THE MAI TACAO TEMPLE

A

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

THE PEACE PALACE

THE HAGUE, THE NETHERLANDS

THE 2008 PHILIP C. JESSUP INTERNATIONAL LAW

MOOT COURT COMPETITION

CASE CONCERNING

MAI TACAO TEMPLE

THE REPUBLIC OF APROPHE

(APPLICANT)

v.

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF RANTANIA

(RESPONDENT)

---------------------------------------------------

MEMORAIL FOR THE APPLICANT

---------------------------------------------------

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ..............................................................................................................

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES .........................................................................................................

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ............................................................................................

QUESTIONS PRESENTED .........................................................................................................

STATEMENT OF FACTS ............................................................................................................

SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS ......................................................................................................

PLEADINGS AND AUTHORITIES ............................................................................................

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Republic of Aprophe ("Aprophe") and the Federal Republic of Rantania ("Rantania") have submitted by special agreement their differences concerning Mai Tacao temple, and transmitted a copy thereof to the Registrar of the International Court of Justice (“I.C.J.”) pursuant to article 40(1) of the Statute of the I.C.J. (“Statute”). Therefore, Aprophe and Rantania have accepted the jurisdiction of the I.C.J. pursuant to Article 36(1) of the Statute.

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

I.

Whether the Court may exercise jurisdiction over all claims in this case, since the Adler's government is the rightful government the Republic of Aprophe.

II.

Whether Rantania is responsible for the illegal use of force against Aprophe in the context of Operation Uniting for Democracy.

III.

Whether since the exercise jurisdiction by Rantanian courts in the case of Turbando, et al., v. The Republic of Aprophe violated international law, Rantania may not permit its officials to execute the judgment in that case.

IV.

Whether Aprophe's destruction of a building of a Mai Tacao Temple did not violate

international law.

STATEMENTS OF FACTS

PARTIES OF THE CASE

Aprophe is a developing state with a population of about 50 million people. Federal Republic of Rantania is a developing industrial economy state with very close diplomatic and trade relations with Lamarthia, Verland and Pellegrinia.

THE MAI TACAO TEMPLE

The Mai Tacao temple is a complex of six small stone buildings and one central temple. There was no settled boundary between Aprophe and Rantania at the time of Aprophe’s founding. As a result, there were many conflicts, concerning Mai Tacao temple. The most recent of them began in 1962. From 1962 to 1964, the Aprophian army secured and pacified the Mai Tacao site, disarming and rounding up Rantanian villagers who lived near by. Some Rantanian peasants were forced to labor to provide goods and services to the army, but these so called “military internees” were provided with three meals a day and were lodged in barracks near the labor sites by Aprophian army. Conflict resulted in Peace Agreement (the1965 Treaty). In accordance to the Treaty’s Arbitral tribunal’s decision in 1968 established a border placing the Mai Tacao site 10 kilometers within Aprophe.

EASTERN NATIONS INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION (“ENI” AND APROPHE)

In 1990 Rantania, Lamarthia, Pellegrinia, Verland created the ENI, regional organization for economic cooperation and political its among its members. In November 2000, Mig Green was elected as a President of Aprophe. In his intention to ENI membership Green restricted rights of Aprophe’s historically strong labor units and financial and tax incentives for businesses of ENI members. Aprophe acceded Eastern Nations Charter in 2005 but exempted it would be subject to the compulsory jurisdiction of the Eastern Nations Court only once it achieved membership in the ENI. These measures resulted to labor unions’, opposition national parties’ and national groups’ strikes and demonstrations.

TURBANDO CASE

In November 2001, ILSA instituted proceedings against Aprophe in a local Aprophian court on behalf of few former Rantanian military internees, including Richard Turbando. Court dismissed claim in light of six-year statute of limitations. Than ILSA initiated similar proceedings in Rantanian court. This court dismissed the case on two grounds: Article XV of the 1965 Treaty that waived all claims concerning recent Mai Tacao war and doctrine of foreign sovereign immunity. Than ILSA filled a petition against Rantania before the Eastern Nations Court that approved ILSA and the Supreme Court of Rantania had to remand the case for trial, it awarded the individual plaintiffs damages ranging in equivalent of US$75,000 to US$$225,000. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Aprophe denounced decision of the Rantanian court as “unacceptable violation of Aprophe’s immunity and as a flagrant violation of the 1965 Treaty, whereby all claims in this regard had been waived”. Despite this fact at the time of initiating air strikes against Aprophian territory bailiffs seized non-diplomatic property of Aprophe in the equivalent of US$10,000,000.

GREEN’S FLIGHT AND ADLER AS “INTERIM PRESIDENT”

The outcome of the lawsuit strengthened opposition to the Green’s pro-ENI program, nationwide strikes called for Green’s resignation. Despite these facts Aprophian Office for National Statistics indicated 60% citizens’ approval of the government’s efforts to join ENI. On January 10, 2011 two months before new president’s elections Green invoked emergency powers to postpone elections for one year (допустимо ли так трактовать??).He also ordered to begin armed patrols in major urban areas.15 January General Paige Adler described March elections as “an attempt to subvert the will of the people.” She also concluded that army will not take up arms against their fellow Aprophians. Green immediately fired Green but police ordered to arrest Adler were turned away by armed soldiers. Then army units entered the Presidents Palace. Green and his ministers flew to Rantania and Adler had to proclaim herself “interim president”. She immediately assured citizens of Aprophe that “new elections [would] be called soon” and that “all civil rights and liberties [would] be respected”. Adler’s government successfully established order in over 90% of Aprophian territory.

RANTANIAN ACTIONS

However 800 members of army’s National Homeland Brigade remained loyal to Green and established bases in two villages. Adler sent some armed forces to arrest pro-Greens forces but fighting continued for three weeks since 20 January, 2011. On January 22, Rantania introduced a resolution before the ENI about situation in Aprophe. Then Council unanimously passed the resolution which recognized Green as a lawful president of Aprophe. Despite this fact at the date of submission of this Compromis 14 nations recognize Adler’s government. On January 23 Adler declared, “this resolution is an unjustified interference in the internal affairs of Aprophe”. At the same day Aprophe denounced Eastern Nations Chapter. The Operation Uniting for Democracy that consisted of air strikes against Aprophian territory was launched by ENI on February 18, 2011. At Rantania’s suggestion a Rantanian national, Otaz Brewscha headed the campaign. This operation was conducted almost entirely by Rantania. OUD resulted in destruction of 12 military installations and death of 50 Aprophian soldiers. Independent military think-tank reported on February 25 “The Aprophian military cannot fight back and it cannot defend itself”

Date: 2015-12-11; view: 1162