Thursday 4 January 2018

An overview of international law



    

An overview of international law
Introduction;
Today in globalized world states cannot become self-sufficient so they have to interact with each other e.g. in trade, security, health, travel etc. these interactions create the need for a body of rule or principles to be obeyed by the all states as a law.[1] Historically from cave to civilization man always ruled by a common notion of law[2], extending this notion from man to state, states also requires to be rule by some principles, rules, or laws. Law has the characteristics of binding in nature, and these are either permissive i.e. allowing to create a contract or coercive i.e. to punish those who infringes it[3]. To interact with each states requires for some universal international law.[4]
International law itself is divided into conflict of laws or private international law and public international law which is usually termed as international law. The former deals with particular legal systems in which foreign elements i.e. application of foreign law, raised[5], or otherwise it mainly concerns with such matters between individuals as fall at the same time under the jurisdiction of two or more different states.[6] Whereas public international law covers relations between states in all aspects.[7]
The main object of international law is to produce an order rather than just a system of international relations.[8]
Nature of International Law, whether international law is or is not law;
It is the legal quality of international law that is the first question to be posed. Eventually every student of international law starts comparing it with domestic law e.g. recognized body to create law or legislature, courts, and system of enforcing those laws.[9] ‘‘what is law?’’. Asking whether international law is ‘‘law’’ presumes national law as the benchmark. But this blinkered definition limits the term ‘‘law’’ to a historical blink of the eye, to certain Post- Westphalian systems.[10]
This is from the beginning that such question arises whether international law is legally binding or not. Prof Hobbes and Pufendorf answered the question in negative. This seems due to the definition of law given by Prof Austin, “as a body of rules for human conduct set and enforced by a sovereign political authority”. So as per this definition international law cannot be termed as law.[11] The jurists in support of this concept put forward the following arguments claiming international law is not a law;
·        No political authority in international law
·        No legislative mechanism/machinery
·        No sanctions/punishments
·        No executive power
·        No judiciary[12]
This concept has been criticized for oversimplifying the true nature of law within a society.[13] Since International Law has not grown up in this way, in fact, cannot grow in this way, because there is no superior whether individual or sovereignty or court which is in a position to lay down the law and be listened to[14] therefore it can be argued that this definition of law is not correct, because it does not cover that part of domestic law which is unwritten or customary law i.e. which exits from the beginning beside written law.[15]  Oppenhiem defines law “is a body of rules for human conduct within a community which by common consent of this community shall be enforced by external power”. So it is not an essential as per this definition for a law to be in written form.[16]
As pointed out by Sir Federick Pollock The existence of law presupposes the following prerequisites;
·        Community
·        Body of rules
·        Common consent
And international law satisfies these three prerequisites. There is a community (international community, includes states, international organizations and certain other non-states entities), there is also a body of rules which are binding. To some extent international law is also backed by sanctions”.[17]
As regards to the first condition it is necessary to define the community. “A community may be said to be the body of a number of individuals more or less bound together through such common interests as create constant and manifold intercourse between the single individuals”. This definition covers not only individuals but also states as a community.[18]
With regards to second requisite for hundreds of years the customary rules have grown up for the conduct of states between each other. But side by side these customary rules many written rules are daily created by international agreements such as the Declaration of Paris 1856 and VCLT 1969 etc.[19] 
With regards to the third prerequisite, consent of states are regarded as the basis for obligations in international law.[20] Common consent with regards to law means every individual must at every moment of their existence consent to every point of law, but such consent can never be proved. The customary rules of international law have grown up by the common consent of the states. Single usage grown when many states started acting in the same manner on a similar occasion[21] and they (usage) with the passage of time turned into customs.   
J.G Starke also criticized the Austinain concept of law. In this connection he has put forward four main arguments;
1.     In many countries system of law existed without a formal legislative authority.
2.     Customary rules of international law are now being replaced by law making treaties and conventions. Thus international legislation has come into existence.
3.     The authoritative agencies responsible for the maintenance of international intercourse do not consider international law as merely as moral code.
4.     United Nations is based on the true legality of international law.[22]  
Thus the term law is of relatively subordinate in importance. International law will remain same whether it is called law or law not. All what needs to establish is that the existence of certain rules of law for states, is sufficient to convince it is real law.[23]
Furthermore although there is no unified system of sanctions in international law but within United Nations sanctions may be imposed by the Security Council upon the determination of threat to peace or an act of aggression, for example in 1990 against Iraq. Since one cannot discover the true nature of international law upon the definition of law predicated upon sanctions, the character of the international legal order has to be examined on the fact that whether states feel obliged to obey the rules of international law or not.[24]
And although the legal structure is hierarchical and authority is vertical, but in international system it is horizontal consisting over 190 independent states. In domestic system law is about individuals but international law only exists between states not between individuals, rather they do have choice as to whether to obey the law or not.
Despite violations of international law by states, the vast majority provisions of international law are followed.[25] And states do not deny the existence of international rather they try to justify their conduct and affirm the binding nature of rules of international law.[26] As pointed out by prof H.L.A. Hart “breaches of rules expose the offender to serious criticism and are held to justify claims for compensation and relation. These are surely all elements…that there exist among states rules imposing legal obligations upon them”.[27] 

 The arguments of the jurists who regard international law as really law may summed up as follows;
·        The term law cannot be limited to rules of conduct enacted by a sovereign authority. Sir Henry Maine established that in primitive societies there was no authority yet there were laws.
·        Austinian concept of law fails to justify customary law.
·        Customary rules of international law are now being replaced by international treaties and conventions.
·        States do not deny the existence of international law.
·        In some states international law is treated as part of their own law e.g. U.K and U.S.A. Justice Gray observed in Paquete Habanna[28]international law is part of our law and must be ascertained and administered by Courts of justice…as often as question of right depending upon it are duly presented for their determination”.
·        International Court of Justice decide disputes as are submitted to it in accordance with international law. And its decision are binding upon the parties to dispute.
·        The United Nations is based upon the true legality of international law.
·        So far sanctions are concerned, international law does not completely lack of it.[29]
The discussion of whether international law has a legal nature in involved in the hopeless ambiguity with which the word “law” is used by the writers, and upon examination amounts to this, that municipal law is enforced by the political power of the state and international law is not, therefore it has no legal nature. The answer to this is that in each case there are external factors determining conduct, and the absence of one factor in one case, which is present in the other, does not make the conception of the factors any less law.[30]
Ultimately, this exercise of seeking to demonstrate that international law is or is not law strikes me as futile. It is clear to all that international law differs in important ways from domestic law. It is equally clear that it provides a set of rules that seek to influence state behavior. It seems to me that it is better to accept that international law is not easily separable from politics. It is better to recognize that decisions about whether or not to comply with international law are always intertwined with political questions. When the United States decided to invade Iraq in violation of international legal rules, when it chose to erect steel tariffs in 2002 in violation of WTO rules, and when it signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, politics played a critical role in its choices.[31]

History of International Law;
As no nation could avoid coming into contact with other nations,[32] International law in its modern sense has evolved and developed since 15th and 16th century,[33] but certain of the basic concepts of international law can be discerned in political relationships thousands of years ago.[34] Rules which may be described as rules of international law are to be found in the history of both ancient and medieval worlds. According to Prof Oppenheim “it is in its origin essentially a product of Christian civilization and began gradually to grow from the second half of the Middle Ages”. Rules and usages were observed with regards to external relations and their violation called for religious expiation.[35] And almost all civilized States have made their contributions in its development. In this connection the contribution of Jews, Romans, Greeks, Hindus and Muslims deserves a special mention.[36]
Contributions;
Jews;
The famous slogan of the Jews was, “Love the stranger for yet were strangers in the land of Egypt”. It is clear from this slogan that they believed in internationalism.[37] Furthermore the history tells us that Egyptians and Jewish tribes entered into some sort of treaties to accord respect to ambassadors,[38] and they were considered sacrosanct and treaties were faithfully observed.[39]
Greeks;
The value of Greece in a study of international law lies partly in the philosophical, and political analysis and partly in the fascinating state of inter-relationship.[40] They lived in small city states. The mutual relations of these states were regulated and governed by some definite rules and principles. They had formulated definite laws of war and peace. They used to resolve their dispute through arbitration. There was also provision for exchange of prisoners.[41] The maritime law of Rhodes is an instance of the general acceptance of common principles.[42] Prof Oppenheim has rightly remarked that “the Greeks had shown to the world how sovereign states could live in mutual co-operation with each other like a single community. But they only consider international rules as religiously binding not legally”.[43]
Romans;
Rome made constitutions in through the way of extension of her own laws of wider spheres, and in attempt to adapt the Roman laws to conditions in remote territories.[44] And it cannot be denied that the Romans contributed much to the development of modern international law. In its early period, Rome was a small city state and had relations with other states. These relations were based on the rules of international law.[45] One of the most influential Greek concepts taken up by the Romans was the idea of Natural Law, and their theory was that it constituted a body of rules of universal relevance. This element of universality is basic to modern doctrines of international law.[46]  Their relationships were depended on a treaty of friendship between Rome and other state, and if it existed, then persons and good comings from other countries stood under legal protection.[47] They divided treaties into three categories, 1) Treaty of Friendship, 2) Treaty of Alliance, and 3) Treaty of Hospitality and they strictly adhered to the provisions of treaty.[48]  
Hindus;
Many Hindu Rules displayed a growing sense of morality and generosity.[49] Hindu culture witnessed a relationship of respect to foreigners on the basis of consent of Dharma or Dharam. Even if such Hindu Rules were religious or moral in nature, nevertheless they resembled the modern rules of International Humanitarian Law (Law of War) to some extent and thus it can be argued that they paved the foundation for the development of the rules of war.[50]
Muslims;
The approach of Muslim Rulers to international relations and law was predicted upon a concept of Dar al Islam, as between Moslem counties.[51] Muslim Rulers of India had relations with other nations. They received the ambassadors of other states and entered into treaties with them. The Muslim rulers recognized the distinction between combatants and non-combatants and had formulated rules for according protection to women and children during war. They observed their treaties in good faith.[52]


Development of international in different centuries;
15th, 16th and 17th centuries;
As pointed out by Brierly “some understanding of the main features of this modern state system is therefore necessary to an understanding of the nature of international law”.[53] Seven factors prepared the ground for growth of international law in future;[54]
1.     First, the Civilians and Canonists. Civilians considered Roman law as the law of civilized world.
2.     Secondly, collection of maritime law of in connection with international trade.
3.     Third, the numerous leagues of trading towns for the protection of their trade and trading citizens.
4.     Fourth, growing custom of the States of sending and receiving permanent legations.
5.     Fifth, custom of States keeping standing armies.
6.     Sixth, the Renaissance and the Reformation.
7.     Seventh, the schemes for the establishment of eternal peace.[55] 
During these Middle Ages, English law established the law merchant, a code of rules for governing the foreign traders and this declared to be of universal application. Through the Europe the mercantile courts were set up to settle disputes between tradesmen. Maritime customs began to be accepted throughout the Continent. With the rise of modern state and emancipation of international relations, the concept of sovereignty emerged.[56] Further developments may be summed up as;
·        Expansion of commerce, especially maritime, emphasized the duties and rights of nations.
·        Closely connected with the development of maritime law during the latter part of the middle period was establishment of office of consul.
·        Discovery of America marked a new epoch in territorial and mercantile expansions.[57]
Grotius the founder of modern international law;
The fluctuations and uncertainties in theory and practice of international intercourse, both in peace and war, made men ready to hear the voice of Grotius (1583-1645)[58]. He was Dutch Scholar and his primary work was the De Jure Belli as Pacis written during 1623 and 1624. One of his most enduring opinions consists in his proclamation of the freedom of the seas.[59] De Jure Belli as Pacis has following four main characteristics;
1.     He advocated that States should also be subject to the same rules which regulate the individuals.
2.     He formulated the law of peace.
3.     He contended that States violating the law may be punished by other States.
4.     In his view, Natural Law was the basis for determining rules for the rightful conduct of States.[60]
Since law of Nations was now a necessity and many principles were already recognized among the doctrines of Grotius and since his book obtained such a world-wide influence that he is correctly styled as Father of the law of nations.[61]
18th century, Naturalists and Positivists;
Two different school of thoughts identified, one is Naturalist exemplified by Samuel Pufendorf (1632-94) who attempted to identify international completely with the of nature, and on the other hand there were the Positivist who distinguished between international law and Natural law and emphasized practical problems and current state practices.[62] Naturalist maintain that all Law of Nations only a part of the Law of Nature.[63] The most important Naturalists were Pufendorf, Christian, Thomasius, Franics, Hutcheson.[64]
While the Positivists are antipodes of the Naturalists and they defend the existence of Law of Nations as the outcome of custom of international treaties.[65]  Positivism became very popular during 18th century. They claimed to have based their theory on the actual practice of States and laid emphasis on law of positivism i.e. which is law in fact. The prominent Positivist were Cornelius, Moser, and Martens.[66]
Combined effect;
Elements of both positivism and naturalism appear in the works of Vattel (1714–67), a Swiss lawyer. His Droit des Gens was based on Natural Law principles yet was practically oriented. He introduced the doctrine of the equality of states into international law, declaring that a small republic was no less a sovereign than the most powerful kingdom, just as a dwarf was as much a man as a giant. By distinguishing between laws of conscience and laws of action and stating that only the latter were of practical concern, he minimized the importance of Natural Law.[67]

19th and 20th centuries;
The nineteenth century by contrast was a practical, expansionist and positivist era.[68] It presented the final impetus needed for International Law and more and more treaties, conventions and agreements established.[69] The science of the Law of Nations developed progressively during the nineteenth and twentieth century under the influence of three factors;
·        First factor was the endeavor of the Powers after the Congress of Vienna to submit to the rules of Law of Nations.
·        Second factor was the many law making treaties.
·        Last but not least factor was the rising predominance of positivism over the theory of law of nature.[70]  

Some important factors in the development of International Law were;
1.     Congress of Vienna 1815; rules of international law were formulated e.g. rules relating to international rivers, agents etc.
2.     Declaration of Paris 1856; rules relating to naval warfare were laid down.
3.     Geneva Convention 1864; rules relating to the wounded and sick members of the armed forces during land warfare were laid down.
4.     Hague Conferences of 1899 and 1907; these conferences are rightly reckoned as great landmarks. They resulted in the adoption of several conventions on various subjects of international concern.
5.     League of Nations; The League of Nations was established under the Treaty of Versailies, 1919. It for the first time, imposed certain restrictions upon the nation’s right to resort to war at their will.   
6.     Geneva Convention 1929; This was signed by 47 States of the world. Many rules relating to the treatment of prisoners of war were laid down in this convention.
7.     United Nations; The United Nations Charter came into force on October 24, 1945 and thus the United Nations was established to regulate the mutual relations of its members and for international peace and order.[71]

Thus after the development of United Nations the development of International Law has been effected mainly through multilateral law making treaties. The chief objective of International Law is to establish the rule of law in international field and to ensure the maintenance of international peace and security.[72]   

Defining International Law;

According to Prof Oppenheim, “Law of Nations or International Law is the name for the body of customary and treaty rules which are considered legally binding by the States in their intercourse with each other.”[73] But this may not be adequate definition of international law. This can be criticized as under;

As in case Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the U.N. Advisory opinion[74] I.C.J. holds that “it is now generally recognized that not only States but public international organizations have rights and duties under international law”. Furthermore today, individuals and other private persons may also have some rights and duties under international law. After the Second World War the most important change in international law is the addition of its subjects, i.e. international organizations, individuals.

And today, as per Article 38 of the Statute of International Court of Justice, International law not only consists of customary and conventional rules but also of ‘general principles of law’.[75]

Another definition of international law is as under;

J. G. Starke’s; “International law may be defined as that body of law which is composed for its greater part of the principles which states feel themselves bound to observe, and therefore, do commonly observe in their relations with each other.”[76]

This definition as well in view of developments during the last some decades, cannot stand as a comprehensive definition. These developments are;
·        The establishment of a large number of permanent international institutions or organizations, e.g. WHO, U.N.
·        The present movements to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals, furthermore declaration of certain acts to be as international crimes, i.e. crime against peace, crime against humanity.[77]  

Before World War One there was no issue with regards to the definition of international law, and till World War Two “only States were regarded as subjects of international law, having the status of international legal personality with international rights and duties including the right to bring international claims, for internationally wrongful acts”.

But, after World War Two, the scope of international law expanded. New actors, i.e.
·        International Organizations
·        Transnational Corporations/Companies
·        Inter-governmental and Non-governmental organizations
·        Indigenous people
These expansions creates more complications in defining international law.

Sir Robert Jennings said; “International Law should be defined with regards to actually using and applying it”.

J. L. Brierly; “The Law of Nations or International Law may be defined as the body of rules and principles of action which are binding upon civilized States in their relations with one another”.[78]    

In S.S. Lotus Case[79], international law was defined in the following words, “international law governs relations between independent states”.

Vaughan Lower in his book “international law, a very short introduction” defines international law as;

“International law may be described as a body of rules and principles that determine the rights and duties of states primarily in respect of their dealing with other states and the citizens of other states”.

International Law in light of Pakistani Court Judgments;

Haji LAL MUHAMMAD
Versus
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
PLD 2014 Peshawar 199
“It is by now settled that International Law, unless in direct conflict with the Municipal Law, ought to be applied and respected by Municipal Courts in deciding matters arising therefrom”.[80]




AHTABAR GUL
VS
State
PLD 2014 Peshawar 10
“When international obligations and bilateral commitments come in conflict with municipal laws, the latter are to prevail”.[81]

A.M. QURESHI
VS
UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS
PLD 1981 SC 377
“To be customary international law it must have two Constitutive elements of: (i) must have a general practice of states and (ii) such general practice must have acceptance of state; as law. Mere habitual following of a certain line of conduct either in doing or not doing something.

Not sufficient-Existence of rule of International Customary Law or General International Law-Held, can be established only when States shown to act in such way due to recognition of their legal obligation to such effect”.[82]














Bibliography

·        alvarez, J. e. (2009). But is it Law? American Soceity of International Law, 163.
·        foulke, R. r. (1919). Definition and Nature of International Law. Columbia Law Review, 6.
·        guzman, A. t. (2009). Rethinking International Law as Law. American Society of International Law, 155.
·        kapoor, L. n. (2011). International Law. Mansoor Book House.
·        lauterpacht, L. O. (1955). International Law A Treatise. LONGMANS.
·        shaw, M. n. (2008). International Law. Cambridge University Press.
·        starke's, J. g. (1994). Introduction to International Law. Frist Indian Reprint.
·        talpur, Z. h. (2017). international law. Pakistan Law House.
·        woolsey, T. s. (1899). Lecture on International Law. The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc, 9.




[1] Zamin hussain talpur, International Law (2nd edn, Pakistan Law House 2017) 15.
[2] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 1.
[3] Ibid.
[4] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 41.
[5] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 1.
[6] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 6.
[7] Ibid 2.
[8] J g starke's, Introduction to International Law (First Indian Reprint 1994) 3.
[9] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 2.
[10] Jose e alvarez, 'But is it Law?' [2009] 103(163) American Society of International Law; Cambridge University Press <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5305/procannmeetasil.103.1.0163> accessed 16 October 2017
[11] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 7.
[12] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 63.
[13] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 3.
[14] Theodore s woolsey, 'Lecture on International Law' [1899] 8(9) The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc <http://www.jstor.org/stable/783833> accessed 16 October 2017
[15] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 7.
[16] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 10.
[17] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 64.
[18] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 11.
[19] Ibid 13.
[20] Ibid 10.
[21] Ibid 18.
[22] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 65, 66.
[23] Ibid.
[24] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 4.
[25] Ibid 6.
[26] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 66.
[27] Ibid 67.
[28] (1900) 175 U.S. 677.
[29] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 67, 68.
[30] Roland r foulke, 'Definition and Nature of International Law' [1919] 19(6) Columbia Law Review <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1111587> accessed 16 October 2017
[31] Andrew t guzman, 'Rethinking International Law as Law' [2009] 103(155) American Society of International Law; Cambridge University Press <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5305/procannmeetasil.103.1.0155> accessed 17 October 2017
[32] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 72.
[33] Zamin hussain talpur, International Law (2nd edn, Pakistan Law House 2017) 25.
[34] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 14.
[35] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 72.
[36] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 114.
[37] Ibid 115.
[38] Zamin hussain talpur, International Law (2nd edn, Pakistan Law House 2017) 25.
[39] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 73.
[40] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 16.
[41] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 115.
[42] Zamin hussain talpur, International Law (2nd edn, Pakistan Law House 2017) 26.
[43] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 75.
[44] Zamin hussain talpur, International Law (2nd edn, Pakistan Law House 2017) 26.

[45] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 115.
[46] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 17.
[47] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 76.
[48] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 116.
[49] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 15.
[50] Zamin hussain talpur, International Law (2nd edn, Pakistan Law House 2017) 26.
[51] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 18.
[52] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 116.
[53] J. L Brierly The Law of Nations (6th edn) 1.
[54] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 79.
[55] Ibid 79-82.
[56] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 18-22.
[57] Zamin hussain talpur, International Law (2nd edn, Pakistan Law House 2017) 26-30.
[58] Ibid 30.
[59] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 23-24.
[60] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 117.
[61] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 84.
[62] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 25.
[63] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 95.
[64] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 120.
[65] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 96.
[66] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 120.
[67] Malcolm n shaw, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2008) 26
[68] ibid 27.
[69] Zamin hussain talpur, International Law (2nd edn, Pakistan Law House 2017) 34.
[70] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 106.
[71] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 122-124.
[72] Ibid 124.
[73] L oppenheim (ed), h lauterpacht , International Law A Treatise (8th edn, LONGMANS 1955) 4.
[74] I.C.J. Rep. (1949), p. 174
[75] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 51, 52.
[76] J g starke's, Introduction to International Law (First Indian Reprint 1994) 3.
[77] Ibid.
[78] L n tandon & s k kapoor , International Law (Mansoor Book House 2011) 54.
[79] (1927) P.C.I.J. Series A, No. 10.
[80] PLD 2014 Peshawar 199
[81] PLD 2014 Peshawar 10
[82] PLD 1981 SC 377

No comments:

Post a Comment