All Exams >
CLAT >
4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG >
All Questions
All questions of International Laws & IPR for CLAT Exam
‘Monism’ denotes that International Law and State Law____________?- a)represent two entirely distinct legal system
- b)are concomitant aspects of the one system
- c)are not enforceable
- d)are not binding
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
‘Monism’ denotes that International Law and State Law____________?
a)
represent two entirely distinct legal system
b)
are concomitant aspects of the one system
c)
are not enforceable
d)
are not binding
|
Mohit Sharma answered |
The human immune system is a complex network of cells, tissues, and organs that work together to defend the body against harmful pathogens such as viruses, bacteria, and parasites. It is an essential part of our body's defense mechanisms and plays a crucial role in maintaining overall health.
The immune system functions by recognizing and attacking foreign substances or antigens that enter the body. These antigens can be found on the surface of pathogens or on cells that have been infected by them. When the immune system detects an antigen, it triggers a cascade of events to eliminate the threat.
There are two main components of the immune system: the innate immune system and the adaptive immune system. The innate immune system is the body's first line of defense and provides immediate, non-specific protection against a wide range of pathogens. It includes physical barriers, such as the skin and mucous membranes, as well as various cells and proteins that can recognize and destroy foreign invaders.
The adaptive immune system, on the other hand, provides a more specific and targeted response to pathogens. It is characterized by the presence of specialized cells called lymphocytes, which can recognize and remember specific antigens. When a lymphocyte encounters an antigen it has previously encountered, it triggers a rapid and specific response to eliminate the threat.
The immune system also relies on a variety of other cells and proteins to carry out its functions. These include phagocytes, which engulf and destroy pathogens, as well as antibodies, which are proteins that can bind to specific antigens and mark them for destruction.
Overall, the immune system is a highly sophisticated and coordinated network that works tirelessly to protect the body from harmful pathogens. It is constantly adapting and evolving to recognize and eliminate new threats, and plays a crucial role in maintaining overall health and well-being.
The immune system functions by recognizing and attacking foreign substances or antigens that enter the body. These antigens can be found on the surface of pathogens or on cells that have been infected by them. When the immune system detects an antigen, it triggers a cascade of events to eliminate the threat.
There are two main components of the immune system: the innate immune system and the adaptive immune system. The innate immune system is the body's first line of defense and provides immediate, non-specific protection against a wide range of pathogens. It includes physical barriers, such as the skin and mucous membranes, as well as various cells and proteins that can recognize and destroy foreign invaders.
The adaptive immune system, on the other hand, provides a more specific and targeted response to pathogens. It is characterized by the presence of specialized cells called lymphocytes, which can recognize and remember specific antigens. When a lymphocyte encounters an antigen it has previously encountered, it triggers a rapid and specific response to eliminate the threat.
The immune system also relies on a variety of other cells and proteins to carry out its functions. These include phagocytes, which engulf and destroy pathogens, as well as antibodies, which are proteins that can bind to specific antigens and mark them for destruction.
Overall, the immune system is a highly sophisticated and coordinated network that works tirelessly to protect the body from harmful pathogens. It is constantly adapting and evolving to recognize and eliminate new threats, and plays a crucial role in maintaining overall health and well-being.
Passage (Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.Q. The principle of “ex acquo et bono” is contained in- a)Article 38(1)(a) of the statue of ICJ
- b)Article 38(1)(b) of the statue of ICJ
- c)Article 38(2) of the statue of ICJ
- d)Article 38(3) of the statue of ICJ
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Passage
(Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))
Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.
Q. The principle of “ex acquo et bono” is contained in
a)
Article 38(1)(a) of the statue of ICJ
b)
Article 38(1)(b) of the statue of ICJ
c)
Article 38(2) of the statue of ICJ
d)
Article 38(3) of the statue of ICJ
|
Nandita Singh answered |
The principle of "ex aequo et bono" is contained in Article 38(2) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This principle allows the Court to decide a case based on principles of equity and fairness, rather than strict adherence to the rules of law. It can be invoked when the parties to a case agree to allow the Court to decide the case using this principle, or if the Court determines that it is necessary to do so in order to arrive at a just and equitable resolution of the case.
Therefore, the correct answer is c) Article 38(2) of the statue of ICJ.
Which one of the following propositions would be correct according to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1960?- a)The reservation and the objection cancel each other and all the provisions of the treaty will apply to all parties
- b)The provisions of the treaty to which the reservation applies, shall not apply between the reserving state and the objecting state unless the objecting state specifically objects to the entry into force of the treaty as between the two states
- c)The reservation and the objection prevent the treaty from coming into force in respect of all of its parties
- d)The objection invalidates the reservation, and the reserving state ceases to be a party to the treaty.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Which one of the following propositions would be correct according to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1960?
a)
The reservation and the objection cancel each other and all the provisions of the treaty will apply to all parties
b)
The provisions of the treaty to which the reservation applies, shall not apply between the reserving state and the objecting state unless the objecting state specifically objects to the entry into force of the treaty as between the two states
c)
The reservation and the objection prevent the treaty from coming into force in respect of all of its parties
d)
The objection invalidates the reservation, and the reserving state ceases to be a party to the treaty.
|
Geeta jain answered |
According to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, the correct proposition is option 'B': The provisions of the treaty to which the reservation applies shall not apply between the reserving state and the objecting state unless the objecting state specifically objects to the entry into force of the treaty as between the two states.
Explanation:
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is an international treaty that sets out the rules governing the formation, interpretation, and termination of treaties. It provides a framework for the rights and obligations of states in relation to treaties.
When a state makes a reservation to a treaty, it effectively modifies its obligations under that treaty. The reservation allows the state to exclude or modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that state. However, the reservation can only be made if it is not prohibited by the treaty and is not incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty.
When a state objects to a reservation made by another state, it means that it disagrees with the reservation and does not consider it valid. The objection can be made if the reservation is considered to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty.
According to the Vienna Convention, when a state makes a reservation to a treaty and another state objects to that reservation, the provisions of the treaty to which the reservation applies shall not apply between the reserving state and the objecting state unless the objecting state specifically objects to the entry into force of the treaty as between the two states.
In other words, the objection by the objecting state prevents the specific provisions of the treaty to which the reservation applies from being applicable between the two states. However, if the objecting state does not object to the entry into force of the treaty as between the two states, then the treaty provisions will apply to the reserving state and the objecting state.
This provision ensures that both the reserving state and the objecting state have a say in the application of the treaty provisions, while also safeguarding the object and purpose of the treaty. It allows for a balance between the rights and obligations of the states involved.
Explanation:
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is an international treaty that sets out the rules governing the formation, interpretation, and termination of treaties. It provides a framework for the rights and obligations of states in relation to treaties.
When a state makes a reservation to a treaty, it effectively modifies its obligations under that treaty. The reservation allows the state to exclude or modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that state. However, the reservation can only be made if it is not prohibited by the treaty and is not incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty.
When a state objects to a reservation made by another state, it means that it disagrees with the reservation and does not consider it valid. The objection can be made if the reservation is considered to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty.
According to the Vienna Convention, when a state makes a reservation to a treaty and another state objects to that reservation, the provisions of the treaty to which the reservation applies shall not apply between the reserving state and the objecting state unless the objecting state specifically objects to the entry into force of the treaty as between the two states.
In other words, the objection by the objecting state prevents the specific provisions of the treaty to which the reservation applies from being applicable between the two states. However, if the objecting state does not object to the entry into force of the treaty as between the two states, then the treaty provisions will apply to the reserving state and the objecting state.
This provision ensures that both the reserving state and the objecting state have a say in the application of the treaty provisions, while also safeguarding the object and purpose of the treaty. It allows for a balance between the rights and obligations of the states involved.
Some effort has been made to transform the status of an individual from the object to the subject of International Law. The first effort towards this was made after the________?- a)Treaty of Westphalia
- b)1815 Vienna Conference
- c)First World War
- d)Second World War
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Some effort has been made to transform the status of an individual from the object to the subject of International Law. The first effort towards this was made after the________?
a)
Treaty of Westphalia
b)
1815 Vienna Conference
c)
First World War
d)
Second World War
|
Shounak Mukherjee answered |
The Transformation of the Status of an Individual to Subject of International Law
The status of an individual as a subject of International Law has been a result of a long and gradual process. The first effort towards this transformation was made after the Second World War.
The aftermath of the Second World War led to the establishment of the United Nations, which was based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members. The UN Charter recognized the importance of protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms for all individuals, without discrimination based on race, gender, religion, or other factors.
Significance of the Second World War:
The Second World War was a significant event in the history of international relations as it resulted in the deaths of millions of people, including civilians. The atrocities committed during the war brought attention to the need for international law to protect individuals from acts of aggression and violations of their human rights.
Impact of the Second World War on International Law:
The Second World War led to the development of new principles of international law, which recognized the importance of protecting individuals from acts of aggression and violations of their human rights.
The Nuremberg Trials, which were held after the war, established the principle of individual criminal responsibility for acts of aggression and crimes against humanity. This principle was later incorporated into the International Criminal Court's Rome Statute.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948, recognized the inherent dignity and inalienable rights of all individuals, regardless of their nationality, race, or religion. This declaration led to the development of international human rights law, which has become an integral part of contemporary international law.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Second World War was a turning point in the history of international law as it led to the recognition of the importance of protecting individuals from acts of aggression and violations of their human rights. The establishment of the UN and the development of new principles of international law paved the way for the transformation of the status of an individual from the object to the subject of international law.
The status of an individual as a subject of International Law has been a result of a long and gradual process. The first effort towards this transformation was made after the Second World War.
The aftermath of the Second World War led to the establishment of the United Nations, which was based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members. The UN Charter recognized the importance of protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms for all individuals, without discrimination based on race, gender, religion, or other factors.
Significance of the Second World War:
The Second World War was a significant event in the history of international relations as it resulted in the deaths of millions of people, including civilians. The atrocities committed during the war brought attention to the need for international law to protect individuals from acts of aggression and violations of their human rights.
Impact of the Second World War on International Law:
The Second World War led to the development of new principles of international law, which recognized the importance of protecting individuals from acts of aggression and violations of their human rights.
The Nuremberg Trials, which were held after the war, established the principle of individual criminal responsibility for acts of aggression and crimes against humanity. This principle was later incorporated into the International Criminal Court's Rome Statute.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948, recognized the inherent dignity and inalienable rights of all individuals, regardless of their nationality, race, or religion. This declaration led to the development of international human rights law, which has become an integral part of contemporary international law.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Second World War was a turning point in the history of international law as it led to the recognition of the importance of protecting individuals from acts of aggression and violations of their human rights. The establishment of the UN and the development of new principles of international law paved the way for the transformation of the status of an individual from the object to the subject of international law.
The Permanent Court of International Justice applied the principle of res judicate while deciding____________?- a)Serbian loans case
- b)Mavrommatis Palestine concessions case
- c)Chozow factory indemnity case
- d)South-West Africa case
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
The Permanent Court of International Justice applied the principle of res judicate while deciding____________?
a)
Serbian loans case
b)
Mavrommatis Palestine concessions case
c)
Chozow factory indemnity case
d)
South-West Africa case
|
Anaya Patel answered |
In Chorzow Factory [Indemnity case] Pub. P.C.I.J (1938) Series A, No. 17]—In this case, the permanent court of International Justice applied the principle of `res judicata’ also held that one who violates a rule is liable to make reparation. Hence Option C is correct.
“Succession of Government” means change of________?- a)external sovereignty
- b)internal sovereignty through constitutional revolutionary processes
- c)Prime Minister
- d)the Administrative System
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
“Succession of Government” means change of________?
a)
external sovereignty
b)
internal sovereignty through constitutional revolutionary processes
c)
Prime Minister
d)
the Administrative System
|
Ayushi patil answered |
The phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words" means that a complex idea or emotion can be conveyed more effectively through a single image than through a large amount of text. It suggests that visual images have a powerful impact and can communicate ideas or feelings more directly and efficiently than written or spoken language.
The main difference between de jure and de facto recognition is that the former is_____?- a)legal while the latter is factual
- b)provisional and the latter is definite
- c)informal while the latter is formal
- d)explicit and the latter is implicit
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
The main difference between de jure and de facto recognition is that the former is_____?
a)
legal while the latter is factual
b)
provisional and the latter is definite
c)
informal while the latter is formal
d)
explicit and the latter is implicit
|
Kajol shukla answered |
De jure recognition refers to the formal acknowledgment of a state's existence and sovereignty by other states, based on their legal and diplomatic recognition. It is a legal recognition of a state's status in the international community. On the other hand, de facto recognition is a factual recognition of a state's existence and government, based on its effective control and governance over a territory, even if it lacks legal recognition.
Legal vs Factual Recognition:
- De jure recognition is a legal recognition, meaning it is based on the principles and norms of international law. It involves the formal acknowledgment of a state's sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity by other states. This recognition is typically expressed through diplomatic means, such as the establishment of diplomatic relations and the exchange of ambassadors. It carries legal consequences, including the state's entitlement to rights and obligations under international law.
- De facto recognition, on the other hand, is a factual recognition. It is based on the practical reality of a state's control and governance over a territory, regardless of its legal status. This recognition does not necessarily involve formal diplomatic relations or the exchange of ambassadors. It is often driven by pragmatic considerations, such as the need to engage with a state for economic or security reasons, rather than strict adherence to legal principles.
Provisional vs Definite Recognition:
- De jure recognition is typically definitive and permanent. Once a state is legally recognized, its status is generally considered permanent, unless there are significant changes in circumstances, such as the breakup of the state or a change in government. De jure recognition confers a state with the rights and privileges enjoyed by other recognized states.
- De facto recognition, however, can be provisional and temporary. It is based on the practical realities on the ground and can change depending on the circumstances. For example, a state may exercise effective control over a territory without gaining widespread legal recognition. In such cases, de facto recognition may be limited and subject to change based on shifts in power dynamics or the emergence of new political entities.
Conclusion:
In summary, the main difference between de jure and de facto recognition lies in their legal and factual nature. De jure recognition is a legal acknowledgment of a state's status, while de facto recognition is a factual recognition based on effective control and governance. De jure recognition is typically definitive and permanent, while de facto recognition can be provisional and subject to change.
Legal vs Factual Recognition:
- De jure recognition is a legal recognition, meaning it is based on the principles and norms of international law. It involves the formal acknowledgment of a state's sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity by other states. This recognition is typically expressed through diplomatic means, such as the establishment of diplomatic relations and the exchange of ambassadors. It carries legal consequences, including the state's entitlement to rights and obligations under international law.
- De facto recognition, on the other hand, is a factual recognition. It is based on the practical reality of a state's control and governance over a territory, regardless of its legal status. This recognition does not necessarily involve formal diplomatic relations or the exchange of ambassadors. It is often driven by pragmatic considerations, such as the need to engage with a state for economic or security reasons, rather than strict adherence to legal principles.
Provisional vs Definite Recognition:
- De jure recognition is typically definitive and permanent. Once a state is legally recognized, its status is generally considered permanent, unless there are significant changes in circumstances, such as the breakup of the state or a change in government. De jure recognition confers a state with the rights and privileges enjoyed by other recognized states.
- De facto recognition, however, can be provisional and temporary. It is based on the practical realities on the ground and can change depending on the circumstances. For example, a state may exercise effective control over a territory without gaining widespread legal recognition. In such cases, de facto recognition may be limited and subject to change based on shifts in power dynamics or the emergence of new political entities.
Conclusion:
In summary, the main difference between de jure and de facto recognition lies in their legal and factual nature. De jure recognition is a legal acknowledgment of a state's status, while de facto recognition is a factual recognition based on effective control and governance. De jure recognition is typically definitive and permanent, while de facto recognition can be provisional and subject to change.
Which one of the following statements is correct?- a)A state has the duty to become a party to every multilateral treaty
- b)A state has a right to decide whether or not to become a party to a multilateral treaty and if it decides to become a party has a right to make a reservation to limit its participation in any way it chooses
- c)A state has a right to decide whether or not to become a party to a multilateral treaty and if it decides to become a party, it should accept the whole treaty
- d)A state has a right to decide whether or not to become a party to the multilateral treaty, and if decides to become a party, it may do so with or without reservations, provided that its reservation is compatible with the objects and purposes of the treaty
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Which one of the following statements is correct?
a)
A state has the duty to become a party to every multilateral treaty
b)
A state has a right to decide whether or not to become a party to a multilateral treaty and if it decides to become a party has a right to make a reservation to limit its participation in any way it chooses
c)
A state has a right to decide whether or not to become a party to a multilateral treaty and if it decides to become a party, it should accept the whole treaty
d)
A state has a right to decide whether or not to become a party to the multilateral treaty, and if decides to become a party, it may do so with or without reservations, provided that its reservation is compatible with the objects and purposes of the treaty
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
It is one of the principles of treaties that the consent of, state bound by a treaty should be free. Thus. a state has the right to decide whether or not to become a part multilateral treaty. Hence Option is D correct.
Passage (Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.Q. The principle of ‘Pacta Sunt Servanda” means:- a)Treaties accepted in good faith
- b)Treaties are revocable
- c)Treaties are irrevocable
- d)Treaties are not binding international law
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Passage
(Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))
Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.
Q. The principle of ‘Pacta Sunt Servanda” means:
a)
Treaties accepted in good faith
b)
Treaties are revocable
c)
Treaties are irrevocable
d)
Treaties are not binding international law
|
|
Radhika joshi answered |
Understanding 'Pacta Sunt Servanda'
The principle of "Pacta Sunt Servanda" is fundamental in international law and diplomacy. It is derived from Latin, meaning "agreements must be kept." This principle underscores the importance of honoring treaties and agreements in a good-faith manner.
Key Aspects of 'Pacta Sunt Servanda'
- Obligation to Honor Treaties: States are expected to fulfill their treaty obligations as a matter of legal and moral duty. This principle ensures that international relations are stable and predictable.
- Good Faith: The application of this principle requires that treaties be executed in good faith, meaning that parties should act honestly and not undermine the agreement's purpose.
- Binding Nature: Unlike the notion that treaties can be easily revoked or dismissed, "Pacta Sunt Servanda" asserts that treaties are binding. This binding nature is crucial for maintaining trust and cooperation among nations.
Why Option 'A' is Correct
- Treaties Accepted in Good Faith: Option 'A' reflects the essence of "Pacta Sunt Servanda" by emphasizing that treaties are to be accepted and executed in good faith. This aligns with the principle's core idea that agreements are binding and should be respected.
- Contrast with Other Options: Other options suggest revocability or non-binding nature of treaties, which contradicts the principle's intent. "Pacta Sunt Servanda" clearly establishes that agreements made by states are to be honored, promoting stability in international relations.
In summary, "Pacta Sunt Servanda" is a cornerstone of international law, ensuring that treaties are respected and executed in good faith, thereby reinforcing the legal obligations of states.
The principle of "Pacta Sunt Servanda" is fundamental in international law and diplomacy. It is derived from Latin, meaning "agreements must be kept." This principle underscores the importance of honoring treaties and agreements in a good-faith manner.
Key Aspects of 'Pacta Sunt Servanda'
- Obligation to Honor Treaties: States are expected to fulfill their treaty obligations as a matter of legal and moral duty. This principle ensures that international relations are stable and predictable.
- Good Faith: The application of this principle requires that treaties be executed in good faith, meaning that parties should act honestly and not undermine the agreement's purpose.
- Binding Nature: Unlike the notion that treaties can be easily revoked or dismissed, "Pacta Sunt Servanda" asserts that treaties are binding. This binding nature is crucial for maintaining trust and cooperation among nations.
Why Option 'A' is Correct
- Treaties Accepted in Good Faith: Option 'A' reflects the essence of "Pacta Sunt Servanda" by emphasizing that treaties are to be accepted and executed in good faith. This aligns with the principle's core idea that agreements are binding and should be respected.
- Contrast with Other Options: Other options suggest revocability or non-binding nature of treaties, which contradicts the principle's intent. "Pacta Sunt Servanda" clearly establishes that agreements made by states are to be honored, promoting stability in international relations.
In summary, "Pacta Sunt Servanda" is a cornerstone of international law, ensuring that treaties are respected and executed in good faith, thereby reinforcing the legal obligations of states.
Passage (Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.Q. In which case the ICJ held that warships have right to innocent passage through international straights in times of undeclared war as well as in peace time:- a)Corfu Channel case
- b)SS Lotus case
- c)North Sea Continental shelf case
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Passage
(Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))
Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.
Q. In which case the ICJ held that warships have right to innocent passage through international straights in times of undeclared war as well as in peace time:
a)
Corfu Channel case
b)
SS Lotus case
c)
North Sea Continental shelf case
d)
None of the above
|
|
Malini verma answered |
Corfu Channel Case Overview
The Corfu Channel case (1949) is a landmark judgment by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding the right of innocent passage for warships. This case involved incidents between British warships and the Albanian government in the Corfu Strait.
Key Findings of the ICJ
- Innocent Passage Recognized: The ICJ ruled that warships have the right to innocent passage through international straits, even during times of undeclared war.
- Definition of Innocent Passage: Innocent passage is defined as navigation through the waters that does not harm the peace, good order, or security of the coastal state. The Court emphasized that warships, like merchant vessels, are entitled to this right.
- Legal Precedent: This case set a precedent for the treatment of warships in international law, affirming that their right of passage is a fundamental principle of maritime law, applicable in both peace and conflict.
Significance of the Judgment
- Strengthening Maritime Law: The ruling reinforced the principle of freedom of navigation in international waters, crucial for maintaining maritime security and trade.
- Implications for Sovereignty: It balanced the sovereign rights of coastal states with the necessity of allowing passage for warships, highlighting that regulation should not equate to obstruction.
- Influence on Future Cases: The Corfu Channel case continues to influence international maritime law, serving as a reference point for subsequent legal disputes involving naval navigation and rights.
In conclusion, the Corfu Channel case is pivotal in establishing the rights of warships to innocent passage, solidifying the balance between national sovereignty and international navigation rights.
The Corfu Channel case (1949) is a landmark judgment by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding the right of innocent passage for warships. This case involved incidents between British warships and the Albanian government in the Corfu Strait.
Key Findings of the ICJ
- Innocent Passage Recognized: The ICJ ruled that warships have the right to innocent passage through international straits, even during times of undeclared war.
- Definition of Innocent Passage: Innocent passage is defined as navigation through the waters that does not harm the peace, good order, or security of the coastal state. The Court emphasized that warships, like merchant vessels, are entitled to this right.
- Legal Precedent: This case set a precedent for the treatment of warships in international law, affirming that their right of passage is a fundamental principle of maritime law, applicable in both peace and conflict.
Significance of the Judgment
- Strengthening Maritime Law: The ruling reinforced the principle of freedom of navigation in international waters, crucial for maintaining maritime security and trade.
- Implications for Sovereignty: It balanced the sovereign rights of coastal states with the necessity of allowing passage for warships, highlighting that regulation should not equate to obstruction.
- Influence on Future Cases: The Corfu Channel case continues to influence international maritime law, serving as a reference point for subsequent legal disputes involving naval navigation and rights.
In conclusion, the Corfu Channel case is pivotal in establishing the rights of warships to innocent passage, solidifying the balance between national sovereignty and international navigation rights.
Passage (Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.Q. Who called international law as vanishing point of jurisprudence- a)Maine
- b)Holland
- c)Brierly
- d)Black Stone
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Passage
(Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))
Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.
Q. Who called international law as vanishing point of jurisprudence
a)
Maine
b)
Holland
c)
Brierly
d)
Black Stone
|
|
Rahul shetty answered |
Introduction to International Law
International law is a crucial aspect of jurisprudence, governing the relationships between states and other international actors. The phrase "vanishing point of jurisprudence" suggests a diminishing or obscured role of international law within broader legal frameworks.
Holland's Perspective
- Holland's Contribution: The legal scholar Thomas Erskine Holland is credited with the phrase "vanishing point of jurisprudence."
- Interpretation of the Term: Holland viewed international law as lacking the binding force associated with domestic law, making it seem less significant or "vanishing" in the grander scheme of legal doctrines.
Comparative Analysis
- Contrast with Other Jurists:
- Maine: Henry Maine focused on the evolution of legal systems and the transition from status to contract, but did not specifically label international law as a vanishing point.
- Brierly: Sir Arnold Brierly wrote extensively on international law but did not use this terminology.
- Blackstone: William Blackstone is known for his Commentaries on the Laws of England, primarily addressing common law, and did not specifically engage with the concept of international law.
Conclusion
Holland’s characterization of international law as a "vanishing point" reflects his belief in its relative weakness compared to domestic legal systems. This perspective highlights ongoing debates about the effectiveness and enforcement of international law, making it an important consideration in the study of legal frameworks.
International law is a crucial aspect of jurisprudence, governing the relationships between states and other international actors. The phrase "vanishing point of jurisprudence" suggests a diminishing or obscured role of international law within broader legal frameworks.
Holland's Perspective
- Holland's Contribution: The legal scholar Thomas Erskine Holland is credited with the phrase "vanishing point of jurisprudence."
- Interpretation of the Term: Holland viewed international law as lacking the binding force associated with domestic law, making it seem less significant or "vanishing" in the grander scheme of legal doctrines.
Comparative Analysis
- Contrast with Other Jurists:
- Maine: Henry Maine focused on the evolution of legal systems and the transition from status to contract, but did not specifically label international law as a vanishing point.
- Brierly: Sir Arnold Brierly wrote extensively on international law but did not use this terminology.
- Blackstone: William Blackstone is known for his Commentaries on the Laws of England, primarily addressing common law, and did not specifically engage with the concept of international law.
Conclusion
Holland’s characterization of international law as a "vanishing point" reflects his belief in its relative weakness compared to domestic legal systems. This perspective highlights ongoing debates about the effectiveness and enforcement of international law, making it an important consideration in the study of legal frameworks.
The Secretary General of the U.N. is appointed_____________?- a)by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council
- b)by the Security Council on the recommendation of the General Assembly
- c)in a joint session of the Security Council and General Assembly
- d)by the permanent members of the Security Council
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
The Secretary General of the U.N. is appointed_____________?
a)
by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council
b)
by the Security Council on the recommendation of the General Assembly
c)
in a joint session of the Security Council and General Assembly
d)
by the permanent members of the Security Council
|
Eshaan Kapoor answered |
Security General of the United Nations is appointed by General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. He is designated as “the Chief Administrative officer of the Organisation”. [Article 97] He is not only the Chief Administrative officer of the Secretariat but of the whole organisation. Hence Option A is correct.
Jus Cogens denotes________?- a)superiority of states
- b)the dominance of the USA over other states
- c)peremptory norms of International Law
- d)the superiority of United Nations
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Jus Cogens denotes________?
a)
superiority of states
b)
the dominance of the USA over other states
c)
peremptory norms of International Law
d)
the superiority of United Nations
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
The provisions relating to Jus Cogens is one of the most controversial provisions incorporated in the Vienna Convention on the law of Treaties, 1969. Article 53 of the Vienna Convention provides that a treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general International Law. A peremptory norm of general International Law is a norm accepted and recognised by the international community of states as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general International Law having the same character. Hence option C is correct.
The International Court of Justice in the Right Passage over India Territory Case 1960, dealt with the_________?- a)principle of succession to delictual liabilities
- b)a customary right relating to territory
- c)succession and public debts
- d)succession to non-fiscal contractual rights
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
The International Court of Justice in the Right Passage over India Territory Case 1960, dealt with the_________?
a)
principle of succession to delictual liabilities
b)
a customary right relating to territory
c)
succession and public debts
d)
succession to non-fiscal contractual rights
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
In this case, the Court ruled that if under a treaty a State gets the right of passage through the territory of another state and if it continues for a long time, then it gains the force of law and thereby imposes the obligation upon the State affected to continue to give right of such passage. Hence Option is B correct.
Passage (Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.Q. The declaratory theory of recognition is also known as:- a)Constitutive theory
- b)Facultative theory
- c)Evidentiary theory
- d)Natural theory
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Passage
(Excerpted from the judgment of RIGHT OF PASSAGE OVER INDIAN TERRITORY CASE (Portugal v. India))
Portugal claims a right of passage between Daman and the enclaves, and between the enclaves, across intervening Indian territory, to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty over the enclaves, subject to India's right of regulation and control of the passage claimed, and without any immunity in Portugal's favour. It claims further that India is under obligation so to exercise its power of regulation and control as not to prevent the passage necessary for the exercise of Portugal's sovereignty over the enclaves. India argues that the vague and contradictory character of the right claimed by Portugal is proved by Portugal's admission that on the one hand the exercise of the right is subject to India's regulation and control as the territorial sovereign, and that on the other hand the right is not accompanied by any immunity, even in the case of the passage of armed forces. There is no doubt that the day-to-day exercise of the right of passage as formulated by Portugal, with correlative obligation upon India, may give rise to delicate questions of application, but that is not, in the view of the Court, sufficient ground for holding that the right is not susceptible of judicial determination with reference to Article 38 (1) of the Statute. In support of its claim, Portugal relies on the Treaty of Poona of 1779 and on sanads (decrees), issued by the Maratha ruler in 1783 and 1785, as having conferred sovereignty on Portugal over the enclaves with the right of passage to them. India objects on various grounds that what is alleged to be the Treaty of 1779 was not validly entered into and never became in law a treaty binding upon the Marathas. It is sufficient to state that the validity of a treaty concluded as long ago as the last quarter of the eighteenth century, in the conditions then prevailing in the Indian Peninsula, should not be judged upon the basis of practices and procedures which have since developed only gradually. The Marathas themselves regarded the Treaty of 1779 as valid and binding upon them, and gave effect to its provisions. The Treaty is frequently referred to as such in subsequent forma1 Maratha documents, including the two sanads of 1783 and 1785, which purport to have been issued in pursuance of the Treaty. The Marathas did not at any time cast any doubt upon the validity or binding character of the Treaty. India contends further that the Treaty and the two sanads of 1783 and 1785 taken together did not operate to transfer sovereignty over the assigned villages to Portugal, but only conferred upon it, with respect to the villages, a revenue grant of the value of 12,000 rupees per annum called a jagir or saranjam.
Q. The declaratory theory of recognition is also known as:
a)
Constitutive theory
b)
Facultative theory
c)
Evidentiary theory
d)
Natural theory
|
Vaishali desai answered |
The Declaratory Theory of Recognition
The declaratory theory of recognition is crucial in understanding the legal status of states and their sovereignty.
Definition
- The declaratory theory posits that recognition of a state or government is not what creates its existence; rather, it acknowledges an already existing statehood.
- According to this theory, a state is sovereign and possesses rights and responsibilities simply by meeting specific criteria, such as having a defined territory, a permanent population, and a functioning government.
Key Characteristics
- Independence from Recognition: The existence of a state does not depend on whether other states formally recognize it.
- Legal Acknowledgment: Recognition serves as a legal acknowledgment of the facts that already validate the state's existence.
Comparison with Other Theories
- Constitutive Theory: In contrast, this theory asserts that recognition is essential for the existence of a state. Without recognition, a state cannot claim sovereignty.
- Evidentiary Theory: While similar to the declaratory theory, it focuses on recognition as evidence of statehood rather than a condition for it.
Implications in International Law
- The declaratory theory supports the idea that states have inherent rights and can engage with other states and international organizations even in the absence of universal recognition.
- This theory can influence diplomatic relations, treaty-making, and participation in international forums.
In summary, the declaratory theory of recognition emphasizes that the legal status of a state exists independently of recognition, aligning with option 'C' as the correct answer.
The declaratory theory of recognition is crucial in understanding the legal status of states and their sovereignty.
Definition
- The declaratory theory posits that recognition of a state or government is not what creates its existence; rather, it acknowledges an already existing statehood.
- According to this theory, a state is sovereign and possesses rights and responsibilities simply by meeting specific criteria, such as having a defined territory, a permanent population, and a functioning government.
Key Characteristics
- Independence from Recognition: The existence of a state does not depend on whether other states formally recognize it.
- Legal Acknowledgment: Recognition serves as a legal acknowledgment of the facts that already validate the state's existence.
Comparison with Other Theories
- Constitutive Theory: In contrast, this theory asserts that recognition is essential for the existence of a state. Without recognition, a state cannot claim sovereignty.
- Evidentiary Theory: While similar to the declaratory theory, it focuses on recognition as evidence of statehood rather than a condition for it.
Implications in International Law
- The declaratory theory supports the idea that states have inherent rights and can engage with other states and international organizations even in the absence of universal recognition.
- This theory can influence diplomatic relations, treaty-making, and participation in international forums.
In summary, the declaratory theory of recognition emphasizes that the legal status of a state exists independently of recognition, aligning with option 'C' as the correct answer.
Chapter doubts & questions for International Laws & IPR - 4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG 2025 is part of CLAT exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of International Laws & IPR - 4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG in English & Hindi are available as part of CLAT exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG
283 videos|1003 docs|331 tests
|
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup