PIL case

7/26/2019 PIL case

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pil-case 1/40

CASE CONCERNING DELIMITATION OFTHE MARITIME BOUNDARY IN THE GULF OF MAINE AREA

Judgment of 12 Oto!e" 1#$%

In its judgment, the Chamber of the Court constituted in the case concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada/United States of America) decided by four otes to one!"#hat the course of the single maritime boundary that diides the continental shelf and the e$clusie fisheries %ones of Canada and theUnited States of America in the Area referred to in the S&ecial Agreement concluded by those t'o States on March *+ shall be

defined by geodetic lines connecting the &oints 'ith the follo'ing coordinates!Latitude North Longitude West A- .. ** *" 0+ *0 .0"� �1- . 23 *." 0+ .. 32"� �C- . 3* 45" 0+ 5 42"� �6- .4 + 42" 02 .* 2"-"� �(7or the location of these &oints see Ma& 8o- .-)

99 9

#he otes 'ere cast as follo's!I8 7A:;U<! President Ago= Judges Mosler and Sch'ebel, Judge ad hoc Cohen= AGAI8S#! Judge Gros-

99 9

#he Chamber 'as com&osed as follo's! President Ago, Judges Gros, Mosler, Sch'ebel, Judge ad hoc Cohen-9

9>udge Sch'ebel a&&ended a se&arate o&inion and >udge Gros a dissenting o&inion to the >udgment-In these o&inions the >udges concerned stated and e$&lained the &ositions they ado&ted in regard to certain &oints dealt 'ith in the>udgment-

99 9

I- The Special Agreement and the Chamber's Jurisdiction (&aras- *+) After reca&itulating the arious stages in the &roceedings and setting out the formal submission of the ?arties (&aras- **3), theChamber ta@es note of the &roisions of the S&ecial Agreement by 'hich the case 'as brought before it- Under Article II, &aragra&h *, of that S&ecial Agreement, it 'as!

"reuested to decide, in accordance 'ith the &rinci&les and rules of international la' a&&licable in the matter as bet'eenthe ?arties, the follo'ing uestion!Bhat is the course of the single maritime boundary that diides the continental shelf and fisheries %ones of Canada andthe United States of America from a &oint in latitude .. ** *" 8, longitude 0+ *0 .0" B to a &oint to be determined� �by the Chamber 'ithin an area bounded by straight lines Connecting the follo'ing sets of geogra&hic coordinates!lati tude .4 8, longitude 0+ B= latitude .4 8, longitude 02 B= latitude . 8, longitude 02 B"� � � � � �

(7or the location of the starting&oint and terminal area of the delimitation, see Ma& 8o- *-)#he Chamber notes that the S&ecial Agreement im&oses no limitation on its jurisdiction other than that resulting from the terms of thisuestion, and that the rights of third States in the marine and submarine areas to 'hich the case related could not in any 'ay be affectedby the delimitation- It also notes that, the case haing been submitted by s&ecial agreement, no &reliminary uestion of jurisdictionarose- #he only initial &roblem that might theoretically arise is 'hether and to 'hat e$tent the Chamber is obliged to adhere to the termsof the S&ecial Agreement as regards the starting&oint of the line to be dra'n called &oint A and the triangular area 'ithin 'hich thatline is to terminate- 8oting the reasons for the ?arties choice of the &oint and area in uestion, the Chamber sees a decisieconsideration for not ado&ting any other starting&oint or terminal area in the fact that, under international la', mutual agreementbet'een States concerned is the &referred &rocedure for establishing a maritime delimitation= since Canada and the United States of America had by mutual agreement ta@en a ste& to'ards the solution of their dis&ute 'hich must not be disregarded, the Chamber must,in &erforming the tas@ conferred u&on it, conform to the terms by 'hich the ?arties hae defined it-#he Chamber notes that there are &rofound differences bet'een the case before it and other delimitation cases &reiously broughtbefore the Court in that (a) the Chamber is reuested to dra' the line of delimitation itself and not merely to underta@e a tas@ &reliminaryto the determination of a line, and (b) the delimitation reuested does not relate e$clusiely to the continental shelf but to both the shelfand the e$clusie fishing %one, the delimitation to be by a single boundary- Bith regard to (b), the Chamber is of the ie' that there iscertainly no rule of international la', or any material im&ossibility, to &reent it from determining such a line-

II- The delimitation area (&aras- 52)#he Chamber finds it indis&ensable to define 'ith greater &recision the geogra&hical area"the Gulf of Maine area" 'ithin 'hich thedelimitation has to be carried out- It notes that the Gulf of Maine &ro&erly so called is a broad indentation in the eastern coast of the8orthAmerican continent, haing roughly the sha&e of an elongated rectangle 'hose short sides are made u& mainly by the coasts ofMassachusetts in the 'est and 8oa Scotia in the east, 'hose long land'ard side is made u& by the coast of Maine from Ca&eDli%abeth to the terminus of the international boundary bet'een the United States and Canada and 'hose fourth, Atlantic side 'ould bean imaginary line, bet'een 8antuc@et and Ca&e Sable, agreed by the ?arties to be the "closing line" of the Gulf of Maine-#he Chamber em&hasi%es the uasi&arallel direction of the o&&osite coasts of Massachusetts and 8oa Scotia- It &oints out that thereference to "long" and "short" sides is not to be inter&reted as an es&ousal of the idea of distinguishing "&rimary" and "secondary"coastal fronts- #he latter distinction is merely the e$&ression of a human alue judgment, 'hich is necessarily subjectie and may aryon the basis of the same facts, de&ending on the ends in ie'- It &oints out, 'ith reference to certain arguments &ut for'ard by the?arties, that geogra&hical facts are the result of natural &henomena and can only be ta@en as they are-#he delimitation, the Chamber obseres, is not limited to the Gulf of Maine but com&rises, beyond the Gulf closing line, another maritime

7/26/2019 PIL case


e$&anse including the 'hole of the Georges 1an@, the main focus of the dis&ute- #he Chamber rejects ho'eer the arguments of the?arties tending to inole coasts other than those directly surrounding the Gulf so as to e$tend the delimitation area to e$&anses 'hichhae in fact nothing to do 'ith it- After noting that it has u& to this &oint based itself on as&ects inherent in &hysical geogra&hy, the Chamber goes on to consider thegeological and geomor&hological characteristics of the area- It notes that the ?arties are in agreement that geological factors are notsignificant and finds that, gien the unity and uniformity of the seabed, there are no geomor&hological reasons for distinguishingbet'een the res&ectie natural &rolongations of the United States and Canadian coasts in the continental shelf of the delimitation area!een the 8ortheast Channel, 'hich is the most &rominent feature, does not hae the characteristics of a real trough diiding t'ogeomor&hologically distinct units- As regards another com&onent element of the delimitation area, the "'ater column", the Chamber notes that 'hile Canada em&hasi%edits character of oerall unity, the United States ino@ed the e$istence of three distinct ecological r gimes se&arated by natural�boundaries the most im&ortant of 'hich consisted of the 8ortheast Channel= the Chamber, ho'eer, is not coninced of the &ossibility of discerning, in so fluctuating an enironment as the 'aters of the ocean, any natural boundaries ca&able of sering as a basis forcarrying out a delimitation of the @ind reuested-III- rigins and de!elopment o" the dispute (&aras- 04+5)1eginning 'ith a reference to the #ruman ?roclamations of *.2, the Chamber summari%es the origins and deelo&ment of the dis&ute,'hich first materiali%ed in the *04s in relation to the continental shelf, as soon as &etroleum e$&loration had begun on either side, more&articularly in certain locations on Georges 1an@- In *+0*++ certain eents occurred 'hich added to the continental shelf dimensionthat of the 'aters and their liing resources, for both States &roceeded to institute an e$clusie 44 mile fishery %one off their coasts andado&ted regulations s&ecifying the limits of the %one and continental shelf they claimed- In its account of the negotiations 'hicheentually led to the reference of the dis&ute to the Court, the Chamber notes that in *+0 the United States ado&ted a line limiting boththe continental shelf and the fishing %ones and the ado&tion by Canada of a first line in *+0 (Ma& 8o- )-#he Chamber ta@es note of the res&ectie delimitation lines no' &ro&osed by each ?arty (Ma& 8o- 3)- #he Canadian line, described li@ethat of *+0 as an euidistance line, is one constructed almost entirely from the nearest &oints of the baselines from 'hich the breadthof the territorial sea is measured- #hose &oints ha&&en to be e$clusiely islands, roc@s or lo'tide eleations, yet the base&oints on theMassachusetts coast 'hich had initially been chosen for the *+0 line hae been shifted 'est'ard so that the ne' line no longer ta@esaccount of the &rotrusion formed by Ca&e Cod and 8antuc@et Island and is accordingly dis&laced 'est- #he line &ro&osed by the UnitedStates is a &er&endicular to the general direction of the coast from the starting&oint agreed u&on by the ?arties, adjusted to aoid thes&litting of fishing ban@s- It differs from the "8ortheast Channel line" ado&ted in *+0 'hich, according to its authors, had been basedu&on the "euidistance/s&ecial circumstances" rub of Article 0 of the *25 Genea Conention- #he Chamber notes that the t'osuccessie lines &ut for'ard by Canada 'ere both dra'n &rimarily 'ith the continental shelf in mind, 'hereas the United States lines'ere both dra'n u& initially on the basis of different considerations though both treated the fishery r gime as essential-�I:- The applicable principles and rules o" international la# (&aras- +**) After obsering that the terms "&rinci&les and rules" really coney one and the same idea, the Chamber stresses that a distinction has tobe made bet'een such &rinci&les or rules and 'hat, rather, are euitable criteria or &ractical methods for ensuring that a &articularsituation is dealt 'ith in accordance 'ith those &rinci&les and rules- ;f its nature, customary international la' can only &roide a fe'basic legal &rinci&les sering as guidelines and cannot be e$&ected also to s&ecify the euitable criteria to be a&&lied or the &racticalmethods to be follo'ed- #he same may ho'eer not be true of international treaty la'-#o determine the &rinci&les and rules of international la' goerning maritime delimitation, the Chamber begins by e$amining the GeneaConention of A&ril *25 on the Continental Shelf, 'hich has been ratified by both the ?arties to the case, 'ho both also recogni%ethat it is in force bet'een them- In &articular the Chamber e$amines Article 0, &aragra&hs * and , from 'hich a &rinci&le of internationalla' may be deduced to the effect bat any delimitation of a continental shelf effected unilaterally by one State regardless of the ie's of

the other State or States concerned is not o&&osable to those States- #o this &rinci&le may conceiably be added a latent rule that anyagreement or other euialent solution should inole the a&&lication of euitable criteria- #he Chamber goes on to consider the bearingon the &roblem of arious judicial decisions and to comment u&on the 'or@ of the #hird United 8ations Conference on the Ea' of theSea, noting that certain &roisions concerning the continental shelf and the e$clusie economic %one 'ere, in the Conention of *5,ado&ted 'ithout any objections and may be regarded as consonant at &resent 'ith general international la' on the uestion- As regards the res&ectie &ositions of the ?arties in the light of those findings, the Chamber notes their agreement as to the e$istence of a fundamental norm of international la' calling for a single maritime boundary to be determined in accordance 'ith the a&&licable la', inconformity 'ith euitable &rinci&les, haing regard to all releant circumstances, in order to achiee an euitable result- Fo'eer, thereis no longer agreement bet'een the ?arties 'hen each se&arately see@s to ascertain 'hether international la' might also contain othermandatory rules in the same field- #he Chamber rejects the Canadian argument from geogra&hical adjacency to the effect that a rulee$ists 'hereby a State any &art of 'hose coasts is less distant from the %ones to be attributed than those of the other State concerned'ould be entitled to hae the %ones recogni%ed as its o'n- #he Chamber also finds unacce&table the distinction made by the UnitedStates bet'een "&rimary" and "secondary" coasts and the conseuent &referential relationshi& said to e$ist bet'een the "&rinci&al"coasts and the maritime and submarine areas situated frontally before them-In concluding this &art of its considerations, the Chamber sets out a more &recise reformulation of the fundamental norm ac@no'ledgedby the ?arties!

"8o maritime delimitation bet'een States 'ith o&&osite or adjacent coasts may be effected unilaterally by one of those States- Suchdelimitation must be sought and effected by means of an agreement, follo'ing negotiations conducted in good faith and 'ith the genuineintention of achieing a &ositie result- Bhere, ho'eer, such agreement cannot be achieed, delimitation should be effected byrecourse to a third &arty &ossessing the necessary com&etence-"In either case delimitation is to be effected by the a&&lication of euitable criteria and by the use of &ractical methods ca&able ofensuring, 'ith regard to the geogra&hic configuration of the area and other releant circumstances, an euitable result-" (?ara- **-):- The e$uitable criteria and practical methods applicable to the delimitation (&aras- **3*03)#urning to the uestion of the criteria and methods 'hich are ca&able of ensuring an euitable result and 'hose a&&lication is&rescribed by the aboe norm, the Chamber is of the ie' that they must be loo@ed for not in customary international la' but in &ositieinternational la', and in that connection it e$amines those &roided for by the *25 Conention on the Continental Shelf, in Article 0(median line in the case of o&&osite coasts, lateral euidistance line in the case of adjacent coasts)- #he Chamber &oints out that atreaty obligation concerning the delimitation of the continental shelf cannot be e$tended so as to a&&ly to the su&erjacent 'aters and,after rejecting the Canadian argument that the combined euidistance/s&ecialcircumstances rule has become a rule of general

7/26/2019 PIL case


international la', finds that Article 0, 'hile in force bet'een the ?arties, does not entail either for them or for the Chamber any legalobligation to a&&ly its &roisions to the &resent delimitation-#he Chamber ne$t turns to the uestion 'hether any obligation of that @ind can hae resulted from the conduct of the ?arties and'hether the conduct of one of them might not hae constituted an acuiescence in the a&&lication of a s&ecific method or resulted ina modus !i!endi 'ith regard to a line corres&onding to such an a&&lication- 6ealing first 'ith a Canadian argument that the conduct ofthe United States had einced a form of consent to the a&&lication of the euidistance method, es&ecially in the Georges 1an@ sector,the Chamber finds that reliance on acuiescence or esto&&el is not 'arranted in the circumstances and that the conduct of the ?artiesnot &roe the e$istence of any such modus !i!endi% As for the argument of the United States based on Canadas failure to react to the#ruman ?roclamation, that amounted to claiming that delimitation must be effected in accordance 'ith euitable &rinci&les=conseuently, the United States &osition on that &oint merely referred bac@ to the "fundamental norm" ac@no'ledged by both ?arties- ;nthe basis of that analysis, the Chamber concludes that the ?arties, in the current state of the la' goerning relations bet'een them, arenot bound, under a rule of treaty la' or other rule, to a&&ly certain criteria or certain methods for the establishment of the single maritimeboundary, and that the Chamber is not so bound either-<egarding &ossible criteria, the Chamber does not consider that it 'ould be useful to underta@e a more or less com&lete enumeration inthe abstract of those that might be theoretically conceiable, or an ealuation of their greater or lesser degree of euity- It also notes, inregard to the &ractical methods, that none 'ould intrinsically bring greater justice or be of greater &ractical usefulness than others, andthat there must be 'illingness to ado&t a combination of different methods 'heneer circumstances so reuire-:I- The criteria and methods proposed b& the Parties and the lines resulting "rom their application to the delimitation (&aras- *0.*5);nce the dis&ute had ta@en on its &resent dual dimension (first the continental shelf and subseuently fisheries) both ?arties too@ careto s&ecify and &ublish their res&ectie claims, &ro&osing the a&&lication of ery different criteria and the use of ery different &racticalmethods- Dach had successiely &ro&osed t'o delimitation lines (Ma&s 8os- and 3)-#he United States had first &ro&osed, in *+0, a criterion attaching determinatie alue to the natural, es&ecially ecological, factors ofthe area- Its line corres&onded a&&ro$imately to the line of the greatest de&ths, leaing German 1an@ to Canada and Georges 1an@ tothe United States- #he Chamber considers that this line, ins&ired as it 'as by the objectie of distributing fishery resources inaccordance 'ith a "natural" criterion, 'as too biased to'ards one as&ect (fisheries) to be considered as euitable in relation to theoerall &roblem- In *5 the United States &ro&osed a second line 'ith the general direction of the coast as its central idea, the criteriona&&lied being that of the frontal &rojection of the &rimary coastal front- #his a&&lication resulted in a &er&endicular to the generaldirection of the coastline, adjusted ho'eer to ta@e account of arious releant circumstances, in &articular such ecologicalcircumstances as the e$istence of fishing ban@s- #he Chamber considers it almost an essential condition for the use of such a methodthat the boundary to be dra'n should concern t'o countries 'hose territories lie successiely along a more or less rectilinear coast, fora certain distance at least- 1ut it 'ould be difficult to imagine a case less conducie to the a&&lication of that method than the Gulf ofMaine case- #he circumstances 'ould moreoer entail so many adjustments that the character of the method 'ould be com&letelydistorted- As for the Canadian &ro&osals, the Chamber considers together the t'o lines &ro&osed res&ectiely in *+0 and *++, as they areessentially based on the same criterion, that of the eual diision of dis&uted areas and the same method euidistance- Canadadescribed the first line as a strict euidistance line, and the second as an euidistance line corrected on account of the s&ecialcircumstance formed by the &rotrusion of 8antuc@et Island and the Ca&e Cod &eninsula, alleged to be geogra&hical anomalies thatCanada is entitled to discount, so that its delimitation line is dis&laced to'ards the 'est- #he Chamber notes that in the case before it thedifference in the lengths of the t'o States coastlines 'ithin the delimitation area is &articularly mar@ed and 'ould constitute a alidground for ma@ing a correction een if this factor in itself furnished neither a criterion nor a method of delimitation- 7urthermore, theCanadian line a&&ears to neglect the difference bet'een t'o situations clearly distinguished by the *25 Conention, namely that ofadjacent coasts and that of o&&osite coasts, and fails to ta@e account of the fact that the relationshi& of lateral adjacency bet'een on the

one hand, &art of the coast of 8oa Scotia and its &rolongation across the o&ening of the 1ay of 7undy and, on the other hand, the coastof Maine, gies 'ay to a relationshi& of frontal o&&osition bet'een the other releant &art of the coast of 8oa Scotia and the coast ofMassachusetts- #he Canadian line fails to allo' for this ne' relationshi&, 'hich is neertheless the most characteristic feature of theobjectie situation in the conte$t of 'hich the delimitation is to be effected-:II- The criteria and methods held b& the Chamber to be applicable% Line resulting "rom their application to the delimitation (&aras- *4)#he Chamber considers that, haing regard to all those considerations, it must &ut for'ard its o'n solution inde&endently of the ?arties-It must e$clude criteria 'hich, ho'eer euitable they may a&&ear in themseles, are not suited to the delimitation of both of the t'oobjects in res&ect of 'hich the delimitation is reuested the continental shelf and the fishery %ones- Ineitably, criteria 'ill be &referred'hich, by their more neutral character, are best suited for use in a multi&ur&ose delimitation- #he Chamber feels bound to turn in the&resent case to criteria more es&ecially deried from geogra&hy, and it is ineitable that its basic choice should faour the criterion'hereby one should aim at an eual diision of areas 'here the maritime &rojections of the coasts of the States bet'een 'hichdelimitation is to be effected conerge and oerla&- Fo'eer, some corrections must be made to certain effects of a&&lying that criterionthat might be unreasonable, so that the concurrent use of au$iliary criteria may a&&ear indis&ensable- As regards the &ractical methodsto be used for giing effect to the criteria indicated, the Chamber considers that, li@e the criteria themseles, they must be basicallyfounded u&on geogra&hy and be as suitable for the delimitation of the seabed and subsoil as to that of the su&erjacent 'aters and their

liing resources- In the outcome, therefore, only geometrical methods 'ill sere-#urning to the concrete choice of the methods it considers a&&ro&riate for im&lementing the euitable criteria it has decided to a&&ly, theChamber notes that the coastal configuration of the Gulf of Maine e$cludes any &ossibility of the boundarys being formed by a basicallyunidirectional line, gien the change of situation noted in the geogra&hy of the Gulf- It is only in the northeastern ector of the Gulf thatthe &reailing relationshi& of the coasts of the United States and Canada is one of lateral adjacency- In the sector closest to the closingline, it is one of o&&ositeness- In the Chambers ie' it is therefore obious that, bet'een &oint A and the line from 8antuc@et to Ca&eSable, i-e- 'ithin the limits of the Gulf of Maine &ro&er, the delimitation line must com&rise t'o segments-In the case of the first segment, the one closest to the international boundary terminus, there is no s&ecial circumstance to militateagainst the diision into, as far as &ossible, eual &arts of the oerla&&ing created by the lateral su&erim&osition of the maritime&rojections of the t'o States coasts- <ejecting the em&loyment of a lateral euidistance line on account of the disadantages it is foundto entail, the Chamber follo's the method of dra'ing, from &oint A, t'o &er&endiculars to the t'o basic coastal lines, namely the linefrom Ca&e Dli%abeth to the international boundary terminus and the line running thence to Ca&e Sable- At &oint A, those t'o&er&endiculars form an acute angle of +5 - It is the bisector of this angle 'hich is &rescribed for the first sector of the delimitation line�

7/26/2019 PIL case


(Ma& 8o- .)-In turning to the second segment, the Chamber &roceeds by t'o stages- 7irst, it decides the method to be em&loyed in ie' of theuasi&arallelism bet'een the coasts of 8oa Scotia and Massachusetts- As these are o&&osite coasts, the a&&lication of a geometricalmethod can only result in the dra'ing of a median delimitation line a&&ro$imately &arallel to them- #he Chamber finds, ho'eer, that,'hile a median line 'ould be &erfectly legitimate if the international boundary ended in the ery middle of the coast at the bac@ of theGulf, in the actual circumstances 'here it is situated at the northeastern corner of the rectangle 'hich geometrically re&resents thesha&e of the Gulf the use of a median line 'ould result in an unreasonable effect, in that it 'ould gie Canada the same oerall maritime&rojection in the delimitation area as if the entire eastern &art of the coast of Maine belonged to Canada instead of the United States-#hat being so, the Chamber finds a second stage necessary, in 'hich it corrects the median line to ta@e account of the undeniablyim&ortant circumstance of the difference in length bet'een the t'o States coastlines abutting on the delimitation area- As the totallength of the United States coastlines on the Gulf is a&&ro$imately 5. nautical miles, and that of the Canadian coasts (including &art ofthe coast of the 1ay of 7undy) is a&&ro$imately 40 nautical miles, the ratio of the coastlines is *-35 to *- Fo'eer, a further correction isnecessitated by the &resence of Seal Island off 8oa Scotia- #he Chamber considers that it 'ould be e$cessie to consider the coastlineof 8oa Scotia as dis&laced in a south'esterly direction by the entire distance bet'een Seal Island and that coast, and thereforeconsiders it a&&ro&riate to attribute half effect to the island- #a@ing that into account, the ratio to be a&&lied to determine the &osition ofthe corrected median line on a line across the Gulf bet'een the &oints 'here the coasts of 8oa Scotia and Massachusetts are closest(i-e- a line from the ti& of Ca&e Cod to Chebogue ?oint) becomes *-3 to *- #he second segment of the delimitation 'ill thereforecorres&ond to the median line as thus corrected, from its intersection 'ith the bisector dra'n from &oint A (first segment) to the &oint'here it reaches the closing line of the Gulf (Ma& 8o- .)- As for the third segment of the delimitation, relating to that &art of the delimitation area lying outside the Gulf of Maine, this &ortion of theline is situated throughout its length in the o&en ocean- It a&&ears obious that the most a&&ro&riate geometrical method for thissegment is the dra'ing of a &er&endicular to the closing line of the Gulf- ;ne adantage of this method is to gie the final segment of theline &ractically the same orientation as that gien by both ?arties to the f inal &ortion of the res&ectie lines they enisaged- As for thee$act &oint on the closing line from 'hich the &er&endicular should be dra'n sea'ards, it 'ill coincide 'ith the intersection of that line'ith the corrected median line- Starting from that &oint, the third segment crosses Georges 1an@ bet'een &oints on the *44fathomde&th line 'ith the follo'ing coordinates!. **-5 8, 0+ **-4 B� �.* *4-* 8, 00 *+- B� �#he terminus of this final segment 'ill be situated 'ithin the triangle defined by the S&ecial Agreement and coincide 'ith the last &oint itreaches 'ithin the oerla&&ing of the res&ectie 44mile %ones claimed by the t'o States-:III- eri"ication o" the e$uitable character o" the result (&aras- 34.*)Faing dra'n the delimitation line reuested by the ?arties, the final tas@ of the Chamber is to erify 'hether the result obtained can beconsidered as intrinsically euitable in the light of all the circumstances- Bhile such erification is not absolutely necessary 'here thefirst t'o segments of the line are concerned, since the Chambers guiding &arameters 'ere &roided by geogra&hy, the situation isdifferent as regards the third segment, 'hich is the one of greatest concern to the ?arties on account of the &resence in the area ittraerses of Georges 1an@, the &rinci&al sta@e in the &roceedings on account of the &otential resources of its subsoil and the economicim&ortance of its fisheries-In the eyes of the United States, the decisie factor lies in the fishing carried on by the United States and its nationals eer since thecountrys inde&endence and een before, actiities 'hich they are held to hae been alone in &ursuing oer the greater &art of that&eriod, and 'hich 'ere accom&anied by other maritime actiities concerning naigational assistance, rescue, research, defence, etc-Canada laid greater em&hasis on the socioeconomic as&ects, concentrating on the recent &ast, es&ecially the last *2 years, and&resenting as an euitable &rinci&le the idea that a single maritime boundary should ensure the maintenance of the e$isting structures of

fishing 'hich, according to it, 'ere of ital im&ortance to the coastal communities of the area-#he Chamber e$&lains 'hy it cannot subscribe to these contentions and finds that it is clearly out of the uestion to consider theres&ectie scale of actiities in the domain of fishing or &etroleum e$&loitation as an euitable criterion to be a&&lied in determining thedelimitation line- Bhat the Chamber 'ould regard as a legitimate scru&le lies rather in concern lest, une$&ectedly, the oerall resultshould a&&ear radically ineuitable as entailing disastrous re&ercussions on the subsistence and economic deelo&ment of the&o&ulations concerned- It considers that there is no reason to fear any such danger in the &resent case on account of the Chamberschoice of delimitation line or, more es&ecially, the course of its third segment, and concludes that the oerall result of the delimitation iseuitable- 8oting the long tradition of friendly and fruitful coo&eration in maritime matters bet'een Canada and the United States, theChamber considers that the ?arties 'ill be able to surmount any difficulties and ta@e the right ste&s to ensure the &ositie deelo&mentof their actiities in the im&ortant domains concerned-7or these reasons, the Chamber renders the decision couched in the follo'ing terms!

;?D<A#I:D ?<;:ISI;8S ;7 #FD CFAM1D<S >U6GMD8##FD CFAM1D<,by four otes to one,ecides#hat the course of the single maritime boundary that diides the continental shelf and the e$clusie fisheries %ones of Canada and the

United States of America in the Area referred to in the S&ecial Agreement concluded by those t'o States on March *+ shall bedefined by geodetic lines connecting the &oints 'ith the follo'ing coordinates!Latitude North Longitude West A- .. ** *" 0+ *0 .0"� �1- . 23 *." 0+ .. 32"� �C- . 3* 45" 0+ 5 42"� �6- .4 + 42" 02 .* 2"� �I8 7A:;U<! President Ago= Judges Mosler and Sch'ebel, Judge ad hoc Cohen= AGAI8S#! Judge Gros-"(7or the location of the coordinates gien aboe, see Ma& 8o-.-)

7/26/2019 PIL case


LOTUS CASE (SUMMARY)

© Ruwanthika Gunaratne and Public nternati!nal Law at htt"#$%%ruwanthika&unaratne'w!rd"re##'c!

*++, - "re#ent' Unauth!ri.ed u#e and%!r du"licati!n !/ thi# aterial with!ut e0"re## and written "eri##i!n /r! thi# bl!&1# auth!r and%!r !wner i# #trictl2 "r!hibited' E0cer"t# and link# a2 be u#ed

"r!3ided that /ull and clear credit i# &i3en t! Ruwanthika Gunaratne and Public nternati!nal Law with

a""r!"riate and #"eci/ic directi!n t! the !ri&inal c!ntent'

4ae !/ the Ca#e$ The L!tu# Ca#e (5rance 3# Turke2)6 Year !/ the deci#i!n$ 78*96 and C!urt$ PC:'

O3er3iew$ A c!lli#i!n !ccurred !n the hi&h #ea# between a 5rench 3e##el and a Turki#h 3e##el' ;icti#were Turki#h nati!nal# and the alle&ed !//ender wa# 5rench' C!uld Turke2 e0erci#e it# <uri#dicti!n !3er

the 5rench nati!nal under internati!nal law=

5act# !/ the Ca#e$

A c!lli#i!n !ccurred !n the hi&h #ea# between a 5rench 3e##el - L!tu# - and a Turki#h 3e##el - >!.?

@!urt' The >!.?@!urt #ank and killed ei&ht Turki#h nati!nal# !n b!ard the Turki#h 3e##el' The 7+#ur3i3!r# !/ the >!.?@!urt (includin& it# ca"tain) were taken t! Turke2 !n b!ard the L!tu#' n Turke2

the !//icer !n watch !/ the L!tu# (e!n#) and the ca"tain !/ the Turki#h #hi" were char&ed with

an#lau&hter' e!n# a 5rench nati!nal wa# #entenced t! ,+ da2# !/ i"ri#!nent and a /ine' The5rench &!3ernent "r!te#ted deandin& the relea#e !/ e!n# !r the tran#/er !/ hi# ca#e t! the

5rench C!urt#' Turke2 and 5rance a&reed t! re/er thi# di#"ute !n the <uri#dicti!n t! the Peranent

C!urt !/ nternati!nal :u#tice (PC:)'

Bue#ti!n# be/!re the C!urt$

id Turke2 3i!late internati!nal law when Turki#h c!urt# e0erci#ed <uri#dicti!n !3er a criec!itted b2 a 5rench nati!nal !ut#ide Turke2= / 2e# #h!uld Turke2 "a2 c!"en#ati!n t! 5rance=

The C!urt1# eci#i!n$

Turke2 b2 in#titutin& criinal "r!ceedin&# a&ain#t e!n# did n!t 3i!late internati!nal law'

Rele3ant 5indin&# !/ the C!urt$

E#tabli#hin& :uri#dicti!n$ !e# Turke2 need t! #u""!rt it# a##erti!n !/ <uri#dicti!n u#in& an e0i#tin&

rule !/ internati!nal law !r i# the ere ab#ence !/ a "r!hibiti!n "re3entin& the e0erci#e !/ <uri#dicti!nen!u&h=

The /ir#t "rinci"le !/ the L!tu# ca#e #aid that <uri#dicti!n i# territ!rial$ A State cann!t e0erci#e it# <uri#dicti!n !ut#ide it# territ!r2 unle## an internati!nal treat2 !r cu#t!ar2 law "erit# it t! d! #!' Thi#

i# what we called the /ir#t L!tu# Princi"le'

4!w the /ir#t and /!re!#t re#tricti!n i"!#ed b2 internati!nal law u"!n a State i# that - /ailin& the

e0i#tence !/ a "eri##i3e rule t! the c!ntrar2 - it a2 n!t e0erci#e it# "!wer in an2 /!r in the territ!r2

!/ an!ther State' n thi# #en#e <uri#dicti!n i# certainl2 territ!rial6 it cann!t be e0erci#ed b2 a State

7/26/2019 PIL case


!ut#ide it# territ!r2 e0ce"t b2 3irtue !/ a "eri##i3e rule deri3ed /r! internati!nal cu#t! !r /r! a

c!n3enti!n'D ("ara F)

The #ec!nd "rinci"le !/ the L!tu# ca#e$ ithin it# territ!r2 a State a2 e0erci#e it# <uri#dicti!n !n an2atter e3en i/ there i# n! #"eci/ic rule !/ internati!nal law "erittin& it t! d! #!' n the#e in#tance#

State# ha3e a wide ea#ure !/ di#creti!n which i# !nl2 liited b2 the "r!hibiti3e rule# !/ internati!nal

law'

t d!e# n!t h!we3er /!ll!w that internati!nal law "r!hibit# a State /r! e0erci#in& <uri#dicti!n in it#

!wn territ!r2 in re#"ect !/ an2 ca#e which relate# t! act# which ha3e taken "lace abr!ad and in whichit cann!t rel2 !n #!e "eri##i3e rule !/ internati!nal law' Such a 3iew w!uld !nl2 be tenable i/

internati!nal law c!ntained a &eneral "r!hibiti!n t! State# t! e0tend the a""licati!n !/ their law# and

the <uri#dicti!n !/ their c!urt# t! "er#!n# "r!"ert2 and act# !ut#ide their territ!r2 and i/ a# ane0ce"ti!n t! thi# &eneral "r!hibiti!n it all!wed State# t! d! #! in certain #"eci/ic ca#e#' >ut thi# i#

certainl2 n!t the ca#e under internati!nal law a# it #tand# at "re#ent' 5ar /r! la2in& d!wn a &eneral

"r!hibiti!n t! the e//ect that State# a2 n!t e0tend the a""licati!n !/ their law# and the <uri#dicti!n !/

their c!urt# t! "er#!n# "r!"ert2 and act# !ut#ide their territ!r2 it lea3e# the in thi# re#"ect a wideea#ure !/ di#creti!n which i# !nl2 liited in certain ca#e# b2 "r!hibiti3e rule#6 a# re&ard# !ther ca#e#

e3er2 State reain# /ree t! ad!"t the "rinci"le# which it re&ard# a# be#t and !#t #uitable' Thi#

di#creti!n le/t t! State# b2 internati!nal law e0"lain# the &reat 3ariet2 !/ rule# which the2 ha3e beenable t! ad!"t with!ut !b<ecti!n# !r c!"laint# !n the "art !/ !ther State# Hn the#e circu#tance# all

that can be reIuired !/ a State i# that it #h!uld n!t !3er#te" the liit# which internati!nal law "lace#

u"!n it# <uri#dicti!n6 within the#e liit# it# title t! e0erci#e <uri#dicti!n re#t# in it# #!3erei&nt2'D ("ara#J and 9)

Thi# a""lied t! ci3il and criinal ca#e#' / the e0i#tence !/ a #"eci/ic rule wa# a "re?reIui#ite t!

e0erci#e <uri#dicti!n PC: ar&ued then it w!uldHin an2 ca#e# re#ult in "aral2#in& the acti!n !/ thec!urt# !win& t! the i"!##ibilit2 !/ citin& a uni3er#all2 acce"ted rule !n which t! #u""!rt the e0erci#e

!/ their KState#1 <uri#dicti!nD ("ara ,)'

The PC: ba#ed thi# /indin& !n the #!3erei&n will !/ State#'

nternati!nal law &!3ern# relati!n# between inde"endent State#' The rule# !/ law bindin& u"!n State#there/!r eanate /r! their !wn /ree will a# e0"re##ed in c!n3enti!n# !r b2 u#a&e# &enerall2 acce"ted

a# e0"re##in& "rinci"le# !/ law and e#tabli#hed in !rder t! re&ulate the relati!n# between the#e c!?

e0i#tin& inde"endent c!unitie# !r with a 3iew t! the achie3eent !/ c!!n ai#' Re#tricti!n#u"!n the inde"endence !/ State# cann!t there/!re be "re#uedD

K4>$ Thi# wa# !ne !/ the !re debated a#"ect# !/ the <ud&eent' S!e ar&ued that the C!urt "laced

t!! uch e"ha#i# !n #!3erei&nt2 and c!n#ent !/ State# (i'e' t!!k a #tr!n& "!#iti3i#t 3iew)'

Criinal :uri#dicti!n$ Territ!rial :uri#dicti!n

5rance alle&ed that the /la& State !/ a 3e##el w!uld ha3e e0clu#i3e <uri#dicti!n !3er !//ence# c!itted

!n b!ard the #hi" in hi&h #ea#' The PC: di#a&reed' t held that 5rance a# the /la& State did n!t en<!2

e0clu#i3e territ!rial <uri#dicti!n in the hi&h #ea# in re#"ect !/ a c!lli#i!n with a 3e##el carr2in& the /la&!/ an!ther State ("ara# 97 - ,)' The C!urt held that Turke2 and 5rance b!th ha3e <uri#dicti!n in

re#"ect !/ the wh!le incident$ i'e' there i# c!ncurrent <uri#dicti!n'

7/26/2019 PIL case


The PC: held that a #hi" in the hi&h #ea# i# a##iilated t! the territ!r2 !/ the /la& State' Thi# State a2

e0erci#e it# <uri#dicti!n !3er the #hi" in the #ae wa2 a# it e0erci#e# it# <uri#dicti!n !3er it# land t! the

e0clu#i!n !/ all !ther State#' n thi# ca#e the C!urt eIuated the Turki#h 3e##el t! Turki#h territ!r2' n

thi# ca#e the PC: held that the H !//ence "r!duced it# e//ect# !n the Turki#h 3e##el and c!n#eIuentl2in a "lace a##iilated t! Turki#h territ!r2 in which the a""licati!n !/ Turki#h criinal law cann!t be

challen&ed e3en in re&ard t! !//ence# c!itted there b2 /!rei&ner#'D Turke2 had <uri#dicti!n !3er thi#

ca#e'

/ there/!re a &uilt2 act c!itted !n the hi&h #ea# "r!duce# it# e//ect# !n a 3e##el /l2in& an!ther

/la& !r in /!rei&n territ!r2 the #ae "rinci"le# u#t be a""lied a# i/ the territ!rie# !/ tw! di//erentState# were c!ncerned and the c!nclu#i!n u#t there/!re be drawn that there i# n! rule !/ internati!nal

law "r!hibitin& the State t! which the #hi" !n which the e//ect# !/ the !//ence ha3e taken "lace

bel!n&# /r! re&ardin& the !//ence a# ha3in& been c!itted in it# territ!r2 and "r!#ecutin&acc!rdin&l2 the delinIuent'D

The L!tu# Ca#e wa# al#! #i&ni/icant in that the PC: #aid that a State w!uld ha3e territ!rial <uri#dicti!n

e3en i/ the crie wa# c!itted !ut#ide it# territ!r2 #! l!n& a# a c!n#tituti3e eleent !/ the crie wa#c!itted in that State' T!da2 we call thi# #ub<ecti3e territ!rial <uri#dicti!n' n !rder /!r #ub<ecti3e

territ!rial <uri#dicti!n t! be e#tabli#hed !ne u#t "r!3e that the eleent !/ the crie and the actual

crie are entirel2 in#e"arable6 i'e' i/ the c!n#tituent eleent wa# ab#ent - the crie w!uld n!t ha3eha""ened'

The !//ence /!r which Lieutenant e!n# a""ear# t! ha3e been "r!#ecuted wa# an act - !/ ne&li&ence!r i"rudence - ha3in& it# !ri&in !n b!ard the L!tu# whil#t it# e//ect# ade the#el3e# /elt !n b!ard

the >!.?@!urt' The#e tw! eleent# are le&all2 entirel2 in#e"arable #! uch #! that their #e"arati!n

render# the !//ence n!n?e0i#tentH t i# !nl2 natural that each #h!uld be able t! e0erci#e <uri#dicti!n

and t! d! #! in re#"ect !/ the incident a# a wh!le' t i# there/!re a ca#e !/ c!ncurrent <uri#dicti!n'D

Cu#t!ar2 nternati!nal Law

The L!tu# ca#e &i3e# an i"!rtant dictu !n creatin& cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law' 5rance alle&ed that

<uri#dicti!nal Iue#ti!n# !n c!lli#i!n ca#e# are rarel2 heard in criinal ca#e# becau#e State# tend t!

"r!#ecute !nl2 be/!re the /la& State' 5rance ar&ued that thi# ab#ence !/ "r!#ecuti!n# "!int# t! a "!#iti3erule in cu#t!ar2 law !n c!lli#i!n#'The C!urt held that thi# Hw!uld erel2 #h!w that State# had

!/ten in "ractice ab#tained /r! in#titutin& criinal "r!ceedin&# and n!t that the2 rec!&ni.ed

the#el3e# a# bein& !bli&ed t! d! #!6 /!r !nl2 i/ #uch ab#tenti!n were ba#ed !n their bein& c!n#ci!u# !/ ha3in& a dut2 t! ab#tain w!uld it be "!##ible t! #"eak !/ an internati!nal cu#t!' The alle&ed /act d!e#

n!t all!w !ne t! in/er that State# ha3e been c!n#ci!u# !/ ha3in& #uch a dut26 !n the !ther hand a# will

"re#entl2 be #een there are !ther circu#tance# calculated t! #h!w that the c!ntrar2 i# true'D n !ther

w!rd# !"ini! <uri# i# re/lected in act# !/ State# (4icara&ua Ca#e) !r in !i##i!n# (L!tu# ca#e) in #! /ara# th!#e act# !r !i##i!n# are d!ne /!ll!win& a belie/ that the #aid State i# !bli&ated b2 law t! act !r

re/rain /r! actin& in a "articular wa2' (5!r !re !n !"ini! <uri# click here)

Sub#eIuent C: eci#i!n# and Se"arate O"ini!n# That Re/erred t! Princi"le# !/ the L!tu# Ca#e

7' Ad3i#!r2 O"ini!n !n the Unilateral eclarati!n !/ @!#!3! (*+7+)

n the @!#!3! Ad3i#!r2 O"ini!n the C!urt had t! decide i/ the unilateral declarati!n !/ @!#!3! !/

5ebruar2 *++, wa# in acc!rdance with1 internati!nal law' The C!urt inIuired and c!ncluded that the

7/26/2019 PIL case


a""licable internati!nal law did n!t "r!hibit an unilateral declarati!n !/ inde"endence' >a#ed !n thi#

/indin& the C!urt decided that the ad!"ti!n !/ the declarati!n !/ inde"endence did n!tH 3i!late an2

a""licable rule !/ internati!nal law1'

:ud&e Sia di#a&ree# inter alia with C!urt1# eth!d!l!&2 in arri3in& at thi# c!nclu#i!n' Ne i"ute#

the eth!d t! the "rinci"le e#tabli#hed in the L!tu# ca#e$ that which i# n!t "r!hibited i# "eritted under

internati!nal law' Ne critici#e# the L!tu# dictu a# an !ut dated 78th centur2 "!#iti3i#t a""r!ach that i#e0ce##i3el2 di//erential t!ward# State c!n#ent' Ne #a2# that the C!urt #h!uld ha3e c!n#idered the

"!##ibilit2 that internati!nal law can be deliberatel2 neutral !r #ilent !n the internati!nal law/ulne## !/

certain act#' n#tead !/ c!ncludin& that an the ab#ence !/ "r!hibiti!n i"#! /act! eant that a unilateraldeclarati!n !/ inde"endence i# "eritted under internati!nal law the c!urt #h!uld ha3e inIuired

whether under certain c!nditi!n# internati!nal law "erit# !r t!lerate# unilateral declarati!n# !/

inde"endence' Read !re here'


*++, - "re#ent' Unauth!ri.ed u#e and%!r du"licati!n !/ thi# aterial with!ut e0"re## and written

"eri##i!n /r! thi# bl!&1# auth!r and%!r !wner i# #trictl2 "r!hibited' E0cer"t# and link# a2 be u#ed "r!3ided that /ull and clear credit i# &i3en t! Ruwanthika Gunaratne and Public nternati!nal Law with


he :ud&ent !/ *9 :une 78,J

CASE CO4CER44G TNE MLTARY A4 PARAMLTARY ACT;TES

4 A4 AGA4ST 4CARAGUA (4CARAGUA 3' U4TE STATES O5 AMERCA)

(MERTS)

:ud&ent !/ *9 :une 78,J

5!r it# <ud&ent !n the erit# in the ca#e c!ncernin& ilitar2 and Parailitar2 Acti3itie# in and a&ain#t

4icara&ua br!u&ht b2 4icara&ua a&ain#t the United State# !/ Aerica the C!urt wa# c!"!#ed a#

/!ll!w#$Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia# Oda A&!�Sette?Caara Schwebel Sir R!bert :ennin&# Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i E3en#en :ud&e ad h!c C!lliard

OPERAT;E PART O5 TNE COURTS :UGME4T

TNE COURT

(7) >2 ele3en 3!te# t! /!urecide# that in ad<udicatin& the di#"ute br!u&ht be/!re it b2 the A""licati!n /iled b2 the Re"ublic !/

4icara&ua !n 8 A"ril 78, the C!urt i# reIuired t! a""l2 the Qultilateral treat2 re#er3ati!nQc!ntained

in "r!3i#! (c) t! the declarati!n !/ acce"tance !/ <uri#dicti!n ade under Article J "ara&ra"h * !/ theStatute !/ the C!urt b2 the G!3ernent !/ the Untied State# !/ Aerica de"!#ited !n *J Au&u#t 78J6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Oda A&!�Schwebel Sir R!bert :ennin&# Mba2e >ed<a!ui and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c C!lliard6AGA4ST$ :ud&e# Ruda Elia# Sette?Caara and 4i'

(*) >2 twel3e 3!te# t! three

Re<ect# the <u#ti/icati!n !/ c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence aintained b2 the United State# !/ Aerica in

7/26/2019 PIL case


c!nnecti!n with the ilitar2 and "arailitar2 acti3itie# in and a&ain#t 4icara&ua the #ub<ect !/ thi#

ca#e6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�A&! Sette?Caara Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c C!lliard6AGA4ST$ :ud&e# Oda Schwebel and Sir R!bert :ennin&#'

() >2 twel3e 3!te# t! three

ecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica b2 trainin& arin& eIui""in& /inancin& and #u""l2in& thec!ntra /!rce# !r !therwi#e enc!ura&in& #u""!rtin& and aidin& ilitar2 and "arailitar2 acti3itie# in

and a&ain#t 4icara&ua ha# acted a&ain#t the Re"ublic !/ 4icara&ua in breach !/ it# !bli&ati!n under

cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law n!t t! inter3ene in the a//air# !/ an!ther State64 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�A&! Sette?Caara Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c C!lliard6

AGA4ST$ :ud&e# Oda Schwebel and Sir R!bert :ennin&#'() >2 twel3e 3!te# t! three

ecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica b2 certain attack# !n 4icara&uan territ!r2 in 78,?78,

nael2 attack# !n Puert! Sandin! !n 7 Se"teber and 7 Oct!ber 78, an attack !n C!rint! !n 7+

Oct!ber 78,6 an attack !n P!t!#i 4a3al >a#e !n %F :anuar2 78, an attack !n San :uan del Sur !n 9March 78,6 attack# !n "atr!l b!at# at Puert! Sandin! !n *, and + March 78,6 and an attack !n San

:uan del 4!rte !n 8 A"ril 78,6 and /urther b2 th!#e act# !/ inter3enti!n re/erred t! in #ub"ara&ra"h ()

here!/ which in3!l3e the u#e !/ /!rce ha# acted a&ain#t the Re"ublic !/ 4icara&ua in breach !/ it#!bli&ati!n under cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law n!t t! u#e /!rce a&ain#t an!ther State6


(F) >2 twel3e 3!te# t! three

ecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica b2 directin& !r auth!ri.in& !3er Ri&ht# !/ 4icara&uan

territ!r2 and b2 the act# i"utable t! the United State# re/erred t! in #ub"ara&ra"h () here!/ ha#acted a&ain#t the Re"ublic !/ 4icara&ua in breach !/ it# !bli&ati!n under cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law

n!t t! 3i!late the #!3erei&nt2 !/ an!ther State6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�A&! Sette?Caara Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c C!lliard6

AGA4ST$ :ud&e# Oda Schwebel and Sir R!bert :ennin&#'

(J) >2 twel3e 3!te# t! threeecide# that b2 la2in& ine# in the internal !r territ!rial water# !/ the Re"ublic !/ 4icara&ua durin&

the /ir#t !nth# !/ 78, the United State# !/ Aerica ha# acted a&ain#t the Re"ublic !/ 4icara&ua in

breach !/ it# !bli&ati!n# under cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law n!t t! u#e /!rce a&ain#t an!ther State n!t t!inter3ene in it# a//air# n!t t! 3i!late it# #!3erei&nt2 and n!t t! interru"t "eace/ul aritie c!erce6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�A&! Sette?Caara Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c C!lliard6

AGA4ST$ :ud&e# Oda Schwebel and Sir R!bert :ennin&#'(9) >2 /!urteen 3!te# t! !ne

ecide# that b2 the act# re/erred t! in #ub"ara&ra"h (J) here!/ the United State# !/ Aerica ha# acted

a&ain#t the Re"ublic !/ 4icara&ua in breach !/ it# !bli&ati!n# under Article !/ the Treat2 !/5riend#hi" C!erce and 4a3i&ati!n between the United State# !/ Aerica and the Re"ublic !/

4icara&ua #i&ned at Mana&ua !n *7 :anuar2 78FJ6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�Oda A&! Sette?Caara Sir R!bert :ennin&# Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c

C!lliard6

AGA4ST$ :ud&e Schwebel'

7/26/2019 PIL case


(,) >2 /!urteen 3!te# t! !ne

ecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica b2 /ailin& t! ake kn!wn the e0i#tence and l!cati!n !/ the

ine# laid b2 it re/erred t! in #ub"ara&ra"h (J) here!/ ha# acted in breach !/ it# !bli&ati!n# under

cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law in thi# re#"ect64 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�A&! Sette Caara Schwebel Sir R!bert :ennin&# Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c

C!lliard6AGA4ST$ :ud&e Oda'

(8) >2 /!urteen 3!te# t! !ne

5ind# that the United State# !/ Aerica b2 "r!ducin& in 78, a anual entitled QO"eraci!ne##ic!l &ica# en &uerra de &uerrilla#Q and di##einatin& it t! c!ntra /!rce# ha# enc!ura&ed the�c!i##i!n b2 the !/ act# c!ntrar2 t! &eneral "rinci"le# !/ huanitarian law6 but d!e# n!t /ind a

ba#i# /!r c!ncludin& that an2 #uch act# which a2 ha3e been c!itted are i"utable t! the UnitedState# !/ Aerica a# act# !/ the United State# !/ Aerica6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�A&! Sette Caara Schwebel Sir R!bert :ennin&# Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c

C!lliard6AGA4ST$ :ud&e Oda'

(7+) >2 twel3e 3!te# t! three

ecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica b2 the attack# !n 4icara&uan territ!r2 re/erred t! in#ub"ara&ra"h () here!/ and b2 declarin& a &eneral ebar&! !n trade with 4icara&ua !n 7 Ma2 78,F

ha# c!itted act# calculated t! de"ri3e !/ it# !b<ect and "ur"!#e the Treat2 !/ 5riend#hi" C!erce

and 4a3i&ati!n between the Partie# #i&ned at Mana&ua !n *7 :anuar2 78FJ64 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�A&! Sette Caara Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c C!lliard6

AGA4ST$ :ud&e# Oda Schwebel and Sir R!bert :ennin&#'

(77) >2 twel3e 3!te# t! threeecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica b2 the attack# !n 4icara&uan territ!r2 re/erred t! in

#ub"ara&ra"h () here!/ and b2 declarin& a &eneral ebar&! !n trade with 4icara&ua !n 7 Ma2 78,F

ha# acted in breach !/ it# !bli&ati!n# under Article !/ the Treat2 !/ 5riend#hi" C!erce and 4a3i&ati!n between the Partie# #i&ned at Mana&ua !n *7 :anuar2 78FJ6


(7*) >2 twel3e 3!te# t! three

ecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica i# under a dut2 iediatel2 t! cea#e and t! re/rain /r! all#uch act# a# a2 c!n#titute breache# !/ the /!re&!in& le&al !bli&ati!n#6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�A&! Sette Caara Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c C!lliard6

AGA4ST$ :ud&e# Oda Schwebel and Sir R!bert :ennin&#'(7) >2 twel3e 3!te# t! three

ecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica i# under an !bli&ati!n t! ake re"arati!n t! the Re"ublic !/

4icara&ua /!r all in<ur2 cau#ed t! 4icara&ua b2 the breache# !/ !bli&ati!n# under cu#t!ar2internati!nal law enuerated ab!3e6


(7) >2 /!urteen 3!te# t! !ne

ecide# that the United State# !/ Aerica i# under an !bli&ati!n t! ake re"arati!n t! the Re"ublic !/

7/26/2019 PIL case


4icara&ua /!r all in<ur2 cau#ed t! 4icara&ua b2 the breache# !/ the Treat2 !/ 5riend#hi" C!erce

and 4a3i&ati!n between the Partie# #i&ned at Mana&ua !n *7 :anuar2 78FJ6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�Oda A&! Sette?Caara Sir R!bert :ennin&# Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!cC!lliard6

AGA4ST$ :ud&e Schwebel'

(7F) >2 /!urteen 3!te# t! !neecide# that the /!r and a!unt !/ #uch re"arati!n /ailin& a&reeent between the Partie# will be

#ettled b2 the C!urt and re#er3e# /!r thi# "ur"!#e the #ub#eIuent "r!cedure in the ca#e6

4 5A;OUR$ Pre#ident 4a&endra Sin&h6 ;ice?Pre#ident de Lacharri re6 :ud&e# Lach# Ruda Elia#�Oda A&! Sette Caara Sir R!bert :ennin&# Mba2e >ed<a!ui 4i and E3en#en6 :ud&e ad h!c

C!lliard6

AGA4ST$ :ud&e Schwebel'(7J) Unani!u#l2

Recall# t! b!th Partie# their !bli&ati!n t! #eek a #!luti!n t! their di#"ute# b2 "eace/ul ean# in

acc!rdance with internati!nal law'

SUMMARY O5 TNE :UGME4T' Bualit # ("ara#' 7 t! 79)�' >ack&r!und t! the di#"ute ("ara#' 7,?*F)

' The n!n?a""earance !/ the Re#"!ndent and Article F !/ the Statute ("ara#' *J?7)The C!urt recall# that #ub#eIuent t! the deli3er2 !/ it# :ud&ent !/ *J 4!3eber 78, !n the

<uri#dicti!n !/ the C!urt and the adi##ibilit2 !/ 4icara&ua# A""licati!n the United State# decided n!t

t! take "art in the "re#ent "ha#e !/ the "r!ceedin&#' Thi# h!we3er d!e# n!t "re3ent the C!urt /r!&i3in& a deci#i!n in the ca#e but it ha# t! d! #! while re#"ectin& the reIuireent# !/ Article F !/ the

Statute which "r!3ide# /!r the #ituati!n when !ne !/ the "artie# d!e# n!t a""ear' The C!urt#

<uri#dicti!n bein& e#tabli#hed it ha# in acc!rdance with Article F t! #ati#/2 it#el/ that the clai !/ the

"art2 a""earin& i# well /!unded in /act and law' n thi# re#"ect the C!urt recall# certain &uidin& "rinci"le# br!u&ht !ut in a nuber !/ "re3i!u# ca#e# !ne !/ which e0clude# an2 "!##ibilit2 !/ a

<ud&ent aut!aticall2 in /a3!ur !/ the "art2 a""earin&' t al#! !b#er3e# that it i# 3aluable /!r the

C!urt t! kn!w the 3iew# !/ the n!n?a""earin& "art2 e3en i/ th!#e 3iew# are e0"re##ed in wa2# n!t "r!3ided /!r in the Rule# !/ C!urt' The "rinci"le !/ the eIualit2 !/ the "artie# ha# t! reain the ba#ic

"rinci"le and the C!urt ha# t! en#ure that the "art2 which decline# t! a""ear #h!uld n!t be "eritted t!

"r!/it /r! it# ab#ence';' :u#ticiabilit2 !/ the di#"ute ("ara#' *?F)

The C!urt c!n#ider# it a""r!"riate t! deal with a "reliinar2 Iue#ti!n' t ha# been #u&&e#ted that the

Iue#ti!n# !/ the u#e !/ /!rce and c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence rai#ed in the ca#e /all !ut#ide the liit# !/ thekind !/ Iue#ti!n# the C!urt can deal with in !ther w!rd# that the2 are n!t <u#ticiable' N!we3er in the

/ir#t "lace the Partie# ha3e n!t ar&ued that the "re#ent di#"ute i# n!t a Qle&al di#"uteQ within the

eanin& !/ Article J "ara&ra"h * !/ the Statute and #ec!ndl2 the C!urt c!n#ider# that the ca#e d!e#

n!t nece##aril2 in3!l3e it in e3aluati!n !/ "!litical !r ilitar2 atter# which w!uld be t! !3er#te" "r!"er <udicial b!und#' C!n#eIuentl2 it i# eIui""ed t! deterine the#e "r!ble#'

;' The #i&ni/icance !/ the ultilateral treat2 re#er3ati!n ("ara#' J?FJ)

The United State# declarati!n !/ acce"tance !/ the c!"ul#!r2 <uri#dicti!n !/ the C!urt under ArticleJ "ara&ra"h * !/ the Statute c!ntained a re#er3ati!n e0cludin& /r! !"erati!n !/ the declarati!n

Qdi#"ute# ari#in& under a ultilateral treat2 unle## (7) all "artie# t! the treat2 a//ected b2 the deci#i!n

are al#! "artie# t! the ca#e be/!re the C!urt !r (*) the United State# !/ Aerica #"eciall2 a&ree# t! <uri#dicti!nQ'

n it# :ud&ent !/ *J 4!3eber 78, the C!urt /!und !n the ba#i# !/ Article 98 "ara&ra"h 9 !/ the

Rule# !/ C!urt that the !b<ecti!n t! <uri#dicti!n ba#ed !n the re#er3ati!n rai#ed Qa Iue#ti!n c!ncernin&

7/26/2019 PIL case


atter# !/ #ub#tance relatin& t! the erit# !/ the ca#eQ and that the !b<ecti!n did Qn!t "!##e## in the

circu#tance# !/ the ca#e an e0clu#i3el2 "reliinar2 characterQ' Since it c!ntained b!th "reliinar2

a#"ect# and !ther a#"ect# relatin& t! the erit# it had t! be dealt with at the #ta&e !/ the erit#'

n !rder t! e#tabli#h whether it# <uri#dicti!n were liited b2 the e//ect !/ the re#er3ati!n in Iue#ti!nthe C!urt ha# t! a#certain whether an2 third State# "artie# t! the /!ur ultilateral treatie# in3!ked b2

4icara&ua and n!t "artie# t! the "r!ceedin&# w!uld be Qa//ectedQ b2 the :ud&ent' O/ the#e treatie#

the C!urt c!n#ider# it #u//icient t! e0aine the "!#iti!n under the United 4ati!n# Charter and theCharter !/ the Or&ani.ati!n !/ Aerican State#'

The C!urt e0aine# the i"act !/ the ultilateral treat2 re#er3ati!n !n 4icara&ua# clai that the

United State# ha# u#ed /!rce in breach !/ the tw! Charter#' The C!urt e0aine# in "articular the ca#e !/ El Sal3ad!r /!r wh!#e bene/it "riaril2 the United State# clai# t! be e0erci#in& the ri&ht !/ c!llecti3e

#el/?de/ence which it re&ard# a# a <u#ti/icati!n !/ it# !wn c!nduct t!ward# 4icara&ua that ri&ht bein&

end!r#ed b2 the United 4ati!n# Charter (Art' F7) and the OAS Charter (Art' *7)' The di#"ute i# t! thi#e0tent a di#"ute Qari#in& underQ ultilateral treatie# t! which the United State# 4icara&ua and El

Sal3ad!r are Partie#' t a""ear# clear t! the C!urt that El Sal3ad!r w!uld be Qa//ectedQ b2 the C!urt#

deci#i!n !n the law/ulne## !/ re#!rt b2 the United State# t! c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence'

A# t! 4icara&ua# clai that the United State# ha# inter3ened in it# a//air# c!ntrar2 t! the OAS Charter(Art' 7,) the C!urt !b#er3e# that it i# i"!##ible t! #a2 that a rulin& !n the alle&ed breach !/ the

Charter b2 the United State# w!uld n!t Qa//ectQ El Sal3ad!r'

Na3in& thu# /!und that El Sal3ad!r w!uld be Qa//ectedQ b2 the deci#i!n that the C!urt w!uld ha3e t!take !n the clai# !/ 4icara&ua ba#ed !n 3i!lati!n !/ the tw! Charter# b2 the United State# the C!urt

c!nclude# that the <uri#dicti!n c!n/erred !n it b2 the United State# declarati!n d!e# n!t "erit it t!

entertain the#e clai#' t ake# it clear that the e//ect !/ the re#er3ati!n i# c!n/ined t! barrin& thea""licabilit2 !/ the#e tw! ultilateral treatie# a# ultilateral treat2 law and ha# n! /urther i"act !n

the #!urce# !/ internati!nal law which Article , !/ the Statute reIuire# the C!urt t! a""l2 includin&

cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law'

;' E#tabli#hent !/ the /act#$ e3idence and eth!d# e"l!2ed b2 the C!urt ("ara#' F9?9)The C!urt ha# had t! deterine the /act# rele3ant t! the di#"ute' The di//icult2 !/ it# ta#k deri3ed /r!

the arked di#a&reeent between the Partie# the n!n?a""earance !/ the Re#"!ndent the #ecrec2

#urr!undin& certain c!nduct and the /act that the c!n/lict i# c!ntinuin&' On thi# la#t "!int the C!urttake# the 3iew in acc!rdance with the &eneral "rinci"le# a# t! the <udicial "r!ce## that the /act# t! be

taken int! acc!unt #h!uld be th!#e !ccurrin& u" t! the cl!#e !/ the !ral "r!ceedin&# !n the erit# !/ the

ca#e (end !/ Se"teber 78,F)'ith re&ard t! the "r!ducti!n !/ e3idence the C!urt indicate# h!w the reIuireent# !/ it# Statute ? in

"articular Article F ? and the Rule# !/ C!urt ha3e t! be et in the ca#e !n the ba#i# that the C!urt ha#

/reed! in e#tiatin& the 3alue !/ the 3ari!u# eleent# !/ e3idence' t ha# n!t #een /it t! !rder anenIuir2 under Article F+ !/ the Statute' ith re&ard t! certain d!cuentar2 aterial ("re## article# and

3ari!u# b!!k#) the C!urt ha# treated the#e with cauti!n' t re&ard# than n!t a# e3idence ca"able !/

"r!3in& /act# but a# aterial which can ne3erthele## c!ntribute t! c!rr!b!ratin& the e0i#tence !/ a /act

and be taken int! acc!unt t! #h!w whether certain /act# are atter# !/ "ublic kn!wled&e' ith re&ardt! #tateent# b2 re"re#entati3e# !/ State# #!etie# at the hi&he#t le3el the C!urt take# the 3iew that

#uch #tateent# are !/ "articular "r!bati3e 3alue when the2 ackn!wled&e /act# !r c!nduct un/a3!urable

t! the State re"re#ented b2 the "er#!n wh! ade the' ith re&ard t! the e3idence !/ witne##e# "re#ented b2 4icara&ua ? /i3e witne##e# &a3e !ral e3idence and an!ther a written a//ida3it?!ne

c!n#eIuence !/ the ab#ence !/ the Re#"!ndent wa# that the e3idence !/ the witne##e# wa# n!t te#ted b2

cr!##?e0ainati!n' The C!urt ha# n!t treated a# e3idence an2 "art !/ the te#ti!n2 which wa# a eree0"re##i!n !/ !"ini!n a# t! the "r!babilit2 !r !therwi#e !/ the e0i#tence !/ a /act n!t directl2 kn!wn t!

the witne##' ith re&ard in "articular t! a//ida3it# and #w!rn #tateent# ade b2 eber# !/ a

G!3ernent the C!urt c!n#ider# that it can certainl2 retain #uch "art# !/ thi# e3idence a# a2 be

7/26/2019 PIL case


re&arded a# c!ntrar2 t! the intere#t# !r c!ntenti!n# !/ the State t! which the witne## ha# alle&iance6 /!r

the re#t #uch e3idence ha# t! be treated with &reat re#er3e'

The C!urt i# al#! aware !/ a "ublicati!n !/ the United State# State e"artent entitled QRe3!luti!n

>e2!nd Our >!rder# Sandini#ta nter3enti!n in Central AericaQ which wa# n!t #ubitted t! theC!urt in an2 /!r !r anner c!nte"lated b2 the Statute and Rule# !/ C!urt' The C!urt c!n#ider# that

in 3iew !/ the #"ecial circu#tance# !/ thi# ca#e it a2 within liit# ake u#e !/ in/!rati!n in that

"ublicati!n';' The /act# i"utable t! the United State# ("ara#' 9F t! 7*F)

7' The C!urt e0aine# the alle&ati!n# !/ 4icara&ua that the inin& !/ 4icara&uan "!rt# !r water# wa#

carried !ut b2 United State# ilitar2 "er#!nnel !r "er#!n# !/ the nati!nalit2 !/ Latin Aericanc!untrie# in the "a2 !/ the United State#' A/ter e0ainin& the /act# the C!urt /ind# it e#tabli#hed that

!n a date in late 78, !r earl2 78, the Pre#ident !/ the United State# auth!ri.ed a United State#

G!3ernent a&enc2 t! la2 ine# in 4icara&uan "!rt# that in earl2 78, ine# were laid in !r cl!#e t!the "!rt# !/ El >lu// C!rint! and Puert! Sandin! either in 4icara&uan internal water# !r in it#

territ!rial #ea !r b!th b2 "er#!n# in the "a2 and actin& !n the in#tructi!n# !/ that a&enc2 under the

#u"er3i#i!n and with the l!&i#tic #u""!rt !/ United State# a&ent#6 that neither be/!re the la2in& !/ the

ine# n!r #ub#eIuentl2 did the United State# G!3ernent i##ue an2 "ublic and !//icial warnin& t!internati!nal #hi""in& !/ the e0i#tence and l!cati!n !/ the ine#6 and that "er#!nal and aterial in<ur2

wa# cau#ed b2 the e0"l!#i!n !/ the ine# which al#! created ri#k# cau#in& a ri#e in arine in#urance

rate#'*' 4icara&ua attribute# t! the direct acti!n !/ United State# "er#!nnel !r "er#!n# in it# "a2 !"erati!n#

a&ain#t !il in#tallati!n# a na3al ba#e etc' li#ted in "ara&ra"h ,7 !/ the :ud&ent' The C!urt /ind# all

the#e incident# e0ce"t three t! be e#tabli#hed' Alth!u&h it i# n!t "r!3ed that an2 United State# ilitar2 "er#!nnel t!!k a direct "art in the !"erati!n# United State# a&ent# "artici"ated in the "lannin&

directi!n and #u""!rt' The i"utabilit2 t! the United State# !/ the#e attack# a""ear# there/!re t! the

C!urt t! be e#tabli#hed'

' 4icara&ua c!"lain# !/ in/rin&eent !/ it# air #"ace b2 United State# ilitar2 aircra/t' A/terindicatin& the e3idence a3ailable the C!urt /ind# that the !nl2 3i!lati!n# !/ 4icara&uan air #"ace

i"utable t! the United State# !n the ba#i# !/ the e3idence are hi&h altitude rec!nnai##ance /li&ht# and

l!w altitude /li&ht# !n 9 t! 77 4!3eber 78, cau#in& Q#!nic b!!#Q'ith re&ard t! <!int ilitar2 an!eu3re# with N!ndura# carried !ut b2 the United State# !n N!nduran

territ!r2 near the N!ndura#%4icara&ua /r!ntier the C!urt c!n#ider# that the2 a2 be treated a# "ublic

kn!wled&e and thu# #u//icientl2 e#tabli#hed'' The C!urt then e0aine# the &ene#i# de3el!"ent and acti3itie# !/ the c!ntra /!rce and the r!le !/

the United State# in relati!n t! it' Acc!rdin& t! 4icara&ua the United State# Qc!ncei3ed created and

!r&ani.ed a ercenar2 ar2 the c!ntra /!rceQ' On the ba#i# !/ the a3ailable in/!rati!n the C!urt i#n!t able t! #ati#/2 it#el/ that the Re#"!ndent State QcreatedQ the c!ntra /!rce in 4icara&ua but h!ld# it

e#tabli#hed that it lar&el2 /inanced trained eIui""ed ared and !r&ani.ed the 54 !ne eleent !/

the /!rce'

t i# claied b2 4icara&ua that the United State# G!3ernent de3i#ed the #trate&2 and directed thetactic# !/ the c!ntra /!rce and "r!3ided direct c!bat #u""!rt /!r it# ilitar2 !"erati!n#' n the li&ht !/

the e3idence and aterial a3ailable t! it the C!urt i# n!t #ati#/ied that all the !"erati!n# launched b2

the c!ntra /!rce at e3er2 #ta&e !/ the c!n/lict re/lected #trate&2 and tactic# #!lel2 de3i#ed b2 theUnited State#' t there/!re cann!t u"h!ld the c!ntenti!n !/ 4icara&ua !n thi# "!int' The C!urt h!we3er

/ind# it clear that a nuber !/ !"erati!n# were decided and "lanned i/ n!t actuall2 b2 the United State#

ad3i#er# then at lea#t in cl!#e c!llab!rati!n with the and !n the ba#i# !/ the intelli&ence and l!&i#tic#u""!rt which the United State# wa# able t! !//er' t i# al#! e#tabli#hed in the C!urt# 3iew that the

#u""!rt !/ the United State# /!r the acti3itie# !/ the c!ntra# t!!k 3ari!u# /!r# !3er the 2ear# #uch a#

l!&i#tic #u""!rt the #u""l2 !/ in/!rati!n !n the l!cati!n and !3eent# !/ the Sandini#ta tr!!"# the

7/26/2019 PIL case


u#e !/ #!"hi#ticated eth!d# !/ c!unicati!n etc' The e3idence d!e# n!t h!we3er warrant a /indin&

that the United State# &a3e direct c!bat #u""!rt i/ that i# taken t! ean direct inter3enti!n b2 United

State# c!bat /!rce#'

The C!urt ha# t! deterine whether the relati!n#hi" !/ the c!ntra# t! the United State# G!3ernentwa# #uch that it w!uld be ri&ht t! eIuate the c!ntra# /!r le&al "ur"!#e# with an !r&an !/ the United

State# G!3ernent !r a# actin& !n behal/ !/ that G!3ernent' The C!urt c!n#ider# that the e3idence

a3ailable t! it i# in#u//icient t! de!n#trate the t!tal de"endence !/ the c!ntra# !n United State# aid' A "artial de"endenc2 the e0act e0tent !/ which the C!urt cann!t e#tabli#h a2 be in/erred /r! the /act

that the leader# were #elected b2 the United State# and /r! !ther /act!r# #uch a# the !r&ani#ati!n

trainin& and eIui""in& !/ the /!rce "lannin& !/ !"erati!n# the ch!!#in& !/ tar&et# and the !"erati!nal#u""!rt "r!3ided' There i# n! clear e3idence that the United State# actuall2 e0erci#ed #uch a de&ree !/

c!ntr!l a# t! <u#ti/2 treatin& the c!ntra# a# actin& !n it# behal/'

F' Na3in& reached the ab!3e c!nclu#i!n the C!urt take# the 3iew that the c!ntra# reain re#"!n#ible/!r their act# in "articular the alle&ed 3i!lati!n# b2 the !/ huanitarian law' 5!r the United State# t!

be le&all2 re#"!n#ible it w!uld ha3e t! be "r!3ed that that State had e//ecti3e c!ntr!l !/ the !"erati!n#

in the c!ur#e !/ which the alle&ed 3i!lati!n# were c!itted'

J' 4icara&ua ha# c!"lained !/ certain ea#ure# !/ an ec!n!ic nature taken a&ain#t it b2 theG!3ernent !/ the United State# which it re&ard# a# an indirect /!r !/ inter3enti!n in it# internal

a//air#' Ec!n!ic aid wa# #u#"ended in :anuar2 78,7 and terinated in A"ril 78,76 the United State#

acted t! !""!#e !r bl!ck l!an# t! 4icara&ua b2 internati!nal /inancial b!die#6 the #u&ar i"!rt Iu!ta/r! 4icara&ua wa# reduced b2 8+ "ercent in Se"teber 78,6 and a t!tal trade ebar&! !n 4icara&ua

wa# declared b2 an e0ecuti3e !rder !/ the Pre#ident !/ the United State# !n 7 Ma2 78,F'

;' The c!nduct !/ 4icara&ua ("ara#' 7*J?797)The C!urt ha# t! a#certain #! /ar a# "!##ible whether the acti3itie# !/ the United State# c!"lained !/

claied t! ha3e been the e0erci#e !/ c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence a2 be <u#ti/ied b2 certain /act#

attributable t! 4icara&ua'

7' The United State# ha# c!ntended that 4icara&ua wa# acti3el2 #u""!rtin& ared &r!u"# !"eratin& incertain !/ the nei&hb!urin& c!untrie# "articularl2 in El Sal3ad!r and #"eci/icall2 in the /!r !/ the

#u""l2 !/ ar# an accu#ati!n which 4icara&ua ha# re"udiated' The C!urt /ir#t e0aine# the acti3it2 !/

4icara&ua with re&ard t! El Sal3ad!r'Na3in& e0ained 3ari!u# e3idence and takin& acc!unt !/ a nuber !/ c!nc!rdant indicati!n# an2 !/

which were "r!3ided b2 4icara&ua it#el/ /r! which the C!urt can rea#!nabl2 in/er the "r!3i#i!n !/ a

certain a!unt !/ aid /r! 4icara&uan territ!r2 the C!urt c!nclude# that #u""!rt /!r the ared!""!#iti!n in El Sal3ad!r /r! 4icara&uan territ!r2 wa# a /act u" t! the earl2 !nth# !/ 78,7'

Sub#eIuentl2 e3idence !/ ilitar2 aid /r! !r thr!u&h 4icara&ua reain# 3er2 weak de#"ite the

de"l!2ent b2 the United State# in the re&i!n !/ e0ten#i3e technical !nit!rin& re#!urce#' The C!urtcann!t h!we3er c!nclude that n! tran#"!rt !/ !r tra//ic in ar# e0i#ted' t erel2 take# n!te that the

alle&ati!n# !/ ar# tra//ic are n!t #!lidl2 e#tabli#hed and ha# n!t been able t! #ati#/2 it#el/ that an2

c!ntinuin& /l!w !n a #i&ni/icant #cale t!!k "lace a/ter the earl2 !nth# !/ 78,7'

E3en #u""!#in& it were e#tabli#hed that ilitar2 aid wa# reachin& the ared !""!#iti!n in El Sal3ad!r/r! the territ!r2 !/ 4icara&ua it #kill reain# t! be "r!3ed that #uch aid i# i"utable t! the auth!ritie#

!/ 4icara&ua which ha# n!t #!u&ht t! c!nceal the "!##ibilit2 !/ wea"!n# cr!##in& it# territ!r2 but

denie# that thi# i# the re#ult !/ an2 deliberate !//icial "!lic2 !n it# "art' Na3in& re&ard t! thecircu#tance# characteri.in& thi# "art !/ Central Aerica the C!urt c!n#ider# that it i# #carcel2

"!##ible /!r 4icara&ua# re#"!n#ibilit2 /!r ar# tra//ic !n it# territ!r2 t! be aut!aticall2 a##ued' The

C!urt c!n#ider# it !re c!n#i#tent with the "r!babilitie# t! rec!&ni.e that an acti3it2 !/ that nature i/!n a liited #cale a2 3er2 well be "ur#ued unkn!wn t! the territ!rial &!3ernent' n an2 e3ent the

e3idence i# in#u//icient t! #ati#/2 the C!urt that the G!3ernent !/ 4icara&ua wa# re#"!n#ible /!r an2

/l!w !/ ar# at either "eri!d'

7/26/2019 PIL case


*' The United State# ha# al#! accu#ed 4icara&ua !/ bein& re#"!n#ible /!r cr!##?b!rder ilitar2 attack#

!n N!ndura# and C!#ta Rica' hile n!t a# /ull2 in/!red !n the Iue#ti!n a# it w!uld wi#h t! be the

C!urt c!n#ider# a# e#tabli#hed the /act that certain tran#?b!rder ilitar2 incur#i!n# are i"utable t! the

G!3ernent !/ 4icara&ua'' The :ud&ent recall# certain e3ent# which !ccurred at the tie !/ the /all !/ Pre#ident S!!.a #ince

reliance ha# been "laced !n the b2 the United State# t! c!ntend that the "re#ent G!3ernent !/

4icara&ua i# in 3i!lati!n !/ certain alle&ed a##urance# &i3en b2 it# iediate "redece##!r' The:ud&ent re/er# in "articular t! the QPlan t! #ecure "eaceQ #ent !n 7* :ul2 7898 b2 the Q:unta !/ the

G!3ernent !/ 4ati!nal Rec!n#tructi!nQ !/ 4icara&ua t! the Secretar2?General !/ the OAS

enti!nin& inter alia it# Q/ir intenti!n t! e#tabli#h /ull !b#er3ance !/ huan ri&ht# in !ur c!untr2Qand Qt! call the /ir#t /ree electi!n# !ur c!untr2 ha# kn!wn in thi# centur2Q' The United State# c!n#ider#

that it ha# a #"ecial re#"!n#ibilit2 re&ardin& the i"leentati!n !/ the#e c!itent#'

' The a""licable law$ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law ("ara#' 79*?7,*)The C!urt ha# reached the c!nclu#i!n (#ecti!n ; in /ine) that it ha# t! a""l2 the ultilateral treat2

re#er3ati!n in the United State# declarati!n the c!n#eIuential e0clu#i!n !/ ultilateral treatie# bein&

with!ut "re<udice either t! !ther treatie# !r !ther #!urce# !/ law enuerated in Article , !/ the Statute'

n !rder t! deterine the law actuall2 t! be a""lied t! the di#"ute it ha# t! a#certain the c!n#eIuence#!/ the e0clu#i!n !/ the a""licabilit2 !/ the ultilateral treatie# /!r the de/initi!n !/ the c!ntent !/ the

cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law which reain# a""licable'

The C!urt which ha# alread2 c!ented brie/l2 !n thi# #ub<ect in the <uri#dicti!n "ha#e ('C':'Re"!rt# 78, ""' * and *F "ara' 9) de3el!"# it# initial reark#' t d!e# n!t c!n#ider that it can be

claied a# the United State# d!e# that all the cu#t!ar2 rule# which a2 be in3!ked ha3e a c!ntent

e0actl2 identical t! that !/ the rule# c!ntained in the treatie# which cann!t be a""lied b2 3irtue !/ theUnited State# re#er3ati!n' E3en i/ a treat2 n!r and a cu#t!ar2 n!r rele3ant t! the "re#ent di#"ute

were t! ha3e e0actl2 the #ae c!ntent thi# w!uld n!t be a rea#!n /!r the C!urt t! take the 3iew that the

!"erati!n !/ the treat2 "r!ce## u#t nece##aril2 de"ri3e the cu#t!ar2 n!r !/ it# #e"arate

a""licabilit2' C!n#eIuentl2 the C!urt i# in n! wa2 b!und t! u"h!ld cu#t!ar2 rule# !nl2 in #! /ar a#the2 di//er /r! the treat2 rule# which it i# "re3ented b2 the United State# re#er3ati!n /r! a""l2in&'

n re#"!n#e t! an ar&uent !/ the United State# the C!urt c!n#ider# that the di3er&ence between the

c!ntent !/ the cu#t!ar2 n!r# and that !/ the treat2 law n!r# i# n!t #uch that a <ud&ent c!n/ined t!the /ield !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law w!uld n!t be #u#ce"tible !/ c!"liance !r e0ecuti!n b2 the

"artie#'

' The c!ntent !/ the a""licable law ("ara#' 7, t! **F)7' ntr!ducti!n$ &eneral !b#er3ati!n# ("ara#' 7,?7,J)

The C!urt ha# ne0t t! c!n#ider what are the rule# !/ cu#t!ar2 law a""licable t! the "re#ent di#"ute'

5!r thi# "ur"!#e it ha# t! c!n#ider whether a cu#t!ar2 rule e0i#t# in the !"ini! <uri# !/ State#and#ati#/2 it#el/ that it i# c!n/ired b2 "ractice'

*' The "r!hibiti!n !/ the u#e !/ /!rce and the ri&ht !/ #el/?de/ence ("ara#' 7,9 t! *+7)

The C!urt /ind# that b!th Partie# take the 3iew that the "rinci"le# a# t! the u#e !/ /!rce inc!r"!rated in

the United 4ati!n# Charter c!rre#"!nd in e##ential# t! th!#e /!und in cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law'The2 there/!re acce"t a treat2?law !bli&ati!n t! re/rain in their internati!nal relati!n# /r! the threat !r

u#e !/ /!rce a&ain#t the territ!rial inte&rit2 !r "!litical inde"endence !/ an2 State !r in an2 !ther

anner inc!n#i#tent with the "ur"!#e# !/ the United 4ati!n# (Art' * "ara' !/ the Charter)' The C!urtha# h!we3er t! be #ati#/ied that there e0i#t# in cu#t!ar2 law an !"ini! <uri# a# t! the bindin& character

!/ #uch ab#tenti!n' t c!n#ider# that thi# !"ini! <uri# a2 be deduced /r! inter alia the attitude !/ the

Partie# and !/ State# t!ward# certain General A##ebl2 re#!luti!n# and "articularl2 re#!luti!n *J*F(;) entitled Qeclarati!n !n Princi"le# !/ nternati!nal Law c!ncernin& 5riendl2 Relati!n# and C!?

!"erati!n a!n& State# in Acc!rdance with the Charter !/ the United 4ati!n#Q' C!n#ent t! #uch

re#!luti!n# i# !ne !/ the /!r# !/ e0"re##i!n !/ an !"ini! <uri# with re&ard t! the "rinci"le !/ n!n?u#e

7/26/2019 PIL case


!/ /!rce re&arded a# a "rinci"le !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law inde"endentl2 !/ the "r!3i#i!n#

e#"eciall2 th!#e !/ an in#tituti!nal kind t! which it i# #ub<ect !n the treat2?law "lane !/ the Charter'

The &eneral rule "r!hibitin& /!rce e#tabli#hed in cu#t!ar2 law all!w# /!r certain e0ce"ti!n#' The

e0ce"ti!n !/ the ri&ht !/ indi3idual !r c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence i# al#! in the 3iew !/ State# e#tabli#hedin cu#t!ar2 law a# i# a""arent /!r e0a"le /r! the ter# !/ Article F7 !/ the United 4ati!n#

Charter which re/er# t! an Qinherent ri&htQ and /r! the declarati!n in re#!luti!n *J*F (;)' The

Partie# wh! c!n#ider the e0i#tence !/ thi# ri&ht t! be e#tabli#hed a# a atter !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nallaw a&ree in h!ldin& that whether the re#"!n#e t! an attack i# law/ul de"end# !n the !b#er3ance !/ the

criteria !/ the nece##it2 and the "r!"!rti!nalit2 !/ the ea#ure# taken in #el/?de/ence'

hether #el/?de/ence be indi3idual !r c!llecti3e it can !nl2 be e0erci#ed in re#"!n#e t! an QaredattackQ' n the 3iew !/ the C!urt thi# i# t! be under#t!!d a# eanin& n!t erel2 acti!n b2 re&ular

ared /!rce# acr!## an internati!nal b!rder but al#! the #endin& b2 a State !/ ared band# !n t! the

territ!r2 !/ an!ther State i/ #uch an !"erati!n becau#e !/ it# #cale and e//ect# w!uld ha3e beencla##i/ied a# an ared attack had it been carried !ut b2 re&ular ared /!rce#' The C!urt Iu!te# the

de/initi!n !/ a&&re##i!n anne0ed t! General A##ebl2 re#!luti!n 7 () a# e0"re##in&

cu#t!ar2 law in thi# re#"ect'

The C!urt d!e# n!t belie3e that the c!nce"t !/ Qared attackQ include# a##i#tance t! rebel# in the /!r!/ the "r!3i#i!n !/ wea"!n# !r l!&i#tical !r !ther #u""!rt' 5urther!re the C!urt /ind# that in

cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law whether !/ a &eneral kind !r that "articular t! the inter?Aerican le&al

#2#te there i# n! rule "erittin& the e0erci#e !/ c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence in the ab#ence !/ a reIue#t b2the State which i# a 3icti !/ the alle&ed attack thi# bein& additi!nal t! the reIuireent that the State

in Iue#ti!n #h!uld ha3e declared it#el/ t! ha3e been attacked'

' The "rinci"le !/ n!n?inter3enti!n ("ara#' *+* t! *+8)The "rinci"le !/ n!n?inter3enti!n in3!l3e# the ri&ht !/ e3er2 #!3erei&n State t! c!nduct it# a//air#

with!ut !ut#ide inter/erence' E0"re##i!n# !/ an !"ini! <uri# !/ State# re&ardin& the e0i#tence !/ thi#

"rinci"le are nuer!u#' The C!urt n!te# that thi# "rinci"le #tated in it# !wn <uri#"rudence ha# been

re/lected in nuer!u# declarati!n# and re#!luti!n# ad!"ted b2 internati!nal !r&ani.ati!n# andc!n/erence# in which the United State# and 4icara&ua ha3e "artici"ated' The te0t there!/ te#ti/ie# t! the

acce"tance b2 the United State# and 4icara&ua !/ a cu#t!ar2 "rinci"le which ha# uni3er#al

a""licati!n' A# t! the c!ntent !/ the "rinci"le in cu#t!ar2 law the C!urt de/ine# the c!n#tituti3eeleent# which a""ear rele3ant in thi# ca#e$ a "r!hibited inter3enti!n u#t be !ne bearin& !n atter# in

which each State i# "eritted b2 the "rinci"le !/ State #!3erei&nt2 t! decide /reel2 (/!r e0a"le the

ch!ice !/ a "!litical ec!n!ic #!cial and cultural #2#te and /!rulati!n !/ /!rei&n "!lic2)'nter3enti!n i# wr!n&/ul when it u#e# in re&ard t! #uch ch!ice# eth!d# !/ c!erci!n "articularl2

/!rce either in the direct /!r !/ ilitar2 acti!n !r in the indirect /!r !/ #u""!rt /!r #ub3er#i3e

acti3itie# in an!ther State'ith re&ard t! the "ractice !/ State# the C!urt n!te# that there ha3e been in recent 2ear# a nuber !/

in#tance# !/ /!rei&n inter3enti!n in !ne State /!r the bene/it !/ /!rce# !""!#ed t! the &!3ernent !/

that State' t c!nclude# that the "ractice !/ State# d!e# n!t <u#ti/2 the 3iew that an2 &eneral ri&ht !/

inter3enti!n in #u""!rt !/ an !""!#iti!n within an!ther State e0i#t# in c!nte"!rar2 internati!nal law6and thi# i# in /act n!t a##erted either b2 the United State# !r b2 4icara&ua'

' C!llecti3e c!unter?ea#ure# in re#"!n#e t! c!nduct n!t a!untin& t! ared attack ("ara#' *7+ and

*77)The C!urt then c!n#ider# the Iue#ti!n whether i/ !ne State act# t!ward# an!ther in breach !/ the

"rinci"le !/ n!n?inter3enti!n a third State a2 law/ull2 take acti!n b2 wa2 !/ c!unter?ea#ure# which

w!uld a!unt t! an inter3enti!n in the /ir#t State# internal a//air#' Thi# w!uld be anal!&!u# t! the ri&ht!/ #el/?de/ence in the ca#e !/ ared attack but the act &i3in& ri#e t! the reacti!n w!uld be le## &ra3e

n!t a!untin& t! ared attack' n the 3iew !/ the C!urt under internati!nal law in /!rce t!da2 State#

d! n!t ha3e a ri&ht !/ Qc!llecti3eQ ared re#"!n#e t! act# which d! n!t c!n#titute an Qared attackQ'

7/26/2019 PIL case


F' State #!3erei&nt2 ("ara#' *7* t! *7)

Turnin& t! the "rinci"le !/ re#"ect /!r State #!3erei&nt2 the C!urt recall# that the c!nce"t !/

#!3erei&nt2 b!th in treat2?law and in cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law e0tend# t! the internal water# and

territ!rial #ea !/ e3er2 State and t! the air#"ace ab!3e it# territ!r2' t n!te# that the la2in& !/ ine#nece##aril2 a//ect# the #!3erei&nt2 !/ the c!a#tal State and that i/ the ri&ht !/ acce## t! "!rt# i# hindered

b2 the la2in& !/ ine# b2 an!ther State what i# in/rin&ed i# the /reed! !/ c!unicati!n# and !/

aritie c!erce'J' Nuanitarian law ("ara#' *7F t! **+)

The C!urt !b#er3e# that the la2in& !/ ine# in the water# !/ an!ther State with!ut an2 warnin& !r

n!ti/icati!n i# n!t !nl2 an unlaw/ul act but al#! a breach !/ the "rinci"le# !/ huanitarian lawunderl2in& the Na&ue C!n3enti!n 4!' ; !/ 78+9' Thi# c!n#iderati!n lead# the C!urt !n t!

e0ainati!n !/ the internati!nal huanitarian law a""licable t! the di#"ute' 4icara&ua ha# n!t

e0"re##l2 in3!ked the "r!3i#i!n# !/ internati!nal huanitarian law a# #uch but ha# c!"lained !/ act#c!itted !n it# territ!r2 which w!uld a""ear t! be breache# there!/' n it# #ubi##i!n# it ha# accu#ed

the United State# !/ ha3in& killed w!unded and kidna""ed citi.en# !/ 4icara&ua' Since the e3idence

a3ailable i# in#u//icient /!r the "ur"!#e !/ attributin& t! the United State# the act# c!itted b2 the

c!ntra# the C!urt re<ect# thi# #ubi##i!n'The Iue#ti!n h!we3er reain# !/ the law a""licable t! the act# !/ the United State# in relati!n t! the

acti3itie# !/ the c!ntra#t Alth!u&h 4icara&ua ha# re/rained /r! re/errin& t! the /!ur Gene3a

C!n3enti!n# !/ 7* Au&u#t 788 t! which 4icara&ua and the United State# are "artie# the C!urtc!n#ider# that the rule# #tated in Article which i# c!!n t! the /!ur C!n3enti!n# a""l2in& t!

ared c!n/lict# !/ a n!n?internati!nal character #h!uld be a""lied' The United State# i# under an

!bli&ati!n t! Qre#"ectQ the C!n3enti!n# and e3en t! Qen#ure re#"ectQ /!r the and thu# n!t t!enc!ura&e "er#!n# !r &r!u"# en&a&ed in the c!n/lict in 4icara&ua t! act in 3i!lati!n !/ the "r!3i#i!n#

!/ Article ' Thi# !bli&ati!n deri3e# /r! the &eneral "rinci"le# !/ huanitarian law t! which the

C!n3enti!n# erel2 &i3e #"eci/ic e0"re##i!n'

9' The 78FJ treat2 ("ara#' **7 t! **F)n it# :ud&ent !/ *J 4!3eber 78, the C!urt c!ncluded that it had <uri#dicti!n t! entertain clai#

c!ncernin& the e0i#tence !/ a di#"ute between the United State# and 4icara&ua a# t! the inter"retati!n

!r a""licati!n !/ a nuber !/ article# !/ the treat2 !/ 5riend#hi" C!erce and 4a3i&ati!n #i&ned atMana&ua !n *7 :anuar2 78FJ' t ha# t! deterine the eanin& !/ the 3ari!u# rele3ant "r!3i#i!n# and

in "articular !/ Article "ara&ra"h# (c) and (d) b2 which the "artie# re#er3ed the "!wer t!

der!&ate /r! the !ther "r!3i#i!n#'' A""licati!n !/ the law t! the /act# ("ara#' **J t! *,*)

Na3in& #et !ut the /act# !/ the ca#e and the rule# !/ internati!nal law which a""ear t! be in i##ue a# a

re#ult !/ th!#e /act# the C!urt ha# n!w t! a""rai#e the /act# in relati!n t! the le&al rule# a""licable anddeterine whether there are "re#ent an2 circu#tance# e0cludin& the unlaw/ulne## !/ "articular act#'

7' The "r!hibiti!n !/ the u#e !/ /!rce and the ri&ht !/ #el/?de/ence ("ara#' **9 t! *,)

A""rai#in& the /act# /ir#t in the li&ht !/ the "rinci"le !/ the n!n?u#e !/ /!rce the C!urt c!n#ider# that

the la2in& !/ ine# in earl2 78, and certain attack# !n 4icara&uan "!rt# !il in#tallati!n# and na3al ba#e# i"utable t! the United State# c!n#titute in/rin&eent# !/ thi# "rinci"le unle## <u#ti/ied b2

circu#tance# which e0clude their unlaw/ulne##' t al#! c!n#ider# that the United State# ha# c!itted

a "ria /acie 3i!lati!n !/ the "rinci"le b2 arin& and trainin& the c!ntra# unle## thi# can be <u#ti/ied a#an e0erci#e !/ the ri&ht !/ #el/?de/ence'

On the !ther hand it d!e# n!t c!n#ider that ilitar2 an!eu3re# held b2 the United State# near the

4icara&uan b!rder# !r the #u""l2 !/ /und# t! the c!ntra# a!unt# t! a u#e !/ /!rce'The C!urt ha# t! c!n#ider whether the act# which it re&ard# a# breache# !/ the "rinci"le a2 be

<u#ti/ied b2 the e0erci#e !/ the ri&ht !/ c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence and ha# there/!re t! e#tabli#h whether

the circu#tance# reIuired are "re#ent' 5!r thi# it w!uld /ir#t ha3e t! /ind that 4icara&ua en&a&ed in an

7/26/2019 PIL case


ared attack a&ain#t El Sal3ad!r N!ndura# !r C!#ta Rica #ince !nl2 #uch an attack c!uld <u#ti/2

reliance !n the ri&ht !/ #el/?de/ence' A# re&ard# El Sal3ad!r the C!urt c!n#ider# that in cu#t!ar2

internati!nal law the "r!3i#i!n !/ ar# t! the !""!#iti!n in an!ther State d!e# n!t c!n#titute an ared

attack !n that State' A# re&ard# N!ndura# and C!#ta Rica the C!urt #tate# that in the ab#ence !/#u//icient in/!rati!n a# t! the tran#b!rder incur#i!n# int! the territ!r2 !/ th!#e tw! State# /r!

4icara&ua it i# di//icult t! decide whether the2 a!unt #in&l2 !r c!llecti3el2 t! an ared attack b2

4icara&ua' The C!urt /ind# that neither the#e incur#i!n# n!r the alle&ed #u""l2 !/ ar# a2 be relied!n a# <u#ti/2in& the e0erci#e !/ the ri&ht !/ c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence'

Sec!ndl2 in !rder t! deterine whether the United State# wa# <u#ti/ied in e0erci#in& #el/?de/ence the

C!urt ha# t! a#certain whether the circu#tance# reIuired /!r the e0erci#e !/ thi# ri&ht !/ c!llecti3e#el/?de/ence were "re#ent and there/!re c!n#ider# whether the State# in Iue#ti!n belie3ed that the2

were the 3icti# !/ an ared attack b2 4icara&ua and reIue#ted the a##i#tance !/ the United State# in

the e0erci#e !/ c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence' The C!urt ha# #een n! e3idence that the c!nduct !/ th!#e State#wa# c!n#i#tent with #uch a #ituati!n'

5inall2 a""rai#in& the United State# acti3it2 in relati!n t! the criteria !/ nece##it2 and "r!"!rti!nalit2

the C!urt cann!t /ind that the acti3itie# in Iue#ti!n were undertaken in the li&ht !/ nece##it2 and /ind#

that #!e !/ the cann!t be re&arded a# #ati#/2in& the criteri!n !/ "r!"!rti!nalit2'Since the "lea !/ c!llecti3e #el/?de/ence ad3anced b2 the United State# cann!t be u"held it /!ll!w# that

the United State# ha# 3i!lated the "rinci"le "r!hibitin& rec!ur#e t! the threat !r u#e !/ /!rce b2 the act#

re/erred t! in the /ir#t "ara&ra"h !/ thi# #ecti!n'*' The "rinci"le !/ n!n?inter3enti!n ("ara#' *8 t! *F)

The C!urt /ind# it clearl2 e#tabli#hed that the United State# intended b2 it# #u""!rt !/ the c!ntra# t!

c!erce 4icara&ua in re#"ect !/ atter# in which each State i# "eritted t! decide /reel2 and that theintenti!n !/ the c!ntra# the#el3e# wa# t! !3erthr!w the "re#ent G!3ernent !/ 4icara&ua' t

c!n#ider# that i/ !ne State with a 3iew t! the c!erci!n !/ an!ther State #u""!rt# and a##i#t# ared

band# in that State wh!#e "ur"!#e i# t! !3erthr!w it# &!3ernent that a!unt# t! an inter3enti!n in it#

internal a//air# whate3er the "!litical !b<ecti3e !/ the State &i3in& #u""!rt' t there/!re /ind# that the#u""!rt &i3en b2 the United State# t! the ilitar2 and "arailitar2 acti3itie# !/ the c!ntra# in

4icara&ua b2 /inancial #u""!rt trainin& #u""l2 !/ wea"!n# intelli&ence and l!&i#tic #u""!rt

c!n#titute# a clear breach !/ the "rinci"le !/ n!n?inter3enti!n' Nuanitarian aid !n the !ther handcann!t be re&arded a# unlaw/ul inter3enti!n' ith e//ect /r! 7 Oct!ber 78, the United State#

C!n&re## ha# re#tricted the u#e !/ /und# t! Qhuanitarian a##i#tanceQ t! the c!ntra#t The C!urt recall#

that i/ the "r!3i#i!n !/ Qhuanitarian a##i#tanceQ i# t! e#ca"e c!ndenati!n a# an inter3enti!n in theinternal a//air# !/ an!ther State it u#t be liited t! the "ur"!#e# hall!wed in the "ractice !/ the Red

Cr!## and ab!3e all be &i3en with!ut di#criinati!n'

ith re&ard t! the /!r !/ indirect inter3enti!n which 4icara&ua #ee# in the takin& !/ certain acti!n !/an ec!n!ic nature a&ain#t it b2 the United State# the C!urt i# unable t! re&ard #uch acti!n in the

"re#ent ca#e a# a breach !/ the cu#t!ar2 law "rinci"le !/ n!n?inter3enti!n'

' C!llecti3e c!unter?ea#ure# in re#"!n#e t! c!nduct n!t a!untin& t! ared attack ("ara#' *J t!

*8)Na3in& /!und that inter3enti!n in the internal a//air# !/ an!ther State d!e# n!t "r!duce an entitleent

t! take c!llecti3e c!unter?ea#ure# in3!l3in& the u#e !/ /!rce the C!urt /ind# that the act# !/ which

4icara&ua i# accu#ed e3en a##uin& the t! ha3e been e#tabli#hed and i"utable t! that State c!uldn!t <u#ti/2 c!unter?ea#ure# taken b2 a third State the United State# and "articularl2 c!uld n!t <u#ti/2

inter3enti!n in3!l3in& the u#e !/ /!rce'

' State #!3erei&nt2 ("ara#' *F+ t! *F)The C!urt /ind# that the a##i#tance t! the c!ntra# the direct attack# !n 4icara&uan "!rt# !il

in#tallati!n# etc' the inin& !"erati!n# in 4icara&uan "!rt# and the act# !/ inter3enti!n in3!l3in& the

u#e !/ /!rce re/erred t! in the :ud&ent which are alread2 a breach !/ the "rinci"le !/ n!n?u#e !/ /!rce

7/26/2019 PIL case


are al#! an in/rin&eent !/ the "rinci"le !/ re#"ect /!r territ!rial #!3erei&nt2' Thi# "rinci"le i# al#!

directl2 in/rin&ed b2 the unauth!ri.ed !3er/li&ht !/ 4icara&uan territ!r2' The#e act# cann!t be <u#ti/ied

b2 the acti3itie# in El Sal3ad!r attributed t! 4icara&ua6 a##uin& that #uch acti3itie# did in /act !ccur

the2 d! n!t brin& int! e//ect an2 ri&ht bel!n&in& t! the United State#' The C!urt al#! c!nclude# that inthe c!nte0t !/ the "re#ent "r!ceedin&# the la2in& !/ ine# in !r near 4icara&uan "!rt# c!n#titute# an

in/rin&eent t! 4icara&ua# detrient !/ the /reed! !/ c!unicati!n# and !/ aritie c!erce'

F' Nuanitarian law ("ara#' *F t! *FJ)The C!urt ha# /!und the United State# re#"!n#ible /!r the /ailure t! &i3e n!tice !/ the inin& !/

4icara&uan "!rt#'

t ha# al#! /!und that under &eneral "rinci"le# !/ huanitarian law the United State# wa# b!und t!re/rain /r! enc!ura&eent !/ "er#!n# !r &r!u"# en&a&ed in the c!n/lict in 4icara&ua t! c!it

3i!lati!n# !/ c!!n Article !/ the /!ur Gene3a C!n3enti!n# !/ 7* Au&u#t 788' The anual !n

QP#2ch!l!&ical O"erati!n# in Guerrilla ar/areQ /!r the "ublicati!n and di##einati!n !/ which theUnited State# i# re#"!n#ible ad3i#e# certain act# which cann!t but be re&arded a# c!ntrar2 t! that

article'

J' Other &r!und# enti!ned in <u#ti/icati!n !/ the act# !/ the United State# ("ara#' *F9 t! *J8)

The United State# ha# linked it# #u""!rt t! the c!ntra# with alle&ed breache# b2 the G!3ernent !/ 4icara&ua !/ certain #!len c!itent# t! the 4icara&uan "e!"le the United State# and the OAS'

The C!urt c!n#ider# whether there i# an2thin& in the c!nduct !/ 4icara&ua which i&ht le&all2 warrant

c!unter?ea#ure# b2 the United State# in re#"!n#e t! the alle&ed 3i!lati!n#' ith re/erence t! the QPlant! #ecure "eaceQ "ut /!rward b2 the :unta !/ the G!3ernent !/ 4ati!nal Rec!n#tructi!n (7* :ul2

7898) the C!urt i# unable t! /ind an2thin& in the d!cuent# and c!unicati!n# tran#ittin& the "lan

/r! which it can be in/erred that an2 le&al undertakin& wa# intended t! e0i#t' The C!urt cann!tc!nte"late the creati!n !/ a new rule !"enin& u" a ri&ht !/ inter3enti!n b2 !ne State a&ain#t an!ther

!n the &r!und that the latter ha# !"ted /!r #!e "articular ide!l!&2 !r "!litical #2#te' 5urther!re the

Re#"!ndent ha# n!t ad3anced a le&al ar&uent ba#ed !n an alle&ed new "rinci"le !/ Qide!l!&ical

inter3enti!nQ'ith re&ard !re #"eci/icall2 t! alle&ed 3i!lati!n# !/ huan ri&ht# relied !n b2 the United State# the

C!urt c!n#ider# that the u#e !/ /!rce b2 the United State# c!uld n!t be the a""r!"riate eth!d t!

!nit!r !r en#ure re#"ect /!r #uch ri&ht# n!rall2 "r!3ided /!r in the a""licable c!n3enti!n#' ithre&ard t! the alle&ed ilitari.ati!n !/ 4icara&ua al#! re/erred t! b2 the United State# t! <u#ti/2 it#

acti3itie# the C!urt !b#er3e# that in internati!nal law there are n! rule# !ther than #uch rule# a# a2

be acce"ted b2 the State c!ncerned b2 treat2 !r !therwi#e whereb2 the le3el !/ araent# !/ a#!3erei&n State can be liited and thi# "rinci"le i# 3alid /!r all State# with!ut e0ce"ti!n'

9' The 78FJ Treat2 ("ara#' *9+ t! *,*)

The C!urt turn# t! the clai# !/ 4icara&ua ba#ed !n the Treat2 !/ 5riend#hi" C!erce and 4a3i&ati!n !/ 78FJ and the clai that the United State# ha# de"ri3ed the Treat2 !/ it# !b<ect and

"ur"!#e and e"tied it !/ real c!ntent' The C!urt cann!t h!we3er entertain the#e clai# unle## the

c!nduct c!"lained !/ i# n!t Qea#ure# ' ' ' nece##ar2 t! "r!tect the e##ential #ecurit2 intere#t#Q !/ the

United State# #ince Article !/ the Treat2 "r!3ide# that the Treat2 #hall n!t "reclude the a""licati!n!/ #uch ea#ure#' ith re&ard t! the Iue#ti!n what acti3itie# !/ the United State# i&ht ha3e been #uch

a# t! de"ri3e the Treat2 !/ it# !b<ect and "ur"!#e the C!urt ake# a di#tincti!n' t i# unable t! re&ard

all the act# c!"lained !/ in that li&ht but c!n#ider# that there are certain acti3itie# which underinethe wh!le #"irit !/ the a&reeent' The#e are the inin& !/ 4icara&uan "!rt# the direct attack# !n "!rt#

!il in#tallati!n# etc' and the &eneral trade ebar&!'

The C!urt al#! u"h!ld# the c!ntenti!n that the inin& !/ the "!rt# i# in ani/e#t c!ntradicti!n with the/reed! !/ na3i&ati!n and c!erce &uaranteed b2 Article !/ the Treat2' t al#! c!nclude# that

the trade ebar&! "r!claied !n 7 Ma2 78,F i# c!ntrar2 t! that article'

The C!urt there/!re /ind# that the United State# i# "ria /acie in breach !/ an !bli&ati!n n!t t! de"ri3e

7/26/2019 PIL case


the 78FJ Treat2 !/ it# !b<ect and "ur"!#e ("acta #unt #er3anda) and ha# c!itted act# in c!ntradicti!n

with the ter# !/ the Treat2' The C!urt ha# h!we3er t! c!n#ider whether the e0ce"ti!n in Article

c!ncernin& Qea#ure# ' ' ' nece##ar2 t! "r!tect the e##ential #ecurit2 intere#t#Q !/ a Part2 a2 be

in3!ked t! <u#ti/2 the act# c!"lained !/' A/ter e0ainin& the a3ailable aterial "articularl2 theE0ecuti3e Order !/ Pre#ident Rea&an !/ 7 Ma2 78,F the C!urt /ind# that the inin& !/ 4icara&uan

"!rt# and the direct attack# !n "!rt# and !il in#tallati!n# and the &eneral trade ebar&! !/ 7 Ma2

78,F cann!t be <u#ti/ied a# nece##ar2 t! "r!tect the e##ential #ecurit2 intere#t# !/ the United State#'' The clai /!r re"arati!n ("ara#' *, t! *,F)

The C!urt i# reIue#ted t! ad<ud&e and declare that c!"en#ati!n i# due t! 4icara&ua the Iuantu

there!/ t! be /i0ed #ub#eIuentl2 and t! award t! 4icara&ua the #u !/ 9+'* illi!n US d!llar# a# aninteri award' A/ter #ati#/2in& it#el/ that it ha# <uri#dicti!n t! !rder re"arati!n the C!urt c!n#ider#

a""r!"riate the reIue#t !/ 4icara&ua /!r the nature and a!unt !/ the re"arati!n t! be deterined in a

#ub#eIuent "ha#e !/ the "r!ceedin&#' t al#! c!n#ider# that there i# n! "r!3i#i!n in the Statute !/ theC!urt either #"eci/icall2 e"!werin& it !r debarrin& it /r! akin& an interi award !/ the kind

reIue#ted' n a ca#e# in which !ne Part2 i# n!t a""earin& the C!urt #h!uld re/rain /r! an2

unnece##ar2 act which i&ht "r!3e an !b#tacle t! a ne&!tiated #ettleent' The C!urt there/!re d!e# n!t

c!n#ider that it can accede at thi# #ta&e t! thi# reIue#t b2 4icara&ua'' The "r!3i#i!nal ea#ure# ("ara#' *,J t! *,8)

A/ter recallin& certain "a##a&e# in it# Order !/ 7+ Ma2 78, the C!urt c!nclude# that it i# incubent

!n each Part2 n!t t! direct it# c!nduct #!lel2 b2 re/erence t! what it belie3e# t! be it# ri&ht#'Particularl2 i# thi# #! in a #ituati!n !/ ared c!n/lict where n! re"arati!n can e//ace the re#ult# !/

c!nduct which the C!urt a2 rule t! ha3e been c!ntrar2 t! internati!nal law

;' Peace/ul #ettleent !/ di#"ute#6 the C!ntad!ra "r!ce## ("ara#' *8+ t! *87)n the "re#ent ca#e the C!urt ha# alread2 taken n!te !/ the C!ntad!ra "r!ce## and !/ the /act that it had

been end!r#ed b2 the United 4ati!n# Securit2 C!uncil and General A##ebl2 a# well a# b2 4icara&ua

and the United State#' t recall# t! b!th Partie# t! the "re#ent ca#e the need t! c!?!"erate with the

C!ntad!ra e//!rt# in #eekin& a de/initi3e and la#tin& "eace in Central Aerica in acc!rdance with the "rinci"le !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law that "re#cribe# the "eace/ul #ettleent !/ internati!nal

di#"ute# al#! end!r#ed b2 Article !/ the United 4ati!n# Charter'

SUMMARY O5 TNE OP4O4S APPE4E TO

TNE :UGME4T O5 TNE COURT

Se"arate O"ini!n !/ :ud&e 4a&endra Sin&hPre#ident

The !"erati3e "art !/ "ara&ra"h *8* (7J) !/ the :ud&ent ad!"ted unani!u#l2 b2 the C!urt which

en<!in# "artie# t! #eek a "eace/ul #!luti!n !/ their di#"ute# in acc!rdance with internati!nal law reall2re#t# !n the due !b#er3ance !/ tw! ba#ic "rinci"le#$ nael2 that !/ n!n?u#e !/ /!rce in inter?State

relati!n# and that !/ n!n?inter3enti!n in the a//air# !/ !ther State#' Thi# in the Pre#ident# 3iew i# the

ain thru#t !/ the :ud&ent !/ the C!urt rendered with ut!#t #incerit2 t! #er3e the be#t intere#t# !/

the c!unit2'n /act the cardinal "rinci"le !/ n!n?u#e !/ /!rce in internati!nal relati!n# ha# been the "i3!tal "!int !/

a tie?h!n!ured le&al "hil!#!"h2 that ha# e3!l3ed "articularl2 a/ter the tw! w!rld war# !/ the current

centur2' The Charter "r!3i#i!n# a# well a# the Latin Aerican Treat2 S2#te ha3e n!t !nl2 de3el!"edthe c!nce"t but #tren&thened it t! the e0tent that it w!uld #tand !n it# !wn e3en i/ the Charter and the

Treat2 ba#i# were held ina""licable in thi# ca#e' The !b3i!u# e0"lanati!n i# that the !ri&inal cu#t!ar2

a#"ect which ha# e3!l3ed with the treat2 law de3el!"ent ha# c!e n!w t! #ta2 and #ur3i3e a# thee0i#tin& !dern c!nce"t !/ internati!nal law whether cu#t!ar2 becau#e !/ it# !ri&in# !r Qa &eneral

"rinci"le !/ internati!nal law rec!&ni.ed b2 ci3ili.ed nati!n#Q' The c!ntributi!n !/ the C!urt ha# been

t! e"ha#i.e the "rinci"le !/ n!n?u#e !/ /!rce a# !ne bel!n&in& t! the real !/ <u# c!&en# and hence a#

7/26/2019 PIL case


the 3er2 c!rner#t!ne !/ the huan e//!rt t! "r!!te "eace in a w!rld t!rn b2 #tri/e' 5!rce be&et# /!rce

and a&&ra3ate# c!n/lict# ebitter# relati!n# and endan&er# "eace/ul re#!luti!n !/ the di#"ute'

There i# al#! the ke2 d!ctrine !/ n!n?inter3enti!n in the a//air# !/ State# which i# eIuall2 3ital /!r the

"eace and "r!&re## !/ huanit2 bein& e##entiall2 needed t! "r!!te the health2 e0i#tence !/ thec!unit2' The "rinci"le !/ n!n?inter3enti!n i# t! be treated a# a #ancti/ied ab#!lute rule !/ law'

State# u#t !b#er3e b!th the#e "rinci"le# nael2 that !/ n!n?u#e !/ /!rce and that !/ n!n?inter3enti!n

in the be#t intere#t# !/ "eace and !rder in the c!unit2' The C!urt ha# ri&htl2 held the b!th a# "rinci"le# !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law alth!u&h #ancti/ied b2 treat2 law but a""licable in thi# ca#e

in the /!rer cu#t!ar2 ani/e#tati!n ha3in& been rein3i&!rated b2 bein& /urther #tren&thened b2 the

e0"re## c!n#ent !/ State# "articularl2 the Partie# in di#"ute here' Thi# u#t indeed ha3e all the wei&htthat law c!uld e3er c!end in an2 ca#e'

The deci#i!n !/ the C!urt i# in the re#ult !/ a c!lle&iate e0erci#e reached a/ter "r!l!n&ed deliberati!n

and a /ull e0chan&e !/ 3iew# !/ n! le## than /i/teen :ud&e# wh! w!rkin& acc!rdin& t! the Statute andRule# !/ the C!urt ha3e e0ained the le&al ar&uent# and all the e3idence be/!re it' n thi# a# in all

!ther ca#e# e3er2 care ha# been taken t! #trictl2 !b#er3e the "r!cedure# "re#cribed and the deci#i!n i#

u"held b2 a clear a<!rit2' hat i# !re the bindin& character !/ the :ud&ent under the Statute (Art'

F8) i# ade #acr!#anct b2 a "r!3i#i!n !/ the U4 Charter (Art' 8)$ all Meber# !/ the United 4ati!n#ha3e undertaken an !bli&ati!n t! c!"l2 with the C!urt# deci#i!n# addre##ed t! the and t! alwa2#

re#"ect the 3alidit2 !/ the :ud&ent'

Se"arate O"ini!n !/ :ud&e Lach#

:ud&e Lach# be&in# b2 drawin& attenti!n t! the reIuireent# !/ the Statute in re#"ect !/ the "er#!nal

Iualitie# and di3er#it2 !/ !ri&in that u#t characteri.e Meber# !/ the C!urt and de"recate# an2a#"er#i!n u"!n their inde"endence'

On the #ub#tance !/ the :ud&ent he w!uld ha3e "re/erred !re attenti!n t! be &i3en t! /!rei&n

a##i#tance t! the !""!#iti!n /!rce# in El Sal3ad!r and di//erent /!rulae t! ha3e been u#ed in 3ari!u#

"lace#':ud&e Lach# return# t! #!e a#"ect# !/ <uri#dicti!n c!n#iderin& that in#u//icient wei&ht had "re3i!u#l2

been &i3en t! the /!rt2 2ear# that had ela"#ed be/!re an2 "ublic !b<ecti!n had been rai#ed a&ain#t the

3alidit2 !/ 4icara&ua# acce"tance !/ the C!urt# <uri#dicti!n' hen that 3alidit2 had been "ri3atel2Iue#ti!ned in c!nnecti!n with a ca#e in the id?78F+# acti!n #h!uld ha3e been taken b2 the United

4ati!n#$ 4icara&ua #h!uld ha3e been a#ked t! c!"lete an2 nece##ar2 /!ralitie# and i/ it /ailed t! d!

#! w!uld ha3e been re!3ed /r! the li#t !/ State# #ub<ect t! the c!"ul#!r2 <uri#dicti!n !/ the C!urt'The United 4ati!n# ha3in& taken n! acti!n it wa# le&itiate t! 3iew the i"er/ecti!n a# cured b2

acIuie#cence !3er a 3er2 l!n& "eri!d' The <uri#dicti!n !/ the C!urt ba#ed !n the 5C4 Treat2 !/ 78FJ

&a3e n! cau#e /!r d!ubt':ud&e Lach# al#! deal# with the Iue#ti!n !/ the <u#ticiabilit2 !/ the ca#e$ the cl!#e relati!n#hi" between

le&al and "!litical di#"ute# a# between law and "!litic#' nternati!nal law t!da2 c!3er# #uch wide area#

!/ internati!nal relati!n# that !nl2 3er2 /ew d!ain# ? /!r in#tance the "r!ble !/ di#araent !r

!ther# #"eci/icall2 e0cluded b2 State# ? are n!t <u#ticiable' Ne #"eci/icall2 in#tance# the ca#ec!ncernin& United State# i"l!atic and C!n#ular Sta// in Tehran'

Re/errin& t! the C!urt# re/u#al t! &rant a hearin& t! El Sal3ad!r at the <uri#dicti!nal #ta&e :ud&e Lach#

#tate# that he ha# c!e t! 3iew it a# a <udicial err!r which d!e# n!t h!we3er <u#ti/2 an2 unrelatedc!nclu#i!n#'

The br!ad c!n/r!ntati!n between the Partie# #h!uld in :ud&e Lach## 3iew be #ettled within the

/raew!rk !/ the C!ntad!ra Plan in c!?!"erati!n with all State# !/ the re&i!n' The area t!rn b2c!n/lict# #u//erin& /r! under?de3el!"ent /!r a l!n& tie reIuire# a new a""r!ach ba#ed !n eIual

c!n#iderati!n !/ the intere#t# !/ all c!ncerned in the #"irit !/ &!!d?nei&hb!url2 relati!n#'

7/26/2019 PIL case


Se"arate O"ini!n !/ :ud&e Ruda

The #e"arate O"ini!n !/ :ud&e Ruda deal# with /!ur #ub<ect#' n the /ir#t "lace :ud&e Ruda d!e# n!t

acce"t the re#er3ati!n e0"re##ed b2 the United State# in the letter dated 7, :anuar2 78,F Qin re#"ect !/

an2 deci#i!n b2 the C!urt re&ardin& 4icara&ua# clai#Q' n :ud&e Ruda# 3iew "ur#uant t! Article 8 "ara&ra"h !/ the Charter !/ the United 4ati!n# the Meber State# !/ the United 4ati!n# ha3e

/!rall2 acce"ted the !bli&ati!n t! c!"l2 with the C!urt# deci#i!n#'

The #ec!nd "art !/ the O"ini!n re/er# t! the ;andenber& Aendent' :ud&e Ruda 3!ted a&ain#t thea""licati!n !/ the Aendent /!r the rea#!n# #tated in the #e"arate O"ini!n which he #ubitted in

78,'

n the third "art :ud&e Ruda deal# with the Iue#ti!n !/ #el/?de/ence' Ne e0"lain# that hi# c!nclu#i!n#are the #ae a# th!#e reached b2 the C!urt but in hi# 3iew it i# n!t nece##ar2 t! enter int! all the

/actual detail# becau#e a##i#tance t! rebel# i# n!t "er #e a "rete0t /!r #el/?de/ence /r! the le&al "!int

!/ 3iew'The /!urth "art i# de3!ted t! the rea#!n# wh2 :ud&e Ruda de#"ite ha3in& 3!ted in 78, a&ain#t the

Treat2 !/ 5riend#hi" C!erce and 4a3i&ati!n a# a ba#i# !/ the C!urt# <uri#dicti!n belie3e# he i#

b!und t! 3!te !n the #ub#tanti3e i##ue# #ubitted t! the C!urt !n thi# #ub<ect'

Se"arate O"ini!n !/ :ud&e Elia#

:ud&e Elia# c!n#ider# that /!ll!win& the C!urt# :ud&ent in the <uri#dicti!nal "ha#e the ultilateral

treat2 re#er3ati!n attached t! the United State# declarati!n acce"tin& <uri#dicti!n under the O"ti!nalClau#e wa# le/t in abe2ance and had n! /urther rele3ance unle## El Sal3ad!r N!ndura# !r C!#ta Rica

inter3ened in the "ha#e !n erit# and re"arati!n' 5!r the C!urt t! ha3e a""lied it wa# there/!re

inc!rrect and tanta!unt t! in3!kin& a "!wer t! re3i#e it# deci#i!n !n <uri#dicti!n and adi##ibilit2 !n behal/ !/ n!n?"artie# t! the ca#e'

Se"arate O"ini!n !/ :ud&e A&!

hile #ub#cribin& t! the :ud&ent a# a wh!le and a""r!3in& in "articular the "!#iti!n ad!"ted b2 theC!urt c!ncernin& the United State# ultilateral treat2 re#er3ati!n :ud&e A&! reain# he#itant ab!ut

certain "!int#' 5!r e0a"le he /eel# that the C!urt ade a #!ewhat t!! ha#t2 /indin& a# t! the Iua#i?

identit2 !/ #ub#tance between cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law and the law en#hrined in certain a<!rultilateral treatie# !/ uni3er#al character and wa# al#! #!ewhat t!! read2 t! #ee the end!r#eent !/

certain "rinci"le# b2 U4 and OAS re#!luti!n# a# "r!!/ !/ the "re#ence !/ th!#e "rinci"le# in the !"ini!

<uri# !/ eber# !/ the internati!nal c!unit2' :ud&e A&! al#! /eel# !bli&ed t! draw attenti!n t!what he 3iew# a# #!e "artiall2 c!ntradict!r2 a#"ect# !/ the C!urt# a##e##ent !/ the /actual and le&al

#ituati!n' Ne /urther c!n#ider# that #!e "a##a&e# !/ the :ud&ent #h!w a "aucit2 !/ le&al rea#!nin& t!

#u""!rt the C!urt# c!nclu#i!n# a# t! the i"utabilit2 !/ certain act# t! the Re#"!ndent Iua act# &i3in&ri#e t! internati!nal re#"!n#ibilit2 and w!uld ha3e "re/erred t! #ee the C!urt include a !re e0"licit

c!n/irati!n !/ it# ca#e?law !n thi# #ub<ect'

Se"arate O"ini!n !/ :ud&e Sette?Caara:ud&e Sette?Caara /ull2 c!ncur# with the :ud&ent becau#e he /irl2 belie3e# that Qthe n!n?u#e !/

/!rce a# well a# n!n?inter3enti!n ? the latter a# a c!r!llar2 !/ eIualit2 !/ State# and #el/?deterinati!n ?

are n!t !nl2 cardinal "rinci"le# !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law but c!uld in additi!n be rec!&ni.ed a# "ere"t!r2 rule# !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law which i"!#e !bli&ati!n# !n all State#Q' Ni# #e"arate

!"ini!n deal# !nl2 with #ub"ara&ra"h (7) !/ the !"erati3e "art a&ain#t which he ha# 3!ted' Ne

aintain# that the ultilateral treat2 re#er3ati!n a""ended t! the United State# 78J eclarati!n !/Acce"tance !/ the :uri#dicti!n !/ the C!urt acc!rdin& t! Article J "ara&ra"h * !/ the Statute cann!t

be a""lied t! the "re#ent ca#e #ince n!ne !/ the deci#i!n# taken in the !"erati3e "art can in an2 wa2

Qa//ectQ third State# and in "articular El Sal3ad!r' The ca#e i# between 4icara&ua and the United State#

7/26/2019 PIL case


and the bindin& /!rce !/ the C!urt# deci#i!n i# c!n/ined t! the#e tw! Partie#' :ud&e Sette?Caara

rec!&ni.e# the ri&ht !/ an2 State akin& eclarati!n# !/ Acce"tance t! a""end t! the whate3er

re#er3ati!n# it dee# /it' N!we3er he c!ntend# that the C!urt i# /ree and indeed b!und t! inter"ret

th!#e re#er3ati!n#' Ne re&ret# that the a""licati!n !/ the ultilateral treat2 re#er3ati!n debarred theC!urt /r! re#tin& the :ud&ent !n the "r!3i#i!n# !/ the Charter !/ the United 4ati!n# and the Charter

!/ the Or&ani.ati!n !/ Aerican State# and /!rced it t! re#!rt !nl2 t! "rinci"le# !/ cu#t!ar2

internati!nal law and the bilateral Treat2 !/ 5riend#hi" C!erce and 4a3i&ati!n !/ 78FJ' Ne #ubit#that the law a""lied b2 the :ud&ent w!uld be clearer and !re "reci#e i/ the C!urt had re#!rted t! the

#"eci/ic "r!3i#i!n# !/ the rele3ant ultilateral c!n3enti!n

Se"arate O"ini!n !/ :ud&e 4i

:ud&e 4i# "riar2 c!ncern a# e0"re##ed in hi# #e"arate !"ini!n i# with re#"ect t! the Qultilateral

treat2 re#er3ati!nQ in3!ked b2 the United State#' n hi# 3iew an2 acce"tance !/ it# a""licabilit2entailed (7) the e0clu#i!n !/ the C!urt /r! e0erci#in& <uri#dicti!n in #! /ar a# 4icara&ua# clai# were

ba#ed !n the ultilateral treatie# in Iue#ti!n and (*) the "reclu#i!n i/ the ca#e wa# !n !ther &r!und#

#till in the C!urt /!r ad<udicati!n !/ the erit# !/ the a""licati!n !/ #uch ultilateral treatie#' n the

in#tant ca#e h!we3er the United State# while in3!kin& the ultilateral treat2 re#er3ati!n t! challen&ethe e0erci#e !/ <uri#dicti!n b2 the C!urt had in the eantie "er#i#tentl2 claied that the ultilateral

treatie# which c!n#titute the 3er2 ba#i# !/ it# re#er3ati!n #h!uld al!ne be a""lied t! the ca#e in di#"ute'

That clai a!unted in e//ect t! a ne&ati!n !/ it# !wn re#er3ati!n and takin& int! acc!unt all therele3ant circu#tance# !u&ht t! ha3e been c!n#idered a# a wai3er !/ the ultilateral treat2 re#er3ati!n'

Such bein& the ca#e :ud&e 4i di//ered /r! the a<!rit2 !/ the C!urt in that he c!n#idered that the

rule# c!ntained in ultilateral treatie# a# well a# cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law #h!uld wherea""r!"riate ha3e been a""lied t! the ca#e'

CASE CO4CER44G RGNT O5 PASSAGE O;ER

4A4 TERRTORY (MERTS)

:ud&ent !/ 7* A"ril 78J+

The ca#e c!ncernin& Ri&ht !/ Pa##a&e !3er ndian Territ!r2 (P!rtu&al 3' ndia) wa# re/erred t! theC!urt b2 an A""licati!n /iled !n ** eceber 78FF' n that A""licati!n the G!3ernent !/ P!rtu&al

#tated that it# territ!r2 in the ndian Penin#ula included tw! encla3e# #urr!unded b2 the Territ!r2 !/

ndia adra and 4a&ar?A3eli' t wa# in re#"ect !/ the c!unicati!n# between th!#e encla3e# and thec!a#tal di#trict !/ aan and between each !ther that the Iue#ti!n ar!#e !/ a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e in

/a3!ur !/ P!rtu&al thr!u&h ndian territ!r2 and !/ a c!rrelati3e !bli&ati!n bindin& u"!n ndia' The

A""licati!n #tated that in :ul2 78F the G!3ernent !/ ndia "re3ented P!rtu&al /r! e0erci#in& that

ri&ht !/ "a##a&e and that P!rtu&al wa# thu# "laced in a "!#iti!n in which it becae i"!##ible /!r it t!e0erci#e it# ri&ht# !/ #!3erei&nt2 !3er the encla3e#'

5!ll!win& u"!n the A""licati!n the C!urt wa# #ei#ed !/ #i0 "reliinar2 !b<ecti!n# rai#ed b2 the

G!3ernent !/ ndia' >2 a :ud&ent &i3en !n *J 4!3eber 78F9 the C!urt re<ected the /ir#t /!ur!b<ecti!n# and <!ined the /i/th and #i0th !b<ecti!n# t! the Merit#'

n it# :ud&ent the C!urt$

(a) re<ected the 5i/th Preliinar2 Ob<ecti!n b2 7 3!te# t! *6(b) re<ected the Si0th Preliinar2 Ob<ecti!n b2 77 3!te# t! 6

(c) /!und b2 77 3!te# t! that P!rtu&al had in 78F a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e !3er inter3enin& ndian

territ!r2 between the encla3e# !/ adra and 4a&ar?A3eli and the c!a#tal di#trict !/ aan and between

7/26/2019 PIL case


the#e encla3e# t! the e0tent nece##ar2 /!r the e0erci#e !/ P!rtu&ue#e #!3erei&nt2 !3er the encla3e# and

#ub<ect t! the re&ulati!n and c!ntr!l !/ ndia in re#"ect !/ "ri3ate "er#!n# ci3il !/ !//icial# and &!!d#

in &eneral6

(d) /!und b2 , 3!te# t! 9 that P!rtu&al did n!t ha3e in 78F #uch a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e in re#"ect !/ ared/!rce# ared "!lice and ar# and auniti!n6

(e) /!und b2 8 3!te# t! J that ndia had n!t acted c!ntrar2 t! it# !bli&ati!n# re#ultin& /r! P!rtu&al#

ri&ht !/ "a##a&e in re#"ect !/ "ri3ate "er#!n# ci3il !//icial# and &!!d# in &eneral'The Pre#ident and :ud&e# >a#de3ant >adawi @!<e3nik!3 and S"ir!"!ul!# a""ended eclarati!n# t!

the :ud&ent !/ the C!urt' :ud&e ellin&t!n @!! a""ended a Se"arate O"ini!n' :ud&e# iniar#ki and

>adawi a""ended a :!int i##entin& O"ini!n' :ud&e# Arand?U&!n M!ren! Buintana and Sir Perc2S"ender and :ud&e# ad h!c Cha&la and 5ernande# a""ended i##entin& O"ini!n#'

n it# :ud&ent the C!urt re/erred t! the Subi##i!n# /iled b2 P!rtu&al which in the /ir#t "lace

reIue#ted the C!urt t! ad<ud&e and declare that a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e wa# "!##e##ed b2 P!rtu&al and u#t

be re#"ected b2 ndia6 thi# ri&ht wa# in3!ked b2 P!rtu&al !nl2 t! the e0tent nece##ar2 /!r the e0erci#e

!/ it# #!3erei&nt2 !3er the encla3e# and it wa# n!t c!ntended that "a##a&e wa# acc!"anied b2 an2iunit2 and ade clear that #uch "a##a&e reained #ub<ect t! the re&ulati!n and c!ntr!l !/ ndia

which u#t be e0erci#ed in &!!d /aith ndia bein& under an !bli&ati!n n!t t! "re3ent the tran#it

nece##ar2 /!r the e0erci#e !/ P!rtu&ue#e #!3erei&nt2' The C!urt then c!n#idered the date with re/erencet! which it u#t a#certain whether the ri&ht in3!ked e0i#ted !r did n!t e0i#t' The Iue#ti!n a# t! the

e0i#tence !/ a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e ha3in& been "ut t! the C!urt in re#"ect !/ the di#"ute which had ari#en

with re&ard t! !b#tacle# "laced b2 ndia in the wa2 !/ "a##a&e it wa# the e3e !/ the creati!n !/ th!#e!b#tacle# that u#t be #elected a# the #tand"!int /r! which t! certain whether !r n!t #uch a ri&ht

e0i#ted6 the #electi!n !/ that date w!uld lea3e !"en the ar&uent# !/ ndia re&ardin& the #ub#eIuent

la"#e !/ the ri&ht !/ "a##a&e'

P!rtu&al ne0t a#ked the C!urt t! ad<ud&e and declare that ndia had n!t c!"lied with the !bli&ati!n#incubent u"!n it b2 3irtue !/ the ri&ht !/ "a##a&e' >ut the C!urt "!inted !ut that it had n!t been

a#ked either in the A""licati!n !r in the /inal Subi##i!n# !/ the Partie# t! decide whether !r n!t

ndia# attitude t!ward# th!#e wh! had in#ti&ated the !3er?thr!w !/ P!rtu&ue#e auth!rit2 at adra and 4a&ar?A3eli in :ul2 and Au&u#t 78F c!n#tituted a breach !/ the !bli&ati!n #aid t! be bindin& u"!n it

under &eneral internati!nal law t! ad!"t #uitable ea#ure# t! "re3ent the incur#i!n !/ #ub3er#i3e

eleent# int! the territ!r2 !/ an!ther State'Turnin& then t! the /uture the Subi##i!n# !/ P!rtu&al reIue#ted the C!urt t! decide that ndia u#t

end the ea#ure# b2 which it !""!#ed the e0erci#e !/ the ri&ht !/ "a##a&e !r i/ the C!urt #h!uld be !/

!"ini!n that there #h!uld be a te"!rar2 #u#"en#i!n !/ the ri&ht t! h!ld that that #u#"en#i!n #h!uldend a# #!!n a# the c!ur#e !/ e3ent# di#cl!#ed that the <u#ti/icati!n /!r the #u#"en#i!n had di#a""eared'

P!rtu&al had "re3i!u#l2 in3ited the C!urt t! h!ld that the ar&uent# !/ ndia c!ncernin& it# ri&ht t!

ad!"t an attitude !/ neutralit2 the a""licati!n !/ the United 4ati!n# Charter and the e0i#tence in the

encla3e# !/ a l!cal &!3ernent were with!ut /!undati!n' The C!urt h!we3er c!n#idered that it wa# n! "art !/ it# <udicial /uncti!n t! declare in the !"erati3e "art !/ it# :ud&ent that an2 !/ th!#e ar&uent#

wa# !r wa# n!t well /!unded'

>e/!re "r!ceedin& t! the c!n#iderati!n !/ the Merit# the C!urt had t! a#certain whether it had

<uri#dicti!n t! d! #! a <uri#dicti!n which ndia had e0"re##l2 c!nte#ted'n it# 5i/th Preliinar2 Ob<ecti!n the G!3ernent !/ ndia relied u"!n the re#er3ati!n in it#

eclarati!n !/ *, 5ebruar2 78+ acce"tin& the <uri#dicti!n !/ the C!urt which e0cluded /r! that

<uri#dicti!n di#"ute# with re&ard t! Iue#ti!n# which b2 internati!nal law /all e0clu#i3el2 within the

7/26/2019 PIL case


<uri#dicti!n !/ ndia' The C!urt "!inted !ut that in the c!ur#e !/ the "r!ceedin&# b!th Partie# had taken

their #tand !n &r!und# which were !n the "lane !/ internati!nal law and had !n !cca#i!n e0"re##l2 #aid

#!' The /i/th !b<ecti!n c!uld n!t there/!re be u"held'

The Si0th Preliinar2 Ob<ecti!n likewi#e related t! a liitati!n in the eclarati!n !/ *, 5ebruar278+' ndia which had acce"ted the <uri#dicti!n !/ the C!urt Q!3er all di#"ute# ari#in& a/ter 5ebruar2

Fth 78+ with re&ard t! #ituati!n# !r /act# #ub#eIuent t! the #ae dateQ c!ntended that the di#"ute did

n!t #ati#/2 either !/ the#e tw! c!nditi!n#' A# t! the /ir#t c!nditi!n the C!urt "!inted !ut that the di#"utec!uld n!t ha3e ari#en until all it# c!n#tituent eleent# had c!e int! e0i#tence6 a!n& the#e were the

!b#tacle# which ndia wa# alle&ed t! ha3e "laced in the wa2 !/ e0erci#e !/ "a##a&e b2 P!rtu&al in 78F6

e3en i/ !nl2 that "art !/ the di#"ute relatin& t! the P!rtu&ue#e clai t! a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e were t! bec!n#idered certain incident# had !ccurred be/!re 78F but the2 had n!t led the Partie# t! ad!"t

clearl2?de/ined le&al "!#iti!n# a# a&ain#t each !ther6 acc!rdin&l2 there wa# n! <u#ti/icati!n /!r #a2in&

that the di#"ute ar!#e be/!re 78F' A# t! the #ec!nd c!nditi!n the Peranent C!urt !/ nternati!nal:u#tice had in 78, drawn a di#tincti!n between the #ituati!n# !r /act# which c!n#tituted the #!urce !/

the ri&ht# claied b2 !ne !/ the Partie# and the #ituati!n# !r /act# which were the #!urce !/ the di#"ute'

Onl2 the latter were t! be taken int! acc!unt /!r the "ur"!#e !/ a""l2in& the eclarati!n' The di#"ute

#ubitted t! the C!urt wa# !ne with re&ard t! the #ituati!n !/ the encla3e# which had &i3en ri#e t!P!rtu&al# clai t! a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e and at the #ae tie with re&ard t! the /act# !/ 78F which

P!rtu&al ad3anced a# in/rin&eent# !/ that ri&ht6 it wa# /r! all !/ thi# that the di#"ute ar!#e and thi#

wh!le whate3er a2 ha3e been the earlier !ri&in !/ !ne !/ it# "art# cae int! e0i#tence !nl2 a/ter F5ebruar2 78+' The C!urt had n!t been a#ked /!r an2 /indin& what#!e3er with re&ard t! the "a#t "ri!r

t! that date6 it wa# there/!re !/ !"ini!n that the #i0th !b<ecti!n #h!uld n!t be u"held and c!n#eIuentl2

that it had <uri#dicti!n'

On the erit# ndia had c!ntended in the /ir#t "lace that the ri&ht !/ "a##a&e claied b2 P!rtu&al wa#

t!! 3a&ue and c!ntradict!r2 t! enable the C!urt t! "a## <ud&ent u"!n it b2 the a""licati!n !/ the le&alrule# enuerated in Article , (7) !/ the Statute' There wa# n! d!ubt that the da2?t!?da2 e0erci#e !/ the

ri&ht i&ht &i3e ri#e t! delicate Iue#ti!n# !/ a""licati!n but that wa# n!t in the 3iew !/ the C!urt

#u//icient &r!und /!r h!ldin& that the ri&ht wa# n!t #u#ce"tible !/ <udicial deterinati!n'P!rtu&al had relied !n the Treat2 !/ P!!na !/ 7998 and !n #anad# (decree#) i##ued b2 the Maratha ruler

in 79, and 79,F a# ha3in& c!n/erred !n P!rtu&al #!3erei&nt2 !3er the encla3e# with the ri&ht !/

"a##a&e t! the6 ndia had !b<ected that what wa# alle&ed t! be the Treat2 !/ 7998 wa# n!t 3alidl2entered int! and ne3er becae in law a treat2 bindin& u"!n the Maratha#' The C!urt h!we3er /!und

that the Maratha# did n!t at an2 tie ca#t an2 d!ubt u"!n the 3alidit2 !r bindin& character !/ the

Treat2' ndia had /urther c!ntended that the Treat2 and the tw! #anad# did n!t !"erate t! tran#/er#!3erei&nt2 !3er the a##i&ned 3illa&e# t! P!rtu&al but !nl2 c!n/erred with re#"ect t! the 3illa&e# a

re3enue &rant' The C!urt wa# unable t! c!nclude /r! an e0ainati!n !/ the 3ari!u# te0t# !/ the Treat2

!/ 7998 that the lan&ua&e e"l!2ed therein wa# intended t! tran#/er #!3erei&nt26 the e0"re##i!n# u#ed

in the tw! #anad# !n the !ther hand e#tabli#hed that what wa# &ranted t! the P!rtu&ue#e wa# !nl2 are3enue tenure called a <a&ir !r #aran<a and n!t a #in&le in#tance had been br!u&ht t! the n!tice !/ the

C!urt in which #uch a &rant had been c!n#trued a# a!untin& t! a ce##i!n !/ #!3erei&nt2' There c!uld

there/!re be n! Iue#ti!n !/ an2 encla3e !r !/ an2 ri&ht !/ "a##a&e /!r the "ur"!#e !/ e0erci#in&#!3erei&nt2 !3er encla3e#'

The C!urt /!und that the #ituati!n underwent a chan&e with the ad3ent !/ the >riti#h a# #!3erei&n !/

that "art !/ the c!untr2 in "lace !/ the Maratha#$ P!rtu&ue#e #!3erei&nt2 !3er the 3illa&e# had beenrec!&ni.ed b2 the >riti#h in /act and b2 i"licati!n and had #ub#eIuentl2 been tacitl2 rec!&ni.ed b2

ndia' A# a c!n#eIuence the 3illa&e# had acIuired the character !/ P!rtu&ue#e encla3e# within ndian

territ!r2 and there had de3el!"ed between the P!rtu&ue#e and the territ!rial #!3erei&n with re&ard t!

7/26/2019 PIL case


"a##a&e t! the encla3e# a "ractice u"!n which P!rtu&al relied /!r the "ur"!#e !/ e#tabli#hin& the ri&ht

!/ "a##a&e claied b2 it' t had been !b<ected !n behal/ !/ ndia that n! l!cal cu#t! c!uld be

e#tabli#hed between !nl2 tw! State# but the C!urt /!und it di//icult t! #ee wh2 the nuber !/ State#

between which a l!cal cu#t! i&ht be e#tabli#hed !n the ba#i# !/ l!n& "ractice u#t nece##aril2 belar&er than tw!'

t wa# c!!n &r!und between the Partie# that durin& the >riti#h and "!#t?>riti#h "eri!d# the "a##a&e

!/ "ri3ate "er#!n# and ci3il !//icial# had n!t been #ub<ect t! an2 re#tricti!n# be2!nd r!utine c!ntr!l'Merchandi#e !ther than ar# and auniti!n had al#! "a##ed /reel2 #ub<ect !nl2 at certain tie# t!

cu#t!# re&ulati!n# and #uch re&ulati!n and c!ntr!l a# were nece##itated b2 c!n#iderati!n# !/ #ecurit2

!r re3enue' The C!urt there/!re c!ncluded that with re&ard t! "ri3ate "er#!n# ci3il !//icial# and &!!d#in &eneral there had e0i#ted a c!n#tant and uni/!r "ractice all!win& /ree "a##a&e between aan and

the encla3e# it wa# in 3iew !/ all the circu#tance# !/ the ca#e #ati#/ied that that "ractice had been

acce"ted a# law b2 the Partie# and had &i3en ri#e t! a ri&ht and a c!rrelati3e !bli&ati!n'A# re&ard# ared /!rce# ared "!lice and ar# and auniti!n the "!#iti!n wa# di//erent'

t a""eared that durin& the >riti#h and "!#t?>riti#h "eri!d# P!rtu&ue#e ared /!rce# and ared "!lice

had n!t "a##ed between aan and the encla3e# a# !/ ri&ht and that a/ter 7,9, #uch "a##a&e c!uld

!nl2 take "lace with "re3i!u# auth!ri.ati!n b2 the >riti#h and later b2 ndia acc!rded either under areci"r!cal arran&eent alread2 a&reed t! !r in indi3idual ca#e#$ it had been ar&ued that that "eri##i!n

wa# alwa2# &ranted but there wa# n!thin& in the rec!rd t! #h!w that &rant !/ "eri##i!n wa#

incubent !n the >riti#h !r !n ndia a# an !bli&ati!n'A treat2 !/ *J eceber 7,9, between Great >ritain and P!rtu&al had laid d!wn that the ared /!rce#

!/ the tw! G!3ernent# #h!uld n!t enter the ndian d!ini!n# !/ the !ther e0ce"t in #"eci/ied ca#e# !r

in c!n#eIuence !/ a /!ral reIue#t ade b2 the "art2 de#irin& #uch entr2' Sub#eIuent c!rre#"!ndence#h!wed that thi# "r!3i#i!n wa# a""licable t! "a##a&e between aan and the encla3e#$ it had been

ar&ued !n behal/ !/ P!rtu&al that !n twent2?three !cca#i!n# ared /!rce# cr!##ed >riti#h territ!r2

between aan and the encla3e# with!ut !btainin& "eri##i!n but in 7,8+ the G!3ernent !/

>!ba2 had /!rwarded a c!"laint t! the e//ect that ared en in the #er3ice !/ the P!rtu&ue#eG!3ernent were in the habit !/ "a##in& with!ut /!ral reIue#t thr!u&h a "!rti!n !/ >riti#h territ!r2

en r!ute /r! aan t! 4a&ar?A3eli which w!uld a""ear t! c!n#titute a breach !/ the Treat26 !n **

eceber the G!3ern!r?General !/ P!rtu&ue#e ndia had re"lied$ QP!rtu&ue#e tr!!"# ne3er cr!##>riti#h territ!r2 with!ut "re3i!u# "eri##i!nQ and the Secretar2?General !/ the G!3ernent !/

P!rtu&ue#e ndia #tated !n 7 Ma2 7,87$ QOn the "art !/ thi# G!3ernent in<uncti!n# will be &i3en /!r

the #tricte#t !b#er3ance !/ ' ' ' the Treat2Q' The reIuireent !/ a /!ral reIue#t be/!re "a##a&e !/ ared/!rce# c!uld take "lace had been re"eated in an a&reeent !/ 787' ith re&ard t! ared "!lice the

Treat2 !/ 7,9, and the A&reeent !/ 787 had re&ulated "a##a&e !n the ba#i# !/ reci"r!cit2 and an

a&reeent !/ 78*+ had "r!3ided that ared "!lice bel!w a certain rank #h!uld n!t enter the territ!r2 !/ the !ther "art2 with!ut c!n#ent "re3i!u#l2 !btained6 /inall2 an a&reeent !/ 78+ c!ncernin& "a##a&e

!/ P!rtu&ue#e ared "!lice !3er the r!ad /r! aan t! 4a&ar?A3eli had "r!3ided that i/ the "art2

did n!t e0ceed ten in nuber intiati!n !/ it# "a##a&e #h!uld be &i3en t! the >riti#h auth!ritie# within

twent2?/!ur h!ur# but that in !ther ca#e# Qthe e0i#tin& "ractice #h!uld be /!ll!wed and c!ncurrence !/ the >riti#h auth!ritie# #h!uld be !btained b2 "ri!r n!tice a# heret!/!re'Q

A# re&ard# ar# and auniti!n the Treat2 !/ 7,9, and rule# /raed under the ndian Ar# Act !/

7,9, "r!hibited the i"!rtati!n !/ ar# auniti!n !r ilitar2 #t!re# /r! P!rtu&ue#e ndia and it#e0"!rt t! P!rtu&ue#e ndia with!ut a #"ecial licence' Sub#eIuent "ractice #h!wed that thi# "r!3i#i!n

a""lied t! tran#it between aan and the encla3e#'

The /indin& !/ the C!urt that the "ractice e#tabli#hed between the Partie# had reIuired /!r the "a##a&e!/ ared /!rce# ared "!lice and ar# and auniti!n the "eri##i!n !/ the >riti#h !r ndian

auth!ritie# rendered it unnece##ar2 /!r the C!urt t! deterine whether !r n!t in the ab#ence !/ the

"ractice that actuall2 "re3ailed &eneral internati!nal cu#t! !r &eneral "rinci"le# !/ law rec!&ni.ed b2

7/26/2019 PIL case


ci3ili.ed nati!n# which had al#! been in3!ked b2 P!rtu&al c!uld ha3e been relied u"!n b2 P!rtu&al in

#u""!rt !/ it# clai t! a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e in re#"ect !/ the#e cate&!rie#' The C!urt wa# dealin& with a

c!ncrete ca#e ha3in& #"ecial /eature#$ hi#t!ricall2 the ca#e went back t! a "eri!d when and related t! a

re&i!n in which the relati!n# between nei&hb!urin& State# were n!t re&ulated b2 "reci#el2 /!rulatedrule# but were &!3erned lar&el2 b2 "ractice$ /indin& a "ractice clearl2 e#tabli#hed between tw! State#

which wa# acce"ted b2 the Partie# a# &!3ernin& the relati!n# between the the C!urt u#t attribute

deci#i3e e//ect t! that "ractice' The C!urt wa# there/!re !/ the 3iew that n! ri&ht !/ "a##a&e in /a3!ur!/ P!rtu&al in3!l3in& a c!rrelati3e !bli&ati!n !n ndia had been e#tabli#hed in re#"ect !/ ared /!rce#

ared "!lice and ar# and auniti!n'

Na3in& /!und that P!rtu&al had in 78F a ri&ht !/ "a##a&e in re#"ect !/ "ri3ate "er#!n# ci3il !//icial#and &!!d# in &eneral the C!urt la#tl2 "r!ceeded t! c!n#ider whether ndia had acted c!ntrar2 t! it#

!bli&ati!n re#ultin& /r! P!rtu&al# ri&ht !/ "a##a&e in re#"ect !/ an2 !/ the#e cate&!rie#' P!rtu&al had

n!t c!ntended that ndia had acted c!ntrar2 t! that !bli&ati!n be/!re :ul2 78F but it c!"lained that "a##a&e wa# therea/ter denied t! P!rtu&ue#e nati!nal# !/ Eur!"ean !ri&in t! nati3e ndian P!rtu&ue#e

in the e"l!2 !/ the P!rtu&ue#e G!3ernent and t! a dele&ati!n that the G!3ern!r !/ aan "r!"!#ed

in :ul2 78F t! #end t! 4a&ar?A3eli and adra' The C!urt /!und that the e3ent# which had !ccurred in

adra !n *7?** :ul2 78F and which had re#ulted in the !3erthr!w !/ P!rtu&ue#e auth!rit2 in thatencla3e had created ten#i!n in the #urr!undin& ndian di#trict ha3in& re&ard t! that ten#i!n the C!urt

wa# !/ the 3iew that ndia# re/u#al !/ "a##a&e wa# c!3ered b2 it# "!wer !/ re&ulati!n and c!ntr!l !/ the

ri&ht !/ "a##a&e !/ P!rtu&al'5!r the#e rea#!n# the C!urt reached the /indin&# indicated ab!3e'

7/26/2019 PIL case


ASYLUM CASE (SUMMARY)


*++, - "re#ent' Unauth!ri.ed u#e and%!r du"licati!n !/ thi# aterial with!ut e0"re## and written

"eri##i!n /r! thi# bl!&1# auth!r and%!r !wner i# #trictl2 "r!hibited' E0cer"t# and link# a2 be u#ed "r!3ided that /ull and clear credit i# &i3en t! Ruwanthika Gunaratne and Public nternati!nal Law with


4ae !/ the Ca#e$ A#2lu Ca#e (C!lubia%Peru)6 Year !/ the deci#i!n$ 78F+6 and C!urt$ C:'

O3er3iew$

C!lubia &ranted a#2lu t! a Peru3ian accu#ed !/ takin& "art in a ilitar2 rebelli!n in Peru' a#

C!lubia entitled t! ake a unilateral and de/initi3e Iuali/icati!n !/ the !//ence (a# a "!litical !//ence)in a anner bindin& !n Peru and wa# Peru wa# under a le&al !bli&ati!n t! "r!3ide #a/e "a##a&e /!r the

Peru3ian t! lea3e Peru=

5act# !/ the Ca#e$

Peru i##ued an arre#t warrant a&ain#t ;ict!r Raul Na2a de la T!rre in re#"ect !/ the crie !/ ilitar2

rebelli!nD which t!!k "lace !n Oct!ber 788 in Peru' !nth# a/ter the rebelli!n T!rre /led t! theC!l!bian Eba##2 in Lia Peru' The C!l!bian Aba##ad!r c!n/ired that T!rre wa# &ranted

di"l!atic a#2lu in acc!rdance with Article *(*) !/ the Na3ana C!n3enti!n !n A#2lu !/ 78*, and

reIue#ted #a/e "a##a&e /!r T!rre t! lea3e Peru' Sub#eIuentl2 the Aba##ad!r al#! #tated C!l!bia hadIuali/ied T!rre a# a "!litical re/u&ee in acc!rdance with Article * M!nte3ide! C!n3enti!n !n P!litical

A#2lu !/ 78 (n!te the ter re/u&ee i# n!t the #ae a# the Re/u&ee C!n3enti!n !/ 78F7)' Peru

re/u#ed t! acce"t the unilateral Iuali/icati!n and re/u#ed t! &rant #a/e "a##a&e'

Bue#ti!n# be/!re the C!urt$

(7) # C!l!bia c!"etent a# the c!untr2 that &rant# a#2lu t! unilaterall2 Iuali/2 the !//ence /!r the "ur"!#e !/ a#2lu under treat2 law and internati!nal law=

(*) n thi# #"eci/ic ca#e wa# Peru a# the territ!rial State b!und t! &i3e a &uarantee !/ #a/e "a##a&e=

() id C!l!bia 3i!late Article 7 and * (*) !/ the C!n3enti!n !n A#2lu !/ 78*, (hereina/ter called

the Na3ana C!n3enti!n) when it &ranted a#2lu and i# the c!ntinued aintenance !/ a#2lu a3i!lati!n !/ the treat2=

The C!urt1# eci#i!n$

Rele3ant 5indin&# !/ the C!urt$

(7) # C!l!bia c!"etent a# the c!untr2 that &rant# a#2lu t! unilaterall2 Iuali/2 the !//ence /!r the "ur"!#e !/ a#2lu under treat2 law and internati!nal law=

7' The c!urt #tated that in the n!ral c!ur#e !/ &rantin& di"l!atic a#2lu a di"l!atic re"re#entati3eha# the c!"etence t! ake a "r!3i#i!nal Iuali/icati!n !/ the !//ence (/!r e0a"le a# a "!litical

!//ence) and the territ!rial State ha# the ri&ht t! &i3e c!n#ent t! thi# Iuali/icati!n' n the T!rre1# ca#e

C!l!bia ha# a##erted a# the State &rantin& a#2lu that it i# c!"etent t! Iuali/2 the nature !/ the

7/26/2019 PIL case


!//ence in a unilateral and de/initi3e anner that i# bindin& !n Peru' The c!urt had t! decide i/ #uch a

deci#i!n wa# bindin& !n Peru either becau#e !/ treat2 law (in "articular the Na3ana C!n3enti!n !/ 78*,

and the M!nte3ide! C!n3enti!n !/ 78) !ther "rinci"le# !/ internati!nal law !r b2 wa2 !/ re&i!nal !r

l!cal cu#t!'

*' The c!urt held that there wa# n! e0"re##ed !r i"lied ri&ht !/ unilateral and de/initi3e Iuali/icati!n

!/ the State that &rant# a#2lu under the Na3ana C!n3enti!n !r rele3ant "rinci"le# !/ internati!nal law("' 7* 7)' The M!nte3ide! C!n3enti!n !/ 78 which acce"t# the ri&ht !/ unilateral Iuali/icati!n

and !n which C!l!bia relied t! <u#ti/2 it# unilateral Iuali/icati!n wa# n!t rati/ied b2 Peru' The

C!n3enti!n "er #a2 wa# n!t bindin& !n Peru and c!n#iderin& the l!w nuber# !/ rati/icati!n# the "r!3i#i!n# !/ the latter C!n3enti!n cann!t be #aid t! re/lect cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law ("' 7F)'

' C!l!bia al#! ar&ued that re&i!nal !r l!cal cu#t!# #u""!rt the Iuali/icati!n' The c!urt held that the burden !/ "r!!/ !n the e0i#tence !/ an alle&ed cu#t!ar2 law re#t# with the "art2 akin& the

alle&ati!n$

The Part2 which relie# !n a cu#t! !/ thi# kind u#t "r!3e that thi# cu#t! i# e#tabli#hed in #uch aanner that it ha# bec!e bindin& !n the !ther Part2H (that) it i# in acc!rdance with a (7) c!n#tant and

uni/!r u#a&e (*) "racticed b2 the State# in Iue#ti!n and that thi# u#a&e i# () the e0"re##i!n !/ a ri&ht

a""ertainin& t! the State &rantin& a#2lu (C!lubia) and () a dut2 incubent !n the territ!rial State(in thi# ca#e Peru)' Thi# /!ll!w# /r! Article , !/ the Statute !/ the C!urt which re/er# t!

internati!nal cu#t! a# e3idence !/ a &eneral "ractice acce"ted a# law(te0t in bracket# added)'D

' The c!urt held that C!lubia did n!t e#tabli#h the e0i#tence !/ a re&i!nal cu#t! becau#e it /ailed t!

"r!3e c!n#i#tent and uni/!r u#a&e !/ the alle&ed cu#t! b2 rele3ant State#' The /luctuati!n# and

c!ntradicti!n# in State "ractice did n!t all!w /!r the uni/!r u#a&e (#ee al#! Mendel#!n 78, and #ee

al#! 4icara&ua ca#e "' 8, the le&al i"act !/ /luctuati!n# !/ State "ractice)' The c!urt al#! reiteratedthat the /act that a "articular State "ractice wa# /!ll!wed becau#e !/ "!litical e0"edienc2 and n!t

becau#e !/ a belie/ that the #aid "ractice i# bindin& !n the State b2 wa2 !/ a le&al !bli&ati!n (!"ini!

<uri#) i# detriental t! the /!rati!n !/ a cu#t!ar2 law (#ee 4!rth Sea C!ntinental Shel/ Ca#e# andL!tu# Ca#e /!r !re !n !"ini! <uri#)$

KThe C!l!bian G!3ernent ha# re/erred t! a lar&e nuber !/ "articular ca#e# in which di"l!atica#2lu wa# in /act &ranted and re#"ected' >ut it ha# n!t #h!wn that the alle&ed rule !/ unilateral and

de/initi3e Iuali/icati!n wa# in3!ked !r H that it wa# a"art /r! c!n3enti!nal #ti"ulati!n# e0erci#ed

b2 the State# &rantin& a#2lu a# a ri&ht a""ertainin& t! the and re#"ected b2 the territ!rial State# a# adut2 incubent !n the and n!t erel2 /!r rea#!n# !/ "!litical e0"edienc2' The /act# br!u&ht t! the

kn!wled&e !/ the C!urt di#cl!#e #! uch uncertaint2 and c!ntradicti!n #! uch /luctuati!n and

di#cre"anc2 in the e0erci#e !/ di"l!atic a#2lu and in the !//icial 3iew# e0"re##ed !n 3ari!u#

!cca#i!n# there ha# been #! uch inc!n#i#tenc2 in the ra"id #ucce##i!n !/ c!n3enti!n# !n a#2lurati/ied b2 #!e State# and re<ected b2 !ther# and the "ractice ha# been #! uch in/luenced b2

c!n#iderati!n# !/ "!litical e0"edienc2 in the 3ari!u# ca#e# that it i# n!t "!##ible t! di#cern in all thi#

an2 c!n#tant and uni/!r u#a&e utuall2 acce"ted a# law with re&ard t! the alle&ed rule !/ unilateraland de/initi3e Iuali/icati!n !/ the !//ence'D

F' The c!urt held that e3en i/ C!l!bia c!uld "r!3e that #uch a re&i!nal cu#t! e0i#ted it w!uld n!t be bindin& !n Peru becau#e Peru /ar /r! ha3in& b2 it# attitude adhered t! it ha# !n the c!ntrar2

re"udiated it b2 re/rainin& /r! rati/2in& the M!nte3ide! C!n3enti!n# !/ 78 and 788 which were

the /ir#t t! include a rule c!ncernin& the Iuali/icati!n !/ the !//ence Ka# "!liticalD in nature in atter#

7/26/2019 PIL case


!/ di"l!atic a#2lu'D (See in thi# re&ard the le##!n !n "er#i#tent !b<ect!r#' Siilarl2 in the 4!rth Sea

C!ntinental Shel/ Ca#e# the c!urt held in an2 e3ent the ' ' ' rule w!uld a""ear t! be ina""licable a#

a&ain#t 4!rwa2 in a# uch a# #he had alwa2# !""!#ed an2 atte"t t! a""l2 it t! the 4!rwe&ian c!a#t1')

J' The c!urt c!ncluded that C!lubia a# the State &rantin& a#2lu i# n!t c!"etent t! Iuali/2 the

!//ence b2 a unilateral and de/initi3e deci#i!n bindin& !n Peru'

(*) n thi# #"eci/ic ca#e wa# Peru a# the territ!rial State b!und t! &i3e a &uarantee !/ #a/e "a##a&e=

9' The c!urt held that there wa# n! le&al !bli&ati!n !n Peru t! &rant #a/e "a##a&e either becau#e !/ theNa3ana C!n3enti!n !r cu#t!ar2 law' n the ca#e !/ the Na3ana C!n3enti!n a "lain readin& !/ Article

* re#ult# in an !bli&ati!n !n the territ!rial #tate (Peru) t! &rant #a/e "a##a&e !nl2 a/ter it reIue#t# the

a#2lu &rantin& State (C!lubia) t! #end the "er#!n &ranted a#2lu !ut#ide it# nati!nal territ!r2(Peru)' n thi# ca#e the Peru3ian &!3ernent had n!t a#ked that T!rre lea3e Peru' On the c!ntrar2 it

c!nte#ted the le&alit2 !/ a#2lu &ranted t! hi and re/u#ed t! &rant #a/e c!nduct'

,' The c!urt l!!ked at the "!##ibilit2 !/ a cu#t!ar2 law eer&in& /r! State "ractice wheredi"l!atic a&ent# ha3e reIue#ted and been &ranted #a/e "a##a&e /!r a#2lu #eeker# be/!re the

territ!rial State c!uld reIue#t /!r hi# de"arture' Once !re the c!urt held that the#e "ractice# were a

re#ult !/ a need /!r e0"edienc2 and !ther "ractice c!n#iderati!n# !3er an e0i#tence !/ a belie/ that theact a!unt# t! a le&al !bli&ati!n (#ee "ara&ra"h ab!3e)'

There e0i#t# und!ubtedl2 a "ractice whereb2 the di"l!atic re"re#entati3e wh! &rant# a#2luiediatel2 reIue#t# a #a/e c!nduct with!ut awaitin& a reIue#t /r! the territ!rial #tate /!r the

de"arture !/ the re/u&eeHbut thi# "ractice d!e# n!t and cann!t ean that the State t! wh! #uch a

reIue#t /!r #a/e?c!nduct ha# been addre##ed i# le&all2 b!und t! accede t! it'D

() id C!l!bia 3i!late Article 7 and * (*) !/ the Na3ana C!n3enti!n when it &ranted a#2lu and i#

the c!ntinued aintenance !/ a#2lu a 3i!lati!n !/ the treat2=

8' Article 7 !/ the Na3ana C!n3enti!n #tate# that t i# n!t "eri##ible /!r State# t! &rant a#2luH t!

"er#!n# accu#ed !r c!ndened /!r c!!n crie#H (#uch "er#!n#) #hall be #urrendered u"!n reIue#t

!/ the l!cal &!3ernent'D

7+' n !ther w!rd# the "er#!n?#eekin& a#2lu u#t n!t be accu#ed !/ a c!!n crie (/!r e0a"le

urder w!uld c!n#titute a c!!n crie while a "!litical !//ence w!uld n!t)'The accu#ati!n# that arerele3ant are th!#e ade be/!re the &rantin& !/ a#2lu' T!rre1# accu#ati!n related t! a ilitar2 rebelli!n

which the c!urt c!ncluded wa# n!t a c!!n crie and a# #uch the &rantin& !/ a#2lu c!"lied with

Article 7 !/ the C!n3enti!n'

77' Article * (*) !/ the Na3ana C!n3enti!n #tate# that A#2lu &ranted t! "!litical !//ender# in

le&ati!n# war#hi"# ilitar2 ca"# !r ilitar2 aircra/t #hall be re#"ected t! the e0tent in which

all!wed a# a ri&ht !r thr!u&h huanitarian t!lerati!n b2 the u#a&e# the c!n3enti!n# !r the law# !/ thec!untr2 in which &ranted and in acc!rdance with the /!ll!win& "r!3i#i!n#$ 5ir#t$ A#2lu a2 n!t be

&ranted e0ce"t in ur&ent ca#e# and /!r the "eri!d !/ tie #trictl2 indi#"en#able /!r the "er#!n wh! ha#

#!u&ht a#2lu t! en#ure in #!e !ther wa2 hi# #a/et2'D

7*' An e##ential "re?reIui#ite /!r the &rantin& !/ a#2lu i# the ur&enc2 !r in !ther w!rd# the "re#ence

!/ an iinent !r "er#i#tence !/ a dan&er /!r the "er#!n !/ the re/u&eeD' The c!urt held that the /act#

7/26/2019 PIL case


!/ the ca#e includin& the !nth# that "a##ed between the rebelli!n and the tie when a#2lu wa#

#!u&ht did n!t e#tabli#h the ur&enc2 criteria in thi# ca#e (""' *+ ?*)' The c!urt held$

n "rinci"le it i# inc!ncei3able that the Na3ana C!n3enti!n c!uld ha3e intended the ter ur&entca#e#D t! include the dan&er !/ re&ular "r!#ecuti!n t! which the citi.en# !/ an2 c!untr2 la2 the#el3e#

!"en b2 attackin& the in#tituti!n# !/ that c!untr2H n "rinci"le a#2lu cann!t be !""!#ed t! the

!"erati!n !/ <u#tice'D

7' n !ther w!rd# T!rre wa# accu#ed !/ a crie but he c!uld n!t be tried in a c!urt becau#e C!l!bia

&ranted hi a#2lu' The c!urt held that "r!tecti!n /r! the !"erati!n !/ re&ular le&al "r!ceedin&#Dwa# n!t <u#ti/ied under di"l!atic a#2lu'

7' The c!urt held$

n the ca#e !/ di"l!atic a#2lu the re/u&ee i# within the territ!r2 !/ the State' A deci#i!n t! &rant

di"l!atic a#2lu in3!l3e# a der!&ati!n /r! the #!3erei&nt2 !/ that State' t withdraw# the !//ender

/r! the <uri#dicti!n !/ the territ!rial State and c!n#titute# an inter3enti!n in atter# which aree0clu#i3el2 within the c!"etence !/ that State' Such a der!&ati!n /r! territ!rial #!3erei&nt2 cann!t

be rec!&ni#ed unle## it# le&al ba#i# i# e#tabli#hed in each "articular ca#e'D

7F' A# a re#ult e0ce"ti!n# t! thi# rule are #trictl2 re&ulated under internati!nal law'

An e0ce"ti!n t! thi# rule (a#2lu #h!uld n!t be &ranted t! th!#e /acin& re&ular "r!#ecuti!n#) can !ccur!nl2 i/ in the &ui#e !/ <u#tice arbitrar2 acti!n i# #ub#tituted /!r the rule !/ law' Such w!uld be the ca#e

i/ the adini#trati!n !/ <u#tice were c!rru"ted b2 ea#ure# clearl2 "r!"ted b2 "!litical ai#' A#2lu

"r!tect# the "!litical !//ender a&ain#t an2 ea#ure# !/ a ani/e#tl2 e0tra?le&al character which a

G!3ernent i&ht take !r atte"t t! take a&ain#t it# "!litical !""!nent#H On the !ther hand the#a/et2 which ari#e# !ut !/ a#2lu cann!t be c!n#trued a# a "r!tecti!n a&ain#t the re&ular a""licati!n !/

the law# and a&ain#t the <uri#dicti!n !/ le&all2 c!n#tituted tribunal#' Pr!tecti!n thu# under#t!!d w!uld

auth!ri.e the di"l!atic a&ent t! !b#truct the a""licati!n !/ the law# !/ the c!untr2 wherea# it i# hi#dut2 t! re#"ect theH Such a c!nce"ti!n !re!3er w!uld c!e int! c!n/lict with !ne !/ the !#t

/irl2 e#tabli#hed traditi!n# !/ Latin?Aerica nael2 n!n?inter3enti!n K/!r e0a"le b2 C!l!bia

int! the internal a//air# !/ an!ther State like PeruH'

7J' A#2lu a2 be &ranted !n huanitarian &r!und# t! "r!tect "!litical "ri#!ner# a&ain#t the 3i!lent

and di#!rderl2 acti!n !/ irre#"!n#ible #ecti!n# !/ the "!"ulati!n'D (/!r e0a"le durin& a !b attackwhere the territ!rial State i# unable t! "r!tect the !//ender)' T!rre wa# n!t in #uch a #ituati!n at the tie

when he #!u&ht re/u&e in the C!l!bian Eba##2 at Lia'

79' The c!urt c!ncluded that the &rant !/ a#2lu and rea#!n# /!r it# "r!l!n&ati!n were n!t inc!n/!rit2 with Article *(*) !/ the Na3ana C!n3enti!n ("' *F)'

The &rant !/ a#2lu i# n!t an in#tantane!u# act which terinate# with the adi##i!n at a &i3en!ent !/ a re/u&ee t! an eba##2 !r a le&ati!n' An2 &rant !/ a#2lu re#ult# in and in c!n#eIuence

l!&icall2 i"lie# a #tate !/ "r!tecti!n the a#2lu i# &ranted a# l!n& a# the c!ntinued "re#ence !/ the

re/u&ee in the eba##2 "r!l!n&# thi# "r!tecti!n'D

4>$ The c!urt al#! di#cu##ed the di//erence between e0traditi!n and &rantin& !/ a#2lu - 2!u can read

!re !n thi# in ""' 7* - 7 !/ the <ud&ent' The di#cu##i!n# !n the adi##ibilit2 !/ the c!unter clai

7/26/2019 PIL case


!/ Peru are #et !ut in ""' 7, - 78'

Additi!nal readin& (!n di"l!atic a#2lu% al#! called e0tra territ!rial a#2lu)$

E0traterrit!rial a#2lu under internati!nal law ""' 77F - 7*8'

5' M!r&en#tern E0tra?Territ!rial1 A#2lu1 *F >YL (78,)

5' M!r&en#tern i"l!atic A#2lu1 J9 The Law Buarterl2 Re3iew (78F7)

A4GLO 4OREGA4 5SNERES CASE (SUMMARY O4 CUSTOMARY 4TER4ATO4AL

LA)

© Ruwanthika Gunaratne and Public nternati!nal Law at htt"#$%%ruwanthika&unaratne'w!rd"re##'c!*++, - "re#ent' Unauth!ri.ed u#e and%!r du"licati!n !/ thi# aterial with!ut e0"re## and written

"eri##i!n /r! thi# bl!&1# auth!r and%!r !wner i# #trictl2 "r!hibited' E0cer"t# and link# a2 be u#ed

"r!3ided that /ull and clear credit i# &i3en t! Ruwanthika Gunaratne and Public nternati!nal Law with


Ca#e$ An&l! 4!rwe&ian 5i#herie# Ca#e (U@ 3# 4!rwa2)

Year !/ eci#i!n$ 78F7' C!urt$ C:'

The C!urt wa# a#ked t! decide inter?alia the 3alidit2 under internati!nal law !/ the eth!d# u#ed t!

deliit 4!rwa21# territ!rial #ea% /i#herie# .!ne' e w!uld n!t di#cu## the technical a#"ect# !/ the

<ud&ent' The <ud&ent c!ntained declarati!n# !n cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law' N!we3er the 3alue !/the <uri#"rudence wa# diini#hed becau#e the#e declarati!n# lacked in?de"th di#cu##i!n'

>ack&r!und t! the ca#e

The United @in&d! reIue#ted the c!urt t! decide i/ 4!rwa2 had u#ed a le&all2 acce"table eth!d in

drawin& the ba#eline /r! which it ea#ured it# territ!rial #ea' The United @in&d! ar&ued that

cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law did n!t all!w the len&th !/ a ba#eline drawn acr!## aba2 t! be l!n&er thanten ile#' 4!rwa2 ar&ued that it# deliitati!n eth!d wa# c!n#i#tent with &eneral "rinci"le# !/

internati!nal law'

5!rati!n !/ cu#t!ar2 law

The c!urt c!n#i#tentl2 re/erred t! "!#iti3e (7) #tate "ractice and (*) lack !/ !b<ecti!n# !/ !ther #tate# !n

that "ractice a# a c!n/irati!n !/ an e0i#tin& rule !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law (#ee "' 79 and 7,)'There wa# n! enti!n !/ !"ini! <uri# in thi# earl2 <ud&ent'

n the /!ll!win& "a##a&e the c!urt c!n#idered that e0"re##ed #tate di##ent re&ardin& a "articular "ractice wa# detriental t! the e0i#tence !/ an alle&ed &eneral rule' t did n!t elab!rate whether the#e

#tate# ad!"ted a c!ntrar2 "ractice becau#e it wa# claiin& an e0ce"ti!n t! the rule (#ee the 4icara&ua

<uri#"rudence) !r becau#e it belie3ed that the #aid rule did n!t "!##e## the character !/ cu#t!ar2 law'

7/26/2019 PIL case


n the#e circu#tance# the C!urt dee# it nece##ar2 t! "!int !ut that alth!u&h the ten?ile rule ha#

been ad!"ted b2 certain State# b!th in their nati!nal law and in their treatie# and c!n3enti!n# and

alth!u&h certain arbitral deci#i!n# ha3e a""lied it a# between the#e State# !ther State# ha3e ad!"ted adi//erent liit' C!n#eIuentl2 the ten?ile rule ha# n!t acIuired the auth!rit2 !/ a &eneral rule !/

internati!nal law'D

Per#i#tent !b<ect!r rule

The c!urt in it# <ud&ent held that e3en i/ a cu#t!ar2 law rule e0i#ted !n the ten?ile rule

Hthe ten?ile rule w!uld a""ear t! be ina""licable a# a&ain#t 4!rwa2 ina#uch a# #he ha# alwa2#

!""!#ed an2 atte"t t! a""l2 it t! the 4!rwe&ian c!a#t'D

n thi# ca#e the c!urt a""ear# t! #u""!rt the idea that an e0i#tin& cu#t!ar2 law rule w!uld n!t a""l2 t!a #tate i/ it !b<ected t! an2 !ut#ide atte"t# t! a""l2 the rule t! it#el/ at the initial #ta&e# and in a

c!n#i#tent anner and i/ !ther #tate# did n!t !b<ect t! her re#i#tance' n thi# anner the An&l!

4!rwe&ian /i#herie# ca#e <!ined the a#2lu ca#e (Peru 3# C!l!bia) in articulatin& what we n!w callthe "er#i#tent !b<ect!r rule'

nitial !b<ecti!n

n the "re#ent ca#e the c!urt "!inted !ut that the 4!rwe&ian Mini#ter !/ 5!rei&n A//air# in 7,9+#tated that in #"ite !/ the ad!"ti!n in #!e treatie# !/ the Iuite arbitrar2 di#tance !/ 7+ #ea ile# thi#

di#tance w!uld n!t a""ear t! e t! ha3e acIuired the /!rce !/ internati!nal law' Still le## w!uld it

a""ear t! ha3e an2 /!undati!n in realit2HD

The c!urt held that Lan&ua&e !/ thi# kind can !nl2 be c!n#trued a# the c!n#idered e0"re##i!n !/ a

le&al c!nce"ti!n re&arded b2 the 4!rwe&ian G!3ernent a# c!"atible with internati!nal lawD' Thec!urt held that 4!rwa2 had re/u#ed t! acce"t the rule a# re&ard# t! it b2 7,9+'

Su#tained !b<ecti!n

The c!urt al#! went !n t! h!ld that 4!rwa2 /!ll!wed the "rinci"le# !/ deliitati!n that it c!n#ider# a "art !/ it# #2#te in a c!n#i#tent and uninterru"ted anner /r! 7,J8 until the tie !/ the di#"ute' n

e#tabli#hin& c!n#i#tent "ractice the c!urt held that Ht!! uch i"!rtance need n!t be attached t! the

/ew uncertaintie# !r c!ntradicti!n# real !r a""arent which the United @in&d! G!3ernent clai# t!ha3e di#c!3ered in 4!rwe&ian "ractice'D

4! !b<ecti!n

7/26/2019 PIL case


A/ter the c!urt held that the 7+?ile rule did n!t /!r a "art !/ the &eneral law and in an2 e3ent c!uld

n!t bind 4!rwa2 becau#e !/ it# !b<ecti!n# the c!urt inIuired whether the 4!rwe&ian #2#te !/

deliitati!n it#el/ wa# c!ntrar2 t! internati!nal law' T! d! #! the c!urt re/erred t! #tate "ractice !nce

!re'

The &eneral t!lerati!n !/ /!rei&n State# with re&ard t! the 4!rwe&ian "ractice i# an unchallen&ed /act'

5!r a "eri!d !/ !re than #i0t2 2ear# the United @in&d! G!3ernent it#el/ in n! wa2 c!nte#ted itHThe C!urt n!te# that in re#"ect !/ a #ituati!n which c!uld !nl2 be #tren&thened with the "a##a&e !/

tie the United @in&d! G!3ernent re/rained /r! /!rulatin& re#er3ati!n#'D

C!ntrar2 "ractice

n thi# ca#e 4!rwa2 ad!"ted a c!ntrar2 "ractice - a "ractice that wa# the #ub<ect !/ liti&ati!n'

N!we3er intere#tin&l2 4!rwa2 wa# clear that it wa# n!t claiin& an e0ce"ti!n t! the rule (i'e' that it# "ractice wa# n!t c!ntrar2 t! internati!nal law) but rather it claied that it# "ractice wa# in c!n/!rit2

with internati!nal law (#ee "a&e *7)'

n it# (4!rwa21#) 3iew the#e rule# !/ internati!nal law take int! acc!unt the di3er#it2 !/ /act# and

there/!re c!ncede that the drawin& !/ ba#e?line# u#t be ada"ted t! the #"ecial c!nditi!n# !btainin& in

di//erent re&i!n#' n it# 3iew the #2#te !/ deliitati!n a""lied in 78F a #2#te characteri.ed b2 theu#e !/ #trai&ht line# d!e# n!t there/!re in/rin&e the &eneral law6 it i# an ada"tati!n rendered nece##ar2

b2 l!cal c!nditi!n#' D

C!nclu#i!n

The c!urt held that the /act that thi# c!n#i#tent and #u//icientl2 l!n& "ractice t!!k "lace with!ut an2

!b<ecti!n t! the "ractice /r! !ther #tate# (until the tie !/ di#"ute) indicated that #tate# did n!t

c!n#ider the 4!rwe&ian #2#te t! be c!ntrar2 t! internati!nal lawD'

The n!t!riet2 !/ the /act# the &eneral t!lerati!n !/ the internati!nal c!unit2 Great >ritain1#

"!#iti!n in the 4!rth Sea her !wn intere#t in the Iue#ti!n and her "r!l!n&ed ab#tenti!n w!uld in an2ca#e warrant 4!rwa21# en/!rceent !/ her #2#te a&ain#t the United @in&d!' The C!urt i# thu# led t!

c!nclude that the eth!d !/ #trai&ht line# e#tabli#hed in the 4!rwe&ian #2#te wa# i"!#ed b2 the

"eculiar &e!&ra"h2 !/ the 4!rwe&ian c!a#t6 that e3en be/!re the di#"ute ar!#e thi# eth!d had been

c!n#!lidated b2 a c!n#i#tent and #u//icientl2 l!n& "ractice in the /ace !/ which the attitude !/&!3ernent# bear# witne## t! the /act that the2 did n!t c!n#ider it t! be c!ntrar2 t! internati!nal law'D

Relati!n#hi" between internati!nal and nati!nal law

The c!urt alluded t! the relati!n#hi" between nati!nal and internati!nal law in deliitati!n !/ aritie

b!undarie#' n deliitati!n ca#e# #tate# u#t be all!wed the latitude nece##ar2 in !rder t! be able t!

ada"t it# deliitati!n t! "ractical need# and l!cal reIuireent#HD The c!urt w!uld al#! c!n#ider H

7/26/2019 PIL case


certain ec!n!ic intere#t# "eculiar t! a re&i!n the realit2 and i"!rtance !/ which are clearl2

e3idenced b2 a l!n& u#a&e'D N!we3er while the act !/ deliitati!n can be undertaken b2 the State it#

le&al 3alidit2 de"end# !n internati!nal law'

The deliitati!n !/ #ea area# ha# alwa2# an internati!nal a#"ect6 it cann!t be de"endent erel2 u"!n

the will !/ the c!a#tal State a# e0"re##ed in it# unici"al law' Alth!u&h it i# true that the act !/

deliitati!n i# nece##aril2 a unilateral act becau#e !nl2 the c!a#tal State i# c!"etent t! undertake itthe 3alidit2 !/ the deliitati!n with re&ard t! !ther State# de"end# u"!n internati!nal law' ("' *+)D

4ORTN SEA CO4T4E4TAL SNEL5 CASES

:ud&ent !/ *+ 5ebruar2 78J8

The C!urt deli3ered <ud&ent b2 77 3!te# t! J in the 4!rth Sea C!ntinental Shel/ ca#e#'

The di#"ute which wa# #ubitted t! the C!urt !n *+ 5ebruar2 78J9 related t! the deliitati!n !/ thec!ntinental #hel/ between the 5ederal Re"ublic !/ Geran2 and enark !n the !ne hand and

between the 5ederal Re"ublic !/ Geran2 and the 4etherland# !n the !ther' The Partie# a#ked the

C!urt t! #tate the "rinci"le# and rule# !/ internati!nal law a""licable and undert!!k therea/ter t! carr2!ut the deliitati!n# !n that ba#i#'

The C!urt re<ected the c!ntenti!n !/ enark and the 4etherland# t! the e//ect that the deliitati!n# in

Iue#ti!n had t! be carried !ut in acc!rdance with the "rinci"le !/ eIuidi#tance a# de/ined in Article J !/ the 78F, Gene3a C!n3enti!n !n the C!ntinental Shel/ h!ldin&$

? that the 5ederal Re"ublic which had n!t rati/ied the C!n3enti!n wa# n!t le&all2 b!und b2 the

"r!3i#i!n# !/ Article J6

? that the eIuidi#tance "rinci"le wa# n!t a nece##ar2 c!n#eIuence !/ the &eneral c!nce"t !/ c!ntinental#hel/ ri&ht# and wa# n!t a rule !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law'

The C!urt al#! re<ected the c!ntenti!n# !/ the 5ederal Re"ublic in #! /ar a# the#e #!u&ht acce"tance !/

the "rinci"le !/ an a""!rti!nent !/ the c!ntinental #hel/ int! <u#t and eIuitable #hare#' t held thateach Part2 had an !ri&inal ri&ht t! th!#e area# !/ the c!ntinental #hel/ which c!n#tituted the natural

"r!l!n&ati!n !/ it# land territ!r2 int! and under the #ea' t wa# n!t a Iue#ti!n !/ a""!rti!nin& !r #harin&

!ut th!#e area# but !/ deliitin& the'The C!urt /!und that the b!undar2 line# in Iue#ti!n were t! be drawn b2 a&reeent between the

Partie# and in acc!rdance with eIuitable "rinci"le# and it indicated certain /act!r# t! be taken int!

c!n#iderati!n /!r that "ur"!#e' t wa# n!w /!r the Partie# t! ne&!tiate !n the ba#i# !/ #uch "rinci"le# a#the2 ha3e a&reed t! d!'

The "r!ceedin&# relatin& t! the deliitati!n a# between the Partie# !/ the area# !/ the 4!rth Sea

c!ntinental #hel/ a""ertainin& t! each !/ the were in#tituted !n *+ 5ebruar2 78J9 b2 the

c!unicati!n t! the Re&i#tr2 !/ the C!urt !/ tw! S"ecial A&reeent# between enark and the5ederal Re"ublic and the 5ederal Re"ublic and the 4etherland# re#"ecti3el2' >2 an Order !/ *J A"ril

78J, the C!urt <!ined the "r!ceedin&# in the tw! ca#e#'

The C!urt decided the tw! ca#e# in a #in&le :ud&ent which it ad!"ted b2 ele3en 3!te# t! #i0'A!n&#t the Meber# !/ the C!urt c!ncurrin& in the :ud&ent :ud&e Sir Muhaad a/rulla @han

a""ended a declarati!n6 and Pre#ident >u#taante 2 Ri3er! and :ud&e# :e##u" Padilla 4er3! and

A!un a""ended #e"arate !"ini!n#' n the ca#e !/ the n!n?c!ncurrin& :ud&e# a declarati!n !/ hi#di##ent wa# a""ended b2 :ud&e >en&.!n6 and ;ice?Pre#ident @!ret#k2 t!&ether with :ud&e# Tanaka

M!relli and Lach# and :ud&e ad h!c S!ren#en a""ended di##entin& !"ini!n#'

n it# :ud&ent the C!urt e0ained in the c!nte0t !/ the deliitati!n# c!ncerned the "r!ble# relatin&

7/26/2019 PIL case


t! the le&al r &ie !/ the c!ntinental #hel/ rai#ed b2 the c!ntenti!n# !/ the Partie#'�The 5act# and the C!ntenti!n# !/ the Partie# ("ara#' 7?79 !/ the :ud&ent)

The tw! S"ecial A&reeent# had a#ked the C!urt t! declare the "rinci"le# and rule# !/ internati!nal law

a""licable t! the deliitati!n a# between the Partie# !/ the area# !/ the 4!rth Sea c!ntinental #hel/a""ertainin& t! each !/ the be2!nd the "artial b!undarie# in the iediate 3icinit2 !/ the c!a#t

alread2 deterined between the 5ederal Re"ublic and the 4etherland# b2 an a&reeent !/ 7 eceber

78J and between the 5ederal Re"ublic and enark b2 an a&reeent !/ 8 :une 78JF'The C!urt wa#n!t a#ked actuall2 t! deliit the /urther b!undarie# in3!l3ed the Partie# undertakin& in their re#"ecti3e

S"ecial A&reeent# t! e//ect #uch deliitati!n b2 a&reeent in "ur#uance !/ the C!urt# deci#i!n'

The water# !/ the 4!rth Sea were #hall!w the wh!le #eabed e0ce"t /!r the 4!rwe&ian Tr!u&hc!n#i#tin& !/ c!ntinental #hel/ at a de"th !/ le## than *++ etre#' M!#t !/ it had alread2 been deliited

between the c!a#tal State# c!ncerned' The 5ederal Re"ublic and enark and the 4etherland#

re#"ecti3el2 had h!we3er been unable t! a&ree !n the "r!l!n&ati!n !/ the "artial b!undarie# re/erredt! ab!3e ainl2 becau#e enark and the 4etherland# had wi#hed thi# "r!l!n&ati!n t! be e//ected !n

the ba#i# !/ the eIuidi#tance "rinci"le wherea# the 5ederal Re"ublic had c!n#idered that it w!uld

undul2 curtail what the 5ederal Re"ublic belie3ed #h!uld be it# "r!"er #hare !/ c!ntinental #hel/ area

!n the ba#i# !/ "r!"!rti!nalit2 t! the len&th !/ it# 4!rth Sea c!a#tline' 4either !/ the b!undarie# inIue#ti!n w!uld b2 it#el/ "r!duce thi# e//ect but !nl2 b!th !/ the t!&ether ? an eleent re&arded b2

enark and the 4etherland# a# irrele3ant t! what the2 3iewed a# bein& tw! #e"arate deliitati!n# t!

be carried !ut with!ut re/erence t! the !ther'A b!undar2 ba#ed !n the eIuidi#tance "rinci"le i'e' an QeIuidi#tance lineQ le/t t! each !/ the Partie#

c!ncerned all th!#e "!rti!n# !/ the c!ntinental #hel/ that were nearer t! a "!int !n it# !wn c!a#t than

the2 were t! an2 "!int !n the c!a#t !/ the !ther Part2' n the ca#e !/ a c!nca3e !r rece##in& c!a#t #ucha# that !/ the 5ederal Re"ublic !n the 4!rth Sea the e//ect !/ the eIuidi#tance eth!d wa# t! "ull the

line !/ the b!undar2 inward# in the directi!n !/ the c!nca3it2' C!n#eIuentl2 where tw! eIuidi#tance

line# were drawn the2 w!uld i/ the cur3ature were "r!n!unced ine3itabl2 eet at a relati3el2 #h!rt

di#tance /r! the c!a#t thu# Qcuttin& !//Q the c!a#tal State /r! the area !/ the c!ntinental #hel/!ut#ide' n c!ntra#t the e//ect !/ c!n3e0 !r !utwardl2 cur3in& c!a#t# #uch a# were t! a !derate

e0tent th!#e !/ enark and the 4etherland# wa# t! cau#e the eIuidi#tance line# t! lea3e the c!a#t#

!n di3er&ent c!ur#e# thu# ha3in& a widenin& tendenc2 !n the area !/ c!ntinental #hel/ !// that c!a#t't had been c!ntended !n behal/ !/ enark and the 4etherland# that the wh!le atter wa# &!3erned

b2 a andat!r2 rule !/ law which re/lectin& the lan&ua&e !/ Article J !/ the Gene3a C!n3enti!n !n the

C!ntinental Shel/ !/ *8 A"ril 78F, wa# de#i&nated b2 the a# the QeIuidi#tance?#"ecialcircu#tance#Q rule' That rule wa# t! the e//ect that in the ab#ence !/ a&reeent b2 the "artie# t!

e"l!2 an!ther eth!d all c!ntinental #hel/ b!undarie# had t! be drawn b2 ean# !/ an eIuidi#tance

line unle## Q#"ecial circu#tance#Q were rec!&ni.ed t! e0i#t' Acc!rdin& t! enark and the 4etherland# the c!n/i&urati!n !/ the Geran 4!rth Sea c!a#t did n!t !/ it#el/ c!n#titute /!r either !/

the tw! b!undar2 line# c!ncerned a #"ecial circu#tance'

The 5ederal Re"ublic /!r it# "art had c!ntended that the c!rrect rule at an2 rate in #uch circu#tance#

a# th!#e !/ the 4!rth Sea wa# !ne acc!rdin& t! which each !/ the State# c!ncerned #h!uld ha3e a Q<u#tand eIuitable #hareQ !/ the a3ailable c!ntinental #hel/ in "r!"!rti!n t! the len&th !/ it# #ea?/r!nta&e' t

had al#! c!ntended that in a #ea #ha"ed a# i# the 4!rth Sea each !/ the State# c!ncerned wa# entitled t!

a c!ntinental #hel/ area e0tendin& u" t! the central "!int !/ that #ea !r at lea#t e0tendin& t! it# edianline' Alternati3el2 the 5ederal Re"ublic had claied that i/ the eIuidi#tance eth!d were held t! bc

a""licable the c!n/i&urati!n !/ the Geran 4!rth Sea c!a#t c!n#tituted a #"ecial circu#tance #uch a#

t! <u#ti/2 a de"arture /r! that eth!d !/ deliitati!n in thi# "articular ca#e'The A""!rti!nent The!r2 Re<ected ("ara#' 7,?*+ !/ the :ud&ent)

The C!urt /elt unable t! acce"t in the "articular /!r it had taken the /ir#t c!ntenti!n "ut /!rward !n

behal/ !/ the 5ederal Re"ublic' t# ta#k wa# t! deliit n!t t! a""!rti!n the area# c!ncerned' The

7/26/2019 PIL case


"r!ce## !/ deliitati!n in3!l3ed e#tabli#hin& the b!undarie# !/ an area alread2 in "rinci"le

a""ertainin& t! the c!a#tal State and n!t the deterinati!n de n!3! !/ #uch an area' The d!ctrine !/ the

<u#t and eIuitable #hare wa# wh!ll2 at 3ariance with the !#t /undaental !/ all the rule# !/ law

relatin& t! the c!ntinental #hel/ nael2 that the ri&ht# !/ the c!a#tal State in re#"ect !/ the area !/c!ntinental #hel/ c!n#titutin& a natural "r!l!n&ati!n !/ it# land territ!r2 under the #ea e0i#ted i"#! /act!

and ab initi! b2 3irtue !/ it# #!3erei&nt2 !3er the land' That ri&ht wa# inherent' n !rder t! e0erci#e it

n! #"ecial le&al act# had t! be "er/!red' t /!ll!wed that the n!ti!n !/ a""!rti!nin& an a# 2etundeliited area c!n#idered a# a wh!le (which underla2 the d!ctrine !/ the <u#t and eIuitable #hare)

wa# inc!n#i#tent with the ba#ic c!nce"t !/ c!ntinental #hel/ entitleent'

4!n?A""licabilit2 !/ Article J !/ the 78F, C!ntinental Shel/ C!n3enti!n ("ara#' *7?J !/ the:ud&ent)

The C!urt then turned t! the Iue#ti!n whether in deliitin& th!#e area# the 5ederal Re"ublic wa# under

a le&al !bli&ati!n t! acce"t the a""licati!n !/ the eIuidi#tance "rinci"le' hile it wa# "r!babl2 true thatn! !ther eth!d !/ deliitati!n had the #ae c!binati!n !/ "ractical c!n3enience and certaint2 !/

a""licati!n th!#e /act!r# did n!t #u//ice !/ the#el3e# t! c!n3ert what wa# a eth!d int! a rule !/ law'

Such a eth!d w!uld ha3e t! draw it# le&al /!rce /r! !ther /act!r# than the e0i#tence !/ th!#e

ad3anta&e#'The /ir#t Iue#ti!n t! be c!n#idered wa# whether the 78F, Gene3a C!n3enti!n !n the C!ntinental Shel/

wa# bindin& /!r all the Partie# in the ca#e' Under the /!ral "r!3i#i!n# !/ the C!n3enti!n it wa# in

/!rce /!r an2 indi3idual State that had #i&ned it within the tie?liit "r!3ided !nl2 i/ that State hadal#! #ub#eIuentl2 rati/ied it' enark and the 4etherland# had b!th #i&ned and rati/ied the C!n3enti!n

and were "artie# t! it but the 5ederal Re"ublic alth!u&h !ne !/ the #i&nat!rie# !/ the C!n3enti!n had

ne3er rati/ied it and wa# c!n#eIuentl2 n!t a "art2' t wa# aditted !n behal/ !/ enark and the 4etherland# that in the circu#tance# the C!n3enti!n c!uld n!t a# #uch be bindin& !n the 5ederal

Re"ublic' >ut it wa# c!ntended that the r &ie !/ Article J !/ the C!n3enti!n had bec!e bindin& !n�the 5ederal Re"ublic becau#e b2 c!nduct b2 "ublic #tateent# and "r!claati!n# and in !ther wa2#

the Re"ublic had a##ued the !bli&ati!n# !/ the C!n3enti!n't wa# clear that !nl2 a 3er2 de/inite 3er2 c!n#i#tent c!ur#e !/ c!nduct !n the "art !/ a State in the

#ituati!n !/ the 5ederal Re"ublic c!uld <u#ti/2 u"h!ldin& th!#e c!ntenti!n#' hen a nuber !/ State#

drew u" a c!n3enti!n #"eci/icall2 "r!3idin& /!r a "articular eth!d b2 which the intenti!n t! bec!e b!und b2 the r &ie !/ the c!n3enti!n wa# t! be ani/e#ted it wa# n!t li&htl2 t! be "re#ued that a�State which had n!t carried !ut th!#e /!ralitie# had ne3erthele## #!eh!w bec!e b!und in an!ther

wa2' 5urther!re had the 5ederal Re"ublic rati/ied the Gene3a C!n3enti!n it c!uld ha3e entered are#er3ati!n t! Article J b2 rea#!n !/ the /acult2 t! d! #! c!n/erred b2 Article 7* !/ the C!n3enti!n'

Onl2 the e0i#tence !/ a #ituati!n !/ e#t!""el c!uld lend #ub#tance t! the c!ntenti!n !/ enark and the

4etherland# ? i'e' i/ the 5ederal Re"ublic were n!w "recluded /r! den2in& the a""licabilit2 !/ thec!n3enti!nal r &ie b2 rea#!n !/ "a#t c!nduct declarati!n# etc' which n!t !nl2 clearl2 and�c!n#i#tentl2 e3inced acce"tance !/ that r &ie but al#! had cau#ed enark !r the 4etherland# in�reliance !n #uch c!nduct detrientall2 t! chan&e "!#iti!n !r #u//er #!e "re<udice' O/ thi# there wa#

n! e3idence' Acc!rdin&l2 Article J !/ the Gene3a C!n3enti!n wa# n!t a# #uch a""licable t! thedeliitati!n# in3!l3ed in the "re#ent "r!ceedin&#'

The EIuidi#tance Princi"le 4!t nherent in the >a#ic !ctrine !/ the C!ntinental Shel/ ("ara#' 9?F8 !/

the :ud&ent)t had been aintained b2 enark and the 4etherland# that the 5ederal Re"ublic wa# in an2 e3ent

and Iuite a"art /r! the Gene3a C!n3enti!n b!und t! acce"t deliitati!n !n an eIuidi#tance ba#i#

#ince the u#e !/ that eth!d wa# a rule !/ &eneral !r cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law aut!aticall2 bindin&!n the 5ederal Re"ublic'

One ar&uent ad3anced b2 the in #u""!rt !/ thi# c!ntenti!n which i&ht be tered the a "ri!ri

ar&uent #tarted /r! the "!#iti!n that the ri&ht# !/ the c!a#tal State t! it# c!ntinental #hel/ area# were

7/26/2019 PIL case


ba#ed !n it# #!3erei&nt2 !3er the land d!ain !/ which the #hel/ area wa# the natural "r!l!n&ati!n

under the #ea' 5r! thi# n!ti!n !/ a""urtenance wa# deri3ed the 3iew which the C!urt acce"ted that

the c!a#tal State# ri&ht# e0i#ted i"#! /act! and ab initi!' enark and the 4etherland# claied that the

te#t !/ a""urtenance u#t be Q"r!0iit2Q$ all th!#e "art# !/ the #hel/ bein& c!n#idered a# a""urtenant t!a "articular c!a#tal State which were cl!#er t! it than the2 were t! an2 "!int !n the c!a#t !/ an!ther

State' Nence deliitati!n had t! be e//ected b2 a eth!d which w!uld lea3e t! each !ne !/ the State#

c!ncerned all th!#e area# that were neare#t t! it# !wn c!a#t' A# !nl2 an eIuidi#tance line w!uld d! thi#!nl2 #uch a line c!uld be 3alid it wa# c!ntended'

Thi# 3iew had uch /!rce6 the &reater "art !/ a State# c!ntinental #hel/ area# w!uld n!rall2 in /act be

nearer t! it# c!a#t# than t! an2 !ther' >ut the real i##ue wa# whether it /!ll!wed that e3er2 "art !/ thearea c!ncerned u#t be "laced in that wa2' The C!urt did n!t c!n#ider thi# t! /!ll!w /r! the n!ti!n !/

"r!0iit2 which wa# a #!ewhat /luid !ne' M!re /undaental wa# the c!nce"t !/ the c!ntinental #hel/

a# bein& the natural "r!l!n&ati!n !/ the land d!ain' E3en i/ "r!0iit2 i&ht a//!rd !ne !/ the te#t# t! be a""lied and an i"!rtant !ne in the ri&ht c!nditi!n# it i&ht n!t nece##aril2 be the !nl2 n!r in all

circu#tance# the !#t a""r!"riate !ne' Subarine area# did n!t a""ertain t! the c!a#tal State erel2

becau#e the2 were near it n!r did their a""urtenance de"end !n an2 certaint2 !/ deliitati!n a# t! their

b!undarie#' hat c!n/erred the i"#! <ure title wa# the /act that the #ubarine area# c!ncerned i&ht bedeeed t! be actuall2 "art !/ it# territ!r2 in the #en#e that the2 were a "r!l!n&ati!n !/ it# land territ!r2

under the #ea' EIuidi#tance clearl2 c!uld n!t be identi/ied with the n!ti!n !/ natural "r!l!n&ati!n #ince

the u#e !/ the eIuidi#tance eth!d w!uld /reIuentl2 cau#e area# which were the natural "r!l!n&ati!n!/ the territ!r2 !/ !ne State t! be attributed t! an!ther' Nence the n!ti!n !/ eIuidi#tance wa# n!t an

ine#ca"able a "ri!ri acc!"anient !/ ba#ic c!ntinental #hel/ d!ctrine'

A re3iew !/ the &ene#i# !/ the eIuidi#tance eth!d !/ deliitati!n c!n/ired the /!re&!in& c!nclu#i!n'The QTruan Pr!claati!nQ i##ued b2 the G!3ernent !/ the United State# !n *, Se"teber 78F

c!uld be re&arded a# a #tartin& "!int !/ the "!#iti3e law !n the #ub<ect and the chie/ d!ctrine it

enunciated that the c!a#tal State had an !ri&inal natural and e0clu#i3e ri&ht t! the c!ntinental #hel/ !//

it# #h!re# had c!e t! "re3ail !3er all !ther# and wa# n!w re/lected in the78F, Gene3a C!n3enti!n'ith re&ard t! the deliitati!n !/ b!undarie# between the c!ntinental #hel3e# !/ ad<acent State# the

Truan Pr!claati!n had #tated that #uch b!undarie# Q#hall be deterined b2 the United State# and the

State c!ncerned in acc!rdance with eIuitable "rinci"le#Q' The#e tw! c!nce"t# !/ deliitati!n b2utual a&reeent and deliitati!n in acc!rdance with eIuitable "rinci"le# had underlain all the

#ub#eIuent hi#t!r2 !/ the #ub<ect' t had been lar&el2 !n the rec!endati!n !/ a c!ittee !/ e0"ert#

that the "rinci"le !/ eIuidi#tance /!r the deliitati!n !/ c!ntinental #hel/ b!undarie# had been acce"ted b2 the United 4ati!n# nternati!nal Law C!i##i!n in the te0t it had laid be/!re the Gene3a

C!n/erence !/ 78F, !n the Law !/ the Sea which had ad!"ted the C!ntinental Shel/ C!n3enti!n' t

c!uld le&itiatel2 be a##ued that the e0"ert# had been actuated b2 c!n#iderati!n# n!t !/ le&al the!r2 but !/ "ractical c!n3enience and cart!&ra"h2' M!re!3er the article ad!"ted b2 the C!i##i!n had

&i3en "ri!rit2 t! deliitati!n b2 a&reeent and had c!ntained an e0ce"ti!n in /a3!ur !/ Q#"ecial

circu#tance#Q'

The C!urt c!n#eIuentl2 c!n#idered that enark and the 4etherland# in3erted the true !rder !/ thin&#and that /ar /r! an eIuidi#tance rule ha3in& been &enerated b2 an antecedent "rinci"le !/ "r!0iit2

inherent in the wh!le c!nce"t !/ c!ntinental #hel/ a""urtenance the latter wa# rather a rati!nali.ati!n

!/ the /!rer The EIuidi#tance Princi"le 4!t a Rule !/ Cu#t!ar2 nternati!nal Law ("ara#' J+?,* !/ the :ud&ent)

The Iue#ti!n reained whether thr!u&h "!#iti3e law "r!ce##e# the eIuidi#tance "rinci"le u#t n!w be

re&arded a# a rule !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law'Re<ectin& the c!ntenti!n# !/ enark and the 4etherland# the C!urt c!n#idered that the "rinci"le !/

eIuidi#tance a# it /i&ured in Article J !/ the Gene3a C!n3enti!n had n!t been "r!"!#ed b2 the

nternati!nal Law C!i##i!n a# an eer&in& rule !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law' Thi# Article c!uld

7/26/2019 PIL case


n!t be #aid t! ha3e re/lected !r cr2#talli.ed #uch a rule' Thi# wa# c!n/ired b2 the /act that an2 State

i&ht ake re#er3ati!n# in re#"ect !/ Article J unlike Article# 7 * and !n #i&nin& rati/2in& !r

accedin& t! the C!n3enti!n' hile certain !ther "r!3i#i!n# !/ the C!n3enti!n alth!u&h relatin& t!

atter# that la2 within the /ield !/ recei3ed cu#t!ar2 law were al#! n!t e0cluded /r! the /acult2 !/re#er3ati!n the2 all related t! rule# !/ &eneral aritie law 3er2 c!n#iderabl2 antedatin& the

C!n3enti!n which were !nl2 incidental t! c!ntinental #hel/ ri&ht# a# #uch and had been enti!ned in

the C!n3enti!n #i"l2 t! en#ure that the2 were n!t "re<udiced b2 the e0erci#e !/ c!ntinental #hel/ri&ht#' Article J h!we3er related directl2 t! c!ntinental #hel/ ri&ht# a# #uch and #ince it wa# n!t

e0cluded /r! the /acult2 !/ re#er3ati!n it wa# a le&itiate in/erence that it wa# n!t c!n#idered t!

re/lect eer&ent cu#t!ar2 law't had been ar&ued !n behal/ !/ enark and the 4etherland# that e3en i/ at the date !/ the Gene3a

C!n3enti!n n! rule !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law e0i#ted in /a3!ur !/ the eIuidi#tance "rinci"le #uch

a rule had ne3erthele## c!e int! bein& #ince the C!n3enti!n "artl2 becau#e !/ it# !wn i"act and "artl2 !n the ba#i# !/ #ub#eIuent State "ractice' n !rder /!r thi# "r!ce## t! !ccur it wa# nece##ar2 that

Article J !/ the C!n3enti!n #h!uld at all e3ent# "!tentiall2 be !/ a n!r?creatin& character' Article J

wa# #! /raed h!we3er a# t! "ut the !bli&ati!n t! ake u#e !/ the eIuidi#tance eth!d a/ter a

"riar2 !bli&ati!n t! e//ect deliitati!n b2 a&reeent' 5urther!re the "art "la2ed b2 the n!ti!n !/#"ecial circu#tance# in relati!n t! the "rinci"le !/ eIuidi#tance the c!ntr!3er#ie# a# t! the e0act

eanin& and #c!"e !/ that n!ti!n and the /acult2 !/ akin& re#er3ati!n# t! Article J u#t all rai#e

d!ubt# a# t! the "!tentiall2 n!r?creatin& character !/ that Article'5urther!re while a 3er2 wide#"read and re"re#entati3e "artici"ati!n in a c!n3enti!n i&ht #h!w that

a c!n3enti!nal rule had bec!e a &eneral rule !/ internati!nal law in the "re#ent ca#e the nuber !/

rati/icati!n# and acce##i!n# #! /ar wa# hardl2 #u//icient' A# re&ard# the tie eleent alth!u&h the "a##a&e !/ !nl2 a #h!rt "eri!d !/ tie wa# n!t nece##aril2 a bar t! the /!rati!n !/ a new rule !/

cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law !n the ba#i# !/ what wa# !ri&inall2 a "urel2 c!n3enti!nal rule it wa#

indi#"en#able that State "ractice durin& that "eri!d includin& that !/ State# wh!#e intere#t# were

#"eciall2 a//ected #h!uld ha3e been b!th e0ten#i3e and 3irtuall2 uni/!r in the #en#e !/ the "r!3i#i!nin3!ked and #h!uld ha3e !ccurred in #uch a wa2 a# t! #h!w a &eneral rec!&niti!n that a rule !/ law wa#

in3!l3ed' S!e 7F ca#e# had been cited in which the State# c!ncerned had a&reed t! draw !r had drawn

the b!undarie# c!ncerned acc!rdin& t! the "rinci"le !/ eIuidi#tance but there wa# n! e3idence thatthe2 had #! acted becau#e the2 had /elt le&all2 c!"elled t! draw the in that wa2 b2 rea#!n !/ a rule

!/ cu#t!ar2 law' The ca#e# cited were inc!nclu#i3e and in#u//icient e3idence !/ a #ettled "ractice'

The C!urt c!n#eIuentl2 c!ncluded that the Gene3a C!n3enti!n wa# n!t in it# !ri&in# !r ince"ti!ndeclarat!r2 !/ a andat!r2 rule !/ cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law en<!inin& the u#e !/ the eIuidi#tance

"rinci"le it# #ub#eIuent e//ect had n!t been c!n#tituti3e !/ #uch a rule and State "ractice u" t! date

had eIuall2 been in#u//icient /!r the "ur"!#e'The Princi"le# and Rule# !/ Law A""licable ("ara#' ,?7+7 !/ the :ud&ent)

The le&al #ituati!n wa# that the Partie# were under n! !bli&ati!n t! a""l2 the eIuidi#tance "rinci"le

either under the 78F, C!n3enti!n !r a# a rule !/ &eneral !r cu#t!ar2 internati!nal law' t c!n#eIuentl2

becae unnece##ar2 /!r the C!urt t! c!n#ider whether !r n!t the c!n/i&urati!n !/ the Geran 4!rthSea c!a#t c!n#tituted a Q#"ecial circu#tanceQ' t reained /!r the C!urt h!we3er t! indicate t! the

Partie# the "rinci"le# and rule# !/ law in the li&ht !/ which deliitati!n wa# t! be e//ected'

The ba#ic "rinci"le# in the atter !/ deliitati!n deri3in& /r! the Truan Pr!claati!n were that itu#t be the !b<ect !/ a&reeent between the State# c!ncerned and that #uch a&reeent u#t be arri3ed

at in acc!rdance with eIuitable "rinci"le#' The Partie# were under an !bli&ati!n t! enter int!

ne&!tiati!n# with a 3iew t! arri3in& at an a&reeent and n!t erel2 t! &! thr!u&h a /!ral "r!ce## !/ne&!tiati!n a# a #!rt !/ "ri!r c!nditi!n /!r the aut!atic a""licati!n !/ a certain eth!d !/ deliitati!n

in the ab#ence !/ a&reeent6 the2 were #! t! c!nduct the#el3e# that the ne&!tiati!n# were eanin&/ul

which w!uld n!t be the ca#e when !ne !/ the in#i#ted u"!n it# !wn "!#iti!n with!ut c!nte"latin&

7/26/2019 PIL case


an2 !di/icati!n !/ it' Thi# !bli&ati!n wa# erel2 a #"ecial a""licati!n !/ a "rinci"le underl2in& all

internati!nal relati!n# which wa# !re!3er rec!&ni.ed in Article !/ the Charter !/ the United

4ati!n# a# !ne !/ the eth!d# /!r the "eace/ul #ettleent !/ internati!nal di#"ute#'

The Partie# were under an !bli&ati!n t! act in #uch a wa2 that in the "articular ca#e and takin& all thecircu#tance# int! acc!unt eIuitable "rinci"le# were a""lied' There wa# n! Iue#ti!n !/ the C!urt#

deci#i!n bein& e0 aeIu! et b!n!' t wa# "reci#el2 a rule !/ law that called /!r the a""licati!n !/

eIuitable "rinci"le# and in #uch ca#e# a# the "re#ent !ne# the eIuidi#tance eth!d c!uldunIue#ti!nabl2 lead t! ineIuit2' Other eth!d# e0i#ted and i&ht be e"l!2ed al!ne !r in

c!binati!n acc!rdin& t! the area# in3!l3ed' Alth!u&h the Partie# intended the#el3e# t! a""l2 the

"rinci"le# and rule# laid d!wn b2 the C!urt #!e indicati!n wa# called /!r !/ the "!##ible wa2# inwhich the2 i&ht a""l2 the'

5!r all the /!re&!in& rea#!n# the C!urt /!und in each ca#e that the u#e !/ the eIuidi#tance eth!d !/

deliitati!n wa# n!t !bli&at!r2 a# between the Partie#6 that n! !ther #in&le eth!d !/ deliitati!n wa#in all circu#tance# !bli&at!r26 that deliitati!n wa# t! be e//ected b2 a&reeent in acc!rdance with

eIuitable "rinci"le# and takin& acc!unt !/ all rele3ant circu#tance# in #uch a wa2 a# t! lea3e a# uch

a# "!##ible t! each Part2 all th!#e "art# !/ the c!ntinental #hel/ that c!n#tituted a natural "r!l!n&ati!n

!/ it# land territ!r2 with!ut encr!achent !n the natural "r!l!n&ati!n !/ the land territ!r2 !/ the !ther6and that i/ #uch deliitati!n "r!duced !3erla""in& area# the2 were t! be di3ided between the Partie#

in a&reed "r!"!rti!n# !r /ailin& a&reeent eIuall2 unle## the2 decided !n a r &ie !/ <!int� <uri#dicti!n u#er !r e0"l!itati!n'n the c!ur#e !/ ne&!tiati!n# the /act!r# t! be taken int! acc!unt were t! include$ the &eneral

c!n/i&urati!n !/ the c!a#t# !/ the Partie# a# well a# the "re#ence !/ an2 #"ecial !r unu#ual /eature#6 #!

/ar a# kn!wn !r readil2 a#certainable the "h2#ical and &e!l!&ical #tructure and natural re#!urce# !/ thec!ntinental #hel/ area# in3!l3ed the eleent !/ a rea#!nable de&ree !/ "r!"!rti!nalit2 between the

e0tent !/ the c!ntinental #hel/ area# a""ertainin& t! each State and the len&th !/ it# c!a#t ea#ured in

the &eneral directi!n !/ the c!a#tline takin& int! acc!unt the e//ect# actual !r "r!#"ecti3e !/ an2 !ther

c!ntinental #hel/ deliitati!n# in the #ae re&i!n'

PIL case

Documents

Transcript of PIL case