UN's General Assembly latest dealings

Holy See Address to 63rd UN General Assembly

"Promote Renewed Cooperation and Harmony Among All Peoples"
VATICAN CITY, OCT. 9, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is the statement Archbishop Celestino Migliore, permanent observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, gave Monday to the 63rd U.N. General Assembly.* * *Mr President,My delegation thanks the Secretary-General for his Report on the Work of the Organization and looks forward to working with him to help ensure that this institution builds upon its successes and bridges its shortcomings.We are witnessing intractable conflicts in many regions of the world. Whether under the guise of civil turmoil, terrorist activity or international conflicts, they perpetuate the flawed belief that violence and war can replace cooperation and dialogue for the common good. In this context, the impasse in the Conference on Disarmament, the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, along with the growing strain upon the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, are enduring obstacles and severely hinder the promotion of the common good and mutual cooperation.However, rather than addressing the symptoms of humanity’s failings we would do well to focus on the underlying causes. Some forty years ago Pope Paul VI stated in this Hall that “development is the new name for peace” and the wisdom of these words should guide us in crafting adequate solutions.At this point in time we cannot but admit a number of setbacks in our work to globalize solidarity toward the poor. With the failed trade talks in the Doha Round, the increasing international economic slowdown and the missed development assistance targets, we have seen the need for effective consensus and delivery. The upcoming conference on Financing for Development in Doha presents an opportunity for the international community to consolidate promises and renew cooperation between developed and developing countries. My delegation looks forward to working with the participants in order to put the ingenuity of global economic activity at the service of people rather than put people at its mercy.Mr President,The Sixty-third Session of the General Assembly stands at a poignant moment in United Nations history. Sixty years ago this December, this body produced the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with which the world leaders agreed that human rights are not bestowed by governments at their whim but rather are inherent in all individuals regardless of race, nationality or religious belief. It is humbling to recall the war that preceded the adoption of the UDHR but also empowering to know that if the world could come together to ensure the rights of all after such a devastating conflict, then surely today we can find the political will to guarantee the full enjoyment of all human rights.The rights to life and freedom of thought, conscience and religion remain the core of the human rights system. The discourse over these two fundamental rights is on the rise. However, too often these rights are neglected in favor of more politically expedient issues, and only when the voices of the disenfranchised and discriminated become too loud to be ignored do we give them their proper attention. Only by respecting the right to life, from the moment of conception until natural death, and the consciences of all believers, will we promote a world cognizant and respectful of a deeper sense of meaning and purpose.A year ago the General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. We encourage the membership to build upon this common commitment in order to foster greater understanding between governments and indigenous communities.Finally, Mr President, it is my delegation’s hope that this Session of the General Assembly can serve to promote renewed cooperation and harmony among all peoples. Time and again we have seen an increase in the use of rhetoric which, instead of bringing nations together, chastises and divides them. In all corners of the globe this rhetoric has been used to foment mistrust between States. However, it is my delegation’s wish that this Session will reverse this crescendo of suspect and mistrust and will give way to confidence in our common leadership and shared values. To this end, the fully operational Mediation Support Unit serves as a valuable tool for restoring lost trust and we look forward to following its further developments.Mr President,The Secretary-General’s Report recognizes the need for addressing an ever growing number of issues. Whether it is humanitarian assistance, mediation or the ability to bring parties together, this Organization must continue to be shaped in a way that is more responsive to the needs of the twenty-first century.Thank you, Mr. President.

General Assembly refers Kosovo independence to world court

Kosovars celebrate after their parliament declared the province's independence from Serbia on February 17, 2008. The UN General Assembly voted Wednesday to ask the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to rule on whether Kosovo's unilateral secession from Serbia is "in accordance with international law."
UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - The UN General Assembly voted Wednesday to ask the International Court of Justice to rule on Kosovo's unilateral secession from Serbia in February, as Western nations argued that independence is irreversible.The vote in the 192-nation assembly on a Serbian resolution seeking support for the referral was 77 in favor, with six against and 74 abstentions. The ICJ, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations and based in The Hague, rules on disputes between sovereign states.The resolution requests the ICJ to render an advisory opinion on the question: "Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?" Approval of the text by General Assembly required a simple majority.Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic hailed its adoption, saying: "It is a great day for international law." In Belgrade, Serbian Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic said: "Our efforts have proved not to have been in vain, but accepted by the international community as legitimate and logical." But in Kosovo's capital Pristina, Kosovo President Fatmir Sejdiu expressed "regret," warning that the move "will not help efforts for promotion of long-term stability in Kosovo and the region".Sejdiu said his government "intends to take an active part in the presentation of the case" before the ICJ and "expects it to be impartial and fair".Speaking on behalf of the United States, which was among the first to recognize Kosovo's independence, representative Rosemary DiCarlo called the resolution "unnecessary and unhelpful"."Kosovo's independence is irreversible," she told the General Assembly. "We are confident that recognition of Kosovo's independence by an ever-increasing number of states is consistent with international law."She added: "We do not think it appropriate or fair to the court to ask it to opine on what is essentially a matter that is reserved to the judgment of member states." Cyprus, Greece, Romania, Slovakia and Spain voted in favor of the resolution, but the 22 other members of the European Union, which have all recognized Kosovo's independence, abstained.Britain's UN ambassador John Sawers, like many other speakers, reaffirmed his nations's support for the ICJ.But he noted that the "Serbian request is primarily for political rather than legal reasons". "It is designed to slow down Kosovo's emergence as a widely recognized independent nation playing its part in the international institutions of the world," he added."Kosovo's independence is and will remain a reality." Forty-eight countries have so far recognized the decision by Kosovo's ethnic Albanian majority to declare unilateral independence from Serbia on February 17, even as the province remained under UN administration. Serbia, which aspires to join the European Union, still considers Kosovo one of its provinces, and Russia -- a veto-wielding member of the UN Security Council -- has strongly backed Belgrade in the dispute.Jeremic told a press conference that Wednesday's vote "has the effect of calming down tensions in the region". "It is de facto transferring the most delicate aspect of the Kosovo issue, which is the status, from the political arena to the judicial arena."France's UN ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert, whose nation holds the rotating European Union presidency, said Paris was determined to help Serbia in its quest for a future within the 27-nation bloc.He also pointed out that the European Union is keen to play a leading role in bolstering stability in the Balkans, notably through the deployment of a rule-of-law mission to Kosovo dubbed EULEX.A Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said it could take the ICJ up to two years to render its non-binding opinion on the legality of Kosovo's independence.Ethnic Albanian-majority Kosovo was put under UN administration in 1999 after it was wrested from Belgrade's control in a NATO air war that halted a long-running conflict between Serbian security forces and ethnic Albanian rebels. © AFP 2008

TREATY

PIMENTEL VS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

The signing of a treaty is composed of two separate and distinct processes to which each requires the exclusive prerogative and act of the executive and legislative department. One is the signing of the treaty which is handled by the executive department during the negotiation stage. The other is the ratification stage where the President ratifies a treaty but with the concurrence of 2/3 of the Senate. These acts are distinct from each other and as such, are within the domain of the political question doctrine. Therefore, pursuant to the principle of separation of powers enshrined in a republican form of government such as the Philippines, the signing of a treaty during the negotiations and the ratification by the President cannot be encroached by the other departments of the government. Corollarily, the President cannot dwell into questions involving the concurrence or non-concurrence by the Senate. Each must respect the prerogatives of a co-equal department.

Therefore, it is error for any court to issue a writ of mandamus compelling the executive branch to transmit the signed Rome Statute to the Senate for concurrence.


BAYAN VS ZAMORA

The Visiting Forces Agreement is constitutional.
Under international law, a treaty has the same force and effect with an executive agreement. Although the latter does not require the concurrence of the Senate, the same is just as binding as treaties under international law. Thus, whether the VFA is signed and concurred by the Senate of the USA is immaterial. Such fact does not affect the efficacy of the executive agreement.





ABAYA VS EBDANE

An exchange of notes is a binding instrument in the form of an executive agreement under international law.
The technique of exchange of notes is frequently resorted to, either because of its speedy procedure, or, sometimes, to avoid the process of legislative approval. Treaties, agreements, conventions, charters, protocols, declarations, memoranda of understanding, modus vivendi and exchange of notes all refer to "international instruments binding at international law." Although these instruments differ from each other by title, they all have common features and international law has applied basically the same rules to all these instruments.
Being binding under international law, the Philippines must comply with its provisions in good faith by virtue of the principle of pacta sunt servanda where treaties or other international agreements must be respected by the contracting States and must be complied with by them in good faith.



AKBAYAN VS AQUINO

The power to directly negotiate treaties and international agreements is vested with the executive department. No other branch of the government can encroach on this exclusive power. Thus, the Senate’s role in the treaty making process is to give its concurrence to the ratification of a treaty. It does not have the power to directly negotiate with the other State.

LIM VS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

In an international standpoint, a treaty must prevail over municipal law. This is in adherence to the principle of pacta sunt servanda. Therefore, a party to a treaty is not allowed to "invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.



CIR VS JOHNSON & JOHNSON

One of the importance of a treaty and other international agreements is to lessen the rigors of multiple taxation of the same taxable income in different States.