[GA] ICJ Case #002

[Hollie]

THE GLOBAL ASSEMBLY (EST 2010)​

INTERNATIONAL COURT REFERRAL​ SECRETARY GENERAL​ COURT LOCATION​ # SERIAL NUMBER​ Mr. Gregory Figueroa​ The Hague, Netherlands​ ICJ​

​ [REFERRAL MEMBER]: Mr. Figueroa [DATE]: 26/09/2018 [THE DEFENDANT]: The Celestial Empire, Government [ALLEGED OFFENCES]: Violation of Maritime Laws of the Sea, Adopted Legislation of 2011 [DATE OF ALLEGED OFFENCES]: 10 - 23rd August, 2012 (08th September - 26th September, 2018) [STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE]: Exhibit #A, Transcripts and Photographic Evidence of Vessels Exhibit #B, Chinese Deployment in Disputed Territorial Seas Exhibit #C, Extract from the Global Resolution [THIS IS A STATEMENT OF TRUTH]: [X] ​ [SIGNED BY]: ​ ​

​

THE GLOBAL ASSEMBLY (EST 2010)​

INTERNATIONAL COURT SUMMONS​ SECRETARY GENERAL​ COURT LOCATION​ # SERIAL NUMBER​ Mr. Gregory Figueroa​ The Hague, Netherlands​ ICJ​

​ [THE DEFENDANT]: The Celestial Empire, Government @Centurius [CASE NUMBER]: #002 [DATE]: 26/09/2018 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE DEFENDANT, APPEARS BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL COURT ON [24/08/2012] (27th September, 2018) FOR A HEARING IN REFERENCE TO ALLEGED OFFENCES. FAILURE TO ATTEND THIS SUMMONS WILL RESULT IN A JUDGEMENT BY DEFAULT MADE AGAINST YOU. [SIGNED BY]: ​ ​

 

[John]

Samuel Alito, would arrive in the chambers, awaiting for the rest of the judges and the accused to arrive.

 

[Dutchy]

Justice Anne Cuijpers would enter the chamber and take her place, waiting for her remaining colleagues to arrive.

 

[Odinson]

Justice Rolfe Olhouser from Norway arrived at the chamber and took a seat next to the Dutch justice.

 

[Centurius]

​

At the designated time and place a likely unexpected type of person would identify himself as representative of the Celestial Empire. Harvey Specter, an originally American lawyer working for the the Linklaters office in Hong Kong had been retained by the Imperial government due to his expertise with the American and English legal systems and as such the likely required procedure in the International Court of Justice. Together with the rest of the Linklaters office and the other Big Six firms they had all been hired to make the Celestial case before the world. After receiving the required permissions Harvey and the rest of a small army of lawyers that accompanied him would enter the court where the judges were assembling. Once all judges were there and the defence was given the word he would address the judges.

"Your honours, on behalf of the Celestial Empire I wish to introduce the following motions. First of all I motion for the justice from Vietnam to recuse himself from these proceedings. Vietnam has shown a history of hostile intent towards the Celestial Empire and her predecessor governments, furthermore in the Global Assembly session it has become obvious that both the plaintiff and Vietnam have extensively cooperated on the South China Sea prior to the current events. The Celestial Empire does not believe it can receive a fair hearing while a judge with such baggage is on the case. Second, I motion for this case to be dismissed. The International Court of Justice is not empowered to make laws, based on the existing binding resolutions and other sources of international law there is no case against my client. This case should never have been introduced and is a waste of the court's time and taxpayer money. Third, I motion for the court to initiate proceedings against the plaintiff for malicious prosecution. It has become clear that this case serves as a convenient ploy for the Federal Republic of the Philippines to gain a strategic advantage in future negotiations concerning the South China Sea. A court of law is not the place for this, only multilateral negotiations are." Harvey concluded before sitting down again.

 

[John]

Justice Alito would speak, his words clear. "I believe I speak for all members of this court when I say that my colleague from Vietnam will not be excused, as this is a matter of International proportions and judgement will not be based on historical or current tensions between the accused and either one or more judges. Now, I'll move onto your second motion, you are absolutely correct in saying that the ICJ is not empowered to make laws, however, we are empowered to uphold the laws set down by the Global Assembly, which is the basis of why we are here today. A case has been written up against your client and we will see fit to provide the right judgement, based on the evidence at hand and what is said in this courtroom. And thirdly, I can not say much on that as it is not solely my decision whether or not proceedings are brought against the plaintiff."

 

[Centurius]

"With all due respect Justice Alito, none of these motions can be dismissed out of hand and will require consultation with your fellow justices. I must also strongly urge that the credibility of this very court is on trial just as much as my client is. Denying my client a fair and impartial hearing endangers the very foundation of international law" Harvey added.

 

[John]

"Of course I can not. Which is why at the beginning I stated 'I BELIEVE I speak for everyone' and of course, any member of this court can intervene and say elsewise"

 

[Odinson]

Justice Rolfe Olhouser waited until Justice Alito was done speaking, and then nodded over to him, signaling that he agreed with what he said. He knocked his clenched fist on the wooden bench before him three times. "Counselor, you are out of order. We have not begun this session because the other justices have yet to arrive. I have taken note of your motions out of professional respect, but we will not discuss them further until we are called to order after the other justices have made themselves present."

One of Rolfe's legal clerks went behind the bench and handed him his gavel which he had used as Chief Justice of the Norwegian Supreme Court. He set the gavel beside some of the notes on his desk and began reading through them as he waited for the other justices to arrive.

 

[HeadlessSeeker]

Justice Nguyen Van Nhat would arrive in the chambers taking a seat after their arrival. Seeing that a conversation was already underway he would listen. As no as transcript has not been written down he would be unable to find out what has been discussed so far. Now they waited for the hearing to begin or for someone to bring him up to speed.

 

[JJSmithJr]

Justice Mary Odili would arrive in the Chambers and take her seat on the bench. She would listen alongside her colleagues to whatever conversations were going on before the official opening of the hearing. She assumed someone would take a transcript if anything of importance had occurred.

 

[Odinson]

Once Justice Odili walked in, Olhouser hit his gavel on the wooden bar before him three times. "I am calling this first meeting of the International Court of Justice to order. The other justices and I have previously agreed that I will serve as the presiding officer of the court for this case. The court reporter will transcribe everything said and communicated here to the official record. Justice Bonadio will be joining us shortly, and will have access to the transcript."

Olhouser briefly turned to the justices on either side of him, "For those of you who just arrived, the counsel for the Celestial Empire proposed three motions. The first motion was that Justice Van Nhat of Vietnam recuse himself, the second motion was that this case be dismissed, and the third motion was for the ICJ to initiate proceedings against the plaintiff for malicious prosecution. I think my secretary has the exact wording of what was proposed..."

Olhouser's secretary brought up an exact transcript of what Mister Specter had proposed and gave it to each justice, plus Mister Specter. Also included were the back and forth between Justice Alito and Mister Specter.

"Our first order of business is to address these three motions. I myself agree with Justice Alito. I would like us to dismiss all three of these motions. However, I would like to especially underscore that I do not think Justice Nguyen Van Nhat needs to recuse himself. In the time I've been able to interact with Justice Van Nhat, and what I've read about him in the press, I have no reason to see why we should assume he would not be able to be impartial or that he would not be capable of putting his national allegiance aside to make a fair judgement."

 

[Naio90]

Santiago Bonadio would arrive and excuse himself for the delay, argumenting he was reviewing the ongoing situation in Bosnia/Turkey. He would begin catching up.

 

[Naio90]

After a firt review, Jugde Bonadio would ask for the floor:

"First of all, sorry for my delay. I hope I haven't missed anything beyond what i've just read in the transcripts.

With that said, regarding the issue of the recusing of our colleague from Vietnam, the decision is entirely up to him, and the court shouldn't force anyone to act on this matter. It could be interpreted that due to his country of origin he might have some kind of connection, but the decision is entirely his.

After that, there is a subsequent matter that we should all have in mind when analyzing this issue, and its that the Law of the Sea cannot be cited and interpreted in this dispute. In Chapter IV, article 3 it clearly says that "Disputed Waters are left outside of the present Law, until the Coastal States disputing it resolve it." Given the Spaltry Islands and the surrounding waters are currently in Dispute among different nations and they have not reached any kind of agreement, the Law of the Sea cannot be applied upon it.

This actually contradicts the second part of that article: "No military vessels from the coastal states involved in the dispute, with the exception of passage, are authorized to operate within the disputed zone.". Phrase 1 of article 3 says we cannot apply this law to Dispute areas, therefore, phrase 2 of article 3 is void in this case.

I see a problem in the lawmaking, but its done and we cannot change at this very moment, now that we are aware of the loophole.

With the Law of the Sea out of the picture the alledged offense cited by the claimant is invalid and there would be no case... Meaning that an entirely new approach should be made."

 

[Centurius]

At this stage Harvey would ask for the floor. "The Defence agrees with the assessment by the honourable Justice Bonadio and emphasizes its motion to dismiss. This matter should be resolved by the members of the Global Assembly in new proper legislation that leaves no room for doubt and grants all affected parties the time to modify policies based on existing legislation"

 

[JJSmithJr]

Justice Mary Odili would make several notes as Justice Bonadio spoke, she would also carefully note the defense statement. She would then speak.

"I have several points I would like to address, firstly it is of my opinion that since the topic for discussion here today is the violation of a specific GA resolution and not the debate of the ownership of the Spratly Islands, it is my opinion that a recusal is certainly not necessary in this case, of course my honorable colleague from Vietnam may recuse themselves if they so wish, but in my opinion it is not legally necessary nor will it have any impact on the court's determination here.

Now as to the question of the violation of the resolution itself. We have several things we must take into account, first as my honorable colleague from Argentina pointed out is the specific wording of the Resolution itself, particularly, these words:

"Disputed Waters are left outside of the present Law, until the Coastal States disputing it resolve it. No military vessels from the coastal states involved in the dispute, with the exception of passage, are authorized to operate within the disputed zone.".

It is my opinion that this passage clearly relays the intention that this Court is not to arbitrate who controls disputed territory, that dispute must be left to those disputing it. It also clearly exempts these disputed waters from the rest of the resolution and international law, in this I agree with my colleague from Argentina, however, I must disagree that there is obviously no infraction.

The very clause that exempts these disputed waters also includes only one other legally binding declaration:

"No military vessels from the coastal states involved in the dispute, with the exception of passage, are authorized to operate within the disputed zone.".

With this I have the following questions for the defendant:

"What was the purpose of the military vessels in question being deployed through the disputed waters?"

"Do you dispute that they were in fact military vessels?"

"Is there documentation regarding this deployment that could be made available to the Court?"

The above questions would be distributed to the defendants and the other Justices of the Court in paper copy as well.

 

[Centurius]

"To answer the first question, I will answer the second question first. The government of the Celestial Empire holds that vessels even if registered under the Navy but if used under command of the Coast Guard do not constitute military vessels but instead police vessels. Lacking an internationally accepted definition of what constitutes military, the Celestial Empire also holds that this is left up to the interpretation of sovereign states. After all all sovereign rights are reserved unless explicitly surrendered to another organization. So yes, my client does dispute that these are military vessels.

Then to answer your first question, as these vessels were not military vessels there were no military vessels in the area and as such they could not have a purpose. The police vessels in the area however were there for the purpose of piracy prevention and law enforcement.

The Celestial Empire can share with the Court the same documents it has with the Global Assembly. For what my client believes to be obvious reasons we cannot provide unredacted files in a public court of law due to compelling national security reasons. The documents included are copies of official Celestial documents ordering the People's Liberation Army Navy to engage in policing operations under command of the Coast Guard as well as logs from the Captains of both ships showing the same, its own copies of radio communications and a brief from the Minister of Public Security outlining the extent of PLA policing operations in more detail." Harvey replied, motioning for one of his other chairs to present carbon copies. "That being said, I and my client insist that answers in these proceedings and the providing of documentation cannot be construed as acceptance of this court's jurisdiction on this matter and we stand by the motions calling upon Justice Nguyen Van Nhat to recuse himself, the case to be dismissed due to the lack of underlying international law and for malicious prosecution proceedings to be brought against the Federal Republic of the Philippines. While the current case may not concern ownership of the Spraty Islands, a negative ruling in this case provides the Socialist Republic of Vietnam with a strategic advantage in the South China Sea. Even the appearance of a conflict of interest would be considered significant enough in any court of law."

 

[HeadlessSeeker]

"Motion denied for recusing myself." Justice Nguyen Van Nhat would state firmly before continuing on."Now then..." he would say with a slight pause."Chapter 4, Article 3 states that Disputed Waters are left outside of the present Law, until the Coastal States disputing it resolve it. No military vessels from the coastal states involved in the dispute, with the exception of passage, are authorized to operate within the disputed zone." he would say."I do not see anything wrong or contradicting within this article. The reasons for this are that the correct interpretation of the first sentence 'Disputed Waters are left outside of the present Law' is that it simply says that Chapter 2 cannot be applied to that zone. A disputed zone cannot be defined yet that it is a Territorial water (as defined in Chapter 2 par 2) of a claimant, or this contiguous zone (Chapter 2 par 3), or its EEZ (Chapter 2 paragraph 4). hence it is still “left outside” the Law since the demarcations are still disputed and are still yet to be resolved by the rival claimants. That said: the 1st sentence of Chapter 4 paragraph 3 simply says that disputed zones are left outside the Law (particularly Chapter 2) until the zone is already a non-dispute. Now the next sentence of chapter 4 paragraph 3 (no military vessel allowed in the disputed zone except for the innocent right of passage) does not contradict the first sentence of chapter 4 paragraph 3. It is simply a “safeguard” or an “insurance clause” that rival claimant must resolve the dispute over the disputed islands peacefully, without military escalation. Based on all of this the Celestial Empire is in violation of chapter 4 paragraph 3 for sending military vessels, not as innocent right of passage, but for actual government-sanctioned operation."

 

[Dutchy]

Anne Cuijpers would wait her turn, patiently listening to the opinions of the other Justices "I can conclude that this document does have loopholes, errors and untouched issues. Which is why I call upon the Global Assembly to rapidly review the resolution, make the necessary amendments to improve the treaty and ensure these issues are tackled."

"However, in light of this case, I see that there is no contradiction when it comes to article 3: 'Disputed Waters are left outside of the present Law, until the Coastal States disputing it resolve it. No military vessels from the coastal states involved in the dispute, with the exception of passage, are authorized to operate within the disputed zone.' Since it is stated in the same sentence, rather than a different article which would make it contradicting, the basis of excluding military vessels from disputed waters remains valid. The article is meant to ensure that contesting parties do not use military force to influence the dispute, which must be solved through dialogue."

"As for the Celestial Empire claiming that their People's Liberation Army Navy warship is not a military vessel because it is acting under the umbrella of the Coast Guard, is a statement I cannot agree with. A Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank does not stop being a military vehicle if used in police operations. A military vessel remains a military vessel regardless of it's assigned mission."

 

[Centurius]

"If that is the case, the Defence would like to ask the court where international law provides for what differentiates military from police. No provision in the Law of the Sea or any other binding resolution provides for this definition. Neither does any piece of active international legislation. Where no law exists, the reserved sovereignty of the sovereign state is supreme. The defence also would like to have it on the record that it protests the refusal of the justice from Vietnam to recuse himself" Harvey responded to the Vietnamese Justice before turning to the Dutch Justice. "You raise an interesting comparison. Is it the position of the Court that a certain vehicle constitutes a military vehicle regardless of its use the Defence must wonder why the Federal Republic of the Philippines is not here with us as a defendant. After all they themselves have used a frigate to intercept the Celestial vessels. Are they not then also in violation? I also must ask your honour where in international law a Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank or any tank is defined as a law." He added before turning to the Court at large again. "Nulla poena sine lege. No penalty without a law. This is a fundamental legal principle. This Court has acknowledged that the Law of the Sea is flawed, it has so far proven unable to find any legislation defining what constitutes a military vehicle. The drawn out Global Assembly session failed to establish such a definition. If we go by the interpretation of Justice Cuipers, the accuser themselves are guilty of the fact. The only proper action by this Court is to dismiss with prejudice or acquit my client."