Legal opinion assignment “STATEHOOD, RECOGNITION, AND PERSONALITY ”
Order Description
Hello Dear,
Instructions:
1. You are expected to write approximately 1000 words maximum on each opinion/question, totaling maximum 2000 words. You must show word count on the first or cover page of your assignment. Mark is 20 x 2 = 40%.
2. Footnotes, references, and bibliography, if any, must be complete and consistent with Australian Guide to Legal Citation (AGLC).
3. Read carefully the requirements, marking rubrics, and guidelines for the preparation of assignments provided in the Unit Guide available on iLearn. Non-compliance will affect your expected marks.
(1) :
Legal opinion is an assignment on the applied aspects of international law. It is gives opportunity to acquire independent skill in applying relevant rules and principles of international law to a new, real, or hypothetical factual situation of modern international relations. The opinion would be thought-provoking, warranting an innovative and interdisciplinary approach.
Before you start writing you have considering the following Learning Outcomes and Corresponding Assessment Tasks of the Unit:
1. Discipline specific knowledge: Describe how the actors, institutions, and processes of international law interact and operate in their international relations.
2. Application skill: Creatively apply theoretical scholarship (both legal and interdisciplinary) and international law principles to major international law problems and new, particularly pressing issues and fact situations of contemporary relevance.
3. Application skill: Connect international law doctrine and theory to international law actors (groups, practitioners, advocates) to acquire cross-border and multi- jurisdictional expertise and experience.
(2)
structure:
-Introduction
-Body
-conclusion
(3)
Resources suggestion:
1. Compulsory text chapter 6-7. M Rafiqul Islam, International Law: Current Concepts and Future Directions,
LexisNexis Australia, 2014.
2. Grant, T, “Defining Statehood: The Montevideo Convention and its Discontents”
(1999) 37:2 Columbia J Transnational L 403.
3. Crawford, J, ‘The Criteria of Statehood in International Law’ (1976-77) 48 British
Yr I L 93-182.
4. Broderick, m, ‘Associated Statehood – a New Form of Decolonisation’ (1968) 17
Int’1 Comp L Q 369-403.
5. Islam, M R, ‘The Status of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in
International Law, The Case of Bangladesh’ (1983) 23 Indian JI.L 1-16.
6. Koskenniemi, M, ‘The Future of Statehood’ (1991) 32:2 Harvard ILJ 397.
7. Sorensen, G, ‘An Analysis of Contemporary Statehood: Consequences for
Conflict and Cooperation’ (July 1997) 23:3 Rev Int’l. Stud. 253-69.
8. Islam, M R, ‘The Recognition of the Revolutionary Regime of Fiji by Papua New
Guinea’ (1988) 16 Melanesian L.J 75-88.
9. Charlesworth, H, ‘The New Australian Recognition Policy in Comparative
Perspective’ (1991) 18 Melbourne U L Rev 1.
10.Murphy, S, ‘Democratic Legitimacy and the Recognition of States and
Governments’ (July 1999) 48:3 Int’l Comp L Q 545-81.
11. Rubin, A P, ‘Recognition Versus Reality in International Law and Policy’
(Spring 1998) 32 New England L Rev 669.
Relevant Cases
1. North Sea Continental Shelf Cases [1969] ICJ Rep
2. Fishries Jurisdiction Case [1971] ICJ Rep
3. Western Sahara Case [1975] ICJ Rep
4. Temple Vehear Case [1962] ICJ Rep
As well there some references could be doing well:
State Sovereignty and Responsibility
? State Sovereignty in a globalised and interdependent world
? Extra-territorial responsibility: theory and reality
Readings:
1. Compulsory text chapter 7.
2. ILC Articles on State Responsibility and Commentary.
3. Ademola Abass, A, ‘Consent Precluding State Responsibility: A Critical
Analysis’ (2004) 53 Int’l & Comp LQ 211.
4. Perkins, J A, ‘The Changing Foundations of International Law: From State
Consent to State Responsibility’ (1997) 15 Boston U I L J 433.
?
5. Handl, G, ‘Territorial Sovereignty and the Problem of Transnational Pollution’ (1975) 67 Am J I L 50-76.
6. Henkin, L, ‘An Agenda for the Next Century: The Myth and Mantra of State Sovereignty’ (1994) 35 Virginia J I L 115-20.
7. Qian, W, ‘The UN and State Sovereignty in the Post-Cold War Era’ (1995) 7:2 Pacific Review 135.
8. Lee, S, ‘A Puzzle of Sovereignty’ (1997) 27:2 California Western ILJ 241.
9. Kingsbury, B, ‘Sovereignty and Inequality’ (1998) 9 European JIL 599-625.
Relevant Cases
1. French Nuclear Arms Testing in the Pacific (Australia v France) (1973) 67 Am J I L 778-90.
2. Trail Smelter Air Pollution Arbitration (US v Canada) (1941) 35 Am J IL 684-736.
3. Tunis and Morocco Nationality Decrees Case [1923] PCIJ Ser. B. No.4.
4. Certain Expenses Case [1962] ICJ Rep 151 (domestic jurisdiction).
5. Lake Lanoux Arbitration (Spain v France) [1957] Int’l L Rep 110.
Feel free to chose this resources or any other relevant resources.