Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 19, 2024, 05:53:59 pm

Author Topic: Free Legal Essay Marking!  (Read 141275 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

kiiaaa

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #285 on: August 19, 2017, 03:29:10 pm »
Hello!

I've been looking at past essay questions on world order and i was sort of struggling with these three
-Explain the role of nation states in achieving world order
-Discuss how the nature of conflict provides challenges for achieving world order
-Discuss how state sovereignty can assist or impede the resolution of world order issues

could you please help me in what points should i discuss in these essays please as im super duper lost.

thank you very much! really appreciate your help :) :)

elysepopplewell

  • HSC Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3236
  • "Hey little fighter, soon it will be brighter."
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #286 on: August 19, 2017, 09:11:07 pm »
Hello!

I've been looking at past essay questions on world order and i was sort of struggling with these three
-Explain the role of nation states in achieving world order
-Discuss how the nature of conflict provides challenges for achieving world order
-Discuss how state sovereignty can assist or impede the resolution of world order issues

could you please help me in what points should i discuss in these essays please as im super duper lost.

thank you very much! really appreciate your help :) :)
'

Hey there! With the first one, state sovereignty would be at the crux of my response! Talking about cooperation, the means of achieving cooperation, the problems when states do not cooperate, and so on. I'd be very happy with this question :)

For the second question I'd be taking a similar approach in terms of making state sovereignty a central argument. Conflict between values, armed conflict, nuclear conflict, colonial conflict - all of this comes from state sovereignty being exercised or maybe even challenged.

And the last one - a similar theme. How does the UN engage with encouraging state cooperation? How does the international community deal with states that are "rogue?" How does the P5 work? Also consider R2P! :)
Not sure how to navigate around ATAR Notes? Check out this video!

kiiaaa

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #287 on: August 19, 2017, 11:13:28 pm »
'

Hey there! With the first one, state sovereignty would be at the crux of my response! Talking about cooperation, the means of achieving cooperation, the problems when states do not cooperate, and so on. I'd be very happy with this question :)

For the second question I'd be taking a similar approach in terms of making state sovereignty a central argument. Conflict between values, armed conflict, nuclear conflict, colonial conflict - all of this comes from state sovereignty being exercised or maybe even challenged.

And the last one - a similar theme. How does the UN engage with encouraging state cooperation? How does the international community deal with states that are "rogue?" How does the P5 work? Also consider R2P! :)

Ooooohhh those could work really well!

Also im started another essay on "ASSESS THE ROLE OF LAW REFORM IN PROMOTING AND MAINTAINING WORLD ORDER."
and i have pargraphs on
- how the ICC formed from adhoc tribunals
- the formation of the UN from the league of nations and the treaty of westphalia

and i was wondering if you could hlp me on what i should discuss in my third ( which is also my last) paragraph)  is there anyother area that has undergone law reform exclusing contemporary issues as we arents being tested for those and tose arent my strong areas right now?

Thank you sooo soooo much! :)))

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #288 on: August 20, 2017, 01:40:34 am »
Ooooohhh those could work really well!

Also im started another essay on "ASSESS THE ROLE OF LAW REFORM IN PROMOTING AND MAINTAINING WORLD ORDER."
and i have pargraphs on
- how the ICC formed from adhoc tribunals
- the formation of the UN from the league of nations and the treaty of westphalia

and i was wondering if you could hlp me on what i should discuss in my third ( which is also my last) paragraph)  is there anyother area that has undergone law reform exclusing contemporary issues as we arents being tested for those and tose arent my strong areas right now?

Thank you sooo soooo much! :)))

Hey! Even though you aren't being assessed on it yet I think Responsibility to Protect is a good one to discuss for law reform. It was 'adopted' by the UN quite recently (2005) and is the new approach to World Order issues, which has semi sort of put state sovereignty in a less pivotal position. Do some Googling on it! You might find it is a nice fit ;D

soha.rizvi1

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #289 on: August 20, 2017, 08:18:23 am »
HEY,

I just wrote this world order essay on the State Soveringty, can someone please take a look ?

The role of state sovereignty plays an enormous role in either assisting or impeding the resolution of world order issues. State sovereignty can play a positive role in assisting world order as states have the ability to adopt domestic laws and policies which intentionally support world order irrespective of whether regional or international neighbours agree.  state sovereignty can also significantly impede world order as their decision to develop law or policies to assist world order issues are not dictated by other states or IGO’s, and in the case where a rouge state is not willing to deal with a world order issue in a mutually cooperative way, it cannot be compelled to do so.

State sovereignty holds significant capacity in either assisting or impeding the resolution of order. As recognised under the Montevideo Convention 1993, states meeting the specific criteria such as having a permanent population, defined borders, a stable government and the ability to enter into international agreements, hold absolute jurisdiction over the people, things and events within their country. Along with the 1933 Convention, this concept of State sovereignty is also enshrined within Article 2 ( 7) of the UN Charter, which also acknowledges the independence of states and their corresponding ability to manage their own domestic affairs without being interfered . This non- interference Article 2(7) can become a hindrance to the establishment of world order, as demonstrated through the Rwandan an genocides in which more than 800,000 Tutsi people were killed within 10 days in 2014. However, while demonstrating an impediment to world order, the Article within the UN character does have ability to be undermined in the disturbance of world order, or when a ‘threat to peace’, ‘act of aggression’ or’ breach of peace’ occur.

State sovereignty allows for individual states to both sign and ratify international law especially when they have coinciding ideologies, allowing them to assist in the promotion of world order issues. This was seen in the case of individual states such as Russia and US, signing the Non- Nuclear Proliferation Treaty 1968, which was created after the destructive cold war period. This signing of the treaty by individual states demonstrated the effective employment of State sovereignty as the treaty promoted the reduction of use and spread of nuclear weapons, attempting to reduce the threat of nuclear war within the country and thus promoting world order. Similarly, through the ratification of this treaty, world order is further promoted as it means that individual countries become accountable to the International Atomic Energy Agency, an organisation which ensures the compliance of states towards the treaty.  Therefore, it can be demonstrated that state sovereignty can be of assistance in maintaining world order, however, the contrary can be demonstrated when there is a lack of state will to sign or enforce these international instruments. This was also seen in the case of the Non- Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, where members of the UN such as India and Pakistan did not become signatories to the treaty, and therefore continued to engage in nuclear testing behaviour. This was demonstrated in the Sydney Morning Herald Newspaper Article “Pakistan continued to test Nuclear Weapons,” further demonstrating that international law can act as a hindrance to the maintenance of world order.

Along with this, State sovereignty and its ability to aid in the promotion and enforcement of world order can also be demonstrated when states willingly co-operate with United nations organisations and therefore, provide monetary or military aid to promoting or enforce world order. This was demonstrated in the case of Switzerland and it’s support of the UN MONUSCO (United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.) Support by Switzerland was seen in the form of military Personnel and was aimed at neutralizing all armed groups and military threats within the republic to ensure the maintenance or domestic state and civilian security and world order. However, this approach of state sovereignty is also limited in assisting the maintenance of world order, as it is heavily reliant on state’s will to ensure actions such as these emerge. Therefore, it can be seen that through states assisting organizations such as the UN due to their own discretion, tit can promote and enforce world order.

However, the notion of state sovereignty can also become an impediment to the establishment of world order, as demonstrated through it’s reducing of effectiveness of external intervention by the UN. Sovereign bodies limiting the effectiveness of international mechanisms such as the UN is demonstrated through the veto power held by the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. This was seen in the case of the China as a member of the UNSC blocking any effective intervention in the Darfur to stop the Janjaweed from spreading more violence due to their pre-existing political interest in obtaining oil from Sudan. Along with this, state sovereignty reducing the effectiveness of UNSC is demonstrated through states using their independency to avoid being forced to take actions to enforce world order. This was seen in the case of the Gaddafi and his ignoring of the UNSC’s call to uphold the first pillar of the Responsibility to protect and prevent the widespread atrocities towards the population.


kiiaaa

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #290 on: August 20, 2017, 11:11:05 am »
Hello,

I have made an essay plan on the question "Examine the role of state sovereignty in assisting and impeding the resolution of world order issues." it doesnt have an introduction/conculstion yet but i was wondering if you could please check my ideas and points i make in my body paragraphs to see if im on the right track in how i answer the question and if my points even make sense especially the last on political will? (the dashes that are underlined and bolded are the main points ill discuss the paragraph)

Thank you very much

-   Treaties
o   State sovereignty can play a crucial factor in the resolution of world order allowing states to enter treaties with free will than political pressure.States can enter treaties with other states without any external force as each nation state can utilize state sovereignty as its means for the decisions its makes which can assists as well as impede the resolution of world order. State sovereignty can ensure cooperation as states willingly enter these treaties demonstrated in the Indus Water Treaty, a bilateral agreement between India and Pakistan been highly successful as despite both states having history of conflicts, state sovereignty has allowed the resolution of world order having allowed both countries to mutually agree on the division of rivers and use of water without any external pressure leading it to be the ‘most successful water sharing endeavors today.’ However state sovereignty can also impeded the resolution of world order in relation to nation states signing treaties as countries aren’t obliged to sign it if it doesn’t meet their interests. This is demonstrated in the time taken by Australia to sign the Kyoto Protocol as it was against its economic interest which impeded the resolution to world order due to the lack of global cooperation. Thus whilst state sovereignty allows nation states to willingly enter treaties which can play a pivotal in assisting world order it can also then impede world order resolutions choose to refrain from signing treaties that don’t meet their self-interests.

-   Limited response of un
o   The limited responses of the UN due to the notion of state sovereignty can severely impede the resolution of world order. As a result of state sovereignty, the international community can provide limited responses when countries commit war crimes against its people or threaten the global peace as they have the right to have unwanted input from the international community regarding conduct and manner. This is demonstrated during the Rwandan genocide, where the UN in fear of breaching state sovereignty was only capable of  sending peace keepers into the country which also had limited capabilities in resolving the conflict within the country. Furthermore, North Korea’s recent nuclear testing has made world order difficult to resolve due to the fact that interference can be considered state sovereignty being impeded. North Korea has utilized State Sovereignty to withdraw its signature from the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty in 2003 as despite being suspected of building nuclear weaponry, it is difficult for the UN to investigate this matter due to it being a closed and separate state. As a result, the UN carries the capacity to impose sanctions upon the nation banning exports and global assets freeze from nation which also relies on cooperation of other countries to ensure it success. However, countries such as China, who are allies with the North Korea can choose to ignore such sanctions that aim to resolve world order utilizing the principal of state sovereignty. Thus state sovereignty can severely impede the responses the UN can take agsint nations that fail to cooperate in the global aim of resolving world order issues
-   Limited enforceability
o   State sovereignty has resulted in the limited enforceability of international law which severely impeded the resolution of world order. Nation state can utilize their state sovereignty to display their political will in assisting the maintenance of world order. This is evident when Solomon islands which formally requested Australia to intervene in its internal conflict, which was in Australia’s best interest the ‘environment for hostile actors and jeopardize national security” as reported in ‘RAMSI ends with its mission accomplished for Solomon islands. Via RAMSI, Solomon Islands has a low crime rate by global standards and lowest rates of gun in the world, displaying that if countries use state sovereignty to display their political will, globally world order is attainable. However, if the state sovereignty’s decides for the lack of political will to cooperate then it is difficult to attain a resolution for world orders as displayed  by the US Guantanamo Bay which is illegally operating under the 1949 Geneva conventions despite being hard international law. Having be located in Cuba outside of US jurisdiction the prisoners from the war of terror are detained, interrogated and tortured without a trials. Whilst US President Obama promised to shut it down, the international community is powerless to act as there is no political will and they cannot impede state sovereignty. Hence resolutions to world order are highly reliant on state sovereignty displaying political will to address the issues which threaten world order


jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #291 on: August 20, 2017, 11:25:44 am »
HEY,

I just wrote this world order essay on the State Soveringty, can someone please take a look ?

Hey! Thanks for posting your essay, unfortunately you need 25 posts on the site to qualify for feedback from one of the markers (the limit was increased after Trials). If you post around a bit more I bet you'll get that in no time :)

elysepopplewell

  • HSC Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3236
  • "Hey little fighter, soon it will be brighter."
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #292 on: August 21, 2017, 05:37:43 pm »
Hello,

I have made an essay plan on the question "Examine the role of state sovereignty in assisting and impeding the resolution of world order issues." it doesnt have an introduction/conculstion yet but i was wondering if you could please check my ideas and points i make in my body paragraphs to see if im on the right track in how i answer the question and if my points even make sense especially the last on political will? (the dashes that are underlined and bolded are the main points ill discuss the paragraph)

Thank you very much

Sure thing! Great initiative Kia :)

Spoiler
-   Treaties
o   State sovereignty can play a crucial factor in the resolution of world order allowing states to enter treaties with free will than political pressure. I know this isn't your final version - but the wording here isn't very clear, and it's also not completely correct. So yes, state sovereignty gives autonomy to states to choose with treaties they enter, but that doesn't mean that they won't be influenced by political pressure as you've stated. So I'd re-word it to say that it gives states the opportunity to enter treaties that suit the interests of their nation. But, a downside could be that the global political sphere is at times full of pressure from different states - either trying to bag themselves the best bargain, or trying to gain cooperation for the greater globe. States can enter treaties with other states without any external force as each nation state can utilize state sovereignty as its means for the decisions its makes which can assists as well as impede the resolution of world order. Just from the "as it means" part, I'm a little confused. "States can enter treaties with other states without having to refer to an impartial body, allowing states to create partnerships on a global level that can assist with maintaining world order." Mayyyybe something like this? I'm not certain it's what you're trying to say. State sovereignty can ensure cooperation as states willingly enter these treaties demonstrated in the Indus Water Treaty, a bilateral agreement between India and Pakistan been highly successful as despite both states having history of conflicts, state sovereignty has allowed the resolution of world order having allowed both countries to mutually agree on the division of rivers and use of water without any external pressure leading it to be the ‘most successful water sharing endeavors today.’ Reference this quote - if it's from someone important then boast it! :) Great example, too. There's a lot of treaties in the world that don't have a whole lot to do with maintaining peace, and you've selected a great treaty that remains a pertinent example for the rest of your essay. Howevercomma, state sovereignty can also impeded  impede* the resolution of world order in relation to nation states signing treaties as countries aren’t obliged to sign it if it doesn’t meet their interests. This is demonstrated in the time taken by Australia to sign the Kyoto Protocol as it was against its economic interest which impeded the resolution to world order due to the lack of global cooperation. Thus whilst state sovereignty allows nation states to willingly enter treaties which can play a pivotal in assisting world order it can also then impede world order resolutions choose to refrain from signing treaties that don’t meet their self-interests. Good one! With the suggested opening sentence I proposed, this balanced approach is great.

-   Limited response of un
o   The limited responses of the UN due to the notion application of...rather than notion. It's not just a notion. of state sovereignty can severely impede the resolution of world order. As a result of state sovereignty, the international community can provide limited responses when countries commit war crimes against its people or threaten the global peace as they have the right to have unwanted input from the international community regarding conduct and manner. This is demonstrated during the Rwandan genocide, where the UN in fear of breaching undermining state sovereignty was only capable of  sending peace keepers into the country which also had limited capabilities in resolving the conflict within the country. Perhaps identify the name of the resolution in Rwanda...I can't remember it off the top of my head but I'm fairly certain there was a title given to it...I remember it from the movie Hotel Rwanda...sorry I can't think of the name. It might be a number like Resolution ####. Furthermore, North Korea’s recent nuclear testing has made world order difficult to resolve due to the fact that interference can be considered state sovereignty being impeded. North Korea has utilized State Sovereignty to withdraw its signature from the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty in 2003 as despite being suspected of building nuclear weaponry, it is difficult for the UN to investigate this matter due to it being a closed and separate state. As a result, the UN carries the capacity to impose sanctions upon the nation banning exports and global assets freeze from nation which also relies on cooperation of other countries to ensure it success. However, countries such as China, who are allies with the North Korea can choose to ignore such sanctions that aim to resolve world order utilizing the principal of state sovereignty. Thus state sovereignty can severely impede the responses the UN can take agsint nations that fail to cooperate in the global aim of resolving world order issues This might be a good time to talk about the UNSC? The p5 and veto power? Also would be a good spot for a media article - there's so many on North Korea!
-   Limited enforceability
o   State sovereignty has resulted in the limited enforceability of international law which severely impeded the resolution of world order. Nation states can utilize their state sovereignty to display their political will in assisting the maintenance of world order. This is evident  when This doesn't make sense. Solomon islands which formally requested Australia to intervene in its internal conflict, which was in Australia’s best interest the ‘environment for hostile actors and jeopardize national security” as reported in ‘RAMSI ends with its mission accomplished for Solomon islands. Via RAMSI, Solomon Islands has a low crime rate by global standards and lowest rates of gun possession? or use? in the world, displaying that if countries use state sovereignty to display their political will, globally world order is attainable. However, if the state sovereignty’s decides for the lack of political will to cooperate then it is difficult to attain a resolution for world orders as displayed  by the US Guantanamo Bay which is illegally operating under the 1949 Geneva conventions despite being hard international law. Having be located in Cuba outside of US jurisdiction the prisoners from the war of terror are detained, interrogated and tortured without a trials. Whilst US President Obama promised to shut it down, the international community is powerless to act as there is no political will and they cannot impede state sovereignty. Hence resolutions to world order are highly reliant on state sovereignty displaying political will to address the issues which threaten world order

I think your areas of discussion are judiciously chosen! Great job! There needs to be some adjustments to the way you're expressing things, particularly topic sentences. I recognise this is just a draft though so it's probably not your most edited work, understandably! A quick note that you might have your computer set to English (US) because you're spelling things with a Z instead of an S :)

In terms of legal content - I think there could be more media articles in there, and perhaps a little more in the way of human rights, particularly when talking about Guantanamo Bay, and North Korea. Identifying the international documents is always relevant to a world order response! The cases are very relevant for each place you discuss them, which is really good! I'd work on expression and the way you're incorporating the legal themes and media throughout the response. I've pointed out some areas where it might be a good spot to add or adjust. Overall, your linking to the question is really outstanding, and that's something to hold on to! :)
Not sure how to navigate around ATAR Notes? Check out this video!

Mounica

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #293 on: August 23, 2017, 10:36:57 am »
Hey guys,
can someone pls explain how i would answer this question:
"assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order"
Thanks

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #294 on: August 23, 2017, 11:13:04 am »
Hey guys,
can someone pls explain how i would answer this question:
"assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order"
Thanks

Hey! I responded to you in the Question thread just now :)

Daniyahasan

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #295 on: August 27, 2017, 07:59:32 pm »
hey guys,
i started writing an essay on this question "assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order"  so can someone pls give me feedback on what i wrote so far.
thanks

The ICJ is an ineffective legal measure in dealing with noncompliance of nation states in relation to world order issues. Established in 1945 by the UN Charter, the ICJ allows for disputes between nations to be settled without violence; however the jurisdiction of the court is challenged by the number of states that have made declarations recognising the jurisdiction of the court. Only 70 states have formed Declarations Recognising as Compulsory the Jurisdiction of the Court. Other states like the United States (US) recognise the jurisdiction of the ICJ on a case-by-case basis. This highly restricts the effectiveness of the ICJ in resolving disputes between nations, as it cannot force states to comply with its judgement. This is demonstrated in the Nicaragua v US (1986) case where the ICJ ruled in favour of Nicaragua and awarded reparations to Nicaragua. However, the US refused to participate in the proceedings and refused to comply with the judgement. This can be seen in the media article “US dismisses World Court ruling on contras” by the Guardian. The ICJ can enforce its judgement in contentious cases, adversarial proceedings seeking to settle a dispute between states, by taking it to the UNSC for enforcement actions. However this is often difficult as the permanent 5 members of the UNSC: US, Russia, United Kingdom, China and France, have the power of veto which when used, can effectively prevent any action from being taken. This was seen in the Nicaragua v US case where the US blocked the enforcement of the judgement by the UNSC and therefore prevented Nicaragua from obtaining any compensation. This has led to a reluctance of the Court to become involved in a dispute where it is in the interests of one or more of the permanent 5 members on the UNSC to block the judgement if a nation does not accept it. This restrains the effectiveness of the ICJ in its ability to force nation states to comply with its judgement.
 The UN is an effective measure in forcing compliance in relation to world. The UN encourages disarmament and the resolution of conflicts with the use of violence. It has created various treaties that restrict and prohibit the use of certain weapons. Some of these treaties include the Treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons (1968), the Biological Weapons Convention (1972) and the Chemical Weapons Convention (1992). The treaties limit the use of weapons that cause indiscriminate and often devastating results. Watchdog groups such as the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons monitor these treaties to ensure compliance and discourage the use of them in armed conflicts. An example of this is when the Security Council passed Resolution 687, which set out the terms that Iraq’s leader Suddam Hussein was to comply with. The resolution required the destruction of all chemical and biological weapons, and ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and required Iraq to submit to a rigorous UN inspection system. Inspections were conducted by United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and later the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) throughout the 1990s. The UNSC has proved to be an effective legal response to monitoring conflict and forcing compliance when dealing with world order issues, as no ‘weapons of mass destruction’ were found.

ATAR Goal 90

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #296 on: August 27, 2017, 08:58:16 pm »
hey guys,
i started writing an essay on this question "assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order"  so can someone pls give me feedback on what i wrote so far.
thanks

Hey! You'll need 75 posts to qualify for a proper bit of feedback, you aren't far off! Perhaps work on posting a few more times while you work on the rest of the essay, that way I can give it feedback all at once :) on a quick skim, watch that you aren't spending too long on a single example - The ICJ paragraph really only analyses one example. It would be good to see another case, for you to trim down the descriptions of how the ICJ operates and substitute it for more evidence and analysis :)

Daniyahasan

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #297 on: August 28, 2017, 11:59:44 am »
Hey! You'll need 75 posts to qualify for a proper bit of feedback, you aren't far off! Perhaps work on posting a few more times while you work on the rest of the essay, that way I can give it feedback all at once :) on a quick skim, watch that you aren't spending too long on a single example - The ICJ paragraph really only analyses one example. It would be good to see another case, for you to trim down the descriptions of how the ICJ operates and substitute it for more evidence and analysis :)

Ok, thanks for letting me know. I'll post my essay when I have 75 posts
ATAR Goal 90

Daniyahasan

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #298 on: August 28, 2017, 12:13:01 pm »
hey guys,
i started writing an essay on this question "assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order"  so can someone pls give me feedback on what i wrote so far. Also can u pls explain how I would talk about a non legal response.
thanks


The ICJ is an ineffective legal measure in dealing with noncompliance of nation states in relation to world order laws. Established in 1945 by the UN Charter, the ICJ allows for disputes between nations to be settled without violence. Only 70 states have formed Declarations Recognising as Compulsory the Jurisdiction of the Court. Other states like the United States (US) recognise the jurisdiction of the ICJ on a case-by-case basis. This highly restricts the effectiveness of the ICJ in resolving disputes between nations, as it cannot force states to comply with its judgement. This is demonstrated in the Nicaragua v US (1986) case where the ICJ ruled in favour of Nicaragua and awarded reparations to Nicaragua. However, the US refused to participate in the proceedings and refused to comply with the judgement. This can be seen in the media article “US dismisses World Court ruling on contras” by the Guardian. The ICJ can enforce its judgement by taking it to the UNSC for enforcement actions. However this is often difficult as the permanent 5 members of the UNSC: US, Russia, United Kingdom, China and France, have the power of veto which when used, can effectively prevent any action from being taken. This was seen in the Nicaragua v US case where the US blocked the enforcement of the judgement by the UNSC and therefore prevented Nicaragua from obtaining any compensation. This restrains the effectiveness of the ICJ in its ability to force nation states to comply with its judgement.

 The UN is an effective measure in forcing compliance in relation to world order laws. The UN encourages disarmament and the resolution of conflicts with the use of violence. It has created various treaties that restrict and prohibit the use of certain weapons. Some of these treaties include the Treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons (1968), the Biological Weapons Convention (1972) and the Chemical Weapons Convention (1992). The treaties limit the use of weapons that cause indiscriminate and often devastating results. Watchdog groups such as the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons monitor these treaties to ensure compliance and discourage the use of them in armed conflicts. An example of this is when the Security Council passed Resolution 687, which set out the terms that Iraq’s leader Suddam Hussein was to comply with. The resolution required the destruction of all chemical and biological weapons, and ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and required Iraq to submit to a rigorous UN inspection system. Inspections were conducted by United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and later the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) throughout the 1990s. The UNSC has proved to be an effective legal response to monitoring conflict and forcing compliance when dealing with world order issues, as no ‘weapons of mass destruction’ were found.


« Last Edit: August 28, 2017, 12:45:07 pm by Daniyahasan »
ATAR Goal 90

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #299 on: August 31, 2017, 03:58:02 pm »
hey guys,
i started writing an essay on this question "assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order"  so can someone pls give me feedback on what i wrote so far. Also can u pls explain how I would talk about a non legal response.
thanks

Sure thing!

Spoiler
The ICJ is an ineffective legal measure in dealing with noncompliance of nation states in relation to world order laws. Good to see an obvious judgement, but "world order laws" is awkward phrasing, we don't have world order laws, I'd say "in relation to laws that promote peace and security," or something similar. Established in 1945 by the UN Charter, the ICJ allows for disputes between nations to be settled without violence. The marker knows this, you don't have to tell them! Only 70 states have formed Declarations Recognising as Compulsory the Jurisdiction of the Court. Wording feels awkward there, "recognising the jurisdiction of the court" would be enough. Other states like the United States (US) recognise the jurisdiction of the ICJ on a case-by-case basis. This highly restricts the effectiveness of the ICJ in resolving disputes between nations, as it cannot force states to comply with its judgement. Good point, but it took too long to get here. This is demonstrated in the Nicaragua v US (1986) case where the ICJ ruled in favour of Nicaragua and awarded reparations to Nicaragua. However, the US refused to participate in the proceedings and refused to comply with the judgement. This can be seen in the media article “US dismisses World Court ruling on contras” by the Guardian. Good case example. The ICJ can enforce its judgement by taking it to the UNSC for enforcement actions. However this is often difficult as the permanent 5 members of the UNSC: US, Russia, United Kingdom, China and France, have the power of veto which when used, can effectively prevent any action from being taken. This was seen in the Nicaragua v US case where the US blocked the enforcement of the judgement by the UNSC and therefore prevented Nicaragua from obtaining any compensation. This restrains the effectiveness of the ICJ in its ability to force nation states to comply with its judgement. A solid argument made, but there is really only one example. It would be good to have a second to make your argument stronger, cut some of the description/case details to leave room for more analysis.

The UN is an effective measure in forcing compliance in relation to world order laws. As above, awkward phrasing, but good judgement. The UN encourages disarmament and the resolution of conflicts with the use of violence. Do you mean 'without' here? It has created various treaties that restrict and prohibit the use of certain weapons. Some of these treaties include the Treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons (1968), the Biological Weapons Convention (1972) and the Chemical Weapons Convention (1992). How effective are these treaties? The treaties limit the use of weapons that cause indiscriminate and often devastating results. Those last three sentences should be condensed for one - Remember, any sentences that doesn't push your argument directly isn't useful and needs to be condensed. Watchdog groups such as the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons monitor these treaties to ensure compliance and discourage the use of them in armed conflicts. How effective are these watchdog groups? An example of this is when the Security Council passed Resolution 687, which set out the terms that Iraq’s leader Suddam Hussein was to comply with. The resolution required the destruction of all chemical and biological weapons, and ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and required Iraq to submit to a rigorous UN inspection system. Inspections were conducted by United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and later the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) throughout the 1990s. You are retelling/describing a world order scenario, you aren't making a judgement! The UNSC has proved to be an effective legal response to monitoring conflict and forcing compliance when dealing with world order issues, as no ‘weapons of mass destruction’ were found. Try and make your conclusion a little more definitive and not case-based, you should be finishing with an overall assessment based on multiple pieces of evidence!

Solid paragraphs with some good evidence throughout! Make sure your arguments are always the key element of your responses, several places where you start retelling scenarios or describing what laws do, and that isn't going to earn you marks. It should always be evaluation and analysis at every step! ;D