International Law Concept

Question: Write an essay on International Law? Answer: Introduction This concept is accepted by all the international community that the relation between different states must be harmonious and friendly. Even if any dispute occurs that states should go for the peaceful means of settlement. It is preferable as well as desirable. The research paper attempts to explore different amicable means of dispute settlement and certain successful example of it throughout the world. The paper also attempts to judge the efficacy of amicable means of settlement. The history states certain successful as well as certain unsuccessful examples which put a big question on the on the efficiency of the dispute settlement. There are certain procedures of the amicable means of settlement. Negotiation, good office, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial adjudication, settlement by regional agencies of United Nations etc are the procedure of amicable means of international dispute settlement. The research paper reported the procedure of dispute settlement between the states in absent of the war politics in modern nation. This enlightenment is resulting from a hypothetical underlying principle based on worldwide democratic standards for reconciliation the rival values and welfare. This paper pointed out that self-governing states in disputes are improved equipped than others in the matter for disseminating conflict circumstances at the previous stage before they got a chance to rise to armed attack. This kind of improved equipment is denoted as the amicable or peaceful means of dispute settlement. This descriptive reason reliable with the conclusion on democratic system and conflict, but it as well involves the narrative experiential proposal that conflicts among the nations are more agreeable than the other kind of conflict to peaceful settlement. Study of modern interstate conflicts disclose that still when possible perplexing issues are organized, democratic adversary are considerably more probable to attain amicable settlements in regards to other forms of settlement of dispute. The reason is to give a universal review of the practice between the nations by the peaceful resolution of global conflicts. The paper reflects the variety of mechanisms for peaceful dispute resolution which includes the process negotiation, reconciliation and commission of investigation. The analytical comment comprises the conversation of the types of dispute and the relative virtues of arbitration and the procedure of negotiation in the International Court. Statement of Problem The researcher wants to research this topic because it is a very burning issue in the international aspect. The main focus of the research topic is to provide the significance of this kind of dispute settlement. Applications of force to the other weaker countries will definitely harm the integrity of that country which is not at all wanted and desirable. So the peaceful means of dispute settlement will help to maintain the peace in the country. The main focus of the research paper is to provide the critical analysis of the peaceful means of settlement to point out its efficacy on it. Aim and Objective of the Research The main objective of the researcher is to find out the efficacy of peaceful settlement of dispute in the international context. In this way researcher is going to find out the different instances to evaluate the effectiveness of this measure. The main objectives are: To evaluate different amicable means of dispute settlement. To ensure and examine the efficiency of those process. To compare the process of this kind of dispute settlement with the other form of dispute settlement. Research Question and Hypotheses RQ 1: Whether the amicable means of settlement of international dispute are effective? Hypotheses HO- No, the amicable means of dispute settlement is not very effective in regards to a dispute settlement. HA- Yes, the amicable means of settlement best process to settle the dispute in international level. RQ 2: Whether the process needs any kind of amendment? Hypotheses HO - No, the process does not needs any kind of amendment. HA- Yes, to certain extent the amendment are required to make the process more effective. Literature Review The amicable means of dispute settlement is important in regards to the international aspect. In todays world all countries are sovereign. So every country has its own sovereignty. In the modern civilized world war or other kind of use of force cannot be encouraged by any of the international community. United Nations Organization (UNO) always tries to settle the disputes between the states in the amicable procedures. If the force is applied or the war started between the states it will actually destroyed the economy and life of the human being. Governing procedures are totally exploited by the war or other kind of dispute. So the peaceful way of settlement is very important. Though, we can find different instances of massive wars in the nations in modern era. The civil wars in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq show the ineffectiveness of this procedure. The data focuses that thousands of live are destroyed and became homeless and leads their lives in the refugee camps. This is not desirable at all in the modern world. It shows the inefficiency of this mentioned dispute resolutions. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), United Nations Organization (UNO), World Trade Organization (WTO) and other regional agencies are always tries to settle the dispute in the peaceful way. The dispute in different states is settled down in this way. Maximum states are encouraging and adopting this view and apply to their countries context. But the major question is regarding the effectiveness. The unrest condition in the Middle East shows the failure of this system. More effective and powerful application is desired. The international organizations must apply strict principles for adopting this process otherwise all the essence of this nice procedure will go in vein. Though, in many occasions it feel by the international community is that the amicable means of settlement could not perform the desired goal and the forceful procedures can only be remedy to it. But the application of amicable means of settlement is desired. Research Methodology The methodology selected for this study is the qualitative research design. The research would be doctrinaire and analytical. It would be conducted through primary and secondary sources. Primary sources would include UNO Agreement, relevant data and decided international cases. Secondary sources include articles, books and journals. As part of methodology the data will be collected from different successful as well as unsuccessful instances of international dispute settlements. Findings and discussion Origination of the principle of amicable means of dispute settlement: Charter of the United Nations: The Charter of the United Nations gives in section I that the doctrine of the United Nations are to keep up global harmony and safety, and to get compelling aggregate events for the expectation and emigration of hazard to the harmony, and for the control of expression of animosity or other ruptures of the harmony, and to realize by tranquil means, and in agreement with the ideology of equity and universal rule, change on the other hand resolution of worldwide debate or circumstances which may lead to a violation of the harmony. The charter claims under Article 1 that the entire member must settle their respective disputes in the amicable means of settlement. Announcement and Declaration of the General Assembly: The standard of the amicable means of dispute settlement has been reconfirmed in numerous resolution of General Assembly which includes resolutions 2627 (XXV) of 24 October 1970, 2734 (XXV) of 16 December 1970 and 40/9 of 8 November 1985. The resolutions are dealt with widely in the statement of ideology of International Law about responsive associations and collaboration between the nations in conformity with Charter of the United Nations. According to the resolution and provision of UN Charter, the code is that nations shall resolve their intercontinental dispute by amicable means in which a mode that global harmony and safety and integrity are not in danger of extinction. Other principles: The Final Act of the discussion on safety and collaboration in Europe, sanctioned at Helsinki in the 1975 declared that the philosophy organized in the statement of ideology directing associations among the States claims for maintaining the independent and fairness in the state, respecting for the privileges innate in independence; refraining from the hazard or employ and application of power and force, inviolability of borders between states; jurisdictional honor of nations; amicable resolution of dispute between states; no interference in domestic interaction; respecting for the basic human rights and basic independence which includes the freedom of deliberation, scruples, faith or principle; identical rights and self-government of citizen; collaboration between nations; and accomplishment of responsibility under the international law are the basic implication under those declaration. The associations among the standard of the amicable means of resolution of dispute and additional precise ideology of international law are seen equally in the Friendly Relations Declaration and Manila Declaration. Non use of force principle: In the civilized society it is very common that people will settle their dispute in peaceful manner. So this rule applicable to states also. They also need to satisfy this criterion to become a civilized nation. This principle is heighted in the Manila Declaration. All the states are thereby instructed settle the dispute in peaceful manner. Non intervention on domestic matters- principle: Every country is independent so they must enjoy full control over their domestic matters. To maintain peace, it is also important to maintain the proper diplomacy that no state should interrupt in the matter of other states. The connections among the rule of peaceful resolution of disputes as well as the rule of non-involvement are also mentioned in article V of the Pact of Bogota, 1948. Aspect of good faith: Manila Declaration confirms that every state at the time of dispute settlement must act in a good faith. If any evil motive is found, it will amount to violation of these principles. 2. Methods of settlement: The primary and traditional style of resolution of international dispute is negotiation. It engages a straight and mutual procedure. Negotiation is able to create a resolution in conformity with authorized criterion or in conformity with equally legal as well as political principles. It can be observed that negotiation is much more bendable than court settlement. We can cite a very recent instance in this context. NATO campaign for bombing against the country Yugoslavia in the year of 1999 is the example. In near about May, 1999, NATO airplane attacks the Chinese delegation in the Belgrade and this attack kills three Chinese citizens and wounds just about 20 Chinese citizens. American authorities explain this procedure as the disastrous error. After five time of discussion, between United States and China in 1999, they came to a conclusion and also execute two contracts regarding recompense for injury to the embassy properties of both Nations. In the initial contract, the United Stat es mentioned its intention to ask for US$ 28 million as financial support from Congress for harm to the Chinese delegation in Belgrade. In the next contract, China decided to pay US$ 2.87 million for harm to US embassy and other possessions in China reasons by the Chinese expressions. This is also a very important aspect in the context of international dispute settlements. Good offices are a comparable instrument. There is no actual typical description of the mediation but it is however usually different from the procedure of conciliation. According to standard, mediation engages the express ways of conference on the foundation of suggestions made by mediator. Contemporary practice encloses a significant instance of the effectual mediation process. We can sight an example in regards to Papal Mediation which was held on the year of 1978 to 1984 involving the Chile and the Argentina.The two Nations officially welcomed the mediation and executed the agreement on 8 January 1978. The mediation extents to five years and gave birth to perfect Treaty of Peace and Friendship which was affirmed by both the states on 29 November 1984. The purpose is same like mediation. This is also a third party settlement. The procedure is almost same like mediation. Conciliation is explains as the amalgamation of the procedure of enquiry and the mediation.The conciliator examines the particulars of the dispute and suggests the terms of the settlement. One of the ordinary obstructions stop the booming resolution of a dispute by cooperation is the complexity of determining the issues which have created the differences among the disputants. In this point this procedure is very helpful. We can cite an example of LetelierandMoffittincident or issue raised between Chile and the United States in 1992. The most effective and important way of dispute settlement in modern era is arbitration. The arbitrator generally appointed by two states or by any UNO organizations to settle the dispute between the states. This is very effective measures in this modern world. We can cite a successful example of arbitration Red Sea Islands Case International court of justice: The International Court of Justice is the sole adjudicating authority under UNO. Firstly, it is obtainable to Nations usually for the reason of dispute resolution.Secondly, the Court has an authority to provide advice, which includes a responsibility to provide recommendation to the political parts of the UNO at their demand on any lawful query. Though we can able to cite many of the instances in regards to successful dispute resolution instances in peaceful manner, but the recent condition of world indicates certain inefficiency of the mechanism. Firstly, this mechanism generally advocates for the powerful states. If the conflict rose between two unequal states the judgment may go in favor of the powerful state. Secondly, the mechanisms are lengthy and many time unable to provide any particular conclusion. The war in Middle East countries reflects the inefficiency in the system. 2003 Iraq war, 2009 Boko Haram issue, 2011 war in Syria provides the instances of inefficacy of this system. Many lives and economy are wasted in those wars but no resolutions are found to resolve those sensitive issue. Conclusion and recommendation This paper reflects the matter that peaceful settlement of dispute is an effective mechanism in modern word. The scheme of peaceful settlement of disputes is an important division of the world of worldwide affairs. Except this procedure the world will not be a good place to live. Though in certain cases the procedure shows inefficiency but cooperation from all the states are required to enhance the effectiveness of this procedure. War is not a thing which a modern world wants so the amicable means of dispute settlement is the best remedy. Each and every disputing state is need to compromise to certain extent to make the procedure successful. It can be recommended that UNO need to make more strict resolution to enforce this mechanism otherwise the essence of this system will be destroyed fully. Except the full cooperation and help from the stares the mechanism has no value n the scenario. In this context we can conclude that this system has merits and demits both. But according to the outcome of this research, it can be claimed that the merits are more in numbers. There are various instances of peaceful settlement in modern world which are helpful to keep the peace in the world. Bibliography: Books: Aksar Y, Implementing International Economic Law, Martinus Nijhoff (2011), 50-60 Alvarez, J. E., International Organizations as Law-Makers, Oxford University Press, 2005, Arend, A. C., Beck, R. J. International law and the use of force: beyond the UN Charter paradigm. Routledge. (2014). Bimal N Patel, The World Court Reference Guide And Case-Law Digest.(2011) Boisson de Chazournes L, Romano C and Mackenzie R, International Organizations And International Dispute Settlement, Transnational Publishers (2002) Brus M, Muller S and Wiemers S, The United Nations Decade Of International Law, M Nijhoff (1991) Christian J Tams and Antonios Tzanakopoulos, The Settlement Of International Disputes,(Hart Pub (2012). Collier, J., and Lowe, V., The Settlement of Disputes in International Law Institutions and Procedures (2nd Ed), Oxford, University Press, 2000, 90-125 Evans Malcolm., International Law (3rd ed), Oxford University Press; 2010, 50-55 Evans Malcolm., International Law, Oxford University Press; (2010) 50-55 French D, Saul M and White N, International Law And Dispute Settlement, Hart Pub (2010) Goh G, Dispute Settlement In International Space Law, Marinus Nijhoff Publishers (2007) Merrills J, International Dispute Settlement Cambridge University Press (1998) Merrills J.G., International Dispute Settlement ( Cambridge University Press, 2011, 100-115 O'Connell M, International Dispute Settlement Ashgate/Dartmouth (2003) Wolfrum R and GaÃÅ'ˆtzschmann I, International Dispute Settlement: Room For Innovations? Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2013) Article: Adede, A. O. (1975). Settlement of dispute arising under the law of the sea convention. American Journal of International Law, 798-818. Allee, T. L. and Huth, P. K. (2006). Legitimizing dispute settlement: International legal rulings as domestic political cover. American Political Science Review, 100(02):219234 Bilder, R. B., Some Limitations of Adjudication as a Dispute Settlement Technique, 23 Va. J. Int'l L. 1 (1986). Botes, J. (2003). Conflict transformation: a debate over semantics or a crucial shift in the theory and practice of peace and conflict studies?. International Journal of Peace Studies, 1-27. Colson, D. A., Hoyle, D. P. (2003). Satisfying the Procedural Prerequisites to the Compulsory Dispute Settlement Mechanisms of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention: Did the Southern Bluefin Tuna Tribunal Get It Right?. Ocean Development International Law, 34(1), 59-82. Gibler, D. M., Tir, J. (2010). Settled borders and regime type: Democratic transitions as consequences of peaceful territorial transfers. American Journal of Political Science, 54(4), 951-968. Hafner-Burton, E. M., Montgomery, A. H. (2012). War, Trade, and Distrust: Why Trade Agreements Dont Always Keep the Peace. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 29(3), 257-278. Hartzell, C., Hoddie, M. (2003). Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing and Postà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ Civil War Conflict Management. American Journal of Political Science,47(2), 318-332. Higgins, R. (2003). The ICJ, the ECJ, and the Integrity of International Law.International and comparative law quarterly, 52(01), 1-20. Jo, H., Namgung, H. (2012). Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in Preferential Trade Agreements Democracy, Boilerplates, and the Multilateral Trade Regime.Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56(6), 1041-1068. Lacarte-Muro, J., Gappah, P. (2000). Developing Countries and the WTO Legal and Dispute Settlement System: A view from the bench. Journal of International Economic Law, 3(3), 395-401. Lee, H., Mitchell, S. M. (2012). Foreign direct investment and territorial disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56(4), 675-703. Powell, E. J., Wiegand, K. E. (2010). Legal systems and peaceful attempts to resolve territorial disputes. Conflict Management and Peace Science. Wiegand, K. E., Powell, E. J. (2010). Past experience, quest for the best forum, and peaceful attempts to resolve territorial disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution. Alvarez, J. E., International Organizations as Law-Makers, Oxford University Press, 2005, 92-95 Bilder, R. B., Some Limitations of Adjudication as a Dispute Settlement Technique, 23 Va. J. Int'l L. 1 (1986). Allee, T. L. and Huth, P. K. (2006). Legitimizing dispute settlement: International legal rulings as domestic political cover. American Political Science Review, 100(02):219234 Merrills J.G., International Dispute Settlement (5th Ed), Cambridge University Press, 2011, 100-115 Collier, J., and Lowe, V., The Settlement of Disputes in International Law Institutions and Procedures (2nd Ed), Oxford, University Press, 2000, 90-125 Evans Malcolm., International Law (3rd ed), Oxford University Press; 2010, 50-55 Evans Malcolm., International Law, Oxford University Press; (2010) 50-55 Boisson de Chazournes L, Romano C and Mackenzie R,International Organizations And International Dispute Settlement,Transnational Publishers (2002) Boisson de Chazournes L, Romano C and Mackenzie R,International Organizations And International Dispute Settlement,Transnational Publishers (2002) O'Connell M,International Dispute SettlementAshgate/Dartmouth (2003) Bilder, R. B., Some Limitations of Adjudication as a Dispute Settlement Technique, 23 Va. J. Int'l L. 1 (1986) Wiegand, K. E., Powell, E. J. (2010). Past experience, quest for the best forum, and peaceful attempts to resolve territorial disputes.Journal of Conflict Resolution Bilder, R. B., Some Limitations of Adjudication as a Dispute Settlement Technique, 23 Va. J. Int'l L. 1 (1986). Jo, H., Namgung, H. (2012). Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in Preferential Trade Agreements Democracy, Boilerplates, and the Multilateral Trade Regime.Journal of Conflict Resolution,56(6), 1041-1068. Hafner-Burton, E. M., Montgomery, A. H. (2012). War, Trade, and Distrust: Why Trade Agreements Dont Always Keep the Peace.Conflict Management and Peace Science,29(3), 257-278. Hafner-Burton, E. M., Montgomery, A. H. (2012). War, Trade, and Distrust: Why Trade Agreements Dont Always Keep the Peace.Conflict Management and Peace Science,29(3), 257-278. Bilder, R. B., Some Limitations of Adjudication as a Dispute Settlement Technique, 23 Va. J. Int'l L. 1 (1986)