You are on page 1of 5

ORAL ARGUMENTS AMALEA (FIRST and SECOND ISSUES)

Goodmorning / afternoon / evening Mr. President, Your Excellencies, may it please the Court.
I am Maria Girly Patigdas, first agent for the applicant, the State of Amalea.
In the next 20 minutes, I will be discussing our first two submissions:
FIRST, Ritanias acts and omissions with respect to the development of the Excelsior Island violated international law;
therefore, Amalea is entitled to seek compensation from Ritania for economic losses caused by the landslide;
SECOND, Amalea has exclusive ownership over the wreck of the Cargast and the artifacts recovered from it; and
Ritanias deployment of patrol vessels to the site of the wreck violated international law.
Meanwhile, in the next 20 minutes, my co-agent, Leofe Sagolili will discuss our next two submissions, that:
ONE, Amaleas pursuit of Oscar de Luz into Ritanias EEZ, and his subsequent arrest, were in compliance with
international law;
TWO, Amalea had jurisdiction to try and convict Luz for the criminal actions related to the Rosehill incident and has no
obligation to return him to Ritania.
We also respectfully reserve 5 minutes for rebuttal.
If there are no preliminary questions, I would like to proceed to my submissions.
Thank you, Mr. President, your Excellencies, May it please the court.

First Submission
RITANIAS ACTS AND OMISSIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EXCELSIOR
ISLAND VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL LAW; therefore, AMALEA IS ENTITLED TO SEEK
COMPENSATION FROM RITANIA FOR ECONOMIC LOSSES CAUSED BY THE LANDSLIDE.
By granting a permit for the dredging, Ritania violated two conventions to which it is a party:
1. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS); and
2. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
ON THE UNCLOS
Article 192 of the UNCLOS provides that States shall protect and preserve the marine environment.
Under Article 194 is a requirement for States to ensure that activities under its jurisdiction or control are so conducted as
not to cause damage by pollution to other States and their environment.
Pollution of the marine environment is defined by UNCLOS as the introduction by man, directly or indirectly, of
substances or energy into the marine environment which results or is likely to result in such deleterious effects as, among
others:
-

Harm to living resources and marine life; and


Hindrance to marine activities, including fishing

(Mention facts on landslide, Dorian wrasse being endangered, decrease in catch of the fish, indefinite suspension of
fishing in 2012)
UNDER THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES
Article 26 of the said convention provides that each treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be complied
by them in good faith. This is the general principle of pacta sunt servanda.
On March 30, 1992, Amalea and Ritania freely entered into an agreement which they termed as the Malachi Gap Treaty of
1992. Article 12 (d) of the said treaty provides that the Parties shall cooperate with each other in the exercise of their
respective rights giving due regard to each Partys unique interests in the Malachi Gap, including but not limited to, in the
case of Amalea, the protection of fisheries.
With the pollution caused to the marine environment, particularly in the shallow waters of the Sirius Plateau near the
breeding ground of the non-migratory wrasse, and the endangerment of the fish, Ritania has violated its obligations under
the Malachi Gap Treaty.

By virtue of these international law violations which have resulted in economic losses for the Amalean fishing
industry, it is respectfully submitted that Ritania should compensate Amalea.
This claim is anchored on the following:
Article 235 of the UNCLOS which requires States to ensure that recourse is available in accordance with their respective
legal systems for prompt and adequate compensation or relief in respect of damage caused by pollution of the marine
environment by natural or juridical persons under their jurisdiction.
Article 36 of the Draft Articles of the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts which provides that the
State responsible for an internationally wrongful act is under obligation to compensate for the damage caused. The
compensation shall cover any financially assessable damage including loss of profits.
(State the $250 M earnings in the next 5 years, and Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project case)

Mr. President, your Excellencies, having established the international law violations committed by Ritania and the
consequent right of Amalea to seek compensation for economic losses, I would like to proceed to my second
submission.

AMALEA HAS EXCLUSIVE OWNERSHIP OVER THE WRECK OF THE CARGAST AND ALL ARTIFACTS
RECOVERED FROM IT; and RITANIAS DEPLOYMENT OF PATROL VESSELS TO THE SITE OF THE
WRECK VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL LAW.
The Cargast was an Amalean State Vessel granted by himself, the King of Amalea, to Baldric Verdigris. Together with
the vessel was the giving of the letter of marquee authorizing Verdigris to bring honor and glory to the Kingdom of
Amalea.
A letter of marque is a written authority granted to a private person by a government to seize the subjects of a foreign
state or their goods.
By such grant, the recipient becomes a privateer with legal authority to act for and in behalf of the Kingdom. The
commissioning of privateers was customary practice in the sixteenth century, when the Cargast sank. It was a way for
States to supplement their lack of a regular navy. It was prevalent in both American and European history. Even at present,
the US Constitution authorizes its Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal.
By virtue of this authority, it is respectfully submitted that Verdigris validly acquired all the cargo that sank with the
Cargast. Since he acquired these for and in behalf of Amalea, our State has, therefore, retained ownership of the same
since 1510 until the discovery of the wreck in 2010.

Consequently, Ritania violated international law when it sent patrol vessels to the site of the wreck.
Under Article 58(3) of the UNCLOS, In exercising their rights and performing their duties in the EEZ, States shall have
due regard to the rights and duties of the coastal State and shall comply with the laws and regulations adopted by the
coastal State in accordance with the provisions of this Convention and other rules of international law
The wreck was found within 80nm from Amalean coastline, within its EEZ. Being the coastal state, Amalea has the right
under Article 10 of the 2001 UNESCO Convention for the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage to prohibit any
activity directed at underwater cultural heritage to prevent interference with its sovereign rights and jurisdiction as
provided for by international law.
The same convention defines UCH to mean all traces of human existence with archaeological, cultural or historical
character and have been submerged underwater for at least 100 years. It includes vessels and their cargo.
The Cargast has been recognized as the first of a standard model of Amalean schooners. It embodies Amalean navigation
history at a time when privateers were hailed as patriots of their nation. Having been submerged for almost 500 years, the
Cargast is an underwater cultural heritage entitled to protection.
Ritania also violated the 1989 International Convention on Salvagei
Article 9 of the said convention gives the Coastal State the right to give directions to salvage operations. Article 6(2) gives
authority to the vessel owner to conclude salvage contracts on behalf of the owner of the property onboard the vessel.
As coastal state and owner of the vessel, Amalea was solely entitled to authorize any activites involving the same.
Therefore, the deployment of patrol vessels to Amaleas EEZ without the latters consent and despite its express objection,
Ritania violated international law.

Mr. President, your excellencies, it is respectfully submitted that:


Ritania violated the UNCLOS and the general principle of pacta sunt servana with respect to the development of the
Excelsior Island; therefore Amalea is entitled to compensation for economic losses as embodied in the UNCLOS and
in the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts;
AND
By its deployment of patrol vessels to the site of the wreck, Ritania violated the UNCLOS, the UNESCO Convention for
the Protection of UCH and the International Convention on Salvage.
If this court no longer needs my assistance, I would like to yield the podium to my co-agent Leofe Sagolili.
MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT!