Q: What is International law? How do you differentiate it from Municipal or Local Law?

A:

Q: What are the School of Thoughts in International Law? Briefly Explain Each. What is the prevalent
school of thought in today’s international set-up? Explain.
A:

Q: What are the sources in International Law? Briefly explain.

A:

Q: Distinguish hard law from soft law.

A:

Q: Japan and Philippines entered into a mutual defense treaty. The President asks you for an advice on
the necessary requirements for the validity of that treaty under our laws. Give your advice in a form of a
discussion.

Q: The President entered into an Economic Treaty with Italy. The document was signed by the
representative of both Nations. Upon the arrival of the Treaty to the Philippines the same was signed by
the President. The President went to a social event. In the social event the President confided the Treaty
to his friend who is an Economist. The economist friend advised the President to discontinue the treaty
for the same is inimical to the Philippine interests. The following morning the President called up his
staff and told him not to transmit the treaty to the Senate for concurrence. Upon learning of the Non
Transmittal of the Economic Treaty, Mr. Ramon Sy filed a case before the Supreme Court citing grave
abuse of discretion on the act of the President in not transmitting the treaty for Senate Concurrence.
Decide.
A:

Q: Suppose the Economic Treaty became effective and the President by himself abrogated it. Is his
unilateral abrogation valid? Decide
A:

Q: What is Pacta Sunt Servanda? Discuss and cite your legal basis.
A:

Q: What is Full Powers?

A:

Q: What are the exempted from the requirement of Full Powers?

A:

Q: Article 6 of the VCLT provides “Every State possesses capacity to conclude treaties” suppose that the
same is not provided for in the VCLT, does it mean that a State has no capacity to enter into a treaty?
Explain.
A:

Q: What is the System of Checks and Balances in Political Law?

A:

1
Q: Discuss the system of Checks and Balances in the treaty making process?
A:

Q: Distinguish Incorporation from Incorporation.

A: Section 2, Article 2 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides the Philippines renounces war as an
instrument of national policy while Sec 23, Article 5 provides that “Congress xx shall have the sole power
to declare the existence of a “state of war”. Are the two provisions conflicting? Explain.

Q: Is an individual a subject or an object of International law? Discuss.

A:

Q: Are States? Discuss.

A:

Q: What are the consequences of the Doctrine of State Equality?

A:

Q: What is Jus Cogens?

A:

Q: What is an Associated State in International Law?

A:

Q: What are obligation erga omnes? Differentiate them from ordinary international obligation?
A:

Q: What are the remedies in case of breach of obligation erga omnes?

A:

Q: How does a practice become Customary International Law?

A:

Q: State Tix and State Tuts entered into a treaty to eliminate all citizens of State D within their respective
territories. The People of State Tix and State Tuts rejoiced over the passage of the treaty because to
them citizens of State D are members of the inferior race. State D questioned the validity of the treaty.
State Tix and State Tuts argue that they have the capacity to enter into any treaty that they want. Is the
treaty valid under International Law? Decide.
A:

Q: State Skyler and State Carebear are neighboring countries with high rates of drug trafficking. In 2011
and 2012 Bangkie and Boy George who are citizens of State Skyler solid high value illegal drugs in State
Carebear and sought refuge in State Skyler. When requested for Extradition State Skyler extradited
Bankgkie and Boy George to State Carebear despite the absence of an extradition treaty. Today, another
criminal from State Skyler sought refuge in that State after being charged with violation of Anti Drug
Trafficking Laws of State Carebear. State Carebear again wants to extradite the criminal. This time State
Skyler refused to request on the ground of non-existence of an extradition treaty. State Carebear argued
that State Skyler is now obligated to extradite despite the non-existence of a treaty despite the non-
existence of a treaty on the ground of ESTOPPEL, which is an internationally accepted principle of law. Is

2
the Argument of State Carebear correct?
A:

Q: The Philippines entered into an Extradition Treaty with Malaysia. The treaty provided for the Listing
Method as the mode of determining which crimes are extraditable. Is the treaty valid under Philippine
Laws? Decide.
A:

Q: John, a citizen of State X killed President Masagana the Head of State of State X. After he killed the
President he fled to State Y. State X requested the extradition of John from State Y. Will the extradition
prosper? Decide.
A:

Q: What is the Principle of Double Criminality? Is it an Ex Post Facto Law?

A:

Q: Explain the Process of Suggestion.

A:

Q: Is there a prescribed Process of Suggestion under Philippine Laws?

A:

Q: How is Suggestion done in our Jurisdiction?

A:

Q: Distinguish Deportation from Extradition.

A:

Q: Is State Immunity absolute? Explain.

A:

Q: Explain whether the following acts are Jure Imperii or Jure Gestionis. Explain Briefly:
1. The repair of Wharves and Docks of the Nations Navy.
2. The establishment of a Diplomatic Nation by a State
3. The repair, maintenance and upkeep of the electricity, power, plumbing and air-conditioning system
of the Embassy.
4. The act of maintaining a Barber Shop by a State for its troops in a foreign State.
A:

Q: State A and Threyota, an Automotive Company entered into a contract within Threyota will maintain
all diplomatic cars of State A located in State B. One of provisions of the Contract read “any legal action
arising out of this agreement shall be settled according to the laws of State B and the proper Courts in so
it decided to terminate the contract. State A in one of the Courts of State claiming that the
aforementioned provision of the Contract is a Waiver of Immunity from Suit. Rule on the claim of
Threyota.
A:

Q: What is the Principle of International Constitutional Supremancy?

A:

3
Q: What is the Principle of Specialty?
A:

Q: What is the Act if State Doctrine?

A:

Q: Sate A and State B had Diplomatic Relations with each other. The Foreign Secretary of State A
requested his counterpart from State B for assistance in establishing the Diplomatic Mission of State A in
the business district of State B. The Secretary of Foreign Relation of State B refused the request on the
ground that the Foreign Secretary of State A refused to give him a drink in one of the Conventions they
attended. Is the refusal justified under International Law?
A:

Q: Atty Banal filed a case of Forcible Entry with a Prayer for Temporary Restraining Order and
Preliminary Injunction against The Embassy of Malta in the Philippines on the ground that his client was
deprived of possession of the Lot on which the Embassy was built. Judge Unholy granted the Temporary
Restraining Order. Is the writ vaid?
A:

Q: What is the liability of Atty. Banal, if any?

A:

Q: The Ambassador of State Makibaka and the Consul of State Matalaw went on a drinking spree on the
streets of State Maganda. Having one drink too many, they engaged in the horrible crime of Rape with
Homicide against Pia, a beauty queen in State Maganda. A criminal case was filed and the Judge issued a
Warrant of Arrest against The Ambassador of State Makibaka and the Consul of State Matalaw. Is the
warrant valid?
A:

Q: The Ambassador of State Housing went shopping for fancy clothes, jewelry and perfume in a fabulous
boutique in State San Joaquin. The Abassador issued checks in payment for the items he bought. The
Check bounced.
1. Is the Ambassador criminally liable for Estafa or BP 22?
2. What is the remedy of the Botique? Explain.
3. What is the remedy of State San Joaquin against the ambassador?

Q: Discuss the Difference between ICC and ICJ.

A:

Q: The StarGazers, a rebel group in the State of Malabad, engaged in an operation whereon they killed
all members of a tribe in a State of Malabad. May the StarGazers be prosecuted in the ICC for Genocide?
Explain.
A:

Q: You are working in a Philippine Law firm who is engaged in International Practice. Your Law firm was
hired by the United States of America to extradite Jackie Cheng, a criminal from the United States who
sought refuge in the Philippines. Your boss wants to know the process on how to extradite Jackie Cheng

4
and whether or not Jackie Cheng may be granted bail Extradition. Draft a Legal Opinion for your boss.
A:

Q: Discuss the concept of aqueo et bono in Public International Law.

A:

Q: State X and State Y entered into a treaty wherein they agreed that they will still exclusively purchase
the agricultural produce of State Z. World foreign analysts lauded the treaty because it will bring down
the prices of raw materials. Is the treaty valid? Explain.

Q: If your answer is no in the above, how can you make the treaty valid? Explain.
A:

Q: Explain the persistent objector doctrine.

A:

Q: On sidelines of the APEC Summit, State B and C entered into a bilateral talk and agreed verbally that if
State B or C is attacked by the military of a third state, State B and C will help each other repel the attack
by sending its military assets. On the eve of the celebration of its independence day, State B was
attacked by State Y. The military commanders of State B radioed State C for help. State C radioed that it
will not help State B because the agreement is only verbal. Is state C correct? Explain.
A:

Q: Is the above agreement a treaty? Explain.

A:

Q: Spain and the Philippines entered into an agreement wherein the elite paratroopers of the Spanish
Royal Army will be stationed and trained in Cuatro Islas Island Philippines. A state-of-the-art rubber boat
with nuclear missiles will be utilized and be based in one of the islands. Is the treaty valid under
Philippine Laws?
A:

Q: Supposing that the treaty is valid, what Constitutional requirements should the same treaty hurdle?
Explain and discuss.
A:

Q: Suppose the Treaty became effective and the President by himself abrogated it. Is his unilateral
abrogation valid? Decide.
A:

Q: Distinguish a treaty form an executive agreement.

A:

Q: In 1995 the Philippines and China entered into a tax treaty wherein citizens of China are exempted
from income tax for income derived in the Philippines. In 2007 it was amended to include estate tax by
an executive agreement by the foreign ministers of China and the Philippines. The amended was
questioned in the Supreme Court because the same was not submitted to Senate for concurrence. The
Executive Branch countered that it does not need concurrence by the Senate because it is an executive
agreement. Moreover, the President has wide latitude of discretion in the treaty making process. Decide

5
the case.
A:

Q: State A signed a treaty disallowing death penalty in 2005. In 2017 drugs proliferated in State A
prompting the government to pass RA 88888 prescribing the penalty of death for the crime of selling
and trafficking of drugs. May State A evade its treaty obligation with the passage of RA 88888? Explain
by citing relevant legal provisions.
A:

Q: State F and G entered into a treaty. A diplomatic row ensued between the two states prompting
them to cancel diplomatic relations with each other. State F now demands State G to perform its treaty
obligations to state F. State G replied that because of the cancellation of diplomatic relations, they have
no treaty obligations towards State F. Is State G correct? Explain.
A:

Q: Distinguish Incorporation from Transformation.

A:

Q: Discuss the doctrine of defensive preparation.

A:

Q: What are the restrictions on the subject matter of treaties? Discuss.