class report on public international law

8/19/2019 Class Report on Public International Law

1/27

P a g e | 1

Class ReportOn

Public International Law

Course Code: Law 212

Course Title: Public International Law

Date of Submission : 10-12-201

Sl!

"o!

Topics Pa#e"o!

Introductory 03

Submitted To:

$r! $d! %bu Sale&Lecturer

Department of LawDa'odil International

Submitted

$d!"a,

$d!Lutfur

$d!

S&a&riSection:

%Depart

Table of


2/27

P a g e | 2

01 Lectures Lecture 1 Definition of International Law 03History of International Law 03

Lecture 2 Important Of International Law. 04Is International law a law in true sense or not. 04

Lecture 3 Major Kinds of International Law 05

Lecture 4 Subjects of international law 06

Lecture 5 Main functions of International law 07

Lecture 6 to

10

Sources of International law 07

Lecture 11

to 13

!e relations!ip between IL and Municipal Law 09

0" Individual

Presentatio

n

!e #elations!ip between International Law and $ational Law. 11

!eory of Monism 11!eory of Dualism 12Status of international Law in %an&lades! 'onstitution. 12

%an&lades!i 'ourts and international Law 14Dispute settlement (nder International law 14Importance of International Or&ani)ation. 16Importance of International Or&ani)ation. 16*+ample of t!e application of International Law at $ational laws of

%an&lades!.

17

History of ,O 1(nited $ation 1

0- !rou"

Presentatio

n

International 'ourt of ustice/I' 2oDispute Settlement under ,O 22*uropean (nion 23

International 'rime tribunal %an&lades! 24Dispute Settlement under ($'LOS 25

Lecture -01

#$no"sis%1&1 Introductor$

1&2 'e(nition o) International Law

1&3 *istor$ o) International Law

1&1 Introductor$%International law is t!e set of rules &enerally re&arded and accepted as bindin& in relations

between states and between nations. It seres as a framewor2 for t!e practice of stable and or&ani)ed

international relations. International law differs from state3based le&al systems in t!at it is primarily

applicable to countries rat!er t!an to priate citi)ens. $ational law may become international law w!en

treaties dele&ate national jurisdiction to supranational tribunals suc! as t!e *uropean 'ourt of Human

#i&!ts or t!e International 'riminal 'ourt. reaties suc! as t!e 4enea 'onentions may re5uire national

law to conform to respectie parts.

Muc! of international law is consent3based &oernance. !is means t!at a state member is not obli&ed to

abide by t!is type of international law6 unless it !as e+pressly consented to a particular course of conduct.

!is is an issue of state soerei&nty. Howeer6 ot!er aspects of international law are not consent3based

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_systemhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supranationalhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rightshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rightshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Courthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventionshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_sovereigntyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_systemhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supranationalhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rightshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rightshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Courthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventionshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_sovereigntyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity)


3/27

P a g e | .

but still are obli&atory upon state and non3state actors suc! as customary international law and

peremptory norms / jus cogens.

1&1 'e(nition o) International Law%

!e body of law t!at &oerns t!e le&al relations between or amon& states or nations.o 5ualify as a subjec

t under t!e traditional definition of international law6 a state !ad to be soerei&n7 It needed a territory6 a p

opulation6 a&oernment6 and t!e ability to en&a&e in diplomatic or forei&n relations. States wit!in t!e (ni

ted States6 proinces6 and cantons were notconsidered subjects of international law6 because t!ey lac2ed t

!e le&al aut!ority to en&a&e in forei&n relations. In addition6 indiiduals did notfall wit!in t!e definition o

f subjects t!at enjoyed ri&!ts and obli&ations under international law.8 more contemporary definition e+p

ands t!e traditional notions of international law to confer ri&!ts and obli&ations on inter&oernmentalinter

national or&ani)ations and een on indiidual.

1&3 *istor$ o) International Law%

!e modern study of international law starts in t!e early 19t! century6 but its ori&ins &o bac2 at least to

t!e 1:t! century6 and 8lberico 4entili6 ;rancisco de


4/27

P a g e | /

Lecture-2#$no"sis%2&1 I+"ortant O) International Law&

2&2 Is International law a law in true sense or not&

2!1 Important f International Law:

International law is an important part of t!e structure of our international society. It adds t!at states accept

it as suc!6 and t!eir record in obserin& it bears comparison wit! t!e leel of law obserance in many

countries. It stresses t!at international law is a part of t!e structure for it is an inte&ral part of it and not an

optional e+tra> and t!at it is but one part in t!e oerall e5uation ? important6 but not to t!e e+clusion of

ot!er parts. It e+plains t!at t!e importance of international law is a function of its effectieness and its

ability to respond to c!an&e. %ot!6 at t!e present time and for t!e most part6 are ade5uate6 but per!aps

only just. It adds t!at neit!er can be ta2en away for &ranted. It clarifies t!at bot! need attention and

deelopment wit!in a framewor2 of respect for t!e international rule of law6 if a stable international order

is to preail.

International law concerns t!e structure and conduct of soerei&n states> analo&ous entities6 suc! as

t!e Holy See> and inter&oernmental or&ani)ations. o a lesser de&ree6 international law also may

affect multinational corporations and indiiduals6 an impact increasin&ly eolin& beyond domestic le&al

interpretation and enforcement. International law !as increased in use and importance astly oer t!e

twentiet! century6 due to t!e increase in &lobal trade6 enironmental deterioration on a worldwide scale6

awareness of !uman ri&!ts iolations6 rapid and ast increases in international transportation and a boom

in &lobal communications.

2!2 Is International law a law in true sense or not:!e status of International law6 t!at w!et!er it is a law in true sense or not6 is a lon& debate. urists !ae

different iews to debate as a result of w!ic! different sc!ools of t!ou&!t !ae come to e+ist. !e iew of

eac! of suc! sc!ool may be &ien as under7

1. International law is not a law in true sense: 8ccordin& to t!is sc!ool of t!ou&!t International law is

not a law in true sense. !ey &ie followin& ar&uments in support of t!eir iew7

i. !ere is no superior political aut!ority

ii. !ere is no le&islature to enact t!e rules as in municipal law6

iii. !ere is no judicial mac!inery to interpret t!e laws6

i. !ere is no e+ecutie aut!ority to enforce international law. International law is fre5uently iolated by states.

So6 on t!e basis of t!e aboe ar&uments t!is sc!ool of t!ou&!t !as contended t!at international law is not

a law in its true sense.

2. International law is a law in true sense: 8ccordin& to t!is sc!ool of t!ou&!t international law is a

law in true sense. !ey &ie t!e followin& ar&uments in support of t!eir iew7

i. ;or t!e definition of law a political superior aut!ority is not so necessary6

ii. In fact t!ere is a le&islatie body in t!e s!ape of 4eneral 8ssembly and Security 'ouncil and t!e states

enter into treaties w!ic! also act as le&islature6

iii. In fact t!ere is a potent judicial mac!inery in t!e s!ape of International 'ourt of ustice / I' .!ou&! its decisions are bindin& on t!e parties w!en t!ey by t!eir mutual consent refer t!e case to it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_the_Holy_Seehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizationshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_lawhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_lawhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_corporationshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_corporationshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_tradehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rightshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_the_Holy_Seehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizationshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_lawhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_corporationshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_tradehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights


5/27

P a g e |

i. It is wron& to say t!at t!ere is no e+ecutie aut!ority to enforce International law6 because t!e aderse

iew of t!e member states and fear of cessation of diplomatic and economic ties and fear of war act as

sanction for its implementation.

3. International law is a law but a weak law: !is sc!ool of t!ou&!t accepts t!e status of International

law as a law but accordin& to t!em it is a wea2 law. !ey &ie followin& ar&uments in t!e support of t!eir

iew7i. !ere is no coercie a&ency to enforce it6

ii. It !as fre5uently been iolated6

iii. %i& powers interpret it accordin& to t!eir wis!es6

i. !ou&! t!ere is an international court of justice6 but it enjoys no compulsory jurisdiction. Its decisions

are only bindin& in circumstances w!ere bot! t!e parties by t!eir mutual consent refer t!e case to it6

. !ere are some sanctions to enforce it but t!e same are to inade5uate to attain t!e end of international

justice.

Conclusion: ;rom t!e aboe discussion it may be concluded t!e international law is a law but a wea2

law due to many tec!nical defects in it.Lecture-.

#$no"sis%3&1 ,a-or .inds o) International Law

.!1 $aor inds of International Law:

!ere are followin& two major 2inds of international law>

1. @riate International Law6 and ". @ublic International Law.

1. Private International Law: !e term priate International law may be defined as under7 A!at branc!

of International law w!ic! determines t!at w!ic! law is to be applied to a specific case containin& aforei&n element is called @riate International law.B

2. Public International Law: !e term @ublic International Law may be defined as under7 A8 body of

le&al rules w!ic! re&ulates t!e relation of states inter se as well as t!eir relations wit! ot!er non3state

entities is said to be @ublic International law.B

Distinction between Private International law and Public International Law Private International

law Public International law:

Private International law Public International law

1.It deals wit! t!e indiiduals of one6 two or

more countries.

1.It deals mainly wit! t!e relations!ip of

states wit! eac! ot!er.

".!e rules of @riate International law aret!e out come of state or state laws

".!e rules of @ublic International law aret!e out come of International customs6

treaties and ot!er sources.

-.It differs from state to state -.@ublic International law is same for all t!e

states of t!e world.

C.It !as been enacted by t!e le&islature of

t!e state or states

C.It comes into force of treaties6 customs6

international a&reements or decisions of

arbitral tribunals.

.It is more ciil in nature. .It is bot! ciil and criminal in nature.

Lecture-/

#$no"sis%4&1 #ub-ects o) international law


6/27

P a g e | 3

4.1

8 subject of International Law is a person /entity w!o possesses international le&al personality6 i.e.6

capable of possessin& international ri&!ts and obli&ations and !ain& t!e capacity to ta2e certain types of

action on t!e international leel. raditionally6 States !ae been t!e only subjects or persons of

International Law. Howeer6 wit! t!e establis!ment of international or&ani)ations6 it !as become

necessary t!at a sort of international le&al personality be &ranted to t!ese entities. !us6 international

or&ani)ations become subjects or persons of International Law. %eside States and international

or&ani)ations6 non3States entities suc! as members of federal States6 belli&erents6 insur&ents6 national

liberation moements6 and international territories are &ranted a sort of international le&al

personality. Special international status was &ranted to t!e Holly See and t!e


7/27

P a g e | 4

Lecture/5#$no"sis%5&1 ,ain )unctions o) International law

!1 $ain functions of International law: %y functions of International law it is meant t!at

to carry on t!e objects and aims of international law. 8s we 2now t!at t!e performance of t!e functions of international law mainly depends upon t!e will of t!e soerei&n states. %ecause t!ere is no political

superior aut!ority to administer t!e law. !ese are t!e states6 t!e main subjects of international law6

w!ic! underta2e to perform t!ose intended functions. So6 as t!e will of t!e states are conditioned wit!

certain political considerations6 due to w!ic! t!e process of attainin& its end is ery slow. %eside t!is

international law plays an important role in t!e international justice.

Imortant functions w!ic! international law erforms in t!e world "ustice and olitics ma# be

$iven as under:

1. Maintenance of peace and security6

". Deelopment of friendly relations!ip amon& states and ot!er International actors6-. 8c!ieement of International co3corporation to sole problems.

C. o sole economic6 cultural and !umanitarian problems

. o &uarantee political and soerei&n inte&rity of states

%eside t!e aboe functions t!ere are a number of ot!er functions w!ic! international law performs.

Lecture/6 to 10#$no"sis%:.1 #ources o) International Law

3!1 Sources of International Law: Sources of International law means t!ose ori&ins fromw!ere it attains its aut!ority and coercie a&ency. 8ccordin& to t!e proisions of t!e Statute of

International 'ourt of ustice t!ere are followin& sources6 on t!e basis of w!ic! 'ourt can decide a case7

1. Treaties: % !e term treaty may be defined as At!e a&reement entered into by $ation states for t!eir

relations wit! eac! ot!er and to underta2e certain duties6 obli&ations and ri&!ts is said to be a treaty.B !e

statute declares t!at t!e 'ourt s!all !ae to decide any dispute between $ation States in accordance wit!

t!e proisions of t!e treaty between t!em if e+isted.

". Customs: % 'ustoms are t!ose !abits and practices w!ic! t!e nations states commonly obsere and t!e

iolation of w!ic! is considered as a&ainst t!e courtesy of International be!aior. !ere are certain practices w!ic! t!e world community obseres wit!out any e+press proisions but because of practice

t!ey !onour t!e same. So if t!ere is no treaty between t!e parties to a dispute t!en t!e statute binds t!e

'ourt to decide t!e case in t!e li&!t of suc! international customs.

-. &eneral Princials of Law 'eco$ni(ed b# Civili(ed )ations: % !ere are certain principles of law6

w!ic! !ae been incorporated6 in t!e domestic laws of many countries because of t!eir uniersal

application. So6 in default of any treaty or international custom t!e statute reeals t!at t!e court t!en s!all

!ae to decide t!e case in t!e li&!t of suc! &eneral principles of law as reco&ni)ed by ciili)ed nations of

t!e world.

C. *udicial Decisions: % (sually t!e udicial decisions of t!e International 'ourt of ustice are not bindin& and t!ey !ae no alue in t!e sense t!at t!ey are related and bindin& only to t!at certain case for

w!ic! t!ey !ae &ien. 8nd t!ey cannot be cited as strict reference in any ot!er case. %ut despite t!e fact


8/27

P a g e | 5

t!e Statute reeals t!at in case of default of all t!e aboe sources t!e court s!all resort to t!e prior judicial

decisions.

C. *uristic +orks: % !e jurists or publicists also declares rules by le&al p!ilosop!y and analo&y and also

by comparin& different le&al systems of t!e world and t!ey also analy)e t!e !istorical perspecties of t!e

different le&al systems of t!e world. So6 as t!ey !ae deoted t!eir lies for t!e le&al study6 t!ey must bedesere to consult in decidin& a dispute. In ot!er words6 t!eir opinion on a specific 5uestion of law

wei&!ts because of t!e t!eir aluable e+periments and sound study on t!e topic. So6 t!e statute furt!er

reeals t!at if t!ere is no treaty6 le&al custom and &eneral principles of law t!en t!e 'ourt s!all resort to

writin&s of t!ese jurists.

:. ,t!er -ources: % %eside t!e aboe sources t!ere are also some ot!er sources w!ic! court can resort

for t!e decision of a case. 8s for e+ample A*5uityB and t!e resolution by t!e ($ or&ani)ation. $o w!ere

in t!e statute t!ese sources !ae been declared for t!e 'ourt to derie law but by practice t!e common

and uniersal principles of e5uity !ae been obsered by t!e courts w!ile decidin& cases. 8nd also t!e

($ or&ani)ation w!en passes a resolution on specific subject t!e 'ourt feels its moral duty to decide t!e

case in t!e li&!t of suc! resolution if t!ere is no e+press proisions for decidin& a case.

Lecture/11 to 13#$no"sis%7&1 e relationsi" between International and ,unici"al Law

4!1 t&e relations&ip between International and $unicipal Law: 8pparently t!ere

seems no relations!ip between international law and municipal law. %et if e+amined wit! p!ilosop!ical

ee t!en it would be seemed t!at t!ere is a relations!ip between bot! t!e le&al orders. !e test as toobsere t!e relations!ip between t!e two systems may be conducted in case of a conflict between t!e two

le&al orders. !e situation would arise t!at w!at law s!all be applicable to t!e case in 5uestion.

'elations!i between unicial Law and International Law

8s to relations!ip between municipal law and international law t!ere are many t!eories t!e most

prominent one of w!ic! may be discussed as under7

I. Dualistic T!eor#: % 8ccordin& to t!e followers of t!is t!eory Municipal law and International law are

two separate6 distinct and self3contained le&al orders6 independent from eac! ot!er. %ot! t!e orders enjoy

its own sp!eres and eac! one is t!e supreme in its own sp!ere. !ey accepts t!e separate and independent

e+istence because6 accordin& to t!em6 t!ere are followin& points of distinctions between bot! t!e orders7

1. -ources: % !e sources of bot! t!e systems are 5uite different. Municipal law !as its source in t!e land

le&islature6 w!ile International law !as its sources in treaties6 entered into by different soerei&n states6

international customs and &eneral principals of law etc.

2. -ub"ect: 3 !e subjects of bot! t!e systems are different. 8s for as6 Municipal is concerned t!at is an

order of t!e soerei&n of t!e state addressed to t!e indiiduals6 w!ile at t!e ot!er !and t!e subjects of t!e

international law are t!e states6 and to t!e lesser e+tent ot!er actors includin& indiiduals. In ot!er words

Municipal law is between t!e indiiduals and international law is between t!e soerei&n states.

3. Princiles: 3 Municipal law is t!e a&&re&ate of t!e principles of state le&islature6 w!ile International

law is obeyed because of principle A@acta sunt seranda.B 8t t!e ot!er !and6 municipal law !as a le&al

sanctity w!ile International is obeyed because states are morally bound to obsere.4. D#namism: 3 It is a uni5ue c!aracteristic of International law t!at it continuously c!an&es and e+pands

w!ile municipal law remains limited. So6 on t!e basis of t!e followin& points of distinction between t!e


9/27

P a g e | 6

two le&al systems t!e supporters of Dualistic !eory contend t!at t!ey bot! are separate and distinct

orders !ain& separate sp!eres of application.

II. onistic T!eor#: % 8ccordin& to t!e followers of t!is t!eory International law is not distinct and

autonomous body of law6 rat!er t!ere e+ists only one sets of le&al system i.e. t!e domestic le&al order.

!ey !ae critici)ed t!e iew adopted by Dualists6 and also rejected t!e alle&ed distinction between

Municipal law and International law as pointed out by t!e dualists. 8ccordin& to t!em bot! t!einternational law and municipal law are related wit! t!e same le&al system. 8nd it is not possible to treat

t!em seerely.

Conclusion: % It may be concluded t!at as for as6 t!e Dualistic and Monistic !eories are concerned t!ey

are primitie and traditional6 due to w!ic! t!ey are most popular. Howeer6 t!e Harmoni)ation !eory is

comparatiely modern. 8lt!ou&! no t!eory can be said to be appropriate6 but Harmoni)ation !eory

appears to be better because it !as re&arded t!at International law6 as well as6 Municipal law !ae been so

framed for t!e conduct of t!e !uman bein&6 so t!ere s!ould be no contradiction between t!em6 and if any

contradiction e+ist6 t!at s!ould be !armoni)ed6 eit!er by courts or t!e le&islature of t!e concerned state.


10/27

P a g e | 10

Indi)idual Presentation- 01

o"ic% e elationsi" between International Law and

ational Law&

Summary: It !as lon& been asserted t!at t!e relations!ip between international law and national lawis a matter of actie concern in many le&al orders. Most would a&ree t!at t!e relations!ip is neit!er fully

clarified nor clearly delineated. Discussion about t!e relations!ip t!erefore continues to en&a&e many

opposin& iews. %y and lar&e6 domestic lawyers try to find t!e answer to t!e 5uestion of t!e relations!ip

between international and national law in t!e domestic constitutional order6 w!ereas international lawyers

inariably loo2 to t!e international le&al order.

!e relations!ip between international and national law deliers ery practical conse5uences in a &ien

le&al order. ;urt!ermore6 to some e+tent6 t!e preailin& of one oer t!e ot!er could &ie rise6 in practice6

to ery unfaorable le&al circumstances. Hence6 many times6 international law and national law !ae

aryin& determinations6 and6 in t!e majority of cases6 t!e former is considered to be more modern wit!respect to !uman ri&!ts and issues of freedoms. *idence s!ows t!at t!e primacy of international law

oer domestic law is a modern p!enomenon6 and is often re&arded to as a benc!mar2 of a democratic

state. %y contrast wit! t!e pre3,orld ,ar II situation6 momentum toward acceptin& t!e primacy of

international law is becomin& more and more eident.

!ere are two main concerns t!at a constitution3ma2er faces. !e first is w!et!er international law norms

s!ould be incorporated in t!e domestic le&al order6 and t!e second is w!et!er t!e incorporated treaty

s!ould preail oer laws or t!e constitution itself. In principle6 t!e issue circles around two concepts 3

namely t!e monist and dualist models. $eert!eless6 t!e two t!eories do not e+plain t!e w!ole of t!e problem6 but lar&ely lay down t!e outline wit!in w!ic! t!e 5uestion can be soled. !e monist model6 on

t!e one !and6 considers t!ere to be just one le&al order6 and t!us international and national law are part of

a sin&le le&al order. !e monist iew t!erefore &enerally asserts t!at international law preails oer

domestic law. 8ccordin& to t!e dualist approac!6 in order for a part of international law to become

bindin& domestically6 it must be transposed into domestic law6 or ot!erwise it will !ae no le&al effect.

Still6 t!is is a domestic iew of t!e relations!ip between international and domestic law6 &ien t!at t!e

primacy of international law would neer be contested before an international tribunal.


o"ic% eor$ o) ,onis+-ummar#: 8ccordin& to Di+on6 t!e monist t!eory supposes t!at international law and national laware simply two components of a sin&le body of 2nowled&e called ElawE. ELawE is seen as a sin&le entity of

w!ic! EnationalE and EinternationalE ersions are merely particular manifestation. In t!e case of conflicts

between t!e two systems6 international law is said to preail. In t!is iew6 t!e International Law is

supposed to be supreme6 but in cases of conflicts6 t!ere are seeral different e+planations as to w!y t!is

s!ould be so.

!e first e+planation is represented by Hans Kelson /monist3positiist6 w!o sees t!e superiority of international law as a direct conse5uence of !is =basic norm= of all law. !is basic norm /fundamental

principle from all law &ains its alidity is t!at Estate s!ould be!ae as t!ey customarily !ae be!aedE.

8s a conse5uence International Law is representin& a !i&!er le&al order and as suc! supreme6 because


11/27

P a g e | 11

is deried from t!e practice of states and national law is deried from t!e states as establis!ed in

international law. !e second e+planation was &ien by Hersc! Lauterpac!t6 w!o sees international law

as a superior6 because it offers t!e best &uarantee for t!e !uman ri&!ts of indiiduals6 t!e EstateE itself is

seen as a collection of indiiduals rat!er t!an a le&al entity in its own. In t!is iew t!e international law

preails6 because it is t!e &uarantor of indiidual liberty. !e last e+planation is based on monist3

naturalist iew6 w!ic! sees t!e superiority of international law in natural law6 so t!ere is a !ierarc!y of le&al orders6 wit! natural law at t!e summit6 followed by international law6 and followed by national

law.

!ese dierse opinions !ae in common t!e basic monistic tenet t!at international law and national law

are part of t!e same !ierarc!ical le&al order6 its norms must be ran2ed in order of priority6 and in t!is

sense t!e international law is superior.

Indi)idual Presentation- 0.

o"ic% eor$ o) 'ualis+-ummar# : 'ontrary of monist t!eory6 dualism denies t!at international law and national law operate

in t!e same sp!ere6 alt!ou&! it does accept t!at t!ey deal wit! t!e same subject matter. %ut accordin& to

Malenos2F 6 t!e international and national laws are two different and separate systems6 w!ic! are

based not only upon different jurisdictions and sanction bodies6 but also upon t!e different sources and

t!e different subject of matter . 8ccordin& to ripel6 international law &oerns relations!ip between

states6 w!ereas national law deals wit! ri&!ts and obli&ations of indiiduals wit!in state.

Dualism considers international law and national law as independent of eac! ot!er6 and bot! systems are

re&arded as mutually e+clusie and are t!erefore &enerally not able to &et into conflict wit! eac! ot!er.Similarly6 accordin& to one of t!e e+ponents of t!is t!eory6 8n)ilotti6 t!e systems are so different6 t!at

no conflict between t!em is possible6 !oweer6 most of t!e dualists would assume t!at municipal law

would be applied.

Indi)idual Presentation- 0/

o"ic% #tatus o) international Law in anglades onstitution&Summary7 !e relations!ip between international law and municipal law is one of t!e important issues

of t!e international law. !ese two le&al orders differ from eac! ot!er due to t!eir common and

conflictin& features. %ut relations!ip between t!em becomes critically important w!en international law

is applied by a national le&al system.

In order to aoid clas!es between two le&al systems6 many states !ae constitutional proisions or

practices t!at in some form or ot!er ma2e international law a part of t!eir municipal laws. In t!is re&ard6

t!ere are t!ree apparent trends deeloped by t!e constitutions7 firstl#6 some constitutions contain

proisions t!at are often found in t!e preambles and fundamental principles of state policy. -econdl#6

some constitutions e+pressly incorporate &eneral international law into municipal law and leae to t!e

le&islators or t!e courts t!e duty of !armoni)in& conflicts between international and municipal laws> and

t!irdl#6 some constitutions not only incorporate international law into national law but also &ie it

priority oer domestic rules in case of conflicts.


12/27

P a g e | 12


13/27

P a g e | 1.


o"ic% angladesi ourts and international Law&-ummar#: ;rom t!e point of iew of international law6 national courts are state or&ans and t!us arere5uired to conform to international norms. ;ailure to do so may impose international responsibility on

t!e state. !e common practice of all states is t!at Hi&!er udiciary !as t!e jurisdiction to deal wit! issues pertinent to international instruments. %an&lades! !as t!e same. !e Supreme 'ourt is comprised of two

diisions i.e. 8ppellate Diision and Hi&! 'ourt Diision. %ot! diisions will be comprised of by t!e

'!ief ustice of %an&lades! and a number of ot!er jud&es specified by t!e @resident. 8ppellate Diision

doesnGt !ae ori&inal jurisdiction6 it !ear matters brou&!t before it from decisions of Hi&! 'ourt Diision

and ot!er tribunals specified by t!e 8ct. !ou&! t!e !i&!er udiciary of %an&lades! is not empowered to

ma2e le&islations6 but it is free to interpret obli&ation of %an&lades! under international law6 ta2e

international instrument to interpret domestic law and proide &uidelines bases on international

instruments.

8rticle " of t!e 'onstitution of %an&lades!6 t!e paramount proision relatin& to international law

contained principles of international law includin& international law and t!e principles enunciated in t!e($ '!arterG will be respected by State. !is article !as no bindin& effect t!at in case of iolation6 one can

&o to t!e !i&!est court for enforcement. %ut it !as two important conse5uences7 by irtue of 8rticle /"

of t!e 'onstitution6 t!e principles of 8rticle " were to be fundamentalG to t!e &oernance and law3

ma2in& of t!e state6 and t!ey were to be a &uide to t!e interpretationG of t!e 'onstitution and ot!er laws.

Hence6 interpretation of t!e 'onstitution and national laws must be in conformity wit! t!e basic

principles of international law.J1- !e &eneral practice of t!e country is eident t!at international

treaties are not automatically become part of t!e domestic law of %an&lades! unless and until it is

incorporated into domestic le&islation.J1C So6 international treaties are re5uired to be inserted into t!e

domestic law passed by due procedure and t!en it will be part of domestic law. !e approac! of t!e 'ourt

was reflected in t!e case of /)+L0 v. &overnment of /an$lades! and ot!ers6 w!ere t!e 'ourt

e!emently declared3

AOur courts will not enforce t!ose 'oenants as reaties and 'onentions een if ratified by t!e State6 as

t!ey are not part of t!e corpus juris of t!e State unless t!ose are incorporated in t!e municipal

le&islation.B

In t!e case of Ershad v Bangladesh and ors in a separate opinion clarified t!at3

A8lt!ou&! uniersal !uman ri&!ts norms6 w!et!er &ien in t!e (DH# or in t!e 'oenants6 are not

directly enforceable in national courts6 t!ey are enforceable by domestic courts if suc! norms are

incorporated into t!e domestic law. Howeer6 national courts s!ould not i&nore t!e international

obli&ations w!ic! a country underta2es. $ational courts s!ould draw upon t!e principles incorporated in

t!e international instruments if t!e domestic laws are ambi&uous or absent. ,!ere t!e domestic laws areclear6 but inconsistent wit! t!e international obli&ations of t!e state concerned6 t!e national courts will be

obli&ed to respect national law. !e uniersal norms of freedom of leain& t!e country and returnin& !ae

been reco&ni)ed in 8rticle -: of t!e 'onstitution6 and t!ere was full application of 8rticle 1- of t!e

(DH# to t!e fact of t!is caseB


o"ic% 'is"ute settle+ent nder International law-ummar#: Institutional met!ods of dispute settlement inole t!e resort to international or&ani)ations

for settlement of international disputes. !ese met!ods !ae come into e+istence wit! t!e creation of t!e

international or&ani)ations. !e most eminent or&ani)ations6 w!ic! proide mec!anisms for settlin&dispute between t!eir member States6 are t!e (nited $ations and t!e re&ional or&ani)ations6 suc! as t!e

*uropean (nion6 t!e Or&ani)ation of 8merican States6 t!e 8rab lea&ue and t!e 8frican (nion.

http://www.clcbd.org/journal/13.html#_edn13http://www.clcbd.org/journal/13.html#_edn13http://www.clcbd.org/journal/13.html#_edn13http://www.clcbd.org/journal/13.html#_edn14http://www.clcbd.org/journal/13.html#_edn14http://www.clcbd.org/journal/13.html#_edn13http://www.clcbd.org/journal/13.html#_edn14


14/27

P a g e | 1/

Peaceful -ettlement of Disute b# t!e nited )ations:

!e Settlement of international disputes is one of t!e most important roles of t!e (nited $ations. !e

'!arter of t!e (nited $ations stipulates t!at it is t!e tas2 of t!e (nited $ations Ato brin& about by

peaceful means6 and in conformity wit! t!e principles of justice and international law6 adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations w!ic! mi&!t lead to a breac! of t!e peace.B o t!is end6

t!e '!arter proides a system for t!e pacific settlement or adjustment of international disputes or

situations under w!ic! t!e wide competence of t!e (nited $ations in t!is matter is establis!ed6 and t!e

correspondin& obli&ations of t!e members of t!e (nited $ations are imposed. !is system is delineated

mainly in '!apter


15/27

P a g e | 1

re&ard to t!e utili)ation of re&ional arran&ements and a&encies. ;irst6 it re5uires t!at t!e matters dealt

wit! must be Aappropriate for re&ional actionB. Second6 it re5uires t!at t!e Aarran&ements or a&encies

and t!eir actiities are consistent wit! t!e @urposes and @rinciples of t!e (nited $ations


o"ic% I+"ortance o) International Organiation&

-ummar#: $owadays6 international or&ani)ations are playin& an increasin&ly important role in t!e

international le&al order. !ey are actie in irtually all fields of !uman actiity> t!ey re&ularly conclude

international treaties and continuously interact wit! ot!er actors of international law6 t!ey wield &rowin&

normatie powers. ;or t!ose wor2in& for or dealin& wit! international or&ani)ations6 a sound

understandin& of t!e law of international or&ani)ations t!us appears indispensable.

!e International Or&ani)ations play an important role in collectin& statistical information6 analy)in& t!e

trends in t!e ariables6 ma2in& a comparatie study and disseminate t!e information to all ot!er

countries. !ere are some inter&oernmental or&ani)ations t!at !ae set international Minimumstandards. Suc! norms are difficult to be set at t!e state leel.

!ere are some international or&ani)ations t!at perform certain superisory functions. !e superisory

system of t!e ($ is ery wea2. In contrast6 t!e superisory mec!anism of t!e ILO is 5uite stron&. !e

*uropean (nion6 to&et!er wit! t!e 'ommission and t!e 'ourt of ustice6 !as a relatiely stron&

superisory mec!anism. !e t!ird function of t!e international or&ani)ations is settin& up multilateral or

bilateral a&reements between countries.

8not!er function6 t!at !as assumed importance in t!e recent times6 is lendin& out tec!nical cooperation to

t!e member countries. %y tec!nical cooperation we mean t!e proision of intellectual or financial

material to t!e countries6 w!ic! re5uire t!em.8mon&st all t!e roles and actiities of t!e international or&ani)ations6 t!e most important is ne&otiatin&

and settin& up multilateral a&reements. Minimi)in& t!e transaction costs can stren&t!en t!e cooperation

between different countries. %eside t!ey also proide lucidity and information. ;or ne&otiations6 forums

for bar&ainin& are set up and focal point structures are constructed durin& ne&otiations. !e multilateral

a&reements t!at are settled by t!e international or&ani)ations occur in sections li2e enironment

protection6 deelopment trade6 crime !uman ri&!ts6 etc.


o"ic% Legal Personalit$ o) International Law-ummar#: International law is based on rules made by states for states. States are soerei&n and e5ualin t!eir relations and can t!us oluntarily create or accept to abide by le&ally bindin& rules6 usually in t!e

form of a treaty or conention. %y si&nin& and ratifyin& treaties6 states willin&ly enter into le&al6

contractual relations!ips wit! ot!er state parties to a particular treaty6 w!ic! obserance is normally

controlled by t!e reciprocal effects of non3compliance. !e capacity of states to enter into suc!

relations!ips wit! ot!er states and to create le&ally bindin& rules for t!emseles6 is a result of

statesE international legal personality 6 a prero&atie attributed to all soerei&n states. ,it!

&lobali)ation !oweer6 international law and international relations e+panded rapidly wit! increasin&

comple+ities7 new tec!nolo&y made t!e world smaller and more interconnected6 new &lobal t!reats

emer&ed t!at could not be fou&!t unless wit! state cooperation6 new players emer&ed at t!e international

forum suc! as arious IOs and $S8s. International law was &reatly influenced by t!is deelopment and


16/27

P a g e | 13

s!ifts in international relations w!ereby states were no lon&er t!e only players on t!e international arena

and t!us not t!e only subjects of international law any lon&er.


o"ic% 8a+"le o) te a""lication o) International Law at ational lawso) anglades&-ummar#:


17/27

P a g e | 14


o"ic% *istor$ o) :O

-ummar#: !e ,orld rade Or&ani)ation came into e+istence in nineteen ninety3fie. It operates a

system of trade rules. It seres as a place for nations to settle disputes and ne&otiate a&reements to reduce

trade barriers. !e newest of its one !undred fifty members6


18/27

P a g e | 15

(nited $ations leads t!e international campai&ns a&ainst dru& traffic2in& and terrorism. !rou&!out t!e

world6 t!e ($ and its a&encies assist refu&ees6 set up pro&rammers to clear landmines6 !elp

e+pand food production and lead t!e fi&!t a&ainst 8IDS.

In September "0006 Member States6 represented at t!e !i&!est leel ? includin& 1CN Heads of State and

4oernment ? e+pressed t!eir collectie ision in t!e Millennium Declaration. !ey set out

measurable in eery area of ($ endeaor ? t!e Millennium Deelopment 4oals. In September6 worldleaders renewed commitments to ac!iein& t!ose 4oals by "01 and set out concrete plans and practical

steps for action.

http://www.unodc.org/http://www.unhcr.org/http://www.mineaction.org/http://www.mineaction.org/http://www.fao.org/http://www.unaids.org/en/http://www.un.org/millennium/summit.htmhttp://www.unodc.org/http://www.unhcr.org/http://www.mineaction.org/http://www.fao.org/http://www.unaids.org/en/http://www.un.org/millennium/summit.htm


19/27

P a g e | 16


20/27

P a g e | 20

7roup Presentation- 1

o"ic% International ourt O) ;ustice

a. refrain from all political and administratie functions6 b. refrain from bein& council6 a&ent or adocate in any case6 and

c. not participate in any case in w!ic! !e !as preiously !as ta2en part as a&ent6 counsel or adocate for

one of t!e parties.

9. 5uorum of t!e Court: % !e 5uorum of t!e 'ourt is fi+ed at nine jud&es.

. President of t!e Court: % 8fter eac! period of t!ree years t!e 'ourt s!all elect its president. !e

president s!all preside t!e cases of t!e 'ourt. %ut if in a case any party is !is national !e s!all not be

entitled to as act as president.

;.


21/27

P a g e | 21

restriction6 is applicable to t!e jurisdiction of t!e 'ourt. In ot!er words6 t!e 'ourt is not entitled to initiate

any proceedin& merely because one party files a case6 rat!er t!e consent of bot! t!e parties are necessary

t!at dependent is also re5uired to &ie consent to t!e case. 'ontentious urisdiction is of t!ree 2inds

w!ic! may be &ien as under7

i.


22/27

P a g e | 22

implementation of rulin&s and recommendations6 and aut!ori)e t!e suspension of obli&ations under t!e coered

a&reements. !e DS% meets as often as necessary to ad!ere to t!e timeframes proided for in t!e DS(.

If a member state considers t!at a measure adopted by anot!er member state !as depried it of a benefit accruin& to it

under one of t!e coered a&reements6 it may call for consultations wit! t!e ot!er member state. If consultations fail to

resole t!e dispute wit!in :0 days after receipt of t!e re5uest for consultations6 t!e complainant state may re5uest t!e

establis!ment of a @anel. It is not possible for t!e respondent state to preent or delay t!e establis!ment of a @anel6

unless t!e DS% by consensus decides ot!erwise. !e panel6 normally consistin& of t!ree members appointed ad hoc by

t!e Secretariat6 sits to receie written and oral submissions of t!e parties6 on t!e basis of w!ic! it is e+pected to ma2e

findin&s and conclusions for presentation to t!e DS%. !e proceedin&s are confidential6 and een w!en priate parties

are directly concerned6 t!ey are not permitted to attend or ma2e submissions separate from t!ose of t!e state in

5uestion. Disputes can also arise under $on3iolation nullification of benefits claims.

!e final ersion of t!e panelEs report is distributed first to t!e parties> two wee2s later it is circulated to all t!e members

of t!e ,O. In s!arp contrast wit! ot!er systems6 t!e report is re5uired to be adopted at a meetin& of t!e DS% wit!in :0

days of its circulation6 unless t!e DS% by consensus decides not to adopt t!e report or a party to t!e dispute &ies notice

of its intention to appeal. 8 party may appeal a panel report to t!e standin& 8ppellate %ody6 but only on issues of law and

le&al interpretations deeloped by t!e panel. *ac! appeal is !eard by t!ree members of t!e permanent seen3member

8ppellate %ody set up by t!e Dispute Settlement %ody and broadly representin& t!e ran&e of ,O members!ip.

Members of t!e 8ppellate %ody !ae four3year terms. !ey must be indiiduals wit! reco&ni)ed standin& in t!e field of

law and international trade6 not affiliated wit! any &oernment. !e 8ppellate %ody may up!old6 modify or reerse t!e

panelEs le&al findin&s and conclusions. $ormally appeals s!ould not last more t!an :0 days6 wit! an absolute ma+imum

of 90 days. !e possibility for appeal ma2es t!e ,O dispute resolution system uni5ue amon& t!e judicial processes of

dispute settlement in &eneral public international law.

Members may e+press t!eir iews on t!e report of t!e 8ppellate %ody6 but t!ey cannot derail it. !e DS( states

une5uiocally t!at an 8ppellate %ody report s!all be adopted by t!e DS% and unconditionally accepted by t!e parties6

unless t!e DS% decides by consensus wit!in t!irty days of its circulation not to adopt t!e report. (nless ot!erwise

a&reed by t!e parties to t!e dispute6 t!e period from establis!ment of t!e panel to consideration of t!e report by t!e DS%

s!all as a &eneral rule not e+ceed nine mont!s if t!ere is no appeal6 and twele mont!s if t!ere is an appeal.

7roup Presentation- .

o"ic% 8uro"ean nion

#u++ar$7 !e *uropean (nion /*( is a unification of "N member states united to create a politicaland economic community t!rou&!out *urope. !ou&! t!e idea of t!e *( mi&!t sound simple at t!e

outset6 t!e *uropean (nion !as a ric! !istory and a uni5ue or&ani)ation6 bot! of w!ic! aid in its current

success and its ability to fulfill its mission for t!e "1st 'entury.

History7 !e precursor to t!e *uropean (nion was establis!ed after ,orld ,ar II in t!e late 19C0s in an

effort to unite t!e countries of *urope and end t!e period of wars between nei&!borin& countries. !ese

nations be&an to officially unite in 19C9 wit! t!e 'ouncil of *urope. In 190 t!e creation of t!e *uropean'oal and Steel 'ommunity e+panded t!e cooperation. !e si+ nations inoled in t!is initial treaty were

%el&ium6 ;rance6 4ermany6 Italy6 Lu+embour&6 and t!e $et!erlands. oday t!ese countries are referred to

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensushttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hochttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-violation_nullification_of_benefits_claimshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-violation_nullification_of_benefits_claimshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-violation_nullification_of_benefits_claimshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_international_lawhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_international_lawhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_international_lawhttp://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/eumembers.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/eumembers.htmhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensushttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hochttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-violation_nullification_of_benefits_claimshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_international_lawhttp://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/eumembers.htm


23/27

P a g e | 2.

as t!e =foundin& members.= Durin& t!e 190s6 t!e 'old ,ar 6 protests6 and diisions between *astern and

,estern *urope s!owed t!e need for furt!er *uropean unification. In order to do t!is6 t!e reaty of #ome

was si&ned on Marc! "6 19N6 t!us creatin& t!e *uropean *conomic 'ommunity and allowin& people

and products to moe t!rou&!out *urope. !rou&!out t!e decades additional countries joined t!e

community.

In order to furt!er unify *urope6 t!e Sin&le *uropean 8ct was si&ned in 19N wit! t!e aim of eentually

creatin& a =sin&le mar2et= for trade. *urope was furt!er unified in 199 wit! t!e elimination of t!e

boundary between *astern and ,estern *urope 3 t!e %erlin ,all.

The Modern-Day EU

!rou&!out t!e 1990s6 t!e =sin&le mar2et= idea allowed easier trade6 more citi)en interaction on issues

suc! as t!e enironment and security6 and easier trael t!rou&! t!e different countries.

*en t!ou&! t!e countries of *urope !ad arious treaties in place prior to t!e early 1990s6 t!is time is

&enerally reco&ni)ed as t!e period w!en t!e modern day *uropean (nion arose due to t!e reaty of

Maastric!t on *uropean (nion w!ic! was si&ned on ;ebruary N6 199" and put into action on $oember

16 199-.

!e reaty of Maastric!t identified fie &oals desi&ned to unify *urope in more ways t!an just

economically. !e &oals are7

1 o stren&t!en t!e democratic &oernin& of participatin& nations.

" o improe t!e efficiency of t!e nations.- o establis! an economic and financial unification.

C o deelop t!e ='ommunity social dimension.=

o establis! a security policy for inoled nations.

In order to reac! t!ese &oals6 t!e reaty of Maastric!t !as arious policies dealin& wit! issues suc! as

industry6 education6 and yout!. In addition6 t!e reaty put a sin&le *uropean currency6 t!e euro6 in t!e

wor2s to establis! fiscal unification in 1999.

In "00C and "00N6 t!e *( e+panded6 brin&in& t!e total number of member states as of "00 to "N.

In December "00N6 all of t!e member nations si&ned t!e reaty of Lisbon in !opes of ma2in& t!e *(

more democratic and efficient to deal wit! climate c!an&e6 national security6 and sustainable

deelopment.

How a Country Joins the EU

;or countries interested in joinin& t!e *(6 t!ere are seeral re5uirements t!at t!ey must meet in order to

proceed to accession and become a member state.

!e first re5uirement !as to do wit! t!e political aspect. 8ll countries in t!e *( are re5uired to !ae a

&oernment t!at &uarantees democracy6 !uman ri&!ts6 and t!e rule of law6 as well as protects t!e ri&!ts of

minorities.

http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/coldwar/p/prcoldwar101.htmhttp://europeanhistory.about.com/od/coldwar/p/prcoldwar101.htmhttp://europeanhistory.about.com/od/coldwar/p/prberlinwall.htmhttp://europeanhistory.about.com/od/coldwar/p/prberlinwall.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/euro.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/climate/a/climateoverview.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/climate/a/climateoverview.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/climate/a/climateoverview.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/geographyglossarys/g/ggsustainablede.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/geographyglossarys/g/ggsustainablede.htmhttp://civilliberty.about.com/od/internationalhumanrights/g/Human-Rights-Definition.htmhttp://civilliberty.about.com/od/internationalhumanrights/g/Human-Rights-Definition.htmhttp://europeanhistory.about.com/od/coldwar/p/prcoldwar101.htmhttp://europeanhistory.about.com/od/coldwar/p/prberlinwall.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/euro.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/climate/a/climateoverview.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/geographyglossarys/g/ggsustainablede.htmhttp://geography.about.com/od/geographyglossarys/g/ggsustainablede.htmhttp://civilliberty.about.com/od/internationalhumanrights/g/Human-Rights-Definition.htm


24/27

P a g e | 2/

In addition to t!ese political areas6 eac! country must !ae a mar2et economy t!at is stron& enou&! to

stand on its own wit!in t!e competitie *( mar2etplace.

;inally6 t!e candidate country must be willin& to follow t!e objecties of t!e *( t!at deal politics6 t!e

economy6 and monetary issues. !is also re5uires t!at t!ey be prepared to be a part of t!e administratie

and judicial structures of t!e *(.

8fter it is belieed t!at t!e candidate nation !as met eac! of t!ese re5uirements6 t!e country is screened6

and if approed t!e 'ouncil of t!e *uropean (nion and t!e country draft a reaty of 8ccession w!ic!

t!en &oes to t!e *uropean 'ommission and *uropean @arliament ratification and approal. If successful

after t!is process6 t!e nation is able to become a member state.

How the EU Works

,it! so many different nations participatin&6 t!e &oernance of t!e *( is c!allen&in&6 !oweer6 it is a

structure t!at continually c!an&es to become t!e most effectie for t!e conditions of t!e time. oday6

treaties and laws are created by t!e =institutional trian&le= t!at is composed of t!e 'ouncil representin&

national &oernments6 t!e *uropean @arliament representin& t!e people6 and t!e *uropean 'ommission

t!at is responsible for !oldin& up *uropeEs main interests.

!e 'ouncil is formally called t!e 'ouncil of t!e *uropean (nion and is t!e main decision ma2in& body

present. !ere is also a 'ouncil @resident !ere and eac! member state ta2es a si+ mont! turn in t!e

position. In addition6 t!e 'ouncil !as t!e le&islatie power and decisions are made wit! a majority ote6 a

5ualified majority6 or a unanimous ote from member state representaties.

!e *uropean @arliament is an elected body representin& t!e citi)ens of t!e *( and participates in t!e

le&islatie process as well. !ese representatie members are directly elected eery fie years.

;inally6 t!e *uropean 'ommission mana&es t!e *( wit! members t!at are appointed by t!e 'ouncil for

fie year terms3 usually one 'ommissioner from eac! member state. Its main job is to up!old t!e

common interest of t!e *(.

In addition to t!ese t!ree main diisions6 t!e *( also !as courts6 committees6 and ban2s w!ic! participate

on certain issues and aid in successful mana&ement.

The EU Mission

8s in 19C9 w!en it was founded wit! t!e creation of t!e 'ouncil of *urope6 t!e *uropean (nionEs

mission for today is to continue prosperity6 freedom6 communication and ease of trael and commerce for

its citi)ens. !e *( is able to maintain t!is mission t!rou&! t!e arious treaties ma2in& it function6

cooperation from member states6 and its uni5ue &oernmental structure.

7roup Presentation- /

o"ic% International ri+e ribunal anglades&

http://economics.about.com/cs/economicsglossary/g/free_market_e.htmhttp://economics.about.com/cs/economicsglossary/g/free_market_e.htm


25/27

P a g e | 2

#u++ar$% !e International Crimes Tribunal /ICT is a domestic war crimes tribunal in%an&lades! set up in "009 to inesti&ate and prosecute suspects for t!e &enocide committed in 19N1 by

t!e @a2istan 8rmy and t!eir local collaborators6 #a)a2ars6 8l3%adr and 8l3S!ams durin& t!e %an&lades!

Liberation ,ar . Durin& t!e "00 &eneral election6 t!e 8wami Lea&ue /8L pled&ed to establis! t!e

tribunals in response to lon&3standin& calls for tryin& war criminals. !e first indictments were issued in

"010. Howeer6 t!e main perpetrators of t!e war crimes6 t!e @a2istan soldiers6 remained out of t!e reac!

of t!e courts.

!e &oernment set up t!e tribunal after t!e 8wami Lea&ue won t!e &eneral election in December "00

wit! a more t!an two3t!irds majority in parliament. !e ,ar 'rimes ;act ;indin& 'ommittee6 tas2ed to

inesti&ate and find eidence6 completed its report in "006 identifyin& 16:00 suspects. @rior to t!e

formation of t!e I'6 t!e (nited $ations Deelopment @ro&ramme offered assistance in "009 on t!e

tribunalEs formation. In "0096 t!e parliament amended t!e 19N- act t!at aut!ori)ed suc! a tribunal to

update it.

%y "01"6 nine leaders of amaat3e3Islami6 t!e lar&est Islamist party in t!e nation6 and two of

t!e %an&lades! $ationalist @arty6 !ad been indicted as suspects in war crimes. !ree leaders of amaat

were t!e first tried> eac! were conicted of seeral c!ar&es of war crimes. !e first person conicted

was 8bul Kalam 8)ad /%ac!c!u6 tried in absentia as !e !ad left t!e country> !e was sentenced to deat!

in anuary "01-.

!e I' receied some support internationally and t!e ($ initially attempted to offer limited support

wit! t!e plannin&. !e *( !as passed t!ree resolutions supportin& t!e trials and ean Lambert !as said

=s!e e+pected t!at t!e trial would conform to t!e !i&!est standard possible.=

Howeer6 since t!e be&innin& of t!e trials seeral !uman ri&!ts or&ani)ations and international le&al

fi&ures !ae raised objections to t!e court proceedin&s.J10 Human #i&!ts ,atc!6 w!ic! initially supported

t!e establis!ment of t!e tribunal6 !ae critici)ed it for issues of fairness and transparency6 as well as

reported !arassment of lawyers and witnesses representin& t!e accused. %ianca Karim and ir)a

!eunissen !ae written t!at t!e international community !ae oiced concerns t!at t!e trial will not be

transparent or impartial.

amaat3e3Islami supporters and t!eir student win&6 Islami '!!atra S!ibir6 called a &eneral stri2e

nationwide on December C6 "01"6 w!ic! erupted in iolence. !ey !ae demanded t!e tribunal be

scrapped permanently and t!eir leaders be released immediately. @ublic opinion polls !oweer6 re&ularly

ran2 t!e war3crimes trials ran2ed amon& t!e top t!ree =positie steps t!at t!e &oernment !as ta2en=.

8fter 8bdul uader Molla6 8ssistant Secretary 4eneral of amaat6 was conicted in ;ebruary "01- and

sentenced to life imprisonment rat!er t!an capital punis!ment6 a peaceful demonstration started at

S!a!ba& intersection in D!a2a. ens of t!ousands of mostly youn& demonstrators6 includin& women6

!ae called for t!e deat! penalty for t!ose conicted of war crimes. $on3iolent protests supportin& t!is

position !ae occurred in ot!er cities as t!e country closely follows t!e trials.

7roup Presentation- /

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocidehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocidehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Armyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razakars_(Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razakars_(Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Badr_(East_Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Badr_(East_Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shams_(East_Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shams_(East_Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_Warhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_Warhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladeshi_general_election,_2008https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awami_Leaguehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awami_Leaguehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awami_Leaguehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Crimes_Fact_Finding_Committeehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Crimes_Fact_Finding_Committeehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Development_Programmehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Nationalist_Partyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Nationalist_Partyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abul_Kalam_Azad_(Bachchu)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_in_absentiahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Lamberthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Crimes_Tribunal_(Bangladesh)#cite_note-10https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Crimes_Tribunal_(Bangladesh)#cite_note-10https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Quader_Mollahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Shahbag_protestshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Shahbag_protestshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocidehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Armyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razakars_(Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Badr_(East_Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shams_(East_Pakistan)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_Warhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_Warhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladeshi_general_election,_2008https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awami_Leaguehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awami_Leaguehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Crimes_Fact_Finding_Committeehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Development_Programmehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Nationalist_Partyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abul_Kalam_Azad_(Bachchu)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_in_absentiahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Lamberthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Crimes_Tribunal_(Bangladesh)#cite_note-10https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Quader_Mollahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Shahbag_protests


26/27

P a g e | 23

o"ic% 'is"ute #ettle+ent under LO#&#u++ar$% @art < of t!e 19" United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea /($'LOSestablis!es a compre!ensie system for t!e settlement of disputes t!at mi&!t arise wit! respect to t!e

interpretation and application of ($'LOS. It re5uires States @arties to settle t!eir disputes by t!e

peaceful means indicated in t!e '!arter of t!e (nited $ations /($ '!arter. Howeer6 if parties to a

dispute fail to reac! a settlement by peaceful means of t!eir own c!oice6 t!ey are obli&ed to resort to t!e

compulsory dispute settlement procedures entailin& bindin& decisions6 subject to certain limitations and

e+ceptions. 8s of May "006 1C States were formally party to ($'LOS and t!us bound by its dispute

settlement procedures.

!is paper e+amines t!e optional e+ception concernin& sea boundary delimitation disputes contained in

8rticle "9/1/a of ($'LOS and discusses t!e endurin& obli&ations wit! respect to dispute settlement

for States t!at !ae lod&ed declarations under t!is article. 8rticle "9/1/a allows States @arties to

declare t!at t!ey do not accept one or more of t!e compulsory procedures entailin& bindin& decisions

found in section " of @art section " sets out t!e compulsory procedures entailin& bindin& decisions> and section

- sets out t!e limitations and e+ceptions to t!e applicability of section ".

Subject to t!e e+ceptions and limitations contained in section -6 any dispute w!ere no settlement !as been

reac!ed by recourse to section 16 s!all be submitted at t!e re5uest of any party to t!e dispute to t!e court

or tribunal !ain& jurisdiction under section ". !us6 t!e compulsory dispute procedures detailed in

section " are of a subsidiary nature. @arties to a dispute must first attempt to reac! a settlement by


27/27

P a g e | 24

recourse to section 1. !is principle contained wit!in 8rticle ": is emp!asised a&ain in 8rticle "9

w!ic! proides t!at t!e ri&!ts of States @arties to e+clude sea boundary delimitation disputes from t!e

application of section " is wit!out prejudice to t!e obli&ations arisin& under section 1. Only w!ere no

settlement !as been reac!ed by recourse to section 1 can a party submit t!e dispute to t!e court or tribunal

!ain& jurisdiction under section ". 8rticle "N proides States @arties wit! a c!oice of four alternatie

forums for t!e settlement of disputes7

a. t!e International ribunal for t!e Law of t!e Sea /ILOS or t!e ribunal>

b. t!e I'>

c. an arbitral trbunal constituted in accordance wit! 8nne+

class report on public international law

Documents