Unit 2 International Law & International Legal Issues
PART 1 → Opening IL Fact Pattern
PART 2 → The Challenge of Controlling State Conduct Internationally
PART 3 → The CORE 4 International Legal Principles
- The Doctrine of Universal Jurisdiction
- The Law of Peacemaking
- The Defence of Nationals
PART 4 → 3 International Case Studies (As Chiefly Interpreted by Canada)
The "Original Position" Thought Experiment Fairness Through Self-Interest = Universal Human Rights
This thought experiment was created by the American philosopher John Rawls. He asks us to imagine ourselves in a situation in which we know nothing of our true lives — we are behind a “veil of ignorance” that prevents us from knowing the political system under which we live or the laws that are in place. Nor do we know anything about psychology, economics, biology, and other sciences.
Along with a group of similarly situation-blind people, we are asked, in this original position, to review a comprehensive list of classic forms of justice drawn from various traditions of social and political philosophy. We are then given the task of selecting which system of justice we feel would best suit our needs in the absence of any information about our true selves and the situation we may actually be in in the real world.
So, for example, what if you came back to “real life” to find out that you live in a shanty town in India? Or a middle class neighborhood in Norway? What if you’re a developmentally disabled person? A wealthy elite? A Syrian citizen internally displaced by the on-going war? Or for our purposes, A Syrian who suffered from the use of internationally banned chemical weapons launched by the Syrian President against his own people? (Or as was proposed in a paper, “All Together Now,” a different species?)
to Rawls, we would all likely end up picking something that guarantees
equal basic rights and liberties to secure our interests as free and
equal citizens, and to pursue a wide range of conceptions of the common
good. He also speculated that we’d likely choose a system that ensures
universal human rights, both negative and positive rights (such as fair
educational and employment opportunities). In short, we would all choose to maximize justice for the least favoured persons in a country or the world.
INTERVENTION # 1 → Counter -- Terrorism
Y = Yes, IL is Ineffective / IL is a Failure
N = No, IL is Effective / IL Works
EACH GROUP HAS 7 MINUTES TO OPEN, MAKE THEIR ARGUMENTS, & CLOSE (30 seconds to open, 30 seconds to close, and 6 minutes (2 minutes x 3 group members) to make your arguments using supporting points, research, and evidence). Each group will have 2 minutes to plan rebuttal for the free debate. The free debate will be 4 minutes in length.
CASE STUDY 2 → THE SOUTH CHINA SEA DISPUTE
PART 5 → Diplomatic Relations
PART 5 → Diplomatic Relations
LANDMARK CASE → The Tehran Hostages Case
Diplomatic Immunity Cases