CBSE Textbook Solutions: International Law | Legal Studies for Class 12 - Humanities/Arts PDF Download

Based on your understanding, answer the following questions:

Q1. Distinguish between Public International Law and Private International Law.
Ans: Public International Law is the body of rules that governs relations between sovereign states and international organisations. It sets out the rights and duties of states on matters such as peace and security, the use of force, state responsibility, treaties and human rights. It is concerned with how states interact with one another and with international institutions.

• Scope: Regulates relations between nations.
• Focus: State obligations and rights.
• Examples: Treaties, international agreements, and customary law.
• Enforcement: Primarily through state compliance, diplomatic means and international adjudication; enforcement is often indirect and depends on state consent.

In contrast, Private International Law, often called the Conflict of Laws, deals with legal problems arising from private transactions or disputes that have a foreign element. It determines which jurisdiction’s law applies, and which court has the authority to decide a dispute between private persons or entities from different states.

• Scope: Governs private transactions involving foreign elements.
• Focus: Jurisdiction and applicable law in private disputes.
• Examples: Marriage and divorce across borders, cross‑border contracts, and recognition of foreign judgments.
• Enforcement: Often implemented through domestic courts applying rules of private international law; outcome depends on national conflict‑of‑law rules and comity between states.

Summary: Public International Law governs state-to-state relations and international organisations, while Private International Law resolves which domestic law and forum applies to private, cross‑border disputes. The subject matter, methods of enforcement and typical actors differ in each branch.

Q2. What is the role of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights? 
Ans: The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights heads the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and plays a central role in promoting and protecting human rights worldwide. The office was created following the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action in 1993 to strengthen the UN’s capacity in this field.

• Advocates for implementation of international human rights standards and norms.
• Monitors human rights situations in member states and reports findings to UN bodies.
• Provides technical assistance, capacity‑building and advice to states to help them meet their human rights obligations.
• Engages with civil society, national human rights institutions and victims to promote awareness and accountability.
• Issues fact‑finding reports, special procedure communications and recommendations to states and international organisations.
• Leads and coordinates the work of the OHCHR within the UN system.

Through these activities, the High Commissioner helps to ensure that obligations under major treaties - such as the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination - are promoted, monitored and, where possible, implemented. The role supports accountability and strengthens international mechanisms for human rights protection.

Q3. Explain the various sources of International Law. 
Ans: Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice identifies the principal sources of international law. These sources are used by international courts and tribunals to determine legal obligations.

• International Conventions (Treaties): Written agreements between states that create binding obligations for the parties who consent to them. Example: the Geneva Conventions.
• Customary International Law: Practices followed by states out of a sense of legal obligation (opinio juris). Example: norms prohibiting piracy or slavery.
• General Principles of Law: Basic legal principles recognised by civilized nations, used to fill gaps where treaties or customs are silent. Example: principles of fairness and due process.

Besides these primary sources, Article 38 also recognises subsidiary means of determining rules of law:

• Judicial Decisions: Decisions of international and national courts that guide interpretation and application of international law.
• Scholarly Writings: Works of the most highly qualified publicists, which may help clarify legal principles.

In practice, courts and tribunals weigh these sources together. Treaties and customary law are generally regarded as the most authoritative. The actual application of these sources depends on state consent, factual circumstances and the specific legal questions before a forum.

Q4. What happens in case of conflict between a treaty provision and a domestic law?
Ans: When a treaty provision conflicts with domestic law, the outcome depends on the state’s constitutional and legal system. Two broad approaches exist:

• Monist States: Treaties become part of domestic law automatically and may override inconsistent domestic legislation.
• Dualist States (like India): Treaties do not have direct domestic effect unless implemented by domestic legislation; parliamentary action is required to give treaty provisions effect within the national legal system.

In India, the courts have held that a treaty cannot automatically override domestic law. The Supreme Court in Magan Bhai Patel v Union of India indicated that where a treaty affects citizens’ rights or requires changes in law, Parliament must enact legislation before the treaty’s provisions can be enforced domestically. Nevertheless, India’s constitution encourages respect for international law (Article 51) and gives Parliament power to implement treaties and override state laws when necessary (Article 253). At the international level, failure to implement a treaty may still attract state responsibility even if the treaty is not directly enforceable in domestic courts.

Q5. Explain the existing dispute resolution mechanism in International Law. 
Ans: International law provides several peaceful means to resolve disputes between states or between states and private parties. The choice of mechanism often depends on the consent of the parties and the terms of applicable treaties.

• Negotiation: Direct discussions between the parties to reach a settlement by mutual agreement.
• Mediation and Conciliation: A neutral third party assists the parties to find a mutually acceptable solution; outcomes are usually non‑binding unless converted into an agreement.
• Arbitration: Parties submit the dispute to an impartial tribunal whose decision (award) is binding as agreed in the arbitration clause or treaty.
• International Court of Justice (ICJ): The principal judicial organ of the UN that adjudicates disputes between states when they consent to its jurisdiction; its judgments are binding between the parties.
• Specialised Forums: Institutions such as the World Trade Organization dispute settlement body and investment tribunals (e.g., ICSID) resolve disputes in their respective fields under treaty rules.

The effectiveness of any mechanism depends on state consent, treaty provisions that prescribe dispute settlement procedures, and the willingness of states to comply with outcomes. Many disputes are resolved by a mix of diplomatic negotiation and legal processes, with enforcement often relying on political and institutional pressure rather than direct coercion.

Q6. In an international conference, aimed at formulating a resolution on an environment issue between the member countries, Indian representative headed for a consent, subject to approval by Indian Parliament. The Parliament, on considering the matter, refused to give assent and thus the terms of resolution were not implemented in India. 
(a) Identify the mode of entering into the treaty opted in the given condition. 
(b) Analyze the situation when it would be binding on the Indian representative to give assent to the resolution.
Ans: (a) Mode of Entering into the Treaty
The mode of entering into the treaty in this situation is best described as signature subject to ratification. The representative indicated consent in principle but made it conditional upon parliamentary approval. Under diplomatic practice, such a signature expresses preliminary consent but the treaty becomes legally binding domestically only after ratification or other required domestic procedures are completed. In some cases a state may also apply a treaty provisionally pending ratification, but that requires a clear decision by the state to do so.

The Indian representative would be bound to give final assent in these situations:

• If the representative had full authority to bind India and the representative’s signature was intended to create immediate legal obligation under the rules of the treaty (for example, where the treaty itself states that signature creates binding obligations).
• If the treaty did not require any change in domestic law or did not affect citizens’ rights, so that parliamentary enactment was not necessary under India’s legal practice; in such a case, the executive may implement the treaty without fresh legislation.
• If Parliament subsequently ratified the treaty or enacted implementing legislation, after which the obligations become binding domestically.

If Parliament refuses assent, the treaty will not have domestic effect in India where legislative measures are necessary. Nevertheless, at the international level India may remain bound by the obligations it accepted internationally unless it validly reserved rights, withdrew before entry into force, or otherwise complied with the treaty’s procedure for non‑acceptance. The Magan Bhai Patel decision underlines that where a treaty affects domestic rights or requires statutory change, parliamentary approval is required for domestic enforceability.