Team No. 521A

THE 2008 PHILIP C. JESSUP INTERNATIONAL LAW

MOOT COURT COMPETITION

In the international court of justice at the peace palace,

THE HAGUE, THE NETHERLANDS

THE REPUBLIC OF ADOVA

Applicant,

v.

THE STATE OF ROTANIA

Respondent.

Case Concerning Certain Criminal Proceedings in Adova and Rotania

SPRING TERM 2008

ON SUBMISSION TO THE

International court of justice

MEMORIAL FOR THE APPLICANT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 3

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 4

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 5

SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS 11

PLEADINGS 12

I. THE APPREHENSION AND RENDITION OF SAMARA PENZA AND OTHER ADOVAN CITIZENS WAS A VIOLATION OF ADOVA’S SOVEREIGHNTY AND IN CONTRAVENTION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 12

A. Extradition Must Be Exercised Only In The Presence Of Bilateral Extradition Treaty 12

European Convention on Extradition, Paris, 13.XII.1957, Article 6 12

B. The Republic Of Adova Was Not Obliged To Extradite Its Citizens 12

C. Rotania Violated The Request Procedure 13

D. The State Of Rotania Had Violated The Sovereignty Of The Republic Of Adova 14

E. Samara Penza And Other Adovan Citizens Are Victims Of An Offense To Human Dignity 15

F. The State Of Rotania Constituted An Act Of Aggression 16

II. THE SUBSEQUENT DETENTION AND TREATMENT OF SAMARA PENZA AND OTHER ADOVAN CITIZENS VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL LAW 17

A. Samara Penza And Other Adovan Citizens Were Treated In The Manner Contrary To The International Law 17

B. Actions, Committed By The State Of Rotania Constitute Torture 17

C. The Respondent Might Not Take Measures Derogating From Their International Obligations 18

Moreover, following the logic applied in Kalashnikov v. Russia case, decided by the European Court on Human Rights, cruel and inhumane treatment constitutes the violation of international law. In Kalashnikov v. Russia case, the prisoners were subjected to the similar circumstances as in the present case. Among them there were the deprivation of sleep, the provision of inadequate food, bright light, loud music (the TV-set was on all the days long) etc. These acts were considered by the European Court to be infringement of the European Convention on Human Rights (article 3), that prohibits torture and other cruel, inhumane, degrading treatment. Samara Penza and other Adovan citizens were subjected to similar inhumane treatment and constituted violation of international law. 18

D. The Actions Of Rotania Are Contrary To The Rules Of International Law 18

E. Rotania May Not Justify Its Actions Referring To The Crimes Committed By Detainees 19

F. The Republic Of Adova Did Not Commit An Act Of Aggression 21

III. ROTANIA’S PROSECUTION OF THE DETAINED ADOVAN CITIZENS BEFORE THE ROTANIAN MILITARY COMMISSION, INCLUDING SAMARA PENZA’S PROSECUTION FOR CONSPIRACY, ARSON, AND MURDER, VIOLATES INTERNATIONAL LAW 22

A. Crimes Committed By Samara Penza And Other Adovan Citizens Were Not War Crimes, And Thus Can Not Be Prosecuted In The Military Commission. 22

B. Rotania Should Have Granted To The Detained Adovan Citizens The Right To Have A Legal Counsel Of Their Own Choice. 23

IV. ADOVA’S EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION OVER MICHAEL KIRGOV AND GOMMEL VINITSA TO PROSECUTE THEM IN ADOVA FOR CRIMES COMMITTED AGAINST SAMARA PENZA AND OTHER ADOVAN CITIZENS IS CONSISTENT WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW 24

A. Michael Kirgov And Gommel Vinitsa Committed Serious International Crimes, Including Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes And Other Serious Violations Of International Humanitarian Law. 24

B. Michael Kirgov Being The Head Of Rotania And Gommel Vinitsa Being A Colonel Of Rotania Do Not Enjoy Any Immunity From The Prosecution. 24

C. Adova Possessed A Right To Exercise Jurisdiction Over Michael Kirgov And Gommel Vinitsa. 25

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 27