The Pros And Cons Of Eurasia

Finally, this international institution may look be more flexible or lacking of many strict formalized rules and legislation. If an institution accommodates a state’s desire to renegotiate agreements and have agreements last for a shorter period of time states are more willing to remain committed to the institution.

To summarize, in the creation of an institution to meet this demand, the creators may focus on having a centralized system, with control in the hands of the majority, that is flexible to changes. This institution may be characterized as flexible and vague, so there are more than one way to interpret the rules. But one must also taken into account the obligation, precision and delegation to more deeply understand the type of

At the time of the two Eastasians travel, Euraasia had not yet entered the agreement. Additionally, it would have another month after ratified for the state to be bound by it. In addition, Eurasia’s argument could be it is against Eurasias sovereign immunity to be tried in this matter. This was not a criminal act but a governmental act that was in compliance with the law at the time. No clause in the statue argue that the treaty should be applied retroactively, and it is not explicitly stated in the treaty during the initial signing of it. Additionally, it was neither Eurasian municipal law or customary at the time. Eurasia can state it was part of the 25% who never engaged in this practice before the treaty. According to the Lotus Case, if the states are divided on whether an action is obligatory you do not have customary international law. Lastly, Eurasia does not agree to the International Court of Justice jurisdiction over this case, so it has no right to sue the country. Countries must agree to decide matters within the ICJ and Eurasia does not accept. In this case, Eurasia has more of a case than