Reference no: EM131581769

INTERNATIONAL LAW

You are required to read the plots and answer the questions referring to legal instruments, cases, practical examples, theory, and academic literatures

Plot 1: "The world powers' view of Iran has significantly shifted. Those days in which Iran was being punished for violating the law seem to have gone. For many, it is baffling that Iran is now capable of getting away with breaking international laws, particularly in the last few months after the nuclear deal was reached between the six world powers (known as P5+1; China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, plus Germany) and the Islamic Republic."

Plot 2: "While the independence of Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia served as a springboard for the development of then nascent normative approaches to secession, the unilateral independence of Kosovo can be examined from the vantage point of three well-developed bodies of thought: remedial, nationalist and choice theories of secession. And judging by the states' written submissions in the advisory proceedings regarding Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence before the International Court of Justice, remedial theories seem to be winning. Most of the states which argue that self-determination still applies after decolonization, anchor their argument in a remedial conception of secession"

Plot 3: "the South African Supreme Court of Appeal decided unanimously that the South African government had breached its obligations under the South African domestic statute implementing the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), and under the Rome Statute, by failing to arrest and detain for surrender to the ICC Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir. Bashir visited South African in June 2015 to attend the African Union summit held there. As will be explained below, although the decision was ultimately based on domestic law, it is potentially very far reaching in the effect that it will have in South Africa and possibly internationally. In summary, the Court held that under the South African Implementation of the Rome Statute of the ICC Act 2002, any head of State subject to an ICC arrest warrant may be arrested in South Africa and surrendered to the ICC. However, the Court also held that under the same Act international law immunities, including the immunity of heads of states, do not apply under South African law when a person is sought for domestic prosecution in South Africa for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity."

Questions

1. Critically analyse the Plot 1 compliance with the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes

2. Discuss Plot 2 in the light of legal scope of self-determination of a state

3. Critically discuss Plot 3 regarding the legality of diplomatic immunity and its limitations.