Rules:
- Each student must propose one constructive argument which contains a thesis and basic premises (reasons).
- Each student must provide a rebuttal on an unrebutted constructive argument. (To be counted, this must be posted as a reply to the comment.).
- Each student may use only 1 complex-compound sentence to propose a constructive argument and for a separate rebuttal https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/573/02/.
- E.g. Japan comitted countless atrocities during WWII, because of this, States, both powerful and less cannot trust her with military expansion, thus prohibiting her from becoming an international military humanitarian intervenor. E.g. Humanitarian intervention is international practical aid, countries such as Syria require military intervention to restore the lives of refugees, hence there is a need to allow willing countries to help.
- 5 pts for constructive arguments (evaluated on logical possibility and connection of ideas).
- 5 pts on rebuttal (evaluated on its capacity to actually dismantle the constructive argument.
- Use the 2nd reading as influential reference.
- Posting is from 6:00 p.m. of September 22, 2015 until 6:00 p.m. of September 23, 2015.
- Undiplomatic rebuttals get auto 0.
Motion: This house believes that international law is a sham.
China has been illegally claiming parts of the West Philippine Sea, but according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea they are still part of Philippine territory but fails to control China's actions, hence its ineffeciency proves that it is a sham
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteCAMILON, Paola E.
DeleteI find it ironic how you have stated that because China has failed to comply with the UNCLOS, the international law is a sham because if we analyze the current China-Philippines territorial dispute, the only way to resolve this conflict without the existence of international law is thru the means of coercive action or war; hence this house is not willing to sacrifice the lives of millions of people if only for the effectivity of a certain method.
International laws exists only to serve the interests of states who consent to such treaties, in accordance to this, Pakistan, in a resolution stating its withdrawal of forces in India, did not submit to the resolution created by UN thus, abidance to the international law is optional and a sham.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAng, Almer Angelo S.
DeleteThe reason behind of this is that Pakistan has developed a strong nuclear weapon for the past years so they intended to do it alone. The resolution created by UN is not necessary to follow because it create more conflict. India and Pakistan has been fighting for the territory of "Kashmir" since 1947. Instead of giving resolution through military forces that will create a violation of the international law, implementing a peace agreement between India and Pakistan will lessen the conflict between both of them.
The Philippines is party to the Convention against Torture which was conducted in 1986, yet twenty nine years later, torture is now considered as a part and mainstay of anti-insurgency operations against the New People's Army and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front for the purpose of extracting forced confessions or information which goes against the purpose of the convention and therefore deems international law as a sham.
ReplyDeleteSince the establishment of the United Nations, which can be considered as the ultimate manifestation of international law, great tragedies that have dawned humanity in the past like world wars, have never occurred again, which can only mean that although it is not the most efficient, international law has become a powerful force which has succeeded in deterring humanity from falling into ruin.
ReplyDeleteQUIMSON, Wilde Ehrolle John A.
DeleteI agree that World Wars have ceased since then, but I disagree with the measure of effectivity of International Law with the basis of World Wars. World Wars may have ceased to exist, but there are still wars that affect various countries and people in the world. Countries in the Middle East and Africa have wars and humanitarian crises that are yet to be resolved with the use of International Law. Terrorist acts and counter-terrorist acts globally have negated International Law and its principles. World Wars may have ceased, but that does not prove the global effectiveness of International Law since it is only a particular of a more general duty and role of International Law.
BESARIO, Kenny Anne
DeleteWhen the United Nations intervened in 1947 during the conflict between the Jewish and the Arabs in their territorial conflict, they used a partition plan which allotted fifty five percent of the Palestinian land to Jewish, because of this, a greater civil war was conducted which is until now still present, therefore it only proves that the international law is not always successful in preventing disputes.
For years, Eritrea and Ethiopia have been simultaneously violating international law through mass forcible transfers, arbitrary prosecutions in an attempt to silence the media, and unprovoked attacks that could not be justified as self-defense and because neither countries have expressed any interest in complying to the peace accord even despite being condemned by the UN Security Council, the international law is an empty pretense.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteCAMILON, Paola
ReplyDeleteInternational Law was perceived as a social force affecting the affairs of the state but its practice has flourished during the Cold War and it had a significant impact on people’s lives for this era became the century of human rights as the League of Nations and the United Nations have succeeded in codifying, consolidating and developing international law in numerous multilateral treaties ranging from human rights and maritime law to international labor.
The United Nations' Security Council, in dealing with the issue of Rwanda, did not issue an authorization of military intervention that could have prevented a mass genocide, therefore, their codification, consolidation and development of international law, like human rights treaties and such, is inefficient and unequally enforced in tragedies making it a sham.
DeleteAREVALO, Anella Vianchi
DeleteWhile it is true that international laws have indeed spearheaded the promotion of treatises and regulations so as to maintain peace and security among state relationships, those laws are nothing but words written on a paper, whose existence is not yet contested because the current situation serves interests of both parties; but with the conflicts in Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel-Palestine, Congo, Kosovo, North Korea, etc., whose situations call for so much more than what is written, it only goes to show that the effect of a hollow body that is the international law is only to a minimum, if not nothing at all.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeletePalestinians living in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the entire city of Jerusalem have their rights sacred under the international law, recognized by the U.N Human Rights Commission and the fourth Geneva Convention, by providing 149 substantive articles upholding the security and rights of every Palestinian living in the aforementioned areas, but Israeli Government is currently violating almost all these sacred rights of the Palestinian People by war crimes, thus making the international law a sham.
ReplyDeleteWar crimes and violation of human rights are some of the many reasons people used to identify the existence and the falsity of International law, this argument misses the fact, that it does not imply when wars or violation of rules are committed international law does not exist, this only indicate that a certain state did not imply to a certain rule, therefore violating the rule means a certain rule exist, like the international law.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe United Nations, an important body for the enforcement and interpretation of international law, relies heavily on the alignment of economic and military interests of its members resulting to disparate treatment to cases in its international courts, hence, international law is contrived.
ReplyDeleteIf the United Nations relies on the economic and military interests of its members, thus the 'disparate' treatment to cases is an acceptable course of action becauses different cases would need different treatments, the reliance on members' interest is needed for an efficiency in a specific case treatment.
DeleteIsrael has violated numerous International laws which includes illegal occupation of Palestinian territories not originally given to them by the UN Partition plan displacing thousands of Palestinians and violated 28 resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, thus proving international law useless and a sham.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteBased on the argument that Israel is currently violating the majority of the Palestinians' rights, the blame should not only focus on Israel because when Israel left Gaza in 2005, a Palestinian militant movement called “Hamas” took control over the said territory and refused to recognize Israel as a country for they wanted the Palestinians to return to their old home but uses violence to achieve it aims; so in order to be fair, conflicts on both side happens so therefore, the blame should not only be denounced on Israel but rather, both states should be liable for their actions.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFERMIN, John Vincent
ReplyDeleteRussia’s recent annexation of the Republic of Crimea as a result of an unlawful referendum despite it being under the jurisdiction of Ukraine shows the weakness of International Law to provide a mediated solution and to prevent future threats within each state, this imply that international law is nothing more than a configuration of weak and useless rules since no government can enforce it in the international stage and obedience to such law depends on the recognition or decision of every state.
UBAY, Ma. Chelca O.
DeleteYour argument that "international law is nothing more than a configuration of weak and useless rules since no government can enforce it..." contradicts the case of Sri Lanka in which perpetrators of their past war have been held responsible for and punished for the acts that they have committed.
In the case filed by Nicaragua against the United States of America before the International Court of Justice, there was a third party who adjudicated the dispute and found the United States of America liable, but it blocked the adverse judgement rendered against it by the Security Council and Nicaragua was never compensated to what it is entitled to, hence, international law is a sham.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe international law is a sham rooting from the fact that it has no degree of consistency and credibility of law taking the dispute over Diaoyu/Senkaku islands wherein a possible scenario is no matter what the final decision would be, it would anger either China or Japan which might only increase the odds of war thus making this resolve as not in adherence with its “responsibility to protect” principle making this law a fiction rather than a realistic objective.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteCELINO, Ralph Rafael
DeleteInternational law cannot be blamed and called a sham for not being able to prevent future conflicts resulting from the aggressive behavior of a state because of a resolution that it has imposed on the grounds of justice and truth, and in cases wherein efforts to protect or deter future conflicts fail, international law fortunately provides mechanisms that no other domestic institution can efficiently execute for the punishment of these violators and retribution for victims.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAREVALO, Anella Vianchi
ReplyDeleteAside from the United Nations' thwarted efforts to investigate on North Korea's humanitarian crisis which consists of a systematic machinery that demands civilian submission through state dominance, control and terror, international laws also fail to address the threats of the country's growing nuclear program, and the validity of its (north korea) resistance to being a party or even the dismissal to being bound by such laws prove the ineffectiveness of the regulation, hence international law is a sham.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI would like to rebut on the previous statement "international laws also fail to address the threats of the country's growing nuclear program..."
DeleteThe Security Council has released several resolutions to address the growing nuclear program, one being the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, a mandatory UN Charter which given the fact that North Korea was not party to that treaty, it was to act strictly in accordance with the treaty's demands such that of providing transparency to its military activities thus making the international law not a sham for continuously pursuing its principles.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRUBIO, Marlon Cyrus V.
ReplyDeleteThe United States in the 1980s had given financial assistance on rebels fighting against the government of Nicaragua. It was a clear violation on the UN international law that states should not intervene on the affairs of another state and it prohibits countries to finance military powers in attacking another country. Yet, the United States and Saudi Arabia had been assisting the rebels that are agains the Damascus government in Syria today, thus proving that international law is a sham for not having the capacity to control the violations committed of a particular state.
QUIMSON, Wilde Ehrolle John A.
ReplyDeleteInternational law and its principles have been violated numerous times by the United States of America, specifically during their intervention with the assassination of Osama Bin Laden in Pakistani airspace without Pakistan's authorization, and the operation of military jets over Syrian airspace. Considering that powerful nations like the U.S suffer little to none consequence for violating international law, and that the enforcement of the most important laws are weak, it is conclusive to say international law is a sham.
Negligence of the law is not dependent to the enforcement of law per se (whether domestic or international), one should remember that states are rational actors capable of making decisions driven by self-interests thus saying that international law is a sham only on the grounds of one's violation is irrelevant because "weak enforcement" is not synonymous to 'bogus', 'false' and 'sham' so it will be more crucial to ignore the international law's authority and embrace the more abusive acts if its jurisdiction will be fully taken for granted.
DeleteCagara, Garilissa Erin
ReplyDeleteCommonly the academic discussions portray international law as a potential means of conflict management or resolution, albeit non-compliance of such law may be present and prevalent, this does not give justification to the absence of international law but only means that it has a weak enforcement and this will not serve as an equivalent of non-existence.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIf these "laws," lack the mechanism for efficient enforcement then it is contrary to what supposedly a law is, the motion is not about the absence or presence of international laws, because we do recognize that there are international laws, the only problem is that it does not serve its true purpose
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBoco, Eva Joy C
ReplyDeleteUnited States has been violating the international laws, its attack on Syria is a one of the many violations but the international law cannot constrict US to do such since United Nations has become dominated by US therefore international law is a false image to protect the interest of powerful states
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBesario, Kenny Anne
ReplyDeleteThe Military activities conducted by the United States of America against Nicaragua during the 1980's and their intervention in Syria in behalf of its rebels are both clear non-compliance to the international law, therefore it only shows that the international law is extremely weak and can easily be violated by countries like the US.
Weakness of the international law does not prove that it is a sham because 'weak' does not tantamount to 'fake', thus making your argument "...international law is extremely weak and can easily violated by countries like the US" irrelevant; and the non-compliance of a single state to the international law does not define the authenticity of the law.
DeletePinlac, Christine Mae
ReplyDeleteSelf-determination, states and their governments are always motivated and drove by their economic and political interests, tends to override international law which lead us to the question of its credibility and effectiveness, one concrete example for this is Russian annexation on Ukraine’s territory--Crimea, UN Charter’s collective security system is powerless with the action of Russian government, consistently sending troops and equipment, to support the rebels against Ukraine and also when Crimea was illegally seized not mentioning its potential of undermining the UN Charter thus proving International Law is a sham.
Natividad, Genesis Joy A.
DeleteIt is true that a state's primary drive for action is self-gain, but you should not neglect the fact that international law sets the flow of action or conduct in pursuing those aim, and State A trying to seize water territories of State B cannot proceed directly into action since the existence of UNCLOS, a body of international laws, requires State A to answer the questions who, what, when and on what justification can it claim such, otherwise such action can alarm other international actors against the State A with the fear that it will try to do the same to them.
1980s in Nicaragua, the United States funded the training, and supplying of weapons of the Contra rebels fighting the Sandinista government, which is a violation of the international law that prohibits a country from financing military forces to attack another country, this is a manifestation that the international law is ineffective.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteArmenia invades a part of the Azerbaijan’s territory by sending armed forces, which is a major violation of the principles of United Nations that prohibits a country to send forces to another country, according to Art 2 (4); hence, international law is a sham.
ReplyDeleteA sham is something that is perceived to be fiction or fake. Saying that international law is a sham on the basis of "a major violation of the principles of the United Nations ... ," proves that an international law exists and is not merely a "sham".
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDELA CRUZ, Ma. Clarissa M.
ReplyDeleteThe genocide in Rwanda in 1994, where 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed, which is violation of Article 3 of the Dutch International Crime Act, generated Dutch criminal case of supposed genocide against Yvonne B. (Rwanda); although this international criminal case did not stand, weak implementation of international law does not infer that there is none, hence international law might be weakly enforced but not a sham.
Boco, Eva Joy
DeleteIf international law is not a sham but only wekaly implemented, what great does it do to the system if in the end it is up to a state whether or not they have the resources not to follow the law? Therefore, international law is just a mere image, a mere title that does not have any equivalent in reality.
Uy, Kier John V.
ReplyDeleteDuring the conflict between the Israel-Gaza in 2014, Almost 2300 Gazans were killed and many were wounded including the children, so the Gaza Health Ministry and the United Nations reacted and reported that 69%-75% of the casualties were civilians, hence it violates the international humanitarian law that protect the civilians especially the children in times of war or conflict.
While it is true that the casualty rate is lopsided it has nothing to do with breach of law or intent to kill since Israel goes to extraordinary and unprecedented lengths not to kill civilians while protecting its own, also it is not even clear that the “civilian” casualty figures coming out of Gaza are accurate, hence the low casualty rate of Israel and the higher Palestinian casualty does not constitute to war crime against Israel.
DeleteDEL ROSARIO, Renzo R.
ReplyDeleteThe International Court of Justice of 2004 has ruled Israel's construction of a separation barrier that runs along the Green line and the West bank in western Asia illegal, but despite this adjudication, concrete actions to demolish the separation wall have not been conducted, thus leading to a presumption that international law is a sham.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt is a clear double-standard and hypocrisy that Israel's security fence was met with such condemnation when the EU itself has its own separation wall while Israel's fence, which was not even intended as an annexation of territory but a mere temporary security measure, has led to a dramatic decline of civilian casualties and suicide bombings therefore its effectiveness is enough justification to retain the fence.
DeleteGarcia, Homyr Jr. L.
ReplyDeleteIn the period of globalization and interdependence among states, International law is observed to provide a system among states on how to relate among themselves without infringing on one's sovereignty, but considering the fact that a lot of developing countries are being exploited by the powerful countries just like the issue of the Democratic Republic of Congo wherein its natural resources are being plundered by other states in order to meet the growing demand of the western world, it can be said that International Law is a sham because the sole purpose of its existence is not accomplished.
How about the case of Nicaragua v.s United states where the ruling of the UNCLOS goew in favor of Nicaragua? Or the ruling on the Thai-Cambodian dispute? Are those not proof that the international law continous to provide ruling and still upheld its purpose? Claiming that the International law is a sham is still groundless.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletethere are still cases wherein the International law was able to execute its purpose. One of these is the Thai-Cambodian dispute. In line with this, we can only say that the International law is weak, but it is not sham.
DeleteLeary, Chulmari
ReplyDeleteDue to migration crisis caused by Syrian Civil War, Hungary has built a fence on the Serbian border and deployed regular patrols, leading to a drastic drop of migrants crossing it wherein authorizing the government in granting the military to use non-lethal force supposes that international law is a sham for using disproportionate force on migrants and refugees is an entirely improper infringement of the human rights.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteMacaraeg, Lovely
DeleteThere are 67,000 refugees that have entered Hungary so far and there are thousands who still want to illegally migrate into the country which already causes conflict and poverty into Western Europe, and I don’t think that by using non-lethal force to protect its country’s order and security will prove that International law is a sham, because, as I have said they have already accepted large amount of refugees and they are just using non-lethal forces to threat the refugees as well as to protect its country because it will somehow worsen the condition of the refugees if they will accept them.
AMARO, Beya Marie F.
ReplyDeleteThe Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan have been violating the international law, specifically their obligation to the International Humanitarian Law, the violation of the law is due to their on going territorial conflict which cause hundreds of casualties, this clearly implies that the international law is spurious.
Territorial conflict which cause hundreds of casualties does not necessarily indicate a violation of the International Humanitarian Law, because of the fact that fundamental to the IHL are the protection only of persons who are NOT or are NO LONGER participating in hostilities and the limitation in the right of parties involved in an armed conflict to choose the methods and means of their warfare. Aside from the fact the 95% of Nagorno-Karabakh inhabitants are ethnic Armenians, the remaining 5% who are not Armenians participate in the hostilities by countering the attacks of Azerbaijans, so they are not to be included in the people protected by the first fundamental. You mentioned that the violation of the law is because of the territorial conflict itself which cause hundreds of casualties, but as indicated in the second fundamental of the IHL, territorial conflict itself is not prohibited, but it is the methods and means of warfare that should be kept an eye on.
DeleteTerritorial conflict which cause hundreds of casualties does not necessarily indicate a violation of the International Humanitarian Law, because of the fact that fundamental to the IHL are the protection only of persons who are NOT or are NO LONGER participating in hostilities and the limitation in the right of parties involved in an armed conflict to choose the methods and means of their warfare. Aside from the fact the 95% of Nagorno-Karabakh inhabitants are ethnic Armenians, the remaining 5% who are not Armenians participate in the hostilities by countering the attacks of Azerbaijans, so they are not to be included in the people protected by the first fundamental. You mentioned that the violation of the law is because of the territorial conflict itself which cause hundreds of casualties, but as indicated in the second fundamental of the IHL, territorial conflict itself is not prohibited, but it is the methods and means of warfare that should be kept an eye on.
DeleteInternational law is perceived to be a powerful means of legally binding the relations between and among the states, in connection, there are issues involving the countries in general such as territorial disputes, human rights violations, economic issues, terrorism and other armed conflicts to which the countries have been greatly affected, the fact that these conflicts are still prevalent in this generation and there are no concrete steps yet in settling and ending only proves that international law is inefficient in carrying out its sole function in securing international order and peace thus, it is a complete fiasco.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the UN Human Rights Office, the recent imposition of death penalty to 529 members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is a violation of the international law and that this event proves that the holding power of the international law is a sham since it was not able to prevent Egypt to impose this ruling.
ReplyDeleteRendon, Anne Margaret
DeleteAccording to International Convention on Civil and Political Rights’ Article 6, countries who has not abolished death penalty may be imposed for the most serious crimes as long with conditions like having the right to a fair trial is satisfied, and it was satisfied in the case of those sentenced to death, and Egypt, like all states, has sovereignty to that should be recognized, and since it has not yet abolished death penalty in its realm, it has all the legal rights to implement its laws.
Despite the fact that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Nagorno-Karabakh was considered a part of Azerbaijan within the terms of international law, Armenians still chose to occupy this region, because of this, hostilities between the two states persisted, and the fact that Armenia should be recognized as an aggressor according to the Charter of the United Nations is not the case yet, hence, international law is a sham.
ReplyDeleteANDAL, Thomas Sergio L.
ReplyDeleteThe persecution of the Yazidis by the ISIS can be seen as a war crime and is evidently a violation against human rights and can be perceived as a genocidal act. The United Nations enacted international agreements about the crimes and its respective penalties. Thus, an international law exists and binds states together but its structure and execution is weak.
The motion does not question the existence of an international law but rather questions quality of the law whether it is a sham or not, the mere fact that you mentioned that it's structure and execution is weak proves that it is indeed a sham.
DeleteDULA, Jaziel M.
ReplyDeleteIn the dispute between Thailand and Cambodia over the temple of Prea Vihear, the International Court of Justice was able o make a verdict, giving the temple under the territory of Cambodia last 1962; however, the dispute escalated again when Thailand protested that the temple should be Thai-Cambodia joint cultural heritage, but the ICJ was able to command the two countries to remove their troops around the temple and later on settled the dispute, giving the temple to Cambodia, thus international law is not a sham.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteFERMIN, John Vincent
DeleteIndeed the International Court of Justice was able to solve this particular dispute but you are limiting the functions of an international law within a particular time and issue, comparing the success of such law from its failures across time and across borders of the world, the latter would still encompass the former characterized by the unsolved disputes not just in Asia but in the rest of the world.
According to recent studies, the border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand is still ongoing but it is true that the International Court of Justice made the two countries remove the troops they sent, and considering the fact that the issue is not yet over even though ICJ already gave its verdict and there is a chance that civilians might be involved during the process of solving the said problem and no immediate actions were made in order to prevent that, then it can be said that International Law is a sham since its purpose which is support order in the world and the attainment of humanity’s fundamental goals of advancing peace is not achieved.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI believe that the international law is still a sham, because as what I have stated in my arguments, if such law is really capable of securing the order and peace in the world then why such conflict like this is still prevalent as of now. Isn't it ironic to state that international law is efficient where in fact it really is not because in this situation, the dispute between Thailand and Cambodia escalated again after years of settling it, this thus only proves that international law is a sham for it was not able put an end to these two conflicting countries.
DeleteAng, Almer Angelo S.
ReplyDeleteInternational law has been violated many times by powerful states like United States of America. During 1980’s United States of America managed and gave financial support for the military forces in Nicaragua against their government. States cannot give any military support to other country to use it in engaging war. It only shows how powerful states like United States can violate international law easily, therefore International law is a sham
Natividad, Genesis Joy A.
ReplyDeleteThe story of Pakistan and the United States starting from the 1950’s has taught us that what an ambitious state needs in order to continually exist are strong sovereignty to control and direct the state, and powerful strategic partners to back it up in its endeavour, in which the US has been funding development programs to Pakistan both for military and non-military scope without any pledge to an international law on kindness or “code of humanitarian assistance”, but rather for US to ensure its security from extremist groups, thus leaving us with the truth that a state remains to exist because of its own efforts and a number of good bilateral alliances and not an international law.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteESPINOLA, Ma. Isabel
ReplyDeleteThe People's Republic of China and Japan have been in conflict over the Senkaku/Diaoyo Islands located in the East China Sea, which concerns the distinct usage of the 1982 UNCLOS where both states have confirmed and both imply that their Exclusive Economic Zones cover the islands, both claim that they have the right of usage to the riches of the islands, this conflict proves that international law is a sham for not providing a clearer provision of the international law nor are they engaging to pacify the issue and address a solution, therefore creating a dispute between states and the international law ineffectual.
Indeed the UNCLOS has faild Settle the issue in the East China sea, however, it dos not mean that the international law is a sham given the reason that :
Delete1. Both parties have not raised the issue to the UNCLOS therefore it cannot be heared yet.
2. Both parties still show some signs that they are still prepared to settle the dispute bilaterally.
3. There is still no official police force that would enforce th ruling once it does get settled.
Estapia, Clint Lou Matthew P.
ReplyDeleteThe claim that the International law is a sham is baseless because to say that a thing is a sham means it is trying to decieve someone or something into believing a thing or pretending to be it which in the case of the international law is groundless. The creation of the international law is meant to legally bind states into treaties and laws like how the common of laws or a state applies to a common man. If you would base your case solely because the International law have in some instances failed to enforce its mandate does not mean it is a sham because if we apply the same principle with that of the common law then can we say that the Philippine laws is a sham because there are instances that it failed to enforc its mandate on let's say the MILF who even though are rvolutionary groups are still citizens of this Republic. The International Law also have on many occasions proven its significance on the Global stage.
Rendon, Anne Margaret A.
ReplyDeleteWith the case of the Philippines and China on territorial disputes, particularly the South China Sea vs. West Philippine Sea, the court proceedings has been very slow and UNCLOS was not able to freeze China in building infrastructures in the disputed areas, with this, international law is a sham.
Court proceedings before the Tribunal hearing in the case filed by the Philippine government against China entails due process and presentation of documents, thus any delay in the disposition thereof, does not consider international law as a sham.
DeleteBut the mere fact that the international bodies concerned with implementing the law was not able to freeze or prohibit China in building infrastructures, it somehow suggests that the international law cannot be relied upon since it has not gave China the impression of an international law with authority.
DeleteUbay, Ma. Chelca O.
ReplyDeleteSri Lanka’s twenty five years of civil war has proved that international law was not a sham because it was a useful instrument in making the perpetrators of the war take responsibility of the crimes of the past wartime, considering the fact this was an internal conflict, the international humanitarian law obligated and punished those who are involved in these crimes.
Pinlac, Christine Mae F.
DeleteInternational law has its limits and usually, states used international laws to pursue their national interests, meaning if international laws cater one’s national interests states will use and if not they will not acknowledge international laws; it could also be argued that international law reflects the interests of the powerful states, when two powerful states are involved international laws are powerless for example the situation of Russia and United States of America, and based on your argument it took 25 years to make the perpetrators of the war convicted about the Syrian civil war showing that International Law is a total sham.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete