Understanding State Responsibility Under International Law

Meaning of State Responsibility under international law

Question:

Discuss about the Weakness of State Responsibility.

The present question is based on the weak points that are found in case of state responsibility. Therefore, it can be said that the ultimate purpose of the report is to point out the international legal relationship and the various aspect of state responsibility. Before cominginto the point, it is important to understand the various scope and applicability of the principal regarding state responsibility[1]. The meaning of state responsibility can be depicted as follows:

Under the international law, it has been stated that state should be held responsible for any wrongful act or any breach to the international obligations that are mentioned under the international law. The state responsibility indicates towards the violation of the legal norms set out by international law and the consequence of such violation[2]. Under the process of state responsibility types of legal rules are to be understood. The first one is primary rules that are also known as the substances rules and the other one is secondary rules that are comprised of issues of responsibility. An attempt has been made by these rules to establish the actions regarding the international wrongful acts, situations by which the acts of the officials and private individuals are attributed to the state and defences as against the international liability and the consequence of such liability[3]. It is a fact that the terms state responsibility denotes injuries faced by the enemy countries and the reciprocal injuries suffered to the enemies . This process involves the relationship between the primary and secondary rules of law. The secondary issues can be gained by way of remedies and the primary issues can be understood by way of tackling the diplomatic protection[4].

The nature of the state responsibility was growing and it was become necessaryto codify the rules regarding the state responsibility and it was one of the most serious concern of the United Nation. After a hard work of 45 years the nature of state responsibility has become codified through International Law Commission. During the purification process of the state responsibility it becomes necessary to understand the nature of the state responsibility[5]. One of the popular and special report of International Law Commission, F.V.GARCIA of Cuba emphasize the chapter on the state responsibility regarding the injury caused by it to its alien enemy. However it has been observed that in the year 1961 when his membership was stopped his ideas and dolphins was denied by international legal Commission[6]. However, the areas of State responsibility are, for the first time, defined by Roberto Ago of Italy. He had emphasized on the distinction between the legal rules that are based on primary and secondary rules and also made an attempt to define the organisational structure of state responsibility.

Primary and Secondary Rules of Law

An attempt to identify the outcomes of the bleachers regarding the international obligation was made by Gaetano Arangio Ruiz. The idea of this rapporteur has been taken into consideration in the year 1995 and the United Nations general assembly have adopted certain decisions regarding the progression of the state responsibility[7]. In the Law Commission report that was drafted in the year 2001, comprised of certain articles and article 19 of the Commission report was dealing with the provision regarding the state crimes[8].

Article 19 creates strong implication on the international Unity that can be breached by the wrongful act of a state if it failed to perform the legal obligations mentioned as a crime. It has been stated another article where it has been mentioned that certain acts can be regarded as International crime that are as follows:

• If an obligation has been violated that has important features regarding the international peace and security;
• A breach has essential importance against the safeguarding of the rights of self determination of people;
• If Breach has been made by a state regarding the obligation that has important effect on safeguarding the human being from slavery or genocide;
• If a breach has been made by the state regarding an obligation that has an effect on human environment and massive pollution to the atmosphere.

It is to be determined that what action of a state can be attracted the provision of state responsibility. One thing is to be kept in mind that there should be a casual connection regarding the injury caused by the state and an official act attributable to the state[9]. It is mentioned under the article that the state should be responsible for every action taken by its officials or organs and the officials of the state will be held liable if it Ultra Vires the provisions of the International Law regarding the public safety or the human rights[10]. There are certain non state actors who play an important role regarding the violation of the international law. These non-states are Al Qaeda, and several non-governmental organisations. It has been observed that all the attributions made by those non-state organisationare creating serious impact on the international community as well as the international integrity to support the benefit of international legal structure.

It has been mentioned under the International Law Commission report that is a state held responsible for violation of the international rules it can defend himself under certain provisions of that report. This Grounds can be categorised as article 23 article 25 article 24 and article 21 and article 20. All the provisions are throwing light on the chapters like distress, Self defence, countermeasures and consent[11].

It is of no doubt to state that violation of international rules is to be considered as one of the international trade that can weaken provision of the international unity and integrity. If a breach has been made as per the provision of article 19 of the International Law Commission report 2001, Saturn liabilities will be imposed on the respective state and that will affect the international community as a whole[12]. The application can be defined as reparation duties made by the state that is mentioned under article 31 of the International Law Commission report. The second entitlements can be defined as a creation of new rights for the NGOs states that has been mentioned under article 42 and 48 of the International Law Commission report. The word reparation means restitution of compensation made by the defendant state and the alien state will be getting much benefit so that they can prepare them self for the development of the standard in general.

The nature of state responsibility and its codification by the International Law Commission

It has been mentioned under article 18 of the International Law Commission report that if our state is a list to coerce the other state regarding matters that has International importance can be fallen within the scope of the state responsibility. Chapter v of the report states certain defences regarding the Alleged state where they can be adopted certain defences regarding the state responsibility. It has been mentioned under article 20 of the report that is a valid consent can be taken by one state to another state and the wrongfulness has been done to that extent to remain within the limits of that consent the state will not be held liable for any such acts. Under article 21 of the report it has been mentioned that it can constitutes art and wrongful acts that violate the principle of international law if it can be done for the process of self-defence. Even under article 12 of the report it has been observed that if the law itself prescribed that a state can take steps against any alien enemy then also the state cannot be responsible for any wrong full at that ensure to the interest of the other states.

Several articles that were encrypted under the International Law Commission are weak in nature. Under the commission report, part four depicts the provision. It has been mentioned under Article 55 of the report states about the applicability of all the provisions of the commission report and certain limitations are also mentioned in this case. It has been stated that the provisions can only be applicable if the questionable act are governed by the other provision of the international law. It has been stated under the Article 56 that the rules mentioned here are not be able to apply in the matters that are not regulated by this Articles. The rules of the article are only applied to certain specific questions that are included within the periphery of the Article and not beyond to that. Relevant provision is also stated under Article 54 of ILC that the provisions of the Article does not does not take any lawful measures against any state regarding the breach made by a state and it could not able to repatriate the alleged state that intend to injure the interest of the state or the alien state.  

Conclusion

Therefore, from the above mentioned statements it has been observed that certain acts that violate the international rules can be regarded as the state responsibility of the violation has been done by a state in general. There are certain grounds that have been mentioned under the various articles of the International Law Commission report regarding the breach international policies[13]. It has been stated that state responsibility arise only when the acts of the state harms the interest of an alien enemy. Article 19 of the International Law Commission report has stated that there are certain Grounds by which it can be determined that whether or state has been violated the principle of the legal policies or not. Beside this provision, there are certain other provisions that are mentioned under the report that identifies the inability of the report to take strong action against those states that are violated the principles of international law. It is required to implement certain steps so that the suggestion given by the ILC regarding the state responsibility should be imposed on the states that had violated the provisions of international law by affecting the interest of the enemy states.  There are many points mentioned under a separate provision of the International Law Commission report 2001 that state should not misuse their position and they are not able to violate the principle of the international law.

Reference:

Akande, Dapo, and Antonios Tzanakopoulos. "The International Court of Justice and the Concept of Aggression." (2015).

ARBITRATION, ADHOC, and I. CASE CONCERNING TERRITORIAL. "Decisions of International Courts and Tribunals." ICLQ 57 (2008): 701-709.

Bernhardt, Rudolf. "Encyclopedia of public international law." (2013).

Byers, Michael. "Terrorism, the use of force and international law after 11 September." International & Comparative Law Quarterly51.2 (2012): 401-414.

Case, Nicaragua. "Case concerning military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua." Judgement on the Merits(2014).

Cohen, Harlan Grant, et al. "Introduction: Legitimacy and International Courts." (2017).

Crawford, James, and Thomas D. Grant. "International Court of Justice." The Oxford Handbook on the United Nations (2017).

De Brabandere, Eric. "The Use of Precedent and External Case Law by the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea." The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 15.1 (2016): 24-55.

Dinstein, Yoram. The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict. Cambridge University Press, 2016.

Elias, Taslim. The international court of justice and some contemporary problems: essays on international law. Vol. 2. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.

Hargrove, John Lawrence. "The Nicaragua Judgment and the Future of the Law of Force and Self-Defense." American Journal of International Law 81.1 (2016): 135-143.

Malintoppi, Loretta. "Fact Finding and Evidence Before the International Court of Justice (Notably in Scientific-Related Disputes)." Journal of International Dispute Settlement 7.2 (2016): 421-444.

MATTERS, MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL. "DECISIONS OF INTERNATIONAL COURTS AND TRIBUNALS." ICLQ 59 (2010): 193-205.

Wellens, Karel. "The International Court of Justice, Back to the Future: Keeping the Dream Alive." Netherlands International Law Review 64.2 (2017): 193-212.

Wi?niewski, Adam. "International Courts and Legalism in International Law." Polish Review of International and European Law (2017).