I.

Define the following: (3 points)

a. Soft Law
Soft law refers to rules that are neither strictly binding in nature nor completely
lacking legal significance. In the context of international law, soft law refers to
guidelines, policy declarations or codes of conduct which set standards of
conduct. However, they are not directly enforceable.
b. Res Transit Cum Suo Onere
Literally means, the thing passes with its burden. Where a thing has been
incumbered by mortgage, the encumbrance follows it wherever it goes.
c. Lateran Treaty
Lateran Treaty, also called Lateran Pact of 1929, treaty (effective June 7, 1929,
to June 3, 1985) between Italy and the Vatican. It was signed by Benito
Mussolini for the Italian government and by cardinal secretary of state Pietro
Gasparri for the papacy and confirmed by the Italian constitution of 1948.
Upon ratification of the Lateran Treaty, the papacy recognized the state of Italy,
with Rome as its capital. Italy in return recognized papal sovereignty over
the Vatican City, a minute territory of 44 hectares (109 acres), and secured full
independence for the pope. A number of additional measures were agreed upon.
Article 1, for example, gave the city of Rome a special character as the “centre of
the Catholic world and place of pilgrimage.” Article 20 stated that all bishops
were to take an oath of loyalty to the state and had to be Italian subjects speaking
the Italian language.
d. Lex Posterior Derogat Priori
A later law repeals an earlier law; A maxim meaning that a legal rule arising after
a conflicting legal rule.
e. Sabbatino Amendment
The Sabbatino case (Banco Nacional de Cuba v Sabbatino) provoked an uproar in
the U.S. Congress. Before the case could be reviewed by the District Court (on
remand), Congress passed the so-called Second Hickenlooper Amendment(or
Sabbatino Amendment) that revoked this presumption in favor of the validity of
the act of state doctrine that the Sabbatino court had established. The Amendment
was retroactive and subsequently found constitutional by the District court and the
Cuban bank's complaint was dismissed. This amendment to the Foreign
Assistance Act has clarified that courts may proceed with an adjudication on
the merits unless the President states that such adjudication may embarrass
foreign policy efforts, but the amendment has been construed very narrowly by
subsequent court decisions.
f. Rome Statutes
the treaty that established the International Criminal Court(ICC).[5] It was adopted
at a diplomatic conference in Rome on 17 July 1998[6][7] and it entered into force
 on 1 July 2002.[2] As of March 2016, 124 states are party to the statute.[2] Among
other things, the statute establishes the court's functions, jurisdiction and structure.
The Rome Statute established four core international crimes: genocide, crimes
against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Those crimes "shall
not be subject to any statute of limitations".[8] Under the Rome Statute, the ICC
can only investigate and prosecute the four core international crimes in situations
where states are "unable" or "unwilling" to do so themselves. The court has
jurisdiction over crimes only if they are committed in the territory of a state party
or if they are committed by a national of a state party; an exception to this rule is
that the ICC may also have jurisdiction over crimes if its jurisdiction is authorized
by the United Nations Security Council.
g. Dettes Odieuses
In international law, odious debt, also known as illegitimate debt, is a legal
doctrine that holds that the national debt incurred by a regime for purposes that do
not serve the best interests of the nation, should not be enforceable. Such debts
are, thus, considered by this doctrine to be personal debts of the regime that
incurred them and not debts of the state. In some respects, the concept is
analogous to the invalidity of contracts signed under coercion.
h. Nullum Poena Sine Lege
Nullum crimen sine lege ("no crime without law") is the moral principle in
criminal law and international criminal law that a person cannot or should not
face criminal punishment except for an act that was criminalized by law before
he/she performed the act. Subtler versions of this principle require crimes to be
declared in unambiguous statutory text.
Nullum Crimen Sine Lege, Nulla Poena Sine Lege is a Latin maxim that means
"no crime or punishment without a law." There can be no crime committed, and
no punishment meted out, without a violation of penal law as it existed at the
time. This basic legal principle has been incorporated into international criminal
law.
i. Obligations Erga Omnes
Erga omnes is a Latin phrase which means "towards all" or "towards everyone".
In legal terminology, erga omnes rights or obligations are owed toward all. For
instance, a property right is an erga omnes entitlement, and therefore enforceable
against anybody infringing that right. An erga omnesright (a statutory right) can
here be distinguished from a right based on contract, unenforceable except against
the contracting party.
In international law, it has been used as a legal term describing obligations owed
by states towards the community of states as a whole. An erga omnesobligation
exists because of the universal and undeniable interest in the perpetuation of
critical rights (and the prevention of their breach). Consequently, any state has the
 right to complain of a breach. Examples of erga omnes norms
include piracy and genocide. The concept was recognized in the International
Court of Justice's decision in the Barcelona Traction case [(Belgium v Spain)
j. International Humanitarian Law
International humanitarian law is a set of rules which seek, for humanitarian
reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict. It protects persons who are not or
are no longer participating in the hostilities and restricts the means and methods
of warfare. International humanitarian law is also known as the law of war or the
law of armed conflict. International humanitarian law is part of international law,
which is the body of rules governing relations between States. International law is
contained in agreements between States – treaties or conventions –, in customary
rules, which consist of State practise considered by them as legally binding, and
in general principles. International humanitarian law applies to armed conflicts. It
does not regulate whether a State may actually use force; this is governed by an
important, but distinct, part of international law set out in the United Nations
Charter.

II. Distinguish/Discuss: (5 points each)

a. Constitutive Theory from Declaratory Theory of Recognition
Constitutive School: it is the act of recognition which constitutes or creates the
status of a State, giving it a legal personality; to be determined by the will and
consent of existing States
Declaratory School: (preferred approach) recognition merely confirms the
acceptance by States of the status of an entity as a State; it acquires legal
personality by its own creative act in bringing about the objective criteria of
statehood
b. Belligerency from Insurgency
"Belligerency" is a term used in international law to indicate the status of two or
more entities, generally sovereign states, being engaged in a war. Wars are often
fought with one or both parties to a conflict invoking the right to self-defence
under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter (as the United Kingdom did in
1982 before the start of the Falklands War) or under the auspices of a United
Nations Security Council resolution (such as the United Nations Security Council
Resolution 678, which gave legal authority for the Gulf War).
A state of belligerency may also exist between one or more sovereign states on
one side and rebel forces, if such rebel forces are recognised as belligerents. If
there is a rebellion against a constituted authority (for example, an authority
recognised as such by the United Nations), and those taking part in the rebellion
are not recognized as belligerents, the rebellion is an insurgency. Once the status
 of belligerency is established between two or more states, their relations are
determined and governed by the laws of war.
If there is a rebellion against the authority (for example the United Nations) and
those taking part in the rebellion are not recognized as belligerents, the rebellion
is an insurgency. However, not all rebellions are insurgencies, as a state of
belligerency may exist between one or more sovereign states and rebel forces.
The use of the term insurgency recognizes the political motivation of those who
participate in an insurgency, but the term brigandry implies no political
motivation. If an uprising has little support (for example, those who continue to
resist towards the end of an armed conflict when most of their allies have
surrendered), such a resistance may be described as brigandry and those who
participate as brigands.
The distinction on whether an uprising is an insurgency or a belligerency has not
been as clearly codified as many other areas covered by the internationally
accepted laws of war for two reasons. The first is that international law
traditionally does not encroach on matters that are solely the internal affairs of a
sovereign state, but recent developments such as the responsibility to protect, are
starting to undermine the traditional approach. The second is that at the Hague
Conference of 1899, there was disagreement between the Great Powers who
considered francs-tireurs to be unlawful combatants subject to execution on
capture, and smaller states, which maintained that they should be
considered lawful combatants. The dispute resulted in a compromise wording
being included in the Hague Conventions known as the Martens Clause from the
diplomat who drafted the clause.
An insurgency is a rebellionagainst authority (for example, an authority
recognized as such by the United Nations) when those taking part in the rebellion
are not recognized as belligerents.
c. Principle of State Succession from State Continuity
Succession of states is a theory and practice in international
relationsregarding successor states. A successor state is a sovereign state over a
territory and populace that was previously under the sovereignty of another state.
The theory has its root in 19th century diplomacy.[1] A successor state often
acquires a new international legal personality, which is distinct from a continuing
state, also known as a continuator, which despite change to its borders retains the
same legal personality and possess all its existing rights and obligations (such as
a rump state).
The Principle of State Continuity is the doctrine by which a state’s identity as an
international legal person persists notwithstanding unconstitutional or even
violent changes in its government. As a result, a state generally continues to owe
and accrue international legal obligations notwithstanding such changes.
 d. Doctrine of Incorporation from Doctrine of Transformation
By the doctrine of incorporation, the country is bound by generally accepted
principles of international law, which are considered automatically part of our
own laws.
The doctrine that rules of international law automatically form part of municipal
law. It is opposed to the doctrine of transformation, which states that international
law only forms a part of municipal law if accepted as such by statute or judicial
decisions.

e. Tobar Doctrine from Estrada Doctrine

f. Jus Cogens from Aequo Et Bono
g. Basic and Fundamental Rights of the States
h. Define Public International Law
III. Explain (15 points each)
a. Discuss the Principle of Recognition, specifically its objective and essence in the
light of the Guaranty Trust Company and the Tinoco Cases.
b. Public International Law is “not true law”. At most, it may