1) a) Define assylum

In public international law, asylum refers to the protection granted by a state to foreign
nationals within its territory who are fleeing persecution or serious harm in their home country.
This protection is typically offered to individuals who fear persecution based on factors such as
race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.
Asylum is grounded in the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits states from returning
individuals to a country where they may face persecution or serious harm. The concept of
asylum is enshrined in various international treaties and conventions, including the 1951
Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol.
Case law plays a crucial role in shaping the understanding and application of asylum in
international law. Notable cases and decisions from international tribunals and domestic courts
contribute to the development of legal principles and standards related to asylum. One
significant case is:
Refugee Case (Colombia v. Peru), 1950:
In this case, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) considered the asylum granted by Peru to
Colombian nationals who were involved in political activities. The ICJ affirmed the right of states
to grant asylum as a legitimate exercise of sovereign authority but emphasized that such
asylum should not be used as a means to interfere in the internal affairs of the state from which
the individuals sought refuge.

b) Different kinds of assylum

Asylum is a form of international protection granted by a country to foreign nationals who have
fled their own country due to fear of persecution. There are different types of asylum
recognized in public international law, and they generally fall under two main categories:
territorial asylum and diplomatic asylum.
1) Territorial Asylum:
This type of asylum is granted within the territory of a state to individuals who have fled their
own country due to persecution.
It is based on the principle that a state has the sovereign right to control who enters and stays
within its borders.
A well-known case illustrating territorial asylum is the case of Lauterpacht, in which the
Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) affirmed the principle that states have the right
to grant asylum within their territory (Case of Asylum, 1930).
2) Diplomatic Asylum:
Diplomatic asylum is granted within the premises of a foreign embassy or consulate to
individuals facing persecution in their home country.
It is based on the inviolability of diplomatic premises and the principle of protecting individuals
in danger.
A notable case involving diplomatic asylum is the Haya de la Torre case (1950) decided by the
International Court of Justice (ICJ), where Peru sought the release of Haya de la Torre, who was
granted asylum in the Colombian embassy in Lima.
3) Non-Refoulement:
While not a specific form of asylum, the principle of non-refoulement is a fundamental aspect
of international refugee law. It prohibits the expulsion or return of individuals to a country
where they may face persecution or serious harm.
The principle is enshrined in various international instruments, including the 1951 Refugee
Convention. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the case of Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy
(2012) emphasized the prohibition of collective expulsions and the obligation of non-
refoulement.
4) Regional Asylum Systems:
In addition to international instruments, some regions have established their own asylum
systems. For example, the European Union has the Common European Asylum System (CEAS),
which includes directives and regulations governing asylum procedures and protection.
Cases within regional systems, such as decisions by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) or the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, contribute to the development of asylum law.

c) State succession
State succession in public international law refers to the process by which a new state comes
into existence or an existing state undergoes a significant change, leading to the emergence of
a new state. State succession can occur due to various reasons, such as the dissolution of a
state, the emergence of a new state through secession, or the merger of states. The legal
consequences of state succession are crucial in determining issues such as state continuity,
rights, and obligations.
Here are some key principles and case law examples related to state succession in public
international law:
1) Continuity of States:
 The general principle is that a state continues to exist despite changes in its government,
territory, or other internal factors.
 Case law: The International Court of Justice (ICJ) affirmed this principle in the "Barcelona
Traction" case (Belgium v. Spain, 1970).
2) Effective Control:
 The concept of effective control is essential in determining which entity will be recognized
as the successor state.
 Case law: The "Arbitral Award of 31 July 1989" (Canada v. France) recognized the
importance of effective control in state succession.
3) Treaties:
 The Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties (1978) provides
guidelines on how treaties are affected by state succession.
 Case law: The "Trail Smelter Arbitration" (United States v. Canada, 1941) addressed the
issue of the continuity of treaty obligations after a change in sovereignty.
4) State Responsibility:
 The issue of state responsibility for the acts of the predecessor state and the allocation of
debts and assets is crucial in state succession.
 Case law: The "Responsibility for Injuries Case" (United States v. Germany, 1927) dealt with
the responsibility of the successor state for injuries caused by the predecessor state.
5) Recognition by Other States:
 Recognition by other states is a significant factor in establishing the legal personality of a
new state.
 Case law: The ICJ in the "South West Africa cases" (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South
Africa, 1966) addressed the issue of non-recognition of South Africa's administration of
South West Africa by certain states.
6) Secession:
 The process of secession leading to the creation of a new state raises complex legal
questions.
 Case law: While there isn't a specific case on secession, the ICJ's advisory opinion on
"Kosovo's Declaration of Independence" (2010) addressed issues related to the recognition
of a new state arising from secession.

2) a) Define contiguous zone

In public international law, the contiguous zone is a concept that extends the coastal state's
sovereignty beyond its territorial sea, allowing for limited control over certain activities in the
adjacent zone. The contiguous zone is established by the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea (UNCLOS), specifically in Part II, Article 33.
According to UNCLOS, the contiguous zone extends from the outer limit of the territorial sea up
to 24 nautical miles from the baseline. Within this zone, coastal states have the authority to
exercise control to prevent and punish infringements of customs, fiscal, immigration, or
sanitary laws and regulations within their territory or territorial sea.
While there may not be specific case law directly related to the contiguous zone itself, various
cases and disputes related to UNCLOS and maritime boundaries have contributed to the
interpretation and application of the law of the sea. It is important to consult relevant
international legal databases and resources for specific cases and legal analyses that may
pertain to the contiguous zone and related issues.

b) short note on exclusive economic zone

An Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is a concept in public international law that grants a coastal
state sovereign rights over the exploration and use of marine resources in a designated area
beyond its territorial sea. The EEZ extends up to 200 nautical miles from the baseline of a
coastal state and is established in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea (UNCLOS).
Key features of an EEZ include the exclusive rights of the coastal state to exploit and manage
natural resources, such as fish, oil, and gas, within the designated zone. While other states
enjoy the freedom of navigation and overflight in the EEZ, they must respect the coastal state's
rights regarding resource exploitation.
A notable case highlighting the significance of EEZ in public international law is the South China
Sea arbitration case between the Philippines and China. In 2016, an arbitral tribunal constituted
under UNCLOS ruled in favor of the Philippines, stating that China's expansive territorial claims
and activities within the Philippines' EEZ were inconsistent with UNCLOS. The tribunal
emphasized the importance of upholding the EEZ as a legal framework for managing maritime
resources and resolving disputes.
This case underscores the role of the EEZ in clarifying the rights and responsibilities of coastal
states and promoting the peaceful resolution of disputes in the realm of public international
law. The EEZ framework continues to be a crucial element in shaping international relations and
maritime governance.

c) what do you mean highseas

In public international law, the term "high seas" refers to those parts of the oceans that are not
within the territorial waters or exclusive economic zones of any particular state. The high seas
are considered to be international waters, meaning they do not belong to any single country,
and they are open to all states for various lawful purposes. The concept of the high seas is
governed by a set of legal principles and conventions.
Key principles regarding the high seas in public international law include:
1) Freedom of Navigation: States have the right to navigate ships on the high seas. This
includes both military and civilian vessels. No state can validly subject any part of the high seas
to its sovereignty.
2) Freedom of Fishing: States have the freedom to fish on the high seas, subject to certain
regulations imposed by international agreements to prevent overfishing and protect marine
resources.
3) Freedom of Overflight: Aircraft, including military aircraft, enjoy the right of overflight over
the high seas. This means that states cannot validly claim sovereignty over the airspace above
the high seas.
4) Common Heritage of Mankind: Some legal scholars argue that the resources of the high seas
are the common heritage of mankind, and as such, their exploitation should be for the benefit
of all states.
Case law in this context often involves disputes related to the interpretation and application of
these principles. For example, cases may arise concerning conflicting claims to maritime
boundaries, disputes over the regulation of activities such as fishing or navigation, or issues
related to environmental protection on the high seas.
One notable convention related to the law of the sea is the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which entered into force in 1994. UNCLOS provides a comprehensive
framework for the rights and responsibilities of states in maritime areas, including the high
seas. Legal decisions and cases may refer to UNCLOS and other relevant international
agreements to resolve disputes related to the high seas.

d) discuss concept of continental self

The concept of "continental shelf" in public international law refers to the submerged
prolongation of a coastal state's land territory, extending from the shorelines to the outer edge
of the continental margin or a distance determined by international legal principles. The
continental shelf is significant for various reasons, including its potential as a source of valuable
resources such as oil, gas, and minerals.
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which came into force
in 1982, the continental shelf is defined in Article 76. According to UNCLOS, a coastal state has
sovereign rights over the continental shelf for the purpose of exploring and exploiting its
natural resources. The continental shelf can extend beyond 200 nautical miles from the
baselines of the coastal state if certain conditions are met.
Case law and state practice have played a crucial role in shaping and clarifying the concept of
the continental shelf in public international law. Here are a few notable cases:
1) North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (1969) (ICJ):
In these cases, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) addressed disputes between Germany
and Denmark/Netherlands concerning the delimitation of the continental shelf in the North
Sea. The Court emphasized the principle of equidistance, stating that in the absence of special
circumstances, the delimitation of the continental shelf between opposite or adjacent states
should be based on the principle of an equidistance line.
2) Libya/Malta Continental Shelf Case (1985) (ICJ):
This case involved a dispute between Libya and Malta over the delimitation of their continental
shelves. The ICJ, in its judgment, emphasized the importance of equitable principles and took
into account relevant circumstances in determining the boundary. The Court considered factors
such as the length of the coastline, the presence of islands, and the configuration of the coasts.
3) Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine) (2009) (ICJ):
This case involved a dispute between Romania and Ukraine over the delimitation of their
maritime boundaries, including the continental shelf. The ICJ applied the principles of equity
and took into account the relevant circumstances to establish the boundary.
These cases illustrate the importance of equity and the principle of equidistance in determining
the limits of the continental shelf. The development of the continental shelf concept has been
influenced by state practice, customary international law, and treaty provisions, particularly
those found in UNCLOS. The cases demonstrate the significance of resolving disputes through
peaceful means and in accordance with established legal principles.

3 a) explain corfu chanel case

As of my last knowledge update in January 2022, there isn't a well-known case specifically
referred to as the "Corfu Channel case" in public international law. However, there is a notable
incident related to the Corfu Channel that led to an international legal dispute.
The incident occurred in the Corfu Channel, which is a strait between the Greek island of Corfu
and the coast of Albania. In 1946, two British warships, HMS Saumarez and HMS Volage, struck
mines in the Corfu Channel. The United Kingdom accused Albania of laying the mines, leading
to an international legal dispute.
The case was brought before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the judgment was
delivered in the Corfu Channel case (United Kingdom v. Albania) on April 9, 1949. The Court
held that Albania had violated its international obligations by laying the mines, and it was
ordered to pay compensation to the United Kingdom for the damages caused to the warships.
The case is significant because it established principles related to the use of international
waterways, the duty of states to ensure the safety of navigation, and the responsibility of states
for wrongful acts. The Corfu Channel case contributes to the development of customary
international law in areas concerning the protection of international navigation and the
peaceful use of international straits.
Please note that if there have been further developments or new cases related to the Corfu
Channel after 2022, you may want to check more recent legal sources for the latest
information.

b) pasific means of dispute settlement

It seems there may be a typographical error in your question. I believe you meant "Pacific"
instead of "Pasific." Assuming that, I'll provide information on Pacific means of dispute
settlement in public international law with case law.
Public international law provides various mechanisms for the peaceful settlement of disputes
between states. These mechanisms are often referred to as "Pacific means of dispute
settlement." Some common methods include negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and
adjudication through international courts. Here are brief explanations of each along with
relevant case law examples:
1) Negotiation:
 States may resolve disputes through direct negotiations. Diplomatic channels and
discussions between parties aim to reach a mutually acceptable solution.
 Case Example: The Iran Nuclear Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) involved
extensive negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 (China, France, Germany, Russia, the
United Kingdom, and the United States).
2) Mediation:
 A third-party, often a neutral mediator, assists disputing parties in reaching a settlement.
The mediator facilitates communication but does not impose a solution.
 Case Example: The Oslo Accords mediated by the United States between Israel and
Palestine in the 1990s.
3) Arbitration:
 Parties submit their dispute to an impartial third party (arbitrator or arbitral tribunal), and
the decision is binding. This method is commonly used in commercial and investment
disputes.
 Case Example: In the case of Southern Bluefin Tuna (Australia/New Zealand v. Japan) before
the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), arbitration was used to settle a
dispute regarding conservation measures.
4) Adjudication (International Courts and Tribunals):
 Disputes are brought before an international court or tribunal, and a binding decision is
rendered.
 Case Example: The Nicaragua v. United States case before the International Court of Justice
(ICJ) in the 1980s, where Nicaragua alleged violations of international law by the United
States.

c) peeta sunt servanda

"Pacta sunt servanda" is a fundamental principle in public international law that means
"agreements must be kept" in Latin. It emphasizes the importance of honoring and fulfilling
obligations arising from treaties and other international agreements. The principle is codified in
Article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), which states that "Every
treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith."
Here are a couple of notable cases where the principle of pacta sunt servanda has been
applied:
1) Case Concerning the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia):
In this case, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) addressed issues related to the construction
of a dam on the Danube River. The parties had entered into an agreement, but Hungary argued
that changed circumstances justified its suspension of the project. The ICJ reaffirmed the
principle of pacta sunt servanda, emphasizing that treaty obligations should be performed
unless there are exceptional circumstances.
2) Case Concerning the Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua
(Nicaragua v. United States of America):
In this ICJ case, Nicaragua claimed that the United States violated its obligations under the
Charter of the United Nations and customary international law. The Court emphasized the
principle of good faith and pacta sunt servanda, stating that states must fulfill their obligations
under treaties and customary international law.
These cases highlight the significance of pacta sunt servanda as a foundational principle in
international law, promoting stability and predictability in the relations between states. The
principle underscores the idea that once states voluntarily enter into agreements, they are
bound to honor and fulfill the terms of those agreements in good faith.

4) a) define international law

International law, in the context of public international law, refers to the body of rules and
principles that govern the conduct and relations between states and other international actors.
It is a set of norms that regulates the behavior of sovereign states and, to some extent, other
entities such as international organizations and individuals, in their interactions on the global
stage. International law encompasses various legal sources, including treaties, customary
international law, general principles of law, and the decisions of international courts and
tribunals.
Case law in the context of international law refers to the decisions and judgments made by
international courts and tribunals. These decisions contribute to the development and
interpretation of international law. Notable international courts include the International Court
of Justice (ICJ), which is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, and various ad hoc
tribunals established to address specific conflicts or issues, such as the International Criminal
Court (ICC).
One significant case in international law is the "Corfu Channel case" (United Kingdom v.
Albania, 1949 ICJ Reports 4). In this case, the International Court of Justice addressed issues
related to state responsibility for damage caused by mines in international waters. The ICJ's
decision in this case contributed to the development of principles regarding the obligation of
states to prevent harm to other states and their responsibility for breaches of international law.

b) discuss weakness of internatinal law

International law, while playing a crucial role in regulating relations between states, is not
without its weaknesses. Some of these weaknesses include:
1) Lack of Enforcement Mechanisms:
Case Example: The lack of an effective enforcement mechanism is evident in situations where
states violate international law without facing significant consequences. For instance, in the
context of territorial disputes, some states may occupy or annex territories in violation of
international law without facing strong repercussions.
2) State Sovereignty and Compliance:
Case Example: Some states may choose not to comply with certain international obligations,
citing reasons such as national sovereignty. For instance, the United States' refusal to ratify or
adhere to certain international treaties, like the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, highlights
the challenge of achieving universal compliance.
3) Inequality Among States:
Case Example: Powerful states may exploit the existing power imbalances in international law.
For example, permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have
disproportionate influence, and their actions may be perceived as inconsistent with the
principles of equality among states.
4) Selective Application:
Case Example: The selective application of international law is evident in instances where
powerful states are treated differently from weaker states. The International Criminal Court
(ICC) has faced criticism for primarily targeting leaders from African countries, leading to
accusations of bias and selective prosecution.
5) Complexity and Ambiguity:
Case Example: The complexity and ambiguity of international law can lead to differing
interpretations, making it challenging to achieve consensus on certain issues. Disputes over the
interpretation of treaties, such as the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, can create
uncertainties in the application of international legal principles.
6) Inadequate Means of Dispute Resolution:
Case Example: The limited effectiveness of international dispute resolution mechanisms can be
seen in ongoing conflicts, such as the Israel-Palestine dispute. Despite numerous resolutions
and efforts by international bodies, a comprehensive and lasting resolution has proven elusive.
7) Influence of Non-State Actors:
Case Example: The growing influence of non-state actors, such as multinational corporations
and terrorist organizations, challenges the traditional state-centric approach of international
law. Addressing transnational issues, like cybercrime or environmental degradation, becomes
more complex when non-state actors are involved.
8) Cultural and Legal Diversity:
Case Example: The diversity of legal traditions and cultural norms among states can complicate
the development of universally accepted legal norms. For instance, issues related to human
rights may be interpreted differently based on cultural and regional perspectives.
9) Limited Judicial Authority:
Case Example: International courts, including the International Court of Justice (ICJ), face
limitations in enforcing their decisions. States may choose not to abide by ICJ rulings, and the
court lacks its own enforcement mechanisms.
c) public international law vs private international law
Public international law and private international law are two distinct branches of international
law that address different aspects of legal relations between states and individuals. Let's
explore the key differences and provide an example of a case in each branch:
1) Public International Law:
Definition: Public international law, also known as international law, governs the relationships
between sovereign states and international organizations. It primarily deals with the rights and
obligations of states in their interactions with each other.
Key Aspects: It encompasses issues such as treaty law, the law of the sea, human rights,
international humanitarian law, and diplomatic law.
Case Example: The "Nicaragua v. United States" case (1986) before the International Court of
Justice (ICJ) is an example. Nicaragua accused the United States of violating international law by
supporting Contra rebels in Nicaragua. The ICJ ruled against the U.S., finding it guilty of violating
Nicaragua's sovereignty and ordering reparations.
2) Private International Law (Conflict of Laws):
Definition: Private international law, or conflict of laws, deals with legal issues that involve
more than one jurisdiction. It provides rules for determining which country's laws should apply
in cases involving individuals, corporations, or legal entities with connections to multiple
jurisdictions.
Key Aspects: It addresses matters such as jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of foreign
judgments, and choice of law in contractual and non-contractual relationships.
Case Example: In the "Erfolg International Case" (1994), the European Court of Justice (ECJ) had
to determine the jurisdiction for a dispute involving a contract between a German company and
an Austrian distributor. The ECJ applied private international law principles to resolve the issue.

5) a) sources of international law

Public international law derives from various sources, and these sources help establish the legal
framework that governs relations between states and other international actors. The primary
sources of international law are recognized under Article 38 of the Statute of the International
Court of Justice (ICJ). The sources include:
1) Treaties (or Conventions): Treaties are formal agreements between states and are a
fundamental source of international law. Treaties can cover a wide range of subjects and are
binding on the parties that have ratified them. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
(1969) is a key instrument governing the law of treaties.
Case law example: The Nuclear Tests Case (Australia v. France, 1974) - The ICJ considered the
legality of France conducting nuclear tests in the Pacific Ocean in violation of the Partial Test
Ban Treaty.
2) Customary International Law: Customary international law arises from the general and
consistent practice of states, coupled with a belief that such practice is legally required (opinio
juris). It is important to note that not all state practices give rise to customary law; there must
be a sense of legal obligation.
Case law example: Nicaragua v. United States (1986) - The ICJ addressed issues related to
customary international law, including the prohibition of the use of force and the principle of
non-intervention.
3) General Principles of Law: These are legal principles that are recognized by civilized nations
and form part of their domestic legal systems. General principles can be drawn from various
legal systems and serve as a supplementary source of international law.
Case law example: Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain,
1970) - The ICJ applied general principles of international law to determine the conditions
under which a state can bring an international claim on behalf of its nationals.
4) Judicial Decisions and the Teachings of Highly Qualified Publicists: While not binding in the
same way as decisions of national courts within a state, international judicial decisions and the
works of legal scholars (jurists) can be considered as subsidiary means for the determination of
rules of law.
Case law example: Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion, 1996) -
The ICJ's opinion considered various sources of law, including international judicial decisions
and the opinions of legal scholars, to address the legality of nuclear weapons.

b) explain the subject matter of internatinal law

Public international law is a body of legal principles, norms, and rules that govern the
interactions between sovereign states and other international actors. It plays a crucial role in
maintaining order, promoting cooperation, and resolving disputes in the international
community. The subject matter of international law encompasses various areas, and case law
often illustrates the application of these principles. Here are some key aspects of international
law and examples of case law:
1) State Sovereignty:
Case Example: Westphalian Peace Treaties (1648) - These treaties marked the beginning of the
modern state system, emphasizing the principle of state sovereignty and non-interference in
the internal affairs of other states.
2) Treaties and International Agreements:
Case Example: Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) - The Convention provides
rules on the formation, interpretation, and termination of treaties. Cases like the Nuclear Tests
Case (Australia v. France, 1974) have explored the obligations arising from treaties.
3) Use of Force and Armed Conflict:
Case Example: Nicaragua v. United States (1986) - The International Court of Justice (ICJ)
addressed issues related to the use of force and state responsibility, particularly in the context
of the United States' support for Contra rebels in Nicaragua.
4) Human Rights:
Case Example: European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) cases - Various cases before the ECHR,
such as Ireland v. United Kingdom (1978), have dealt with issues like torture and inhuman or
degrading treatment, highlighting the significance of human rights in international law.
5) International Criminal Law:
Case Example: International Criminal Court (ICC) cases - Notable cases before the ICC, like the
Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo (2006), have addressed war crimes and crimes against
humanity, contributing to the development of international criminal law.
6) State Responsibility:
Case Example: Trail Smelter Arbitration (1941) - This case established principles of state
responsibility for transboundary harm, providing guidance on the liability of states for
environmental damage caused by their activities.
7) Law of the Sea:
Case Example: South China Sea Arbitration (2016) - An arbitration tribunal constituted under
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) addressed disputes over
maritime claims in the South China Sea, clarifying the application of UNCLOS provisions.
8) Diplomatic Immunity:
Case Example: Arrest Warrant Case (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium, 2002) - The
ICJ ruled on the immunity of a foreign minister from prosecution in another state, emphasizing
the importance of diplomatic immunity in international relations.

6 a) write the powers and function of general assembly

In public international law, the term "General Assembly" typically refers to the principal
deliberative body of the United Nations (UN). The General Assembly is one of the six main
organs of the UN, and its powers and functions are outlined in the UN Charter. Below are some
key powers and functions of the UN General Assembly in public international law, along with
relevant case law:
1) Deliberative Role:
Power: The General Assembly serves as a forum for member states to engage in discussions on
international issues.
Function: Member states can express their views on various matters, fostering diplomatic
dialogue and understanding.
2) Adoption of Resolutions:
Power: The General Assembly has the authority to adopt resolutions on a wide range of issues.
Function: Resolutions may cover political, economic, social, or humanitarian topics, and they
express the collective will or opinion of the international community.
3) Budgetary Authority:
Power: The General Assembly has the power to approve the UN budget and determine the
financial contributions of member states.
Function: This ensures financial accountability and equitable burden-sharing among member
states.
4) Election of Non-Permanent Members of the Security Council:
Power: The General Assembly participates in the election of non-permanent members of the
UN Security Council.
Function: This process enhances the democratic legitimacy of the Security Council and
promotes broader representation.
5) Appointment of the Secretary-General:
Power: The General Assembly has a role in the appointment of the UN Secretary-General.
Function: This fosters transparency and inclusivity in the selection process, as member states
express their preferences and opinions.
6) International Law-Making:
Power: While the General Assembly itself does not make binding law, it can initiate the process
of creating conventions and treaties.
Function: The General Assembly can recommend the negotiation and drafting of international
agreements on various subjects.
7) Peacekeeping and Security Matters:
Power: The General Assembly can make recommendations on peacekeeping operations and
other security-related issues.
Function: It provides a platform for member states to discuss and address global security
challenges collectively.
8) Emergency Special Sessions:
Power: The General Assembly can convene emergency special sessions to address urgent
matters.
Function: This mechanism allows for prompt responses to unforeseen crises or developments.
Case Law:
The ICJ (International Court of Justice) case of "Legal Consequences of the Construction of a
Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory" (2004) highlighted the General Assembly's role in
expressing the international community's opinion on legal issues. The court considered General
Assembly resolutions as a factor in determining the customary international law status of
certain principles.

b) power of security council

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is a crucial organ in the field of public international
law, responsible for maintaining international peace and security. Its powers and functions are
outlined in the United Nations Charter, and its decisions are binding on all UN member states.
The powers of the Security Council are primarily outlined in Chapter VII of the UN Charter,
which addresses "Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts
of Aggression."
Here are some key powers of the Security Council in public international law:
1) Threats to Peace:
The Security Council has the authority to determine the existence of any threat to the peace,
breach of the peace, or act of aggression.
2) Enforcement Measures:
The Council is empowered to take various enforcement measures, including the use of
economic sanctions, diplomatic measures, and, if necessary, military action, to maintain or
restore international peace and security.
3) Sanctions:
The Security Council can impose economic and other sanctions on states as a means of coercion
to compel compliance with its resolutions.
4) Peacekeeping Operations:
The Council can establish peacekeeping operations to help maintain or restore peace and
security in conflict zones.
5) Authorization of the Use of Force:
The Security Council has the authority to authorize the use of force, including collective military
action, against a state that poses a threat to international peace and security.
6) Imposition of Arms Embargo:
The Council can impose arms embargoes to prevent the supply of weapons to conflict zones.
7) International Criminal Tribunals:
The Security Council has the power to establish international criminal tribunals to prosecute
individuals for serious international crimes, such as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against
humanity.
Case Law:
Several instances in international law illustrate the exercise of the Security Council's powers:
1) Gulf War (1990-1991):
The Security Council authorized the use of force to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait, leading to
the Gulf War.
2) Kosovo (1999):
The NATO intervention in Kosovo was conducted without explicit Security Council authorization
but was justified on humanitarian grounds.
3) Libya (2011):
The Security Council authorized military intervention in Libya to protect civilians from the
government's violent crackdown during the Arab Spring.
4) North Korea Sanctions:
The Security Council has imposed multiple rounds of sanctions on North Korea in response to
its nuclear weapons program.

c) merites of security council

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) plays a crucial role in maintaining international
peace and security, and its merits in public international law are reflected in its powers,
functions, and the impact it has on resolving conflicts. Here are some merits of the Security
Council in public international law, along with relevant case law:
1) Primary Responsibility for International Peace and Security:
Merit: The UNSC is granted primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace
and security under Article 24 of the UN Charter.
Case Law: The case of United States v. Iran (1980) highlighted the UNSC's role in addressing
threats to international peace and security.
2) Enforcement of Collective Security:
Merit: The Security Council has the authority to take measures, including the use of force, to
maintain or restore international peace and security (Chapter VII of the UN Charter).
Case Law: Resolution 678 (1990) authorized the use of force against Iraq in the Gulf War,
demonstrating the Security Council's enforcement powers.
3) Peacekeeping Operations:
Merit: The UNSC can establish peacekeeping missions to help countries in conflict transition to
peace and stability.
Case Law: UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338 formed the basis for peacekeeping efforts in the
Middle East, such as the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) in the Golan
Heights.
4) Imposition of Sanctions:
Merit: The Security Council can impose economic and diplomatic sanctions to compel states to
comply with its decisions.
Case Law: Resolution 1718 (2006) imposed sanctions on North Korea in response to its nuclear
activities, illustrating the UNSC's use of sanctions as a tool for conflict resolution.
5) Legal Authority and Legitimacy:
Merit: Decisions of the Security Council are legally binding on all UN member states, providing a
legal framework for addressing threats to international peace.
Case Law: The ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons
(1996) acknowledged the authority of the UNSC to take collective measures for international
peace and security.
6) Prevention and Resolution of Conflicts:
Merit: The UNSC has the authority to take preventive action and facilitate the peaceful
resolution of disputes before they escalate into armed conflicts.
Case Law: The UNSC's involvement in the resolution of the South China Sea dispute, as seen in
various resolutions and statements, showcases its role in preventing conflicts.
7) Human Rights and Humanitarian Interventions:
Merit: The UNSC can address situations involving gross human rights violations and authorize
humanitarian interventions.
Case Law: Resolution 688 (1991) authorized intervention in Iraq to protect the Kurdish
population, demonstrating the Security Council's commitment to addressing humanitarian
crises.

7 a) what do you mean by the term recognition

In public international law, the term "recognition" generally refers to the acknowledgment or
acceptance by one state of the legal existence and sovereignty of another state. Recognition is
a crucial aspect of international relations as it establishes the legal and diplomatic relationship
between states. It signifies that one state accepts the other as a member of the international
community with all the rights and responsibilities that come with statehood.
Recognition can take various forms, including de facto recognition and de jure recognition:
1) De Facto Recognition: This form of recognition acknowledges the existence of a state as a
matter of fact, without necessarily implying an endorsement of its legitimacy or government.
De facto recognition may be based on practical considerations, such as the effective control and
functioning of a state's government.
2) De Jure Recognition: This form of recognition goes beyond acknowledging the factual
existence of a state and extends to recognizing its legitimacy and sovereignty under
international law. De jure recognition is a more formal and complete acknowledgment of a
state's status.
Recognition in international law is not always straightforward, and it can lead to complex legal
and diplomatic situations. Case law often plays a significant role in shaping the principles and
criteria for recognition. For instance, historical cases, such as the recognition of new states
emerging from decolonization or the dissolution of former states (like the Soviet Union and
Yugoslavia), have contributed to the development of recognition norms.
b) Explain dejure and defacto recognition
De jure and de facto recognition are concepts in public international law that pertain to the
acknowledgment and acceptance of states or governments. These terms help distinguish
between formal, legal recognition and the factual, practical acknowledgment of a state's
existence or a government's authority.
1) De Jure Recognition:
 Definition: De jure recognition refers to the formal and legal acknowledgment of the
existence of a state or government by other states, based on adherence to certain legal
criteria, such as fulfilling the requirements of statehood under international law.
 Case Law Example: In the case of Taiwan, many states do not extend de jure recognition to
it as an independent state due to the One-China policy. However, a few states do recognize
Taiwan as a sovereign state, demonstrating the variance in de jure recognition.
2) De Facto Recognition:
 Definition: De facto recognition is the acknowledgment of the practical or factual existence
and control of a state or government, irrespective of its legal status or compliance with
international legal criteria. It is often based on the effective exercise of authority.
 Case Law Example: The case of Somaliland is often cited as an example of de facto
recognition. While not formally recognized de jure as an independent state, Somaliland has
established effective control over its territory, maintaining stability and governance. Some
states and international actors engage with Somaliland in practice, even if they do not
extend formal legal recognition.
3) Difference Between De Jure and De Facto Recognition:
 De jure recognition is based on adherence to legal criteria for statehood, while de facto
recognition is more concerned with the practical control and functioning of a government.
 De jure recognition implies acceptance of the legal status of a state or government, while de
facto recognition is a recognition of the reality on the ground.
4) Effects of Recognition:
 De jure recognition often entails diplomatic relations, the establishment of embassies, and
participation in international organizations.
 De facto recognition may involve practical engagement, trade, and cooperation without the
formalities associated with de jure recognition.

c) theries of recognition
Recognition in public international law refers to the acknowledgment by states or international
actors of the legal status and rights of another entity, such as a state or government. There are
several theories and principles related to recognition in international law, and these have
evolved over time. Here are some key theories of recognition, along with relevant case law
examples:
1) Declaratory Theory:
 According to the declaratory theory, recognition is considered a mere acknowledgment of
an existing state of affairs. Recognition does not create the state's legal status but rather
reflects the recognition of a pre-existing reality.
 Case law: The recognition of the State of Israel in 1948 is often cited as an example of the
declaratory theory. The establishment of Israel was a result of various events, and
recognition by other states followed as an acknowledgment of the facts on the ground.
2) Constitutive Theory:
 The constitutive theory posits that recognition is a constitutive act that creates the legal
personality of a state. In other words, a state only becomes a legal entity when it is
recognized by other states or the international community.
 Case law: Kosovo's declaration of independence in 2008 is an example. While some states,
like the United States and many European countries, recognized Kosovo as an independent
state, others, like Russia and China, did not. This reflects the constitutive theory in action.
3) Neutralization Theory:
 The neutralization theory suggests that recognition is a neutral act and does not necessarily
imply approval or disapproval of the recognized entity's conduct or legitimacy.
 Case law: Recognition of a government despite political differences can illustrate the
neutralization theory. For example, during the Cold War, some states recognized
governments that were ideologically aligned with them, even if those governments were
opposed by others.
4) Tacit Recognition:
 Tacit recognition occurs when a state acts in a manner consistent with the existence of
another state without explicitly stating its recognition.
 Case law: Economic and diplomatic interactions with a state can be considered as a form of
tacit recognition. For instance, conducting diplomatic relations or entering into treaties with
a state may imply tacit recognition.
5) Conditional Recognition:
 Some states may provide recognition with certain conditions attached, such as respect for
human rights or compliance with international law.
 Case law: Recognition of the Palestinian Authority by some states may be seen as
conditional, with expectations of progress in peace negotiations with Israel.

8 a) define extrodiction
It appears that there might be a slight spelling error in your question. If you intended to ask
about "extradition" in public international law, I can certainly provide information on that.
Extradition is a legal process by which one country formally requests the surrender of a
suspected or convicted criminal from another country. It is based on the principle of reciprocity
and international cooperation in the pursuit of justice. The process typically involves the
submission of evidence and legal arguments to support the request, and the requested country
evaluates whether the request meets its legal requirements.
Here are some key elements and principles related to extradition in public international law:
1) Treaties and Agreements: Many countries have bilateral or multilateral extradition treaties
or agreements to facilitate the extradition process. These treaties establish the conditions
under which extradition requests can be made and granted.
2) Dual Criminality: One common requirement for extradition is the principle of dual
criminality, which means that the alleged offense must be a crime in both the requesting and
requested countries.
3) Political Offense Exception: Extradition may be denied if the alleged crime is considered a
political offense. However, the definition of political offenses can vary, and many extradition
treaties provide specific criteria to determine what constitutes a political offense.
4) Fair Trial Safeguards: Extradition may be refused if there are concerns about the fairness of
the legal proceedings or the treatment of the accused in the requesting country.
5) Case Law Example: Assange v. Sweden (2010-2012): While not strictly an extradition case,
the legal proceedings involving Julian Assange provide an example of how international law and
extradition issues can intersect. Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, faced extradition from the
United Kingdom to Sweden over allegations of sexual misconduct. The case raised various legal
and human rights considerations, including the principle of non-refoulement and the adequacy
of legal safeguards.

b) explain esential elements of extradiction

Extradition is a legal process through which one country surrenders a person to another
country for prosecution or punishment. In public international law, there are essential elements
and principles governing extradition, and these are often outlined in treaties or agreements
between countries. Here are some essential elements of extradition:
1) Dual Criminality:
One of the fundamental principles is the requirement of dual criminality, which means that the
offense for which extradition is requested must be recognized as a crime in both the requesting
and requested countries. If the alleged conduct does not constitute a crime in both
jurisdictions, extradition may not be granted.
2) Extraditable Offenses:
Extradition treaties typically list specific offenses for which extradition can be requested. These
offenses may range from serious crimes such as murder, terrorism, and drug trafficking to other
extraditable offenses as agreed upon by the countries involved.
3) Legal Documentation:
The requesting country must provide proper legal documentation, including an extradition
request, evidence supporting the charges, and a copy of the relevant laws under which the
person is accused. Failure to provide adequate documentation may result in the denial of
extradition.
4) Nationality:
Some countries may have restrictions on extraditing their own nationals. Some extradition
treaties exclude the extradition of nationals, while others allow it under certain conditions. The
principle of aut dedere aut judicare (extradite or prosecute) may require a country to either
extradite the accused or prosecute them domestically.
5) Fair Trial and Human Rights:
Extradition may be denied if there is a risk that the person extradited will face an unfair trial or
if there are concerns about human rights violations, including the risk of torture or cruel,
inhuman, or degrading treatment.
6) Political Offenses:
Extradition is often denied for political offenses. However, the definition of a political offense
may vary, and there is a distinction between political crimes and ordinary crimes committed for
political motives.
7) Rule of Specialty:
The rule of specialty ensures that the extradited person is only tried for the offenses for which
extradition was granted. Deviating from this principle requires the consent of the requested
country.
Case Law Examples:
 A well-known case is the "Assange v. Swedish Prosecution Authority" case, where Julian
Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, fought against extradition from the UK to Sweden. The
case involved considerations of dual criminality and the risk of political persecution.
 Another example is the "Noriega v. United States" case, where Manuel Noriega, the former
Panamanian dictator, challenged his extradition from France to the United States. The case
involved issues related to the legality of his arrest and the application of the rule of
specialty.

c) discuss some landmark judgements relating to extradiction

Extradition is a process in public international law through which one state surrenders a
suspected or convicted criminal to another state for prosecution or punishment. Landmark
judgments in extradition cases have helped shape the principles and procedures governing this
area of law. Here are some notable cases:
1) Neumeister v. Switzerland (1968):
In this case, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) emphasized the importance of human
rights considerations in extradition cases. The court held that extradition should be refused if
there is a real risk of a flagrant denial of justice or if the requested person faces inhuman or
degrading treatment in the requesting state.
2) Soering v. United Kingdom (1989):
The ECHR, in this case, held that extradition could be barred if there is a real risk of the death
penalty or if the conditions of detention in the requesting state would amount to inhuman or
degrading treatment, violating Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
3) Pinochet Case (1999):
The House of Lords in the United Kingdom ruled on the extradition of former Chilean dictator
Augusto Pinochet to Spain. The decision established the principle that individuals could be held
accountable for crimes such as torture committed while in office, even if they held the position
of head of state at the time.
4) Meng Wanzhou Case (2018):
The arrest of Meng Wanzhou, CFO of Huawei, at the request of the United States, raised
extradition issues. The case highlighted the role of political considerations in extradition, with
Meng's legal team arguing that her arrest was politically motivated. The proceedings brought
attention to the delicate balance between legal and political factors in extradition cases.
5) Assange v. Sweden (2012):
While not an extradition judgment per se, the legal battles of Julian Assange, founder of
WikiLeaks, involve extradition-related issues. The case raised questions about the use of
extradition for political offenses and the potential impact on freedom of the press.
6) Tanzania v. Rwanda (2014):
In this case before the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, the court emphasized the
need for fair trial standards in extradition proceedings. It highlighted the importance of
ensuring that the requested person receives a fair trial in the requesting state.