RECOGNITION

Marcos vs Manglapus , G. R. No. 88211 , September 15, 1989

Facts : In February 1986, Ferdinand E. Marcos was deposed from presidency via people power and forced into exile in Hawaii. Nearly three years after, in his deathbed seeks return to the Philippines to die.

Thus, this petition for mandamus and prohibition asks the Court to order the respondent to issue travel documents to Mr. Marcos and the immediate members of his family and to enjoin the the implementation of President Aquino’s decision to bar their return to the Philippines.

Petitioners contend that the right of the Marcoses to return to the Philippines is guaranteed under the Bill of Rights. That the President is without power to impair the liberty of abode of the Marcoses because only the court may do so “within the limits prescribed by law.” The President has enumerated powers and what is not enumerated is impliedly denied to her.

Issues : Whether or not the President has the power under the Constitution, to bar Marcoses from returning to the Philippines

Whether or not the President acted arbitrarily or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction upon determining that the Marcoses’s return poses a serious threat to national interest and welfare and decided to bar their return

Held : The executive power of the President under the Constitution is more than the sum of specific powers enumerated under the Constitution. In balancing the general welfare and the common good against the exercise of rights of certain individuals, the power involved is the President’s residual power to protect the general welfare of the people. Presidential power is a wide discretion, within the bounds of laws and extraordinary in times of emergency.

The President did not act arbitrarily or with grave abuse of discretion in determining that the return of former President Marcos and his family poses a serious threat to national interest and welfare. There exist factual bases in the President’s decision in the pleadings, oral arguments and facts filed by the parties during the briefing in chambers by the Chief of Staff of the Armed of the Philppines and National Security Adviser.

That the President has the power under the Constitution to bar the Macrose’s from returning has been recognized by the members of the Legislature. Through a Resolution proposed in the House of Representative, signed by 103 members urging the President to allow Mr. Marcos to return to the Philippines –an act of true national reconciliation. The Resolution does not question the President’s power but was an appeal to allow a man to come home and to die in his country. Such request submit to the exercise of a broader discretion on the part of the President to determine whether it must be granted or not.

The case is not a political question and for such, the court exercised its judicial power involving the determination whether there has been a grave abuse of discretion on the part of any branch or instrumnetality of the government.

Petition is hereby DISMISSED.

_______________________________________

ICMC vs Calleja , G.R. No. 85750 , September 28, 1990

Facts : After the Vietnam War, the international community was confronted with a problem on the plight of Vietnamese refugees fleeing from South Vietnam. In response, an agreement was forged between Philippine Government and United Nations High Commissioner for refugees to create an operating center for the resettlement of refugees.

Under the said agreement, the International Catholic Migration Commission (ICMC) was accredited by the Philippine Government to operate the refugee processing center in Morong, Bataan. The ICMC was considered a non-profit agency involved in international and humanitarian and voluntary work.

However, on July 14, 1986, the Trade Unions of the Philippines and Allied Service (TUPAS) filed to the then Ministry of Labor and Employment a Petition for Certification Election among the rank and file members employed by ICMC.

Afterwhich, while ICMC’s request for recognition as a “specialized agency” was still pending, Director Pura Calleja of the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) ordered ICMC the immediate conduct of certification of election.

Subsequently, through the Department of Foreign Affairs (DEFORAF) the ICMC was granted a status of a specialized agency with corresponding diplomatic priveleges and immunities. ICMC then sought immediate dismissal of TUPAS petition invoking immunities expressly granted but were twice denied by respondent BLR director. Thus, the present Petition for Certiorari is now at bar.

Issue : Whether or not the grant of diplomatic priveleges and immunities to ICMC extends to immunity from the application of Philippine labor laws

Held : The immunity granted being from every form of legal process except in any particular case they have expressly waived the immunity.
Respondent’s claim in so far as stating that a certification of election is beyond the scope of immunity. That such is not a suit against ICMC but mere investigation of a non-adversary fact-finding character were all rejected.

The immunuties accorded to international organization constitute a categorical recognition by the executive branch of the Government. Its determination is held to be a political question and courts should refuse to look beyond a determination by the Executive Branch. Where the plea of diplomatic immunity is recognized an affirmed by the executive branch as in the case at bar, it is then the duty of the courts to accept the claim of immunity upon appropriate suggestion of the principal law officer of the government or other officer acting under his direction - as for this case the DEFORAF.

Moreover, the exercise of jurisdiction by the Department of Labor would defeat the very purpose of immunity, which is to shield the affairs of internatinal organizations, in accordance with international practice, from political pressure or control by the host country and to ensure unhampered perfromance of their functions.

Petition is GRANTED.

__________________________________________________________
Tobar or Wilson Doctrine

- recognition shall not be extended to any government established by revolution, civil war, coup d'etat or other forms of internal violence until the freely elected representatatives of the people have organized a constitutional government.
Example : The Revolution in Nicaragua in which through the moral mandate of US, communicated to rebels in order to foster a true consititutional government and free elections aimed for the preservation of general welfare of Central America.

Stimson Doctrine

- non-recognition of international territorial changes brought about by breach of international obligation , by force or established as a result of external aggression.
Example : The United States did not recognize the Japanese-supported government in Manchukuo (1932) or the Italian government in Ethiopia (1936).

Estrada Doctrine

- enclosed view of sovereignty
- it claimed that foreign governments should not judge, for good or bad, governments or changes in governments in other nations, because it would imply a breach to its sovereignty
-diclaiming the right if foreign states to rule upon the legitimacy of the government of another state
- the policy of recognizing states rather than governments
Example : Many Latin Americans condemn the idea of the US unilaterally "certifying" nations as fighting against the drug trade

ZIMBABWE Situation

Unstoppable Problem

With no end in sight to the worsening scenario of Zimbabwe's human rights abuses, pressure is now beginning to mount on southern African countries to break the silence and join hands to help resolve the neighbouring country's crisis.

"All SADC (Southern African Development Community) member states must move into Zimbabwe to organize elections and to make the people come together" says Wisdom Gondwe, a Lusaka-based political observer.

"As far as the situation in Zimbabwe is concerned, President Robert Mugabe is ruling by default, he is not the president of Zimbabwe because his mandate expired before the (March 29) election. So, that country's chief justice should have been in control during the period of preparing for the election re-run. He is ruling by default, and even his government officials are all ruling by default."

Zimbabwe is in its eighth year of an economic recession that has seen inflation soar to unofficial estimates of one million per cent - the highest ever in the world - and unemployment levels rising to above 80 per cent. Shortages of key commodities such as fuel and food, have over the years been commonplace in literally every corner of the once-buoyant southern African economic giant.

According to international donor organizations, nearly five million Zimbabweans are in need of emergency food assistance this year alone. It is estimated that as many as three million Zimbabweans could have left the country for neighbouring states, such as Zambia, Botswana, Malawi and South Africa, or have gone further outside the continent to England and the United States.

Inside Zimbabwe, a myriad of glaring cases of violent attacks has been reported with about 86 people, mostly supporters of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) killed in targeted attacks since the March 29 election, according to the MDC.
The first round presidential election was won by the MDC's Morgan Tsvangarai, but he fell short of the required 50 per cent plus one vote for an outright victory, forcing a re-run with Mugabe, 84,who has ruled Zimbabwe since independence in 1980. -The Times of Zambia

UN takes part

The U.N. Security Council has unanimously condemned the Zimbabwean government because of violence that has marred the campaign leading up to a scheduled presidential election runoff, which forced the withdrawal of the opposition candidate from the race.

The council's statement that questioned the legitimacy of any election held under such circumstances but did not directly call for the runoff, scheduled for Friday, to be postponed.

Earlier, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon made that appeal, saying the vote runoff as currently scheduled "would only deepen divisions within the country and produce a result that could not be seen as credible."

But Boniface Chidyausiku, Zimbabwe's ambassador to the United Nations, said after the Security Council vote that the runoff would take place as planned.

"The Security Council cannot micromanage political elections in any country," he said. "They have expressed their view, and we take note of their view. But as far as we're concerned, the date is set." HARARE, Zimbabwe (CNN)

In the past, United Nations Emergency Coordinator Jan Egeland, said that the humanitarian situation in the southern Africa is “extremely serious and it is worsening as we speak.”

The UN and donor countries could contribute to breaking the vicious circle which had locked the Zimbabwean people into declining standards of living. The country that had enjoyed a life expectancy of more than 60 years about 16 years ago now has seen that cut to only 32 years today.

It’s heartbreaking to meet with people who are fearing the future because of food insecurity, which is affecting the majority of the people. Prices are spiralling as food is becoming increasingly scarce. It was heartbreaking to meet victims of the eviction campaign last summer, who now are back in the same place, only in much worse shelter than the house that was bulldozed.”

The UN wants to do more to help, he said, noting that it launched an appeal last week for $276 million for food aid, medical assistance, safe water and sanitation, as well as general assistance for Zimbabwe’s people.

Security Council to standstill

China last week once again demonstrated its willingness to opportunistically trade diplomatic favors for access to African riches. Joining with Russia, the People's Republic vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that would have imposed tough sanctions on Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe and other members of his illegitimate regime for rigging the country's presidential election.

In Zimbabwe, it's not petroleum that China covets. Rather, the African nation is the world's second-largest exporter of platinum, a key input for China's auto industry. China is also the world's largest steel producer, and Zimbabwe controls more than half of the world's known chromium reserves, used in making stainless steel.

That China implements this imperialistic strategy by leveraging its position as a permanent member of the UN Security Council with veto power is arguably one of the most reprehensible aspects of an amoral foreign policy. That foreign policy is founded on a principle that China's own President Hu Jintao has preached like the lowliest of rug merchants across Africa and Latin America: "Just business, no political conditions."

The veto power of the permanent members of SC (Big5) corrupts the functions and UN’s purpose. It makes it a slave of its own organization.

UN finds another way

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed a deal between Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe and opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai on Monday that paves the way for talks on forming a power-sharing government.

The preliminary agreement was signed in Harare's Rainbow Towers Hotel after weeks of deadlock since Mugabe was re-elected on June 27 in a widely condemned poll boycotted by Tsvangirai because of violence against his supporters.

"The Secretary-General encourages all sides to engage, in good faith, in serious talks that would lead to a lasting solution to the political crisis and address the urgent economic and humanitarian needs of the Zimbabwean people people," Ban's spokeswoman, Michele Montas, said in a statement.

Monday's meeting was the first in 10 years between Mugabe and Tsvangirai, who have long traded insults, but shook hands at the end of the ceremony, with the opposition leader referring to Mugabe as "comrade".

"The handshake is a good sign and we hope that something will be achieved," French U.N. Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert told reporters. "We hope it's the beginning of good work together between Mr Tsvangirai and Mr Mugabe.

"Ripert said that any political solution had to be built on the results of the first round of the presidential poll on March 29, which was won by Tsvangirai who fell short of an absolute majority, and that things "seem to be aiming in the right direction, so we're fully supportive."

France holds the rotating six-month presidency of the European Union.

Mugabe and Tsvangirai have been under heavy pressure to enter negotiations. They have both demanded to be recognized as Zimbabwe's rightful president.

Russian U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said the deal justified Moscow's decision to veto earlier this month, along with China, a Western-backed U.N. Security Council resolution to impose sanctions on Zimbabwe."It's very good news," Churkin said of the pact.

"It shows we were right when we said that there is potential (for) contacts between the parties in Zimbabwe and that this should be encouraged by the international community." -The Times of Zambia

SUDAN Conflict

Historical Background

A rebellion started in 2003 against the Arab-dominated Sudanese government, with two local rebel groups - the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) and the Sudanese Liberation Army (SLA) - accusing the government of oppressing non-Arabs in favor of Arabs. The government was also accused of neglecting the Darfur region of Sudan. In response, the government mounted a campaign of aerial bombardment supporting ground attacks by an Arab militia, the Janjaweed. Literally translated, Janjaweed means 'devils on horseback'. The government-supported Janjaweed were accused of committing major human rights violations, including mass killing, looting, and systematic rape of the non-Arab population of Darfur. They have frequently burned down whole villages, driving the surviving inhabitants to flee to refugee camps, mainly in Darfur and Chad; many of the camps in Darfur are surrounded by Janjaweed forces. By the summer of 2004, 50,000 to 80,000 people had been killed and at least a million had been driven from their homes, causing a major humanitarian crisis in the region.

United Nations : First Intervention

On September 18, 2004, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1564, which called for a Commission of Inquiry on Darfur to assess the Sudanese conflict. On January 31, 2005, the UN released a 176-Page report saying that while there were mass murders and rapes, they could not label it as genocide because "genocidal intent appears to be missing".[30] [31] Many activists, however, refer to the crisis in Darfur as a genocide, including the Save Darfur Coalition and the Genocide Intervention Network. These organizations point to statements by former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, referring to the conflict as a genocide. Other activists organizations, such as Amnesty International, while calling for international intervention, avoid the use of the term genocide.

International Responses

International attention to the Darfur conflict largely began with reports by the advocacy organizations Amnesty International in July 2003 and the International Crisis Group in December 2003. However, widespread media coverage did not start until the outgoing United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan, Mukesh Kapila, called Darfur the "world's greatest humanitarian crisis" in March 2004. A movement advocating for humanitarian intervention has emerged in several countries since then.

UN’s failure to prove existence of GENOCIDE

Genocide - murder of entire ethnic group: the systematic killing of all the people from a national, ethnic, or religious group, or an attempt to do this.

In January 2005, an International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur, authorized by UN Security Council Resolution 1564 of 2004, issued a report to the Secretary-General stating that "the Government of the Sudan has not pursued a policy of genocide." Nevertheless, the Commission cautioned that "The conclusion that no genocidal policy has been pursued and implemented in Darfur by the Government authorities, directly or through the militias under their control, should not be taken in any way as detracting from the gravity of the crimes perpetrated in that region. International offences such as the crimes against humanity and war crimes that have been committed in Darfur may be no less serious and heinous than genocide."

To address the dire human rights and humanitarian emergency in Darfur, the United Nations has taken several steps, but all of these have been frustrated by the Government of Sudan with the support of a number of other governments, including Egypt and Algeria.

In January 2005, the UN Secretary-General's International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur issued a well documented report that indicated that there was by then already some 1.6 million internally displaced persons as a result of the ongoing violence, more than 200,000 refugees from Darfur into neighbouring Chad, and that Government forces and allied militia had committed widespread and consistent war crimes and crimes against humanity including murder, torture, mass rape, summary executions and arbitrary detention. The Commission found that technically there was not a genocide in the legal sense of the term but that massive violations of human rights and humanitarian law were continuing. The Commission also found that the Janjaweed militia operated alongside or with ground or air logistical support from the Government's armed forces.

UN : Paralyzed

The United Nations Human Rights Council appointed seven UN human rights special rapporteurs to form a group of experts on Darfur.

On 11 December 2007, the group of experts issued its final 106-page report to the Human Rights Council which details the status of the Government's implementation of the recommendations the group had brought together and which concluded that the Government's implementation of human rights recommendations has been largely inadequate.
Attacks in January 2008 and February 2008 by Sudanese forces on Darfur villagers are described in a U.N. report, from March 20, 2008, as "violations of international humanitarian and human rights law."

As Sudan has not ratified the Rome Statute the International Criminal Court can not investigate crimes that may have taken place in Darfur unless the United Nations Security council asks them to under Article 13.b of the Rome Statute ("A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations").

In March 2005, the Security Council formally referred the situation in Darfur to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, taking into account the report of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur, authorized by UN Security Council Resolution 1564 of 2004, but without mentioning any specific crimes. Two permanent members of the Security Council, the United States and China, abstained from the vote on the referral resolution. As of his fourth report to the Security Council, the Prosecutor has found "reasonable grounds to believe that the individuals identified [in the UN Security Council Resolution 1593] have committed crimes against humanity and war crimes," but did not find sufficient evidence to prosecute for genocide.
In April 2007, the Judges of the ICC issued arrest warrants against the former Minister of State for the Interior, Ahmad Harun, and a Militia Janjaweed leader, Ali Kushayb, for crimes against humanity and war crimes. The Sudan Government says that the ICC had no jurisdiction to try Sudanese citizens and that it will not hand the two men over to its custody.

Criticisms of International Response

On October 16, 2006, Minority Rights Group (MRG) published a critical report, challenging that the UN and the great powers could have prevented the deepening crisis in Darfur and that few lessons appear to have been drawn from their ineptitude during the Rwandan Genocide. MRG's executive director, Mark Lattimer, stated that: "this level of crisis, the killings, rape and displacement could have been foreseen and avoided ... Darfur would just not be in this situation had the UN systems got its act together after Rwanda: their action was too little too late." On October 20, 120 genocide survivors of the Holocaust, the Cambodian and Rwandan Genocides, backed by six aid agencies, submitted an open letter to the European Union, calling on them to do more to end the atrocities in Darfur, with a UN peacekeeping force as "the only viable option."

China : Criticized of supporting Sudan

As based on Security Council’s YALTA formula, substantive issues which requires the Security Council under it’s responsibility of maintaining or restoring world peace to invoke measures of enfrocement – the approval of which needs 9 votes including the Big Five (China as one of the Big 5). With the veto power vested to the so-called Big 5 , one vote from any of them will totally reject a draft of resolution or proposal of possible preventive measures. Under this Rule of Great-Power Unanimity, the Security Council is unable to function once any of the Big 5 exercises it’s veto power.

"Human Rights First" claimed that over 90% of the light weapons currently being imported by Sudan and used in the conflict are from China; however, according to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)'s "Arms Transfers Data for 2007", between 2003-2007, Sudan received 87 per cent of its major conventional weapons from Russia and 8 per cent from China.[ Human rights advocates and opponents of the Sudanese government portray China's role in providing weapons and aircraft as a cynical attempt to obtain oil and gas just as colonial powers once supplied African chieftains with the military means to maintain control as they extracted natural resources. According to China's critics, China has offered Sudan support threatening to use its veto on the U.N. Security Council to protect Khartoum from sanctions and has been able to water down every resolution on Darfur in order to protect its interests in Sudan. In response to these allegations, Chinese Ambassador to Sudan Li Chengwen said that "China played an important role in promoting the agreement of the Sudanese government, the African Union and the UN for the deployment of the Hybrid Force in Darfur. China's view is that intensive economic development of the region is a more effective means than harsh economic sanctions, in the effort to stabilize the crisis and alleviate the suffering of the people".[60] Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao reiterated these views on February 20, 2008, and "pointed out that China was the first non-African nation to send peacekeepers to Darfur and the biggest development aid provider to the region". However accusations of the supply of weapons from China in breach of a UN embargo continue to arise.

Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (ICC) has put countries providing arms to Sudan on notice that they are arming a potentially indicted war criminal, as well as likely violating the Genocide Convention, said Human Rights First.

China's trade and oil interests in Sudan have induced the permanent U.N. Security Council member to provide diplomatic cover for the government accused by many of war crimes against its own people, analysts say.

Sudan has had its back against the wall of the U.N. headquarters in New York during the past 18 months over the conflict in Darfur, where tens of thousands of people have died as a result of violence the United States called genocide. But the spectre of a Chinese veto has shielded Sudan from possible sanctions over the conflict and in turn protected a growing source of much-needed oil for Beijing. "This is RealPolitik," said Adwoa Kufuor, a human rights analyst on Sudan. "Yes China has economic interests ... and yes China will not risk offending the government of Sudan."
China's heavy but understated presence in Sudan is symbolised by the vast, walled compound housing its embassy on prime real estate in Khartoum. It dominates Sudan's crude oil sector, which produces around 330,000 barrels per day, and is building roads, bridges and dams. China has become Sudan's biggest foreign investor with $4 billion in projects.

China has in the past "sold" its UN veto power to protect Sudan from sanctions over the killing of people in Darfur in exchange for access to Sudanese oil. China is now Sudan's biggest customer.

Just Recently

On July 14, 2008, prosecutors at the International Criminal Court (ICC), filed ten charges of war crimes against Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir, three counts of genocide, five of crimes against humanity and two of murder. The ICC's prosecutors have claimed that al-Bashir "masterminded and implemented a plan to destroy in substantial part" three tribal groups in Darfur because of their ethnicity. The ICC's prosecutor for Darfur, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, is expected within months to ask a panel of ICC judges to issue an arrest warrant for al-Bashir.[19]
ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo referred President Bashir to the Court's Pre-Trial Chamber I, and requested that the chamber issue a warrant for his arrest for his role in perpetrating genocide in Darfur from 2003-2008, resulting in deaths of more than 300,000 people. The prosecutor’s request for a warrant marks the end of the initial phase of what is thus far a three-year investigation into crimes committed in all of Darfur, as well as the first time a sitting president has been charged with genocide.

MONTEVIDEO Convention

The Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States was a treaty (which was later accepted as part of customary international law) signed at Montevideo, Uruguay, on December 26, 1933, at the Seventh International Conference of American States.

A state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications :

1. a permanent population – consist of a group of people, both sexes living together as a community. They must be sufficient in number to maintain and perpetuate themselves.
2. a defined territory – a known fixed portion on the earth’s surface occupied by the inhabitants.
3. government – must be organized, exercising control over and capable of maintaining law and order within the territory. It can be held internationally responsible for the acts of the inhabitants. The identity of the state is not affected by changes in government.
4. capacity to enter into relations with the other states – has an external sovereignty capable of conducting both its internal and foreign affairs.

The federal state constitute a sole person in the eys of international law. Thus, its fundamental rights are not susceptible of being affected in any manner whatsoever.

Determinative Factor of Statehood
- the political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts.

- the exercise of these rights has no other limitation than the exercise of the rights of other states according to international law.

Judicial Equality among States
-states are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.

What is a recognition of a state ?
The recognition of a state merely signifies that the state which recognizes it accepts the personality of the other with all the rights and duties determined by international law. Recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.
The recognition of a state may be express or tacit. The latter results from any act which implies the intention of recognizing the new state.

Domestic Jurisdiction of states
-no state has the right to intervene in the internal or external affairs of another
-the jurisdiction of states within the limits of national territory applies to all the inhabitants
-nationals and foreigners are under the same protection of the law and the national authorities and the foreigners may not claim rights other or more extensive than those of the nationals.

Inviolability of states
-the contracting states definitely establish as the rule of their conduct the precise obligation not to recognize territorial acquisitions or special advantages which have been obtained by force whether this consists in the employment of arms, in threatening diplomatic representations, or in any other effective coercive measure.
-the territory of a state is inviolable and may not be the object of military occupation nor of other measures of force imposed by another state directly or indirectly or for any motive whatever even temporarily.

Montevideo Convention’s ratification
-defines the mode of it’s applicability based on contracting parties’ respective procedures
-involves the transmission of the aunthentic certified copies to the governments and the instrument of ratification shall be deposited in the archives of Pan American Union in Washington
- the signatory governments will be notified of the said deposit and thus, considered as an exchange of ratification

Effects of the Montevideo Convention
-the present Convention shall not affect obligations previously entered into by the High Contracting Parties by virtue of international agreements.
-the present Convention will enter into force between the High Contracting Parties in the order in which they deposit their respective ratifications.

Coventions’s enforceability duration
General Rule : the present Convention shall remain in force indefinitely.

Exemption : may be denounced by means of one year's notice given to the Pan American Union, which shall transmit it to the other signatory governments. After the expiration of this period the Convention shall cease in its effects as regards the party which denounces but shall remain in effect for the remaining High Contracting Parties.

Signatories of the Convention
The states that signed this convention are:
Honduras, United States of America, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Argentina, Venezuela, Uruguay, Paraguay, Mexico, Panama, Guatemala, Brazil, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Colombia, Chile, Peru, Cuba.

Non- signatories of the Convention
- the present Convention shall be open for the adherence and accession of the States which are not signatories.

RESERVATIONS
(codification)
The Delegation of the United States of America, in signing the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, does so with the express reservation presented to the Plenary Session of the Conference on December 22, 1933 :
“No time within which to prepare interpretations and definitions of these fundamental terms that are embraced in the report. Such definitions and interpretations would enable every government to proceed in a uniform way without any difference of opinion or of interpretations. In the meantime in case of differences of interpretations and also until they (the proposed doctrines and principles) can be worked out and codified for the common use of every government. The United States Government in all of its international associations and relationships and conduct will follow scrupulously the doctrines and policies which it has pursued which are embodied in the different addresses of President Roosevelt since that time and in the recent peace address on the 15th day of December before this Conference and in the law of nations as generally recognized and accepted".
The delegates of Brazil and Peru recorded the following private vote with regard to article 11: "That they accept the doctrine in principle but that they do not consider it codifiable because there are some countries which have not yet signed the Anti-War Pact of Rio de Janeiro 4 of which this doctrine is a part and therefore it does not yet constitute positive international law suitable for codification".

Montevideo Convention’s Impact
-as a restatement of customary international law, the Montevideo Convention merely codified existing legal norms and its principles and therefore does not apply merely to the signatories, but to all subjects of international law as a whole
-Switzerland, although not a member of the European Union, adheres to the same principle, stating that "neither a political unit needs to be recognized to become a state, nor does a state have the obligation to recognize another one. At the same time, neither recognition is enough to create a state, nor does its absence abolish it."

Philippines : Archipelagic Doctrine

SPEECH OF ACTING SECRETARY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS EDSEL T. CUSTODIO ON THE OPENING OF THE MOAC EXHIBIT ENTITLED “THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ARCHIPELAGIC DOCTRINE” 7 MARCH 2005, DFA LOBBY

Fifty years ago, on 7 March 1955, the Philippine Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York city formally submitted to the United Nations Secretary General, by note verbale, the Philippine assertion that: “ All waters around, between and connecting different islands belonging to the Philippine Archipelago, irrespective of their width or dimension, are necessary appurtenances of its land territory, forming an integral part of the national or inland waters, subject to the exclusive sovereignty of the Philippines.”

This was the very first formulation of the key principle that would define the Philippines as a mid-ocean archipelagic state. Indeed, the principles contained in that note verbale would serve to this day as the bases of Philippine laws and policies and would even be later enshrined in the 1973 and 1987 Philippine Constitution.(end of quote)__________________________________________________

The archipelagic principle is a fundamental pillar of the Philippine concept of national territory :

The guiding principle for resolving the issue about offshore islands is the archipelagic principle, which is enshrined in Art. 1 of the 1987 Constitution and has been one of the fundamental pillars of the Philippine concept of national territory. Since the 1950s, the Philippines has pushed this principle, which led to the so-called "Archipelagic Doctrine" in international law and has become the legal and political basis for considering our 7,107 islands as one political unit. The "Archipelagic Doctrine" is one of our most important contributions to the international legal system; without it, the widely scattered islands of our archipelago will be separated by international waters, and the Filipino nation will be deprived of the large tracts of marine resources between the islands that it has claimed since its inception.

Central to the archipelagic principle is the concept of equality between landmasses, where each island regardless of size is treated in the same manner as all others. Without such equality of treatment, small outlying islands like Tawi-Tawi and Batanes may be considered as mere territories not entitled to provincial or municipal status; at most they may be mere attachments to some province located in one of the 10 major landmasses of the country. Equally important to the archipelagic principle is the concept of unity between land and water, where the water forms the link between the disparate islands. The proper application of the doctrine demands that, as a national policy, we should treat all of our islands in the same manner, not allowing some of them to be insignificant as if they were mere parts of the water, and that we should not allow the waters to create highly fragmented political units.

Arial Domains

Article 1, Sovereignty : The contracting States recognize that every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory.This refers to the air space above the land and waters of the State. The Convention on International Civil Aviation, also known as the Chicago Convention, established the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), a specialized agency of the United Nations charged with coordinating and regulating international air travel. The Convention establishes rules of airspace, aircraft registration and safety, and details the rights of the signatories in relation to air travel. The Convention also exempts air fuels from tax. The document was signed on December 7, 1944 in Chicago, Illinois, by 52 signatory states. The Convention defines the supreme authority of each state to its airspace. Relevant provisions of the convention relates to such recognition and the elements of a state’s territory

Territorial Waters

Out to 12 nautical miles from the baseline, the coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Vessels were given the right of "innocent passage" through any territorial waters, with strategic straits allowing the passage of military craft as "transit passage", in that naval vessels are allowed to maintain postures that would be illegal in territorial waters. "Innocent passage" is defined by the convention as passing through waters in an expeditious and continuous manner, which is not “prejudicial to the peace, good order or the security” of the coastal state. Fishing, polluting, weapons practice, and spying are not “innocent", and submarines and other underwater vehicles are required to navigate on the surface and to show their flag. Nations can also temporarily suspend innocent passage in specific areas of their territorial seas, if doing so is essential for the protection of its security.Archipelagic watersThe convention set the definition of Archipelagic States in Part IV, which also defines how the state can draw its territorial borders. A baseline is drawn between the outermost points of the outermost islands, subject to these points being sufficiently close to one another. All waters inside this baseline will be Archipelagic Waters and included as part of the state's internal waters.

Internal waters

Covers all water and waterways on the landward side of the baseline. The coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Foreign vessels have no right of passage within internal waters.

THE BASELINE METHODS

Baselines are reference lines drawn by a coastal or archipelagic State using different methods as discussed below. They are used to measure the breadth of the territorial sea (12nm), contiguous zone (24 nm), EEZ (200nm) and continental shelf (up to 350nm). Also, the waters enclosed by the baselines are called archipelagic waters over which an archipelagic State exercises sovereignty.According to the UNCLOS, there are three methods that can be employed in determining a State’s baselines, namely:

1. Normal Baseline, according to Art. 5, “is the low-water line along the coast as marked on large-scale charts officially recognized by the coastal State.”

2. Straight Baseline, according to Art. 7, can be employed if ever “the coastlines are indented and cut into or there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its immediate vicinity.”

3. Archipelagic Baseline, according to Art. 47, is a method of “joining the outermost points of the outermost islands and drying reefs of an archipelago provided that within such baselines are included the main island and an area in which the ratio of the area of the water to the area of the land, including atolls, is between 1:1 and 9:1.”

Of the three methods, the archipelagic baselines method is most applicable and advantageous to an archipelago such as ours. Otherwise, to use either the Normal or Straight baseline methods, which are primarily designed for coastal States, would effectively waive our status as an archipelagic State and lose much of the archipelagic waters as defined above.

Treaty of Paris of 1898

The Treaty of Paris
- terminated the War bet. US & Spain
- main gate opening to the broadening highway of constitutionalism
- American occupation in the Phils started with a Military Government by the US Army which also discharged a legislative function by issuing “general orders”
- With the establishment of the American military government, provost courts and military commission were created. At the same time, civil courts were created for certain civil purposes

Commissioners from the United States and Spain met in Paris on October 1, 1898 to produce a treaty that would bring an end to the war after six months of hostilities. The American peace commission consisted of William R. Day, Sen. Cushman K. Davis, Sen. William P. Frye, Sen. George Gray, and the Honorable Whitelaw Reid. The Spanish commission was headed by Don Eugenio Montero Rios, the President of the Senate. Jules Cambon, a French diplomat, also negotiated on Spain's behalf. The American commissioners negotiated in a hostile atmosphere because all Europe, except England, was sympathetic to the Spanish side.
Although the Conference discussed Cuba and debt questions, the major conflict concerned the situation of the Philippines. Admiral Dewey's victory had come as a great surprise and it marked the entrance of the United States into the Pacific. Spanish commissioners argued that Manila had surrendered after the armistice and therefore the Philippines could not be demanded as a war conquest, but they eventually yielded because they had no other choice, and the U.S. ultimately paid Spain 20 million dollars for possession of the Philippines. The islands of Puerto Rico and Guam were also placed under American control, and Spain relinquished its claim to Cuba. The treaty was signed on December 10, 1898.

Organs of the United Nations (UN)

The following are the six organs of the United Nations :
1. General Assembly
2. Security Council
3. Economic and Social Council
4. Trusteeship Council
5. International Court of Justice
6. Secretariat

General Assembly
The most representative of the organs of the United Nations.
Composition
Consist of all the nation-members of the United Nations. Each member is entitled to at least five representatives and five alternates such as technical staff as needed.
Pre - Function
The characterization of questions as to important or not important . Such that after being determined the General Assembly proceeds to its vital functions and powers.
Functions and Powers
According to the Charter of the United Nations, the General Assembly may:
- Consider and make recommendations on the general principles of cooperation for maintaining international peace and security, including disarmament;
- Discuss any question relating to international peace and security and, except where a dispute or situation is currently being discussed by the Security Council, make recommendations on it;
- Discuss, with the same exception, and make recommendations on any questions within the scope of the Charter or affecting the powers and functions of any organ of the United Nations;
- Initiate studies and make recommendations to promote international political cooperation, the development and codification of international law, the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms and international collaboration in the economic, social, humanitarian, cultural, educational and health fields;
- Make recommendations for the peaceful settlement of any situation that might impair friendly relations among nations;
- Receive and consider reports from the Security Council and other United Nations organs;
- Consider and approve the United Nations budget and establish the financial assessments of Member States;
- Elect the non-permanent members of the Security Council and the members of other - United Nations councils and organs and, on the recommendation of the Security Council, appoint the Secretary-General.
Session
Regular annual session begins every third Tuesday of September, or can also conduct special sessions at the call of the majority or upon request of the Security Council.
Voting
Each member of the General Assembly has one vote.
(Vote Needed)
Important Questions - requires two-third votes of all the present and voting members
Not Important Questions – requires majority of those present and voting members
President of the General Assembly
A seasoned diplomat, economist, scholar and businessman, Dr. Kerim brings with him a wealth of experience in international political and economic affairs and extensive knowledge of the United Nations system. From 2000 to 2001, Dr. Kerim was Foreign Minister of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, in which capacity he also served as Chairman of the South-East European Cooperation Process. He then became his country's Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations, from 2001 to 2003, during which time he served as vice-chairman both of the International Conference on Financing for Development (Monterrey, 2002) and of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Johannesburg, 2002). In addition, he was a member of the group of facilitators of the President of the fifty-sixth UN General Assembly, focusing on UN reform, and was a co-organizer of the Regional Forum on Dialogue of Civilizations (Ohrid, 2003).

Security Council
The key organ of the United Nation in the maintenance of peace and security
Composition
Consist of fifteen (15) members. Five permanent members and ten elective members.
Five permanent members are the commonly known as UN’s Big Five, these are :
1. China
2. France
3. United kingdom
4. Russia
5. United States
- the permanent members are given a preferred position because of their prestige and power thus, can be called upon to provide leadership and physical force needed to preserve peace of the world.
Ten elective members elected by the General Assembly :
1. Five from African and Asian states
2. Two from Latin American state
3. Two from Western European and other states
4. One from Eastern European states
Term/Re-election
Big Five : permanent
Ten elective members : elected for two years by the General Assembly and not eligible for immediate re-election.
Chairmanship is rotated every calendar month on the basis of English alphabetical order of the names of members.
Pre- Function
(Characterization of Questions)
Procedural matters – includes questions relating to the organization and meeting of the Security Council, establishment of subsidiary organs and the participation of states paries to a dispute in the discussions of the organ
Non-procedural matters – are those that may require the Security Council under it’s responsibility of maintaining and restoring peace to invoke measures of enforcement.
Functions and Powers
to maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations;
to investigate any dispute or situation which mightlead to international friction;
to recommend methods of adjusting such disputes or the terms of settlement;
to formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate armaments;
to determine the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression and to recommend what action should be taken;
to call on Members to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving the use of force to prevent or stop aggression;
to take military action against an aggressor;
to recommend the admission of new Members;
to exercise the trusteeship functions of the United Nations in "strategic areas";
to recommend to the GeneralAssembly the appointment of the Secretary-General and, together with the Assembly, to elect the Judges of the International Court of Justice.
Voting : Yalta Formula
According to this formula, each member shall have one vote but distinction is made between the Big Five and the non-permanent in resolution of substantive questions. This formula was devised at the Crimea Conference and subsequently incorporated in Article 27 of the UN Charter, which provides :
1. Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote.
2. Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members.
3. Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI and under paragraph 3 of Article 52 a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting
Purpose of the Yalta Formula is to ensure the unity of permanent members in the measures to be taken in the pursuit of its primary function of maintaining international peace and security.
Procedural matters – requires nine votes of any permanent members or more
Non-procedural matters –requires nine votes but including concurrence of all the Big Five
Veto : prevent agreement on a non-procedural question even if it is supported by all the members of the Security Council
Double veto : by means of which it can disapprove any proposal to consider a question merely procedural and threafter vote against the question itself on the merits.

Economic and Social Council
The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations assists the General Assembly in promoting international economic and social cooperation and development. ECOSOC has 54 members, all of whom are elected by the General Assembly for a three-year term. The president is elected for a one-year term and chosen amongst the small or middle powers represented on ECOSOC. ECOSOC meets once a year in July for a four-week session. Since 1998, it has held another meeting each April with finance ministers heading key committees of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Viewed separate from the specialized bodies it coordinates, ECOSOC’s functions include information gathering, advising member nations, and making recommendations. In addition, ECOSOC is well positioned to provide policy coherence and coordinate the overlapping functions of the UN’s subsidiary bodies and it is in these roles that it is most active.
Composition
Fifty-four (54) members elected by the General Assembly.
Term
Elected members serve for three years and maybe re-elected immediately. Terms are staggered as to provide for replacement or re-election of one-third of the body every year.
Session
Regular sessions as required in accordance with its rules. Special Sessions upon the request of majority of its members.
Voting
Each member has one vote. Decisions are reached by a majority of those present and voting.
Function
Exert efforts toward :
1. Higher standaards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development;
2. Solutions of international economic, social, health and related problems, and international, cultural and educational cooperation , and;
3. Universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language and religion.

Trusteeship Council
The organ charged with the duty of assisting the Security Council and General Assembly
The United Nations Trusteeship Council, one of the principal organs of the United Nations, was established to help ensure that non-self-governing territories were administered in the best interests of the inhabitants and of international peace and security. The trust territories – most of them former mandates of the League of Nations or territories taken from nations defeated at the end of World War II – have all now attained self-government or independence, either as separate nations or by joining neighbouring independent countries. The last was Palau, which became a member state of the United Nations in December 1994.
Compostion
1. Member of the UN administering trust terriories
2. Permanent members of the Security Council
3. As many other members (necessary) elected for three years by the General Assembly
Session
Regular sessions as required in accordance with its rules. Special Sessions upon the request of majority of its members.
Voting
Each member has one vote. Decisions are reached by a majority of those present and voting.

International Court of Justice (ICJ)
The judicial organ of the United Nations which functions in accordance with the Statute.
Composition of Court Members
Fifteen members elected by abosolute majority vote in the General Assembly and Security Council.
Qualifications/Considerations
1. Judge must be of high moral character
2. Appointed in his/her country the highest judicial offices/ recognized competence in international law.
3. No one should be of the same state
4. (in the event wherein more than one of them of the same nationals)
Eledest shall be considered elected
Position/Terms
Court shall elect President and Vice – President : serve for three years and may be re-elected
En banc or Chambers : three or more judges
Voting
All questions are decided by a majority of the judges present , the quorom being nine when the full court is sitting.
Functions/Process
The functions of the court are to decide contentious cases and to render advisory opinions.
(Contentious cases)
Only States (States Members of the United Nations and other States which have become parties to the Statute of the Court or which have accepted its jurisdiction under certain conditions) may be parties to contentious cases.
The Court is competent to entertain a dispute only if the States concerned have accepted its jurisdiction in one or more of the following ways:
by entering into a special agreement to submit the dispute to the Court;
by virtue of a jurisdictional clause, i.e., typically, when they are parties to a treaty containing a provision whereby, in the event of a dispute of a given type or disagreement over the interpretation or application of the treaty, one of them may refer the dispute to the Court;
through the reciprocal effect of declarations made by them under the Statute whereby each has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in the event of a dispute with another State having made a similar declaration. A number of these declarations, which must be deposited with the United Nations Secretary-General, contain reservations excluding certain categories of dispute.
Proceedings may be instituted in one of two ways:
through the notification of a special agreement: this document, which is of a bilateral nature, can be lodged with the Court by either of the States parties to the proceedings or by both of them. A special agreement must indicate the subject of the dispute and the parties thereto. Since there is neither an “applicant” State nor a “respondent” State, in the Court’s publications their names are separated by an oblique stroke at the end of the official title of the case, e.g., Benin/Niger;
by means of an application: the application, which is of a unilateral nature, is submitted by an applicant State against a respondent State. It is intended for communication to the latter State and the Rules of Court contain stricter requirements with respect to its content. In addition to the name of the party against which the claim is brought and the subject of the dispute, the applicant State must, as far as possible, indicate briefly on what basis - a treaty or a declaration of acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction - it claims the Court has jurisdiction, and must succinctly state the facts and grounds on which it bases its claim. At the end of the official title of the case the names of the two parties are separated by the abbreviation “v.” (for the Latin versus), e.g., Nicaragua v. Colombia.
Jurisdiction
The International Court of Justice acts as a world court. The Court has a dual jurisdiction : it decides, in accordance with international law, disputes of a legal nature that are submitted to it by States (jurisdiction in contentious cases); and it gives advisory opinions on legal questions at the request of the organs of the United Nations or specialized agencies authorized to make such a request (advisory jurisdiction).

Secretariat
The chief administrative organ of the United Nation.
Compostion
Headed by Secretary General chosen by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.
Secretary General is the highest representative of the United Nation. He/She is entitled to full diplomatic immunities and privileges.
Term
Secretary General has a fixed term of five years and he may be re-elected.
Functions
His primary duty is to bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten international peace and security.
Acts as secretary in all meeting of th General Assembly, Security Council, Economic and Social Council and Trusteeship Council (any may perform other functions as may be assigned to him by theses organs)
Prepares budget of the UN for submission to the General Assembly
Provides technical facilities and in general coordinates its vast administrative machinery.
The duties carried out by the Secretariat are as varied as the problems dealt with by the United Nations. These range from administering peacekeeping operations to mediating international disputes, from surveying economic and social trends and problems to preparing studies on human rights and sustainable development. Secretariat staff also inform the world's communications media about the work of the United Nations; organize international conferences on issues of worldwide concern; and interpret speeches and translate documents into the Organization's official languages.
The Secretariat has a staff of about 8,900 under the regular budget drawn from some 170 countries. As international civil servants, staff members and the Secretary-General answer to the United Nations alone for their activities, and take an oath not to seek or receive instructions from any Government or outside authority. Under the Charter, each Member State undertakes to respect the exclusively international character of the responsibilities of the Secretary-General and the staff and to refrain from seeking to influence them improperly in the discharge of their duties.
The United Nations, while headquartered in New York, maintains a significant presence in Addis Ababa, Bangkok, Beirut, Geneva, Nairobi, Santiago and Vienna, and has offices all over the world.
The Secretary – General
Ban Ki-moon of the Republic of Korea, the eighth Secretary-General of the United Nations, brings to his post 37 years of service both in government and on the global stage. At the time of his election as Secretary-General, Mr. Ban was his country’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade. His long tenure with the ministry included postings in New Delhi, Washington D.C. and Vienna, and responsibility for a variety of portfolios, including Foreign Policy Advisor to the President, Chief National Security Advisor to the President, Deputy Minister for Policy Planning and Director-General of American Affairs. Throughout this service, his guiding vision was that of a peaceful Korean peninsula, playing an expanding role for peace and prosperity in the region and the wider world.


Sources :
Official Website of the United Nations
International Law by Isagani Cruz
Pub. International Law Subject (class discussion) by Atty. Ethelbert Ouano and inputs of my classmates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Secretariat