ILP <> OD.AR

ILP (INTERNATIONAL LAW AND POLICY)

cocoo will challenge SNs'(sovereign nations)
 convention agreements, if there was no true consent, thus no freedom of contract 
 [situational monopoly]. eg: a person/sn 'choice' not to be free 

cocoo challenges uk gov decision to recognise/refusetorecognise, a gov or state

cocoo v SNs's laws/policies that breach clcp/wpi/il

COCOO JR OF ACT/DECIS that affect the rights of other states/indivs..
..eg uk decis/act to continue to allow offshore jurisdictions

<> cocoo: claims that the contracting [banks/firm/sn], should not have entered agreements with those that did
not disclose bos.. thus failing ddp....thus disrupting clp, elp, alp, ilp

two types of international liability: 

a. intl. civil liability: redress for victims (claimants) paid by states responsible (defendants) 
[eg echr jurisdiction]

b. intl. criminal liability: victims cannot be parties, only witnesses. ICC jurisdiction.

the doctrine of ‘no (sn) recognition, no existence’:

Non-recognition may take place when norms on the use of force, have
 been violated or when regional treaty obligations have been disregarded. 
In addition, there is a duty not to recognize situations resulting from the illegal
 use of force 
UK caselaw: two exceptions: 

1/ the ‘delegated authority exception’: 
acts of an unrecognized state can be recognised, if done pursuant to powers delegated by a recognized 
sovereign authority.

2/ the ‘private acts exception’[= acts of everyday occurrence = acts regulating 
the day to day affairs of the people within the territory, are private

the effective control and the legitimacy doctrine ECLD: [The most important]:

gov is not a legal person, but is the state's agent ....thus, for recognition (of a new gov) to be lawful, 
other nations need to make sure this agency is exercised with effective control and legitimacy.
 
EG: the conflict in Libya in 2011, the recognition of LYBIA by some States, while the Gadaffi regime was 
still in control over parts of the territory, is not supported by the ECLD....
Thus, the new gov's acts/decisions were void, until
gadaffi regime fell completely.  

<>cocoo: was a recognition/rejection lawful?....contracts void, etc.

uk courts: an entity (state) unrecognized by the UK government,
 is treated by the courts simply as if it did not exist: both the unrecognized government/state, and its 
acts are a nullity ....exception: 1966 case of Carl Zeiss v Rayner & Keeler ....The defendants alleged that
 CarlZeiss had no standing to sue, since the administrative act under which Carl Zeiss had been constituted
 was an act of East Germany (GDR), not recognized (as a sn) by the UK: . While the Court of Appeal ruled
 lack of standing, the House of Lords gave standing, on the basis that ussr (sn) had 
lawfully delegated to the GDR

diff:  state creation: (needs proof); state continuity (presumed); state extinction (needs proof) 

eg: the general international rejection of Somaliland as a new state, 
is based on the presumption of continuity of somalia.

a SN has the right to regulate its own domestic affairs...But what are "domestic affairs?" 
SNs do NOT have the  right to decide which are its own domestic affairs:

SR is limited by international law, in particular by the pple of international responsibility and justice. 
[= a State's act/decis wrt a SR, are illegal, if affect the properandjust rights of other nations/individuals]

-in case of conflict between domestic and international law, courts and govs are bound by the domestic law....
but this does not mean that domestic law is superior to international law. no domestic law may alter international law.
....domestic law is not a defense to claims for IL violations 

-States sometimes impose their interpretation of IL upon weaker states... but they have no right to do so.... 
and in controversies between states of equal strength, this attempt (to impose IL interpretations) usually fails

eg-reciprocal right of states to protect their nationals/firms abroad, to demand redress for wrongs caused by 
a foreign state where they are domiciled 

eg-a state has no right to choose/alter a government, to a gov notoriously opposed to the intl order
 [eg dictatorship]

eg-a state has no right to extend/contract its territory by purchase/cession, if 
could affect the safety/peace of other states.

eg. the refusal of the Usa to recognize the ussr

eg. Italy, by an act of parliament in 1912, created a state monopoly of
the life insurance business, and expropriated the business of
foreign private companies without indemnifying them. Some foreign governments protested on the 
basis  that a state does not have a right to deprive aliens of their property rights and invoke 
as a defense its SN on domestic affairs.

eg. Uruguay passed a similar law,,but the protests of Great Britain and France were such as to
cause the Uruguayan legislature to rescind its action and abolish the monopoly

eg: usa issued a protest to the government of Romania, for enacting a mining law confiscatory of an American oil company. 

eg. france imposed nationality upon the subjects of other 
states against their will

                             AR (NORTH STEALS FROM SOUTH) <> OD (SOUTH STEALS FROM NORTH)

TRACEPublic: to TRACE BOS

share lists of politically exposed persons (PEPs) and corruption evidence 

present a statement of policy reforms to world governments, through the UNCAC Coalition

new leaks ...eg. The Panama and Paradise Papers, following the Swiss and Luxleaks investigations

a new [other than netzero] 2030 TL HAS BEEN SET: 
''the main target under Goal, by 2030, is to significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows [iffs/iafs], 
strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets, obliging States to work towards strengthening the system'' 
COCOO JR V SN'S FAILURE TO comply/UNLAWFULDECISION, WRT TO THE new 2030 tl. 
iow: cocoo will copy the strategies followed by ngos v implementation of netzero 2030 GOAL..... 

UNODC is the UN secretariat against Corruption...with its sister agency UNCTAD, UNODC measures iffs.   

cocoo to request a state, to ask another state, to immediately freeze corr assets…and then to NCC: 

[confiscation=forfeiture] requires a final (crim) corr conviction, in the country where the assets were stolen…. this is so hard, that is best to use an NCC, which only needs civil procedures.   The UN Convention against Corruption, (UNCAC) is the key int. legal instrument for inter-state AR 

ods = debts incurred and used, knowingly, against the interests of the nation

ods are not repayable, unless, and to the extent, that real advantages were obtained