaysia exercises, and a special request was
sent to the police officers where Joaquin Loera was being held. Four sympathetic
police officers who believed it to be joint law enforcement exercise, sedated
Joaquin and put him on Singapore Airlines to London. Joaquin was then taken
away by British police officers and was submitted to the jurisdiction of the courts
there.

Discuss all of the international law issues that arise

8
3. A, a citizen of State X, is opposed to the current government of State Y. He
creates an internet site critical of State Y’s policies relating to human rights and
discloses personal information about State Y’s government officials. While on a
visit to State Y, he is arrested and charged with two crimes:

a) the promotion of dissatisfaction against the government of State Y; and

b) encouraging personal attacks on government officials of State Y by disclosing

details about State Y’s government officials.

To what extent could State Y claim jurisdiction to try A of such crimes?

VII. STATE RESPONSIBILITY

1. “Nationality is a legal bond having its basis a social fact of attachment, a genuine
connection of existence, interest and sentiments.”
Nottenbohm Case (1955) ICJ Reports 4, 23

To what extent does international law require such a “genuine connection”

between an individual or a corporation and a state which seeks to exercise the
right of diplomatic protection on his or its behalf?

2. Charles has lived and traded in Timbuktu for thirty years. In January 2010, he was
arrested and detained incommunicado without trial for several months under the
Internal Security Act. During this time in detention, he was often interrogated by
the policeman in charge – sometimes, the policeman would also try to ‘persuade’
him through physical actions to confess. He was then expelled from Timbuktu and

8
 forbidden from entering the country any longer. All his property was expropriated,
including a company worth 3 million in Timbuktu currency.

Charles was a citizen of Germany until June 2010, upon which he obtained the
nationality of Arcadia. He has no permanent home in Arcadia, though he visits his
brother who lives in Arcadia every year during Christmas. Since his exile from
Timbuktu, Charles opened a business in Arcadia to earn an income, and lives with
his brother.

Discuss.

3. During a rugby match between the national teams of Chersonesia and Tumasik,
played in Chersonese, the Tumasik team cheated. Thereupon, a mob of
Chersonesian supporters destroyed the unguarded High Commission of Tumasik
and seized the High Commissioner, Sang Nila Utama. Chersonesian troops
dispersed the mob and rescued Sang Nila Utama, but the Chersonesian
Government announced that it would not release Sang Nila Utama until the
Tumasik Government apologized for the behavior of the rugby team. The Tumasik
Government refused to comply with that demand; instead, it requested that
compensation be paid for damage to its High Commission and an apology for the
conduct of the Chersonesian rioters. Tumasik’s counter demands were refused.
The day after this refusal, the Tumasik Government passed a decree to nationalize
in the public interest all foreign-owned car equipment manufacturing firm in
Tumasik, paying the owners the scrap value of their plant. Ninety percent of such
firms were owned by Chersonesian nationals.

Advise the Chersonesian Government.

8
 VIII. IMMUNITIES FROM NATIONAL JURISDICTION

1. Advise the ambassador in Kuala Lumpur of the Republic of Utopia on the following
matters:

(a) A drug-trafficking charge brought against his 21 year old son;

(b) A proposed search of the embassy for drugs allegedly possessed by the said
accused for trafficking;

(c) A proposed search of a diplomatic bag, which is being used to transport the
drugs from Utopia into Malaysia.

(d) An action for breach of contract by the Utopian Economic Corporation, an

organ of the Utopian Government, for its failure to deliver goods to a
Malaysian customer; and

(e) An action for damages against his chauffeur, a Malaysian citizen, who
negligently injured a pedestrian while borrowing an embassy car for the
Deepavali weekend.

2. Dickens Enterprise, a Blefusco company, entered into a contract to buy sugar from
the State of Lilliput. Two cargoes of sugar were sent to Lilliput on the ships,
Gulliver Travels and Oliver Twist. Lilliput was the owner of Gulliver Travels while
Oliver Twist was chartered by Lilliput from Charles Sdn Bhd. Unfortunately, a
revolution occurred in Blefusco which resulted in the Government of Lilliput
terminating all commercial dealings with Blefusco and severing all diplomatic
relations with the State.

8
 At the time of the revolution, Gulliver Travels was docked in Blefusco and had
been unloading its cargo while Oliver Twist was just about to arrive. The
Government of Lilliput was concerned over the safety of Gulliver Travels and
ordered it to return to Lilliput. Gulliver Travels stopped unloading its cargo and
obeyed the order given. Meanwhile, the captain of Oliver Twist made a detour and
landed in Laputa. The cargo of sugar was unloaded and sold off in accordance
with the bill of lading and local laws.

Dickens Enterprise wants to bring an action against Lilliput for (i) the remaining
cargo onboard Gulliver Travels and (ii) for the cost of sale of sugar in Laputa.
Lilliput, on the other hand, claims immunity.

(a) Discuss whether Lilliput is able to claim immunity.

(b) Would your answer differ if the ships were commercial ships? State the
reasons for your answer.

3. The doctrine of State immunity is justified on the basis of the equality,

independence, and dignity of States. The maxim par in parem non habet imperium
is also commonly cited.

Taking into account the above doctrine, critically examine the extent to which a
State can be sued before the courts of another State with reference to the United
Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property
2004.