Loss of legal rights and privileges

Another method of enforcing legal obligations is to ensure that any violation of law results in the loss of corresponding legal rights and privileges. For example, if State A violates the terms of a commercial treaty with State B, the latter may be entitled to rescind the whole treaty or suspend performance of the obligations it owes to State A. Of course, this is no hardship to State A if its whole purpose is to avoid the obligations contained in the treaty, but the loss of legal rights or privileges may go further. Thus, on a bilateral level, there may be termination of diplomatic relations, restriction of economic aid or cancellation of supply agreements. In 1982, for example, the UK broke diplomatic relations with Argentina after its invasion of the Falkland Islands, and in 1979/80 the USA froze Iranian assets after the unlawful seizure of its embassy in Tehran. Similarly, a state's unlawful action may cause the community at large to impose penalties. Again, this can take various forms, includ­ing the expulsion or suspension from inter-governmental organisations, as when the International Atomic Energy Agency suspended Israel after the latter's unlawful attack on an Iraqi nuclear facility in 1981. Likewise, when Iranian students occu­pied the US embassy in Tehran, several Western industrialised powers cut back on their diplomatic contacts and in 1992 the European Community as a whole imposed trading restrictions on Serbia and Montenegro. Again, in 1995 Nigeria was suspended from the Commonwealth as a result of its violation of human rights. More strikingly, in 1999/2000 the EU imposed limited penalties (now lifted) on Austria - itself an EU member - following the election of what was seen as an extremist government, although whether any breach of 'international law' had occurred is not clear.

These methods of enforcement should not be underestimated for they can cause embarrassment and hardship to the delinquent state. Of course, such methods are overlaid with political and economic considerations and they cannot be regarded as a wholly trustworthy mechanism for the enforcement of legal obligations. They are often more appropriate for dealing with violations of international good practice rather than law and, of course, a state may choose to ignore a blatant violation of international law if it is in its interests to do so. However, on the whole, the loss of legal rights and privileges can have a greater practical effect on a delinquent state than overt displays of force, especially in today's highly interdependent inter­national community.

The nature of international law and the international system

Date: 2014-12-21; view: 1126