Questions on Quizzes

1. In case of conflict between international and domestic law, which prevails?

It depends on the theory, whether dualist or monist, adhered to by the State in whose jurisdiction the conflict
appears. Those who maintain the dualist theory hold that in case of conflict, municipal law prevails. Those who
adhere to the monist theory tend to fall to two categories: one group holds the supremacy of international law;
the other group holds that supremacy of domestic law.

2. Discuss the requisites of Statehood according to Montevideo Convention.

a) Population: no numerical requirement as long as they are capable of maintaining and governing
themselves
b) Defined Territory: there is no minimum amount of territory required as long as there is a place where the
population occupy and function in
c) Government: there is no specified kind of type of government as long as it exercises sovereignty and
supremacy within
d) Capacity to enter into relations: power and right to enter into foreign relations without restraint from
another entity.

3. What are treaties?

A treaty is an international agreement concluded between states in written form and governed by international
law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever particular
designation they may be given.

4. What are kinds of treaties?

a) Multilateral treaties are those that are open to all states of the world. They create norms which are basis
for a general rule of law. They are codification treaties or law-making treaties or they may have the same
character of both.
b) Another category includes treaties that create a collaborative mechanism. These can be of universal
scope or regional. They operate through the organs of different states.
c) The largest category of treaties are bilateral treaties. Many of these are in the nature of contractual
agreements which create shared expectations such as trade agreements of various forms. They are
sometimes called contract treaties.

5. What is the Clean Slate Doctrine?

A newly independent state is not bound to maintain in force, or to become a party to, any treaty by reason only
of the fact that at a date of the succession of States the treaty was in force in respect of the territory to which
the succession of State relates.

6. Consequences of Recognition of a State or Government

a) Right to Possession of properties of predecessor on the recognizing states

b) All acts of the recognized state or government are validated retroactively, preventing the recognizing
state from passing upon their legality in its own courts
c) Full diplomatic relations
d) Right to Sue in courts of recognizing states
7. Incomplete Subjects of International Law

a) Protectorates
b) Federal States
c) Mandated and Trust Territories
d) Taiwan
e) The Sovereign Order of Malta
f) The Holy See and Vatican City

MIDTERM EXAM

1. The following are primary sources of international law except: (a) international conventions (b) international
custom (c) general principles of law (d) teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of various nations
(e) all of the above (f) none of the above

2. In Bayan v. Zamora, the Supreme Court ruled that Section 25, Article XVIII disallows foreign military bases,
troops, or facilities in the country, unless the following conditions are sufficiently met except: (a) it must be
under a treaty or executive agreement (b) the treaty must be duly concurred in by the Senate and, when so
required by Congress, ratified by a majority of the votes cast by the people in a national referendum (c)
recognized as a treaty by other contracting state (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

3. In Lim v. Executive Secretary, the Supreme Court held that a treaty may be qualified, amended or
invalidates by the following except: (a) police power (b) Supreme Court (c) lower courts (d) law (e) all of the
above (f) none of the above

4. In Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, it was held that the President has the following functions with respect to
foreign relations except: acts as the country’s mouthpiece with respect to international affairs (b) sole
authority to negotiate with other states (c) ministerial duty to transmit the signed text of a treaty to the
Senate of the Philippines for ratification (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

5. According to Abaya v. Ebdane, an exchange of notes has the following characteristics except: (a) a routine
agreement that has many similarities with the private law contract (b) it is regarded as international
customary law (c) a form of an executive agreement, which becomes binding through executive action
without the need of a vote by the Senate or Congress (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

6. In Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of the Philippines v. DOH, it was held that in the
Philippines, international law can become part of the domestic law by: (a) transformation (b) incorporation
(c) both transformation and incorporation (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

7. According to Bayan Muna v. Romulo, the following distinctions between treaties and executive agreements
are true except: (a) there is no difference between treaties and executive agreements in terms of their
binding effects (b) only a treaty can one be held valid even if it violates a statutory enactment (c) a ratified
treaty, unlike an executive agreement, takes precedence over any prior statutory enactment (d) all of the
above (e) none of the above

8. According to China National Machinery and Equipment Corporation v. Santamaria, an executive

agreement, to be valid under the Vienna Convention, must have the following requisites except: (a) it must
be written (b) it must have states as parties (c) it must be governed by international law (d) all of the above
(e) none of the above
9. A state may, when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, formulate a reservation
unless: (a) the reservation is prohibited by the treaty (b) the treaty provides that only specified reservations,
which do not include the reservation in question, may be made (c) the reservation is incompatible with the
object and purpose of the treaty (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

10. Which of the following is not considered as an evidence of state practice: (a) treaties (b) statements of
national leaders (c) diplomatic correspondence (d) conduct of states (e) all of the above (f) none of the
above

11. The following are ground for invalidating a treaty except: (a) error of fact (b) coercion (c) falsification (d)
corruption (e) all of the above (f) none of the above

12. The following are ground for invalidating a treaty except: (a) change of circumstance (b) material breach (c)
supervening impossibility of performance (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

13. The following are examples of jus cogens norm except: (a) law on genocide (b) law against terrorism (c)
prohibition against slavery (d) principle of racial non-discrimination (e) all of the above (f) none of the above

14. The following are functions of treaty except: (a) subsidiary source of international law (b) charter of an
international organization (c) used to transfer territory (d) settle disputes (d) all of the above (e) none of the
above

15. The consent of a state to be bound by a treaty may be expressed by: (a) signature (b) ratification (c)
exchange of instruments constituting a treaty (d) accession (e) all of the above (f) none of the above

16. The following are formal sources of international law except: (a) state practice (b) treaties (c) judicial
decisions (d) UN resolutions (e) all of the above (f) none of the above

17. The following are permanent members of the United Nations except: (a) Germany (b) France (d) United
Kingdom (e) China (e) all of the above (f) none of the above

18. The following are official languages of the UN except: (a) Spanish (b) Arabic (c) French (d) Latin (e) all of
the above (f) none of the above

19. The following are fundamental rights of States except: (a) independence (b) recognition (c) equality (d)
peaceful co-existence (e) all of the above (f) none of the above

20. Which of the following is not an effect of recognition: (a) diplomatic relations (b) retroactive validation of the
acts of the recognized state governments (c) entitlement to property within the recognizing state (d)
absolute immunity from jurisdiction

TRUE OR FALSE

1. A treaty overrides customary international law. FALSE. Both treaty and customary law can override each
other depending on the situation present.
2. A unilateral declaration of a state concerning legal or factual situations may become a source of
international obligations. TRUE.
3. Reservation can be made in all kinds of treaties. FALSE. There are exceptions provided, if the treaty
prohibits reservations, then reservations cannot be made.
4. The clean slate rule is applicable to all kind of treaties. FALSE. The clean slate rule does not apply to
treaties affecting boundary regimes.
5. In case of conflict between a municipal law and international law, the state is bound to uphold the municipal
law. FALSE. It depends on the theory, whether dualist or monist, adhered to by the State in whose
jurisdiction the conflict appears
6. A state may be derecognized. TRUE.
7. The list of sources of international law as provided under the ICJ is exclusive. (I still don’t know the
answer here)
8. While occupied by a foreign power, a state ceases to exist. TRUE.
9. A territory may not be acquired by use of force. (I still don’t know the answer here)
10. Vatican City is not a state. FALSE. Vatican was officially recognized when Italy and the Holy See entered
into the Lateran Treaty, recognizing the sovereignty of Holy See in international matters and its full
ownership, exclusive dominion and sovereign authority and jurisdiction over Vatican.

Definition of Terms

1. Pacta sunt servanda – Every treaty in force is binding to parties upon to it and must be performed in good
faith.
2. Ex aequo et bono – The parties to a case before the ICJ may stipulate and therefore ask the Court to
decide their dispute based solely on equity and outside the recognized set of rules under international law.
3. Opinio juris – It is a recognition and a feeling of states that they are conforming to what amounts as legal
obligation rather than something that is just done out of courtesy, fairness or morality.
4. Instant custom – A binding rule established by a spontaneous activity of a great number of states and
need not be observed for a considerable period.
5. Jus cogens – A norm accepted and recognized by the international community as a rule for which no
derogation is permitted and can be made by a subsequent law having the same character.
6. Rebus sic stantibus – A fundamental change of circumstance is radically to transform the extent of the
obligations still to be performed under the treaty.
7. Subjects of International Law – It is an entity that has rights and responsibilities under international law
and which has the capacity to maintain its rights by bringing international claims.
8. Recognition – An act of a state acknowledging the existence of another state, government or belligerent
community and indicates its willingness to deal with such entity under the rules of international law.
9. Declaratory Theory – A State becomes a subject of International Law the moment it meets the conditions
of statehood notwithstanding the lack of recognition by international community.
10. Constitutive Theory – A state is and becomes an International Person through recognition only and
exclusively.

Enumeration

1. Rules on Succession of States

When a state succeeds another state with respect to particular territory, the capacities, rights and duties of
the predecessor state with respect to that territory terminate and are assumed by the successor state.

With respect to treaties, the rules are as follow: a) Moving Treaty Rule is when part of the territory of a
state becomes territory of another state, the international agreements of the predecessor state cease to
have effect in respect of the territory; b) When a state is absorbed by another state international
agreements of the observed states are absorbed; c) Clean Slate Theory is when part of a state becomes a
new state, the new state does not succeed to the international agreements to which the predecessor state
was a party unless, expressly or impliedly, it accepts such agreements.
 As to state property, this is subject to agreement between the predecessor state and successor states,
title passes as follows: a) where part of the territory of a state becomes territory of another state, property
of the predecessor state located in that territory passes to the successor state; b) where a state is
absorbed by another state, property of the absorbed state, wherever located, passes to the absorbing
state; c) where part of a state becomes a separate state, property of the predecessor state located in the
territory of new state passes to the new state

With respect to public debts, subject again to agreement between states concerned, responsibility for the
public debt of the predecessor state under its contracts, remain with the predecessor state under its
contracts, remain with the predecessor state, provided certain exceptions.

2. Different Problems Discussed by Goldsmith and Levinson between and among International Law,
Constitutional Law, and Public Law

International law has no centralized legislature or hierarchical court system authorized to create, revise, or
specify the application of legal norms, and as a result is said to suffer from irremediable uncertainty and
political contestation.

Constitutional law, like international law, lacks a centralized legislature to specify and update legal norms,
and although constitutional courts possess some ability to resolve the existence and meaning of
constitutional norms, they are limited in special ways that prevent them from providing authoritative
settlement. As a result, constitutional law suffers from the same kinds of foundational uncertainty and
contestation over meaning that are viewed as characteristic of international law. Constitutional law also
shares with international law the absence of an enforcement authority capable of coercing powerful political
actors to comply with unpopular decisions.

Furthermore, by “public law” we mean constitutional and international law — legal regimes that both
constitute and govern the behavior of states and state actors. By “ordinary domestic law” we mean the
usual assortment of statutes and common law that apply to private actors within a state and are
administered by and through the governmental institutions of that state. The respects in which both
international and constitutional law differ from ordinary domestic law follow from the distinctive aspiration of
public law regimes to constitute and constrain the behavior of state institutions and the distinctive difficulty
these regimes face of not being able to rely fully on these same state institutions for implementation and
enforcement.

In conclusion, the problems between and among international law, constitutional law, and public law are
centralized on uncertainty, enforcement and sovereignty as well.
FINAL EXAM

I.

Compare and contrast the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and International Court of
Justice.

The jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) primarily deals with the prosecution of individuals for
core international crimes, while the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) deals with contentious
proceedings between States.

As to subject matter jurisdiction (ratione materiae), the jurisdiction of the ICC is limited to the most serious
crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, particularly: (a) the Crime of Genocide; (b)
Crimes against Humanity; (c) War crimes; and (d) the Crime of Aggression. (R. Sarmiento, Public International
Law Bar Reviewer, 2009 Revised Edition, p. 308). On the other hand, the jurisdiction of the ICJ covers legal
disputes which the States refer to it. This includes disputes concerning: (a) the interpretation of a treaty; (b) any
question of international law; (c) the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an
international obligation; and (d) the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an
international obligation. (Article 36, ICJ Statute) The ICJ also has jurisdiction to give an advisory opinion on any
legal question as may be requested by the General Assembly or the Security Council or on legal questions
arising within the scope of the activities of other organs and specialized agencies of the U.N. upon their
request and when so authorized by the General Assembly. (Article 96, U.N. Charter)

As to jurisdiction over the persons or parties (ratione personae), the ICC shall have the power to exercise its
jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, and shall be complementary to
national criminal jurisdictions. (Art. 1, Rome Statute) On the other hand, only States may be parties in cases
before the ICJ and their consent is needed for the ICJ to acquire jurisdiction.

II.

In 1979, the United States filed with the ICJ a complaint against Iran alleging that the latter is detaining
American diplomats in violation of International Law. Explain how the ICj can acquire jurisdiction over
the contending countries.

The ICJ, notwithstanding Iran’s objection to its jurisdiction, proceeded to grant some provisional remedies
prayed for by the US. Jurisdiction in this case, in the absence of special agreement between parties to submit
their dispute to the Court, or express consent of the defendant State to submit to the jurisdiction of the Court,
may be based on prior consent by virtue of jurisdictional clauses of treaties of which the contending States are
parties.

So far as the rights claimed by US with regard to its diplomats in Iran, jurisdiction may be acquired by the Court
in accordance with Article I of each of the two Protocols which accompany the Vienna Convention of 1961 and
1963 on, respectively, Diplomatic and Consular Relations that provides expressly that:

“Disputes arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention shall lie within the compulsory
jurisdiction of the ICJ and may be accordingly be brought before the Court by an application made by any party
to the dispute being a Party to the present Protocol.”

III.

President Black of the Republic of Pasensya (RP) had a telephone conversation with President Blue of
the People’s Republic of Conquerors (PRC). In that conversation, both leaders agreed that they will
both pull-out all their vessels, civilians or otherwise, sea crafts and other ships from hotly disputed
Kalmado Shoal area within 8 days in order to de-escalate the situation. After 8 days, all RP ships and
vessels have left the area. However, several military and civilian ships carrying PRC flag in the area
and began construction of a dock that could provide fuel and other supplies to vessels passing by.

a. Assuming that President Black and President Blue both had full capacity to represent their
states and negotiate with each other under their respective systems of government, and further
assuming that both leaders acknowledge the existence of the conversation, is the verbal
agreement via telephone binding under international law? Explain.

Yes, the verbal agreement via telephone is binding under international law. The definition of treaty under
the Vienna Convention that requires a treaty to be in written form is only for purposes of clarity and
simplicity. Article 3 of the Convention provides that it shall not affect the legal force of international
agreements that are not in written form.

b. Assuming the answer to (a) is in the affirmative, does that agreement constitute a Treaty under
the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties?

No, the verbal agreement does not constitute a treaty under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Laws of
Treaties. Article 2 of the Convention requires that a treaty must be in written form.

IV.

A, a British photojournalist was covering the violent protests of the Thai Red-Shirts Movement in
Bangkok. Despite warnings given by the Thai Prime Minister to foreigners, specially journalists, A
moved around the Thai capital. In the course of his coverage, he was killed with a stray bullet which
was later identified as having come from the ranks of the Red-Shirts. The wife of A sought relief from
Thai authorities but was refused assistance.

a) Is there state responsibility on the part of Thailand?

No, there is no state responsibility on the part of Thailand because the acts of the Thai Red-Shirts were not
the acts of Thailand. Under the Principle of Attribution or Imputation, a State only incurs liability for
individual acts or omission which can be attributed to it. The Thai Red-Shirts are not its officials, agents, or
representatives and they were not acting on the instructions of, or under the direction or control of, the Thai
Government.

b) What is the appropriate remedy available to the victim’s family under international law?

The Red-Shirts becomes the new Government of Thailand or Thailand acknowledges and adopts the
conduct of the Red-Shirts as its own, the victim’s family has no appropriate remedy under international law.
Their remedy, if any, if only available under the domestic laws of Thailand by the institution of the
appropriate criminal cases against the persons responsible for A’ killing and the filing of an action to
recover damages arising from A’s death.

V.

Lawrence is a Filipino computer expert based in Manila who invented a virus that destroys all the files
stored in a computer. Assume that in May 2005, this virus spread all over the world and caused $50
million in damage to property in the United States, and that in June 2005, he was criminally charged
before United States courts under their anti-hacker law. Assume that in July 2005, the Philippines
adopted its own anti-hacker law, to strengthen existing sanctions already provided against damage to
property. The United States has requested the Philippines to extradite him to US courts under the RP-
US Extradition Treaty.
 a. Is the Philippines under an obligation to extradite Lawrence? State the applicable rule and its
rationale.

The Philippine is under no obligation to extradite Lawrence. Under the principle of dual or double
criminality, the crime must be punishable in both the requesting and requested states to make it
extraditable. In this case, only the United States had anti-hacker law at the time of the commission of
the crime in May 2005. The rational for the principle of dual criminality rests “in part on the basic
principle of reciprocity” and “in part of the maxim nulla poena sine lege.”

b. Assume that the extradition request was made after the Philippines adopted its anti-hacker
legislation. Will that change your answer?

No, it will not change my answer. The rule of double criminality does not require that the act must be
punishable under the laws of both contracting parties at the time of its commission. It simple requires
that to be extraditable, the act must be punishable under the laws of both contracting parties at the time
of making the request of for extradition.

VI.

In 1993, historians confirmed that during World War II, "comfort women" were forced into serving the
Japanese military. These women were either abducted or lured by false promises of jobs as cooks or
waitresses, and eventually forced against their will to have sex with Japanese soldiers on a daily basis
during the course of the war, and often suffered from severe beatings and venereal diseases. The
Japanese government contends that the "comfort stations" were run as "onsite military brothels" (or
prostitution houses) by private operators, and not by the Japanese military. There were many Filipina
"comfort women."

a. Name at least one basic principle or norm of international humanitarian law that was violated by
the Japanese military in the treatment of the "comfort women."

The Japanese military violated jus cogens norms of international law concerning war crimes, crimes
against humanity like white slavery, sexual slavery and trafficking in women..

b. The surviving Filipina "comfort women" demand that the Japanese government apologize and
pay them compensation. However, under the 1951 San Francisco Peace Agreement -the legal
instrument that ended the state of war between Japan and the Allied Forces -all the injured
states, including the Philippines, received war reparations and, in return, waived all claims
against Japan arising from the war. Is that a valid defense?

No, that is not a valid defense. Even if it could be argued that the Philippines, by signing said Peace
Agreement had the right as a state to bring further claims, it had no authority to waive the individual right to
reparations vested directly in its nationals who were victims of sexual slavery. The Philippines can only
validly waive its right to recovery of reparations for injuries to the state. Moreover, there is no defense for
the violation of jus cogens norms.

c. The surviving Filipina "comfort women" sue the Japanese government for damages before
Philippine courts. Will that case prosper?

No, the case will not prosper. The Japanese government may not be sued without for damages before
Philippine courts without its consent. The precept that a state cannot be sued in courts of a foreign state is
a long-standing rule of customary international law.
 VII.

May a treaty violate international law? If your answer is in the affirmative, explain when such may
happen. If your answer is in the negative, explain

Yes, a treaty may violate international law when at a time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm
of general international law or its conclusion has been procured by the threat or use of force in violation of the
principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations.

VIII.

The President alone without the concurrence of the Senate abrogated a treaty. Assume that the other
country-party to the treaty is agreeable to the abrogation provided it complies with the Philippine
Constitution. If a case involving the validity of the treaty abrogation is brought to the Supreme Court,
how should it be resolved?

The Supreme Court should sustain the validity of the treaty abrogation. While the Constitution is express as to
manner in which the Senate shall participate in the ratification of a treaty, it is silent as to that body’s
participation in the abrogation of a treaty. In light of the absence of any constitutional provision governing the
termination procedures may be appropriate for different treaties, the case must surely be controlled by political
standards, even more so because it involves the conduct of foreign relations.

IX.

(I am not able to acquire the question and answer on this number)

X.

Ambassador Gaylor is State Juvenus’ diplomatic representative to State Hinderlands. During one of
his vacations, Ambassador Gaylore decided to experience for himself the sights and sounds of State
Paradise, a country known for its beauty and other attractions. While in State paradise, Ambassador
Gaylor was caught in the company of children under suspicious circumstances. He was arrested for
violation of the strict anti-pedophilia statute of State Paradise. He claims that he is immune from arrest
and incarceration by virtue of his diplomatic immunity. Does the claim of Ambassador Gaylor hold
water?

No, the claim of Ambassador Gaylor does not hold water. A diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the
criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state. They are not exempt from the criminal jurisdiction of other States.

Ambassador Gaylor is not a diplomatic representative to State Paradise where he was arrested for violation of
the latter’s anti-pedophilia statue. Hence, State Paradise is not obliged to extend diplomatic immunities and
privileges to Ambassador Gaylor.

Compare and Contrast the following:

1. Extradition and Deportation

Extradition means the surrender by force of a wanted person by the requested state to the requesting
state, while deportation is the expulsion of an unwanted or undesirable alien.

Extradition may only be made pursuant to a treaty between requesting and the requested State, but
deportation is a pure unilateral act and an exercise of sovereignty.
 Extradition is for the benefit of the requesting State, but deportation takes place in the interest of the
country of residence and is ordered without a request by a third state.

2. Refugees and Stateless Person (I cannot find the clear answer to this question)

3. Nationality and Citizenship

Both emphasize different aspects of the same notion of state membership. “Nationality” stresses the
international, “citizenship” the national, municipal aspect. Every citizen is a national, but not every national is
necessarily a citizen of the State concerned.

4. Diplomatic Immunity and Consular Immunity (I cannot find the clear answer to this question)

5. Jus imperii and Jus gestionis (I cannot find the clear answer to this question)