Icj report 1990 page 71

SC case:

Wronski v commissioner s23 sept 1991

_ v director of prisons

STATE RESPONSIBILITY

 Give emphasis on concept of attribution. It s consists of the acts of the organ of the state, but
the officer of the state committing such an act is not the on responsible under intl law, but the
act of the organ is attributed to the state itseld and becomes its own acts.
 It is becayse of this attribution that an internationally wring act is attributed to the state as its
wrong act.
 The responsibility of the satte by committing an internationally wrongful act has to be
responded to by the respondent state in terms of restitution or any other act such as apology,
but any act in response in resposnse to the internationally wrongful act should not be unlawful.
 If the internationally wrongful act is committed by a revolutionary gvt. If the rebel force takes
over the govt and becomes the lawful govt, whatever it committed while it was an
insurrectionary govt will have to be paid off when it becomes a lawful govt.
 If the intl wrongful act is committed under national law and it might be lawful but is identified in
intl law as an intl wrongful act, the intl classification shall be supreme over national.
 Intl lawful acts may be xcused by occurences: force majeure or nececity, but it intl wrongful act
is a vviolation of territory norm of intl law- cannot be excused

LAW OF THE SEA OBSCURE PRINCIPLES

 The area of the law of the sea is outside the jurisdiction of any state. The area is characterized
by the concept “common heritage of mankind”.
 Characteristics:
o 1. No state shall create or exercise sovereignty or sovereign rights over any part of the
area
o 2. No state natural or juridical person, shall appropriate any part of this area
o 3. O sate natural or jd shall claim, acquire, or exercise rights with respect to minerals
recovered in the area except in accord to un law of the sea
o 4. Area is open to use exclusively for peaceful ppurposes of all states
 o The area and resources are the common heritage of mankind, all rights in the resources
of the area are vested in mankind as a whole and the exploritation of the are shall be
carriedout for the benefit of mankind. These resources can only be alientated in
accordance of the UN law of the sea in behalf of mankind as a whole.
 In the collection of this principle, take note, as thought mankind is a new subj of international
law. (W/ mankind has replaced the state)
o Distinction between natural island and artificial island
a. Nat island: UN CON LAW O T S, natural formation of land, which is above water during
hightide. Nat islands may have contiguous zones, Exclusive economic Zone and
continental shelf
b. ART ISLAND: within the JD of the coastal state with respect ot its exclusive econ zone
and as well as with respect to its jd in the continental shelf. The coastal states has jd to
build artificial islands. But an artificial island does not have the capability of
maintainingthe maritime znones that the natural island has.
o Is the continental shelf part of ph territory?
a. A state has sovereign right but not sovereignty and therefore it cannot have the
character f becoming part of the coastal states such as PH.
b. Report of consultative comm of PDUT: claims continental shelf included in ph territory
(WRONGBOBO)
c. Continental shelf as coextensive with exclusive econ zone with 200 nautical miles,
however the coastal states may apply extension of continental shelf an make
propositions and nego with intl commission. May be extended but not beyond 300 natut
miles. But approval of extension is subj to the evid tat ph may present to un commission
that certain resources, in particular mining resources, are available for exploritation of
ph, in order to have extension.

CONCEPT OF CONTIGUOUS ZONE

 Given te baseline as the means of measuring the… 12 nautical miles, the next maritime zone is
the contiguous zone measuring 24 naut miles from baseline. Ph has not declared contig zone,
there is no provision in the law of the sea that requires a declarationof contig zone. \

W/ EXEC AGREEMENTS MAY VBE CONSIDERED AS TREATY UNDER ART 2 OF VIENA CONV

 Authorities are of the view that an exc agreement is in seeming characteristic of a treaty and
may be considered as such under art 2. For the reason that def under art 2 speaks of anyother
characterization other than the term treaty itself. Take not, how, that the term exec agreement
is not a term that exists in consti.

 Art 43 of the viena conv of the law of treaties: “ the invalidity ermination or denunciation of a
treaty , the withdrawal of a party from it, or the suspension of its operation, as a result of the
application of the present convention or of the provisions of the treaty shall not in anyway
impair the duty of any state to part.. any obligation embodied in the treaty which would be subj
under intl law, independently of the treaty.
o Dean: without the effectivity of the treaty on the basis of the provision above,