View Single Post
  #22  
Old Friday, February 08, 2013
Fassi's Avatar
Fassi Fassi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Islamabad, Hafizabad
Posts: 469
Thanks: 13
Thanked 753 Times in 324 Posts
Fassi is a glorious beacon of lightFassi is a glorious beacon of lightFassi is a glorious beacon of lightFassi is a glorious beacon of lightFassi is a glorious beacon of lightFassi is a glorious beacon of light
Default

International Law MCQs, 2004


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tassawur View Post
(9) Contiguous Zone is limited to a maximum of
(a) 25 miles (24 nautical mile )
(b) 50 miles
(c) 12 miles
(d) None of these
Option "(c) 12 Miles" and "(d) None of These (24 miles)" are right answers as far as I think

"Contiguous Zone is an area of water not exceeding 24 NMI from the baseline. It thus extends 12nm from the edge of the territorial sea."


Though in the above said question neither BASELINE nor TERRITORIAL SEA are mentioned so we may pick 12 miles as answer that is Contiguous Zone from the edge of Territorial Sea.

Hope you got it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tassawur View Post
(12) Culvo Clause means
(a) A state can intervene on behalf of its nationals
(b) A state can’t intervene on behalf of its nationals
(c) An alien agrees not to seek the diplomatic protection of his own state
(d) None of these
Right answer is
(c) An alien agrees not to seek the diplomatic protection of his own state

because Calvo Clause is a provision included generally in international investment agreements under which foreign investors waive their right to be protected by their national laws and accept the jurisdiction of the courts of the host country (where the investment is located or made). Reference: Calvo Clause

For further explanation, plz visit below links

Calvo Clause

Calvo Doctrine


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tassawur View Post
(14) Eruption of war terminates
(a) All treaties
(b) No treaty
(c) Only political treaties
(d) None of these
The correct answer is
(b) No treaty

because War may suspend the treaties but neither they are invalidated nor terminated and not it is mentioned in Law of Treaties or UN Charter. Moreover, violation of treaties doesn't mean termination of treaties as LoC has been violated a lot of time b/w Pakistan and India but it is not terminated or invalidated.

In addition to above, Indus Water Treaty 1960, Tashkant Pact etc are not effected by host of wars between Pakistan and India it is no doubt true that they are violated but as I quoted earlier violation doesn't amount to termination or invalidation.

Effects of Armed Conflicts (war) on Treaties

The Effect Of Armed Conflict On Treaties: An Examination Of Practice


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tassawur View Post
(20) Diplomatic staff enjoys complete immunity from
(a) Civil Jurisdiction
(b) Criminal Jurisdiction
(c) Both
(d) None of these
Please confirm me. I think its (b) Criminal Jurisdiction but not sure.


Regards

F@SsI
__________________
Apni Matti Pay Hi Chalnay Ka Saleeqa Seekho
Sang-e-Marmar Py Chalo Gy To Phisal Jao Gy
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Fassi For This Useful Post:
mudasr (Sunday, January 28, 2018)