Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge

(Malaysia/Singapore)

On 24 July 2003, Malaysia and Singapore jointly seised the Court of a dispute between them by
notification of a Special Agreement signed on 6 February 2003 and which entered into force on 9 May
2003. Under the terms of that Special Agreement, the Parties requested the Court to “determine
whether sovereignty over : (a) Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh ; (b) Middle Rocks ; and (c) South Ledge
belongs to Malaysia or the Republic of Singapore”. They agreed in advance “to accept the Judgment of
the Court . . . as final and binding upon them”. By an Order of 1 September 2003, taking account of
Article 4 of that Special Agreement, the President of the Court fixed 25 March 2004 as the time-limit for
the filing of a Memorial by each of the Parties and 25 January 2005 as the time-limit for the filing of a
Counter-Memorial by each of the Parties. Those pleadings were duly filed within the time-limits thus
fixed.

By an Order of 1 February 2005, the Court, taking into account the provisions of the Special Agreement,
fixed 25 November 2005 as the time-limit for the filing of a Reply by each of the Parties. The Replies
were duly filed within the time-limit thus fixed. By a joint letter of 23 January 2006, the Parties informed
the Court that they had agreed that there was no need for an exchange of rejoinders in the case. The
Court itself subsequently decided that no further pleadings were necessary and thus that the written
proceedings were closed.

Following public hearings which were held in November 2007, the Court rendered its Judgment on 23
May 2008. In that Judgment, the Court first indicated that the Sultanate of Johor (predecessor of
Malaysia) had original title to Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, a granite island on which Horsburgh
lighthouse stands. It concluded, however, that, when the dispute crystallized (1980), title had passed to
Singapore, as attested to by the conduct of the Parties (in particular certain acts performed by
Singapore à titre de souverain and the failure of Malaysia to react to the conduct of Singapore). The
Court consequently awarded sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh to Singapore. As for
Middle Rocks, a maritime feature consisting of several rocks permanently above water, the Court
observed that the particular circumstances which had led it to find that sovereignty over Pedra
Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh rested with Singapore clearly did not apply to Middle Rocks. It therefore found
that Malaysia, as the successor to the Sultan of Johor, should be considered to have retained original
title to Middle Rocks. Finally, with respect to the low-tide elevation South Ledge, the Court noted that it
fell within the apparently overlapping territorial waters generated by Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh
and by Middle Rocks. Recalling that it had not been mandated by the Parties to delimit their territorial
waters, the Court concluded that sovereignty over South Ledge belongs to the State in whose territorial
waters it lies.

Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapon (Advisory Opinion)

Citation. I.C.J., Advisory Opinion, 1996 I.C.J. 266

Brief Fact Summary. An advisory opinion as to whether states are permitted to use nuclear weapons
under international law was placed before the International Court of Justice by the U.N. General
Assembly.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Under certain circumstance, threat or use of nuclear weapons is permitted
under international law.

Facts. A request for an advisory opinion as to whether states are permitted to use nuclear weapons
under international law was laid on the table of the International Court of Justice by the U.N. General
Assembly.

Issue. Under certain circumstances, are threats or use of nuclear weapons permitted under international
law?

Held. Yes. Under certain circumstance, threat or use of nuclear weapons are permitted under
international law. The threat or use of nuclear weapons in all circumstances is not authorized or
prohibited by either the customary or conventional international nuclear law.
Under the U.N. Charter, the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be considered legal if all
requirements of Article 51 which deals with state’s rights to self-defense are met. However, in whatever
the situation can be, a state obligation exists to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion
negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspect under strict and effective international
control.
Discussion. The idea that despite steps taken by a very large part of the international community
towards complete nuclear disarmament, in which no customary rule specifically proscribe the threat or
use of nuclear weapons that exists is illustrated by this case. Reservations about the notion that there
are no imaginable circumstances warranting their use have been expressed by too many dissenters.

ESTRADA DOCTRINE

is the name of Mexico's core Foreign Policy ideal from 1930 to 2000. Its name derives
from Genaro Estrada, Secretary of Foreign Affairs during the Presidency of Pascual Ortiz Rubio.

The Estrada Doctrine favored an enclosed view of sovereignty. It claimed that foreign
governments should not judge, for good or bad, governments or changes in governments in other
nations, because it would imply a breach to its sovereignty.

is a development on the earlier recognition of governments approach whereby a government

would recognize another governments. This caused political problems following an unconstitutional
change in the government of another state.

policy of recognizing states rather than governments. It is an alternative to the method of

express recognition, in which an express statement is made according or withholding recognition after
each unconstitutional change of government, and tacit recognition in which, only under exceptional
circumstances, is a recognition statement made.

Mexican government declared that it would, as it saw fit, continue to terminate its relations
with any country in which a political upheaval had taken place " and in so doing it does not pronounce
judgement, either precipitately or a posteriori, regarding the right of foreign nations to accept, maintain
or replace their governments or authorities"

Monroe Doctrine

(December 2, 1823), cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy enunciated by Pres. James Monroe in his annual

message to Congress. Declaring that the Old World and New World had different systems and must
remain distinct spheres, Monroe made four basic points: (1) the United States would not interfere in the
internal affairs of or the wars between European powers; (2) the United States recognized and would
not interfere with existing colonies and dependencies in the Western Hemisphere; (3) the Western
Hemisphere was closed to future colonization; and (4) any attempt by a European power to oppress or
control any nation in the Western Hemisphere would be viewed as a hostile act against the United
States.