Lavona Case Study

Issue:

The problem that exists is whether Dastil’s treatment of Lavonan citizens breaks current international law. Lavona wish to take Dastil to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to gain a ruling on this matter. There are two ways in which Lavona could bring the dispute to the court. They could rely on the Agreement of Friendship they have with Lavona, in which Art 4 states disputes can be brought to the ICJ. Or they could aim to use the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as both parties are UN members to argue international customary law, and bring the dispute to the court under Art 38(1) of the Statute of the Court and have the court come to a conclusion around any facts presented under this.

Jurisdiction of court:

For jurisdiction

Since there were no criminal charges, no trial was ever going to occur for a reasonable timeframe to exist or for an eventual release to

To prove international customary law one must show both sustained state practice and opino juris (a states belief they are complying with norms of law). Each part needs to be looked at individually in there own right.

Due to the nature of human rights and its role within international law in the past it has often been unknown and discredited. However when World War II was coming to a close, states started engaging in discourse surrounding the importance of a need for such practice in order to safeguard certain universal principles regarding individuals’ basic rights. In 1948 the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and although it is believed there has not been sufficient state practice to simply claim that this declaration is customary international law it would be unrealistic to try and show that certain articles within the declaration are not. Steiner and Alston (2000; cited in Rothwell et al., 452) argue that the UN charter ‘is legally binding, either as a matter of customary international law or as an authoritative interpretation of the UN