Question 1
If used for military purposes during an international armed conflict, this exam room qualifies as a military object.
Is this statement true or false?
Question 2
Any dispute between the Netherlands and Zimbabwe relating to the interpretation or application of the Bilateral Investment Treaty they concluded in 1996 (entry force in 1998) may be submitted to the International Centre of the Settlement of Investment Disputes.
Is this statement true or false?
Question 3
The application of Art. 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights may be subject to limitations.
Is this statement true or false?
Question 4
The International Criminal Court cannot exercise jurisdiction over nationals from a state that is not a party to the Rome Statute.
Is this statement true or false?
Question 5
The obligation to prevent transboundary harm qualifies as an obligation of result.
Is this statement true or false?
Question 1
True.
The principle of distinction (Article 48 AP I) obliges the parties to international armed conflicts to distinguish between civilian objects and military objects. Belligerents may only attack combatants and military objects.
A civilian object is defined by Article 52 AP I as an object that is not a military object. A military object is defined in Article 52(2) AP I as an object that makes an effective contribution to military action.
In case of doubt, an object shall be presumed to be a civilian object (Article 52(3) AP I).
The exam room is a prima facie a civilian object but since it is use for military purposes and therefore contributes to military action, it qualifies as a military object.
Question 2
False.
Art 13 BIT regulates the settlement of disputes between the two contracting parties and article 13 provides for arbitration if a dispute arises between both states.
Question 3
True.
According to the ECtHR in the Mothers of Srebrenica case, the right to a court, of which the right to have access to a court is only one aspect (para. 139) is not absolute. The implementation of this right requires regulation and for that purpose states enjoy a margin of appreciation.
A limitation to Article 6(1) may not affect the very essence of the right to have access to a court. Further a limitation must have a legitimate aim and proportionate to achieve that aim.
Question 4
False.
The ICC can extend its jurisdiction over nationals from States not party to the Rome Statute in three instances.
The ICC can exercise jurisdiction over conduct committed on the territory of a State party to the Rome Statute (Article 12(2)(a)) Rome Statute).
Secondly, a non-party State may lodge a declaration with ICC Registrar accepting the jurisdiction of the ICC for a particular crime (Article 12(3) Rome Statute).
Finally, the UNSC can refer situations to the ICC, acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, including where crimes were committed on the territory of non-party States or by nationals of non-party States (13(b) Rome Statute).
Question 5
False.
According to the ICJ in the Pulp Mills case, the obligation to prevent transboundary harm requires due diligence (para. 204), which includes the obligation to carry out an environmental impact assessment. This obligation therefore qualifies as an obligation of conduct.
This is confirmed by Article 2 Rio Declaration (responsibility to ensure that activities do not cause damage to the environment of other states) and Article 3 of the 2001 Articles on the Prevention of Transboundary Harm, which provides that states must take all appropriate measures to prevent transboundary harm.
- If you're a JoHo member, log in and read below for ExamTests with question 1 to 3
- If you're not yet a member, sign up here first.
