I.

THE STATE OF MODUS SHOULD SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF

THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

It is humbly submitted that the state of Modus should submit to the jurisdiction of the

international court of justice because [A] it preaches Kritistans sovereignty, [B] It goes against

the principal of Right to Return, [C] and because the evacuation was illegal in nature.

A. MODUS HAS BREACHED THE SOVEREIGNTY OF KRITISTAN

Every recognised state have sovereign power vested in it, Sovereignty is the ultimate power,

authority and/or jurisdiction over a people and a territory. No other person, group, tribe or state

can tell a sovereign entity what to do with its land and/or people. A sovereign entity can decide

and administer its own laws, can determine the use of its land and can do pretty much as it

pleases, free of external influence.1 No other State can have formal political authority within

that State. Therefore, sovereignty is closely associated with the concept of political

independence. 2 Since a State has sovereignty over its territory, the entry into its territory by

the armed forces of another State without consent is a prima facie breach of international law.3

Among the attributes of sovereignty is the right to exclude foreigners from entering the

territory, which is traditionally referred to as the right to exclude aliens. 4

The principle of non-interference is that sovereign states shall not intervene in each others

internal affairs.5 It is the general principle of contemporary international law that the non-

interference in each others internal affairs is based on the respect for states sovereignty and

1
Bartelson, Jens. 1995. A Genealogy of Sovereignty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2
Bierstecker, Thomas J., and Cynthia Weber, eds. 1996. State Sovereignty as Social Construct.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3
Article 2(4) and 2(7) of Charter of the United Nations.
4
Introduction to International Law, Robert Beckman, Dagmar Butte. ILSA
5
Chen, Yifeng. 2013. On the principle of non-interference in contemporary international law.
Beijing: Peking University Press
territorial integration, which governs the relations between states in regard to their rights and

obligations. It has been established as the general principle of international law or customary

law in compliance with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.6 Various cases in the

International Court of Justice have established this principle that there shall be no interference

in the internal affairs of the state in any way by neighbouring state.7

Applying the above mentioned principles to the present set of fact, the council would humbly

like to submit that the secret evacuation operation undertaken by modus which was done

without the permissions of Kritistan would constitute as a breach of sovereignty of Kritistan

and would be a violation of International Law.

B. MODUS HAS VIOLATED THE RIGHT TO RETURN

The Right of Return is an inalienable right sacredly held by all refugees and entitles them to

return at any time to their homes. This Right can never be diminished by the passage of time

or by any treaty unless the refugees themselves declare otherwise, or forfeit that Right

altogether, but under no duress of any kind.8

International Law considers agreements between occupiers and occupied as null and void if

they deprive civilians of their right to return to their homes, of their right to repatriation and of

their right to restitution. Under international law, all individuals have a right to return to their

homes - commonly referred to as their homes of origin- whenever they have become

displaced due to circumstances beyond their control.9 The state where the refugees are striding

6
A/RES/2625 (XXV). 1970. Declaration on principles of international law concerning
friendly relations and co-operation among states in accordance with the charter of the United
Nations. 24 October.
7
Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States) (Merits) ICJ Reports (1986) ; ICJ Report.
1955. Nottebohm case (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala) Second Phase Judgment, p. 22.
8
M. Cranston, The Political and Philosophical Aspects of the Right to Leave and to Return.
Bethlehem, BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, 2001,
9
G.J. Boling, The 1948 Palestinian Refugees and the Individual Right of Return: An
International Law Analysis, Bethlehem, BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency
and Refugee Rights, 2001, p. 5.
has the obligation to facilitate the voluntary repatriation of the victims.10 Like all human rights,

the right to return is an inherent human right that all individuals possess even if, in actual

practice, governments deliberately obstruct its free exercise. Since the right to return is one

accorded under international law, deliberate governmental obstruction of it would violate

international law and will in principle be illegal.11 The Universal Declaration of Human

Rights,12 adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948, is the foundation of the right to

return in human rights law. Article 13 of the Universal Declaration phrases the right to return

broadly and simply, as follows:

Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

The council would humbly like to submit that the government of Modus on 28.02.2016 by

issuing an order sanctioning adoption of evacuated children has clearly violated the right to

return of the children hence is in violation of International Law.

C. THE EVACUATION WAS ILLEGAL.

The guidline that have been specified for humanitarian evacuation specifies that the full

informed consent of the state and the person has to be taken while evacuation is being done,13

and it has been clearly specified that informed consent and written information of the

evacuation process are the key feature of the evacuation process.14 It has been also specified in

the said guidelines that the evacuation of children should not be done out of the bound of the

10
A.M. de Zayas, Population: Expulsion and Transfer, in R. Bernhardt (ed.), Encyclopedia of
Public International Law, Amsterdam, Elsevier, 1994, p. 1065.
11
W.T. Mallison and S. Mallison, The Right to Return , in Journal of Palestine Studies vol.
9, no. 3, 1980, p. 125. Lawand
12
Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December
1948
13
Protecting Persons Affected by Natural Disasters: IASC Operational Guidelines on Human
Rights and Natural Disasters, IASC, June 2006.
14
UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Moving Kosovars to Albania: A Specific
Form of Humanitarian Evacuation, 3 May 1999
affected nation unless and until the evacuation is being done by the affected nation itself,15 and

that humanitarian international assistance could not be done without the consent of the nation

that is affected.16

It is humbly submitted in this honorable court that the evacuation done did not conform to any

of the guidelines that are mentioned above, the state of Modus carried out a mass evacuation

program without the consent and the assistance of the state of Kritistan and hence it was in

clear violation of the guidelines above specified and hence in violation of International Law.

15
Guidelines for the Humanitarian Evacuation Programme of Kosovar Refugees in the Former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia dated 26 April 1999 and Protection Framework Guidance
16
Evacuation of Children from Conflict Areas: Considerations and Guidelines, UNICEF and
UNHCR, Geneva, 1992