Responsibility of State

It is a body of law which is adhered to by sovereign states or nations for governance of legal relationships among them. It can also be defined as set of rules and principles that are acknowledged and observed by independent countries’ body that are civilized as a mutual binding in conduct of their relationships.

Question 1

(a)Deltazeta do have a responsibility for destruction of trout farm since it is responsible for causing conflict among its residents as it introduced laws that were biased and only favored the Delta community. By implementing a law of teaching using Delta language which created sentiments among beta community who felt that they are sidelined and moreover viewed it as lack of recognition. Eventually, it led to rivalry among the two ethnic communities which was perpetuated by the presence of an insurrectionist movement known as Zeta Liberation Army .Once the movement had been formed, it led to civil war as the Zeta tried to fight for their rights and a coup was attempted thus in the process of war the trout farm was destroyed. Therefore, if it hadn’t be for  the Deltazeta government that introduce laws that ignited rivalry among the two communities  then the civil war  wouldn’t  have occurred and thus destruction of the trout farm would have been prevented.[1]

(b) Deltazeta were not responsible for destruction of alpha embassy and injuries/death to its personnel because;

The embassy was taken over by unknown group of people who are said to be sympathizers of Zeta Liberation Army thus, it’s unclear of whom did the destruction .It is also clear that Zeta Liberation Army were not responsible for kidnapping the Alpha embassy’ personnel hence the attackers could be foreigners who may have had bad blood with Alpha state. Propaganda issued by insurrectionists shows clearly that they did it for recognition that they had taken over the ruling of Deltazeta. In addition, the Liberation Army never took credit for the activity instead they issued false information in relation to the incident .Based on all the above reasons, it depicts that Deltazeta have no responsibility in relation to the above allegations and moreover the location of the embassy is an urban area that is mostly occupied by agrarian communities who could be from different state/nation.[2]

(c) The government has a responsibility for deportation of the CEO of Sigma Corporation since revolutionary authorities took over the organization and forced the alpha personnel out of the organization, froze all the banks accounts and took over its entitlements. In addition, members from the liberation army arrested the CEO and detained him at a central hotel in Omicron city and thereafter he was deported from Delzeta. Legally, deportation is usually issued by a responsible authority in that state.

Question 2

(a) Yes, Beta can diplomatically intercede to fight for the rights of its national because;

First, Sigma Tau is a citizen of Beta state by birth and hence they he never denied his participation.

Secondly, if the laws governing Beta state allows for dual citizenship then the government has a responsibility to negotiate on behalf of its citizen in any state they are situated. Although Sigma Tau might have lost his Beta citizenship when he acquired Deltazeta’s citizenship based on their law, the Beta citizenship was never scrapped off in his country thus he still remained as a citizen legally.

(b) Deltazeta do have a responsibility in connection to Sigma Tau death this is because:

Sigma Tau had acquired their citizenship and had been allowed to work within Deltazeta. Therefore, the government of Deltazeta had a responsibility to protect his rights as their citizen. It is also significantly important to note that it was due to civil war that arose due to biased laws that were introduced by their government and in the process Sigma tau got killed. Based on the reasons mentioned, the government has a duty to compensate Sigma Tau’s death.[3]

Question 3

(a)  Yes, Alpha can intervene harmoniously to ensure that sigma corporations issue is addressed since no command has been issued by Deltazeta.It is also a legit move to do so due to the lack of laws and any decree pertaining the same case within Delta zeta government .Bearing in mind that Dela zeta are held responsible for indulging in bias harassment of Alpha personnel who were working in Sigma corporations without a prior communication from appropriate Deltazeta authorities. The Sigma corporations was owned by one of its nationals hence alpha have a duty to arbitrate for their rights

(b) No. because it is unclear of which authorities was the one that forced Sigma corporations to surrender its entitlements and furthermore froze all its bank accounts. It is stated that they were revolutionary authorities and not Deltazeta authorities hence they could be from the private sector and not governmental. There are no legal documents that are evident to show the binding between government and Sigma corporations since all entitlements were surrendered to revolutionary authorities.

Question 4

(a)

Yes, they do have a jurisdiction, since DeltaZeta is a party to the Rome Statue of International Criminal Court. In addition, the state has an optional declaration that was made which is non-negotiable hence; it gives international criminal court judge authority that is adhered to when a ruling is made.

Offenses that Mr. x is likely to be charged with are; Incitement of persons that led to ethnic groups rivalry and hatred, Conspiring with Zeta ethnic community to eliminate Delta community from their country, destruction of property and its environments, formation and leading an illegal armed group known as Zeta Liberation Army, Illegally acquiring power through a civil war, Disruption of peace and causing ethnic clashes in a country. [4]

(b)

No, they can’t do so since the Rome statue states that its only international criminal court that can prosecute victims who have committed crimes but no state or organization can do so.

The nation can only do so if it is given a mandate to arrest a president once an arrest warrant has been issued by the international criminal court then all the member state are obliged to arrest the head of state once they make a visit to their state.

Question 5

(a)Yes, because Alpha offered their Army at will without a prior request and consultation with Deltazeta. Also the government never took over the command of their army since they were under order of a general who was from the same state as the army. The command issued by general that destroyed a lot of properties and led to many deaths was declined by the member state. Since the army were under orders of their general and were from neighboring state. Moreover, all his army was also from same state then they all take responsibility for what occurred. Usually an army is considered when it is under command of the host state general. This is depicted usually in transfers of powers or overrule in new state.

(b)The general can be arrested by launching a case on crimes against humanity by Deltazeta government at the international Criminal court .Once the prosecutor begins investigation on the case that is when the court has a duty to issue an arrest warrant for the general.

It can also be done through secret mission by the army to find the general and arrest him that is when legal procedures fail.

Question 6

Arbitration is a process by which two parties submit their dispute to a third party which is usually independent to resolve it.

Advantages of Arbitration

The arbitrator to the disputing parties is usually agreed on by both parties on whom they have confidence on and that it should be someone who is impartial and fair. An arbitrator can be selected on the basis of qualifications that one has or on technical capability or knowledge. This can be done amicable based on both parties agreement or they can also assign the task for choice to an institution

The dispute is normally solved faster as a date for the intercession can usually attained a lot quicker than a court date.  For example, in Virginia, a trial date is ordinarily about twelve months from the date the lawsuit is filed.

Arbitration is less costly: This is because; most of the time the arbitrator’s fee is equally split between parties. Also, it less costly compared to the cost of paying skilled witnesses to testify at a trial. Preparation costs for the arbitration is lower than there are in for preparing for a trial. Partly it is due to the detail that the procedures of indication are more relaxed than they are in a trial. Therefore, documents can be submitted and be referred to unlike in a trial where the witness has to be physically present for a case to precede. Take for instance, if a claimant has several doctors who are out of a nation, the court has to incur costs in order to bring them to trial or travelling out of the nation to go and take their confessions may be prohibitive for trial, but in arbitration, their records and reports can usually be used.

Unlike a trial, arbitration is essentially a confidential process: in comparison with judicial proceeding which is usually held publicly, arbitration is a private affair. This is done for the benefit of both parties as they could be matters that require an accord of commercial sensitivity that are worth excluding from the public domain.

Finality of the Award: When arbitration is binding there are very limited chances for a party to appeal hence the process ends the dispute. Therefore, it gives finality to the arbitration award that is usually made and ordinarily understood by both parties. It is also much easier to enforce an arbitration award in different jurisdiction more than a court order can be done.

Disadvantages

It lacks a right to an appeal by both parties; This means there is no opportunity for a party to correct what they feel is erroneous on decisions made by an arbitrator hence once a decision has been made there is no more liaising as it is final resolution for disputes

Arbitration may be uneconomical: if a matter is complicated and the charge fee is modest then it tends to lower its resolution.  This can be cheaper if the case is brought before a judge in General District Court, as it gives room for medical evidence to be presented by affidavits instead paying personnel like a doctor to testify. However, the amount that can be awarded in that court could be relatively lower compared to arbitration.

Arbitration does not adhere to rules of evidence that are usually followed by a judge or jury. Normally some evidence may not be considered by a judge but an arbitrator can make a decision based on information that may not be considered on a trial by a judge or jury.

Lack of an opportunity to cross-examine testimonies of witnesses once certain information is presented by documents from a witness. This is quite a challenge as information on documents is not validated in order to determine whether they are legit or not.

There are no clear standards used by  arbitrators as they may take into consideration apparent fairness to both parties since whey strictly stick and abide by the law ,most likely the outcome may be favorable to one party. Though generally they are required to follow the law they try and avoid so that the final decision may be less favorable

Arbitration has limited discovery: Discovery entails process of requiring the opposing party or entity to give certain information or documents and they should not be a party to the case. Thus it results many times that arbitration agreed on once the parties are already in litigation and discovery is completed. By then, the opportunity to avoid costs by using arbitration may be diminished.

Lack of flexibility in parties to choose arbitration on agreement. Due to  mandatory requirements by one party to supersede the other to enter into the binding agreement.

Question 7

No, Alpha cannot send its secret service or undercover to storm the embassy in order to save their citizens from the hands of the kidnappers. This embassy is under a territory of the host country and thus Alpha have no rights or obligations to try and engage without the consent of relevant authorities in the host state. Principle of national jurisdiction on sovereignty states that the laws of a country are supreme within its territory and thus no other nation can supersede or try to engage against the laws. Based on the theory of scope of immunity in relation to international laws, it is clear that texts on the same denies usually application for political secret agents or spies in a foreign state. In addition, agents that are send secretly on a mission for political purposes who may not have requirements which are recommendation letter and proper admission by government of the state in which is mandated to fulfill the task, usually lacks a recognizable position bearing in mind international law. Therefore, he is treated as any other foreign individual in that particular state since they don’t act as agents of political relations between states and hence if they commit crimes or participate in acts that are troublesome they are either convicted or expelled.

Question 8.

Yes they can use drones to destroy the general due to the state of security of its citizens. Normally in a state when someone or something jeopardizes the wellbeing or safety of the country it calls for immediate action to eliminate it and secure its territory. It is a duty of a head of state to issue a command to its armed forces to execute it for the betterment of the nation and ensuring that all factors are kept in consideration that it may not affect any humanity. This was exercised by United states government under the leadership of president Barack Obama, the military was given a decree by the president for them to target Kabul a town in Eastern Afghanistan which was the host hence it was done in pursuance of Islamic militia. This was to  protect its citizens as terrorism attacks had become rampant particularly United states had been the target and thus the state had a duty to protect its citizens and innocent Afghan civilians .By doing so they had to use drones to attack and eliminate the Islamic militia in Kabul, this was in September,2016.

Conclusion

International laws plays very important roles, for instance, regulating political wars especially for the United Nations countries in Africa regarding agreed-upon principle for power that can results in wars in times of elections, example is in Kenya in the elections of 2007, where post elections violence where witnessed that resulted in the deaths of thousands of people and evictions across the country.

The perpetrators suspects of the violence; which includes the current sitting president and his deputy present where tries in the ICC courts under the Rome Statute.

This cannot be achieved by the local courts because of impunity in the courts.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bensouda, Fatou. Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, concerning referral from the Gabonese Republic. ICC. September 29, 2016.

Buchanan, Allen. Justice, Legitimacy, and Self-Determination: Moral Foundations for International Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Carter, William P. Government Ethics and Law Enforcement:Toward Global Guidelines. Edited by Yassin El-Ayouty. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2000.

Carty, Anthony. Philosophy of International Law. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007.

court-proceedings. arbitration advantages-and-disadvantages. n.d. http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/29295.html.

Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court. 1994.

Evidence Before the International Court of Justice. (ICJ, 2009).

Franck, Thomas M. Fairness in International Law and Institutions. Oxford. Publication year: Oxford University Press, 1997.

"Genin v Estonia at para."372. n.d.

Guzman, Andrew T. How International Law Works, A Rational Choice Theory. London: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Investigation, The Federal Bureau of. Ten Alleged Secret Agents Arrested in the United States. U.S. Department of Justice. 2010.

J, Quigley. "If you are not a United States Citizen…: International Requirements in the Arrest of Foreigners."Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 6, 2009: 661-679.

Jack L. Goldsmith, Eric A. Posner. The Limits of International Law. London: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Kevin Sieff. In historical ruling, internatinal court cites rape inwar crimes conviction of ex-Congo Official. Washington, 2016.

Kolb, Robert. "The International Court of Justice."2013.

Korman, Sharon. The Right of Conquest:The Acquisition of Territory by Force in International Law and Practice. Oxford. Publication: Clarendon Press, 1996.

Meisenberg, Simon M. Internatinal Review of the Red Cross 86. n.d.

Murray, Daragh. Practitioners' guide to human rights law in armed conflict. n.d.

—. Practitioners' guide to human rights law in armed conflict. n.d.

—. Practitioners' guide to human rights law in armed conflict. London: Oxford University Press, 2016.

Ohlin, Jens David. Weighing lives in war. London: Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2017.

Rosenne, Shabtai. Law and Practice of the International Court. 2006.

—. The Perplexities of Modern International Law. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff, 2004.

"Ruto and Sang case: ICC Trial Chamber V(A) terminates the case without prejudice to re-prosecution in future."ICC press release, ICC, 2016.

Scharf, Michael P. Results of the Rome Conference for an International Criminal Court. Rome: American Society of International Law, 1998.

Talmon, Stefan. Recognition of Governments in International Law:With Particular Reference to Governments in Exile. Oxford. Publication: Clarendon Press, 1998.

Court, International Criminal, ed. The Court Today. n.d. (accessed April 11, 2017).

Weiss, Kenneth R. "Woman Named President of Claremont McKenna."Los Angeles Times, February 4, 1999.

[1]

European Journal of International Law, Volume 23, Issue 3, 1 August 2012, Pages 719–730, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chs039

Published:

11 October 2012

[2]

The Law of Nations, or the Principles of Natural Law, Classics of International Law, Book II, Chapter VI at 136 (ed. C. Fenwich transl. 1916)).

[3]

See, e.g., ALEXANDER ADDISON, ANALYSIS OF THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE VIRGINIA ASSEMBLY (1800), reprinted in 2 AMERICAN POLITICAL WRITING DURING THE FOUNDING ERA, 1760-1805, at 1055, 1070 (Charles S. Hynemen & Donald S. Lutz eds., 1983) ("The restrictions of the [U.S.] constitution are not restrictions of external and national right, but of internal and municipal right.").

[4]

Rome Statute Article 5 and 6