Can someone please help me with this problem question?
Einer state and Alto state are neighbouring states with a history of armed conflict. One day, a fighter plane from Einer state accidentally enters the air space of Alto state while on a training mission. Alto air traffic controllers give several warnings, but Quinn the pilot does not understand, and continues flying in Alto airspace. Alto launches an anti-aircraft missile which hits the fighter plane and causes it to crash. Einer state protests that Alto’s actions were unlawful, and demands that Alto offer reparation. Alto insists that their actions were lawful.
Pilot Quinn managed to eject and parachute to land. He was arrested and charged with spying. Quinn is tried in a secret trial. He is found guilty and sentenced to death. Einer state protests that mode of trial and the death penalty violate Quinn’s fundamental human rights, but Alto points out that Alto citizens would also face a similar trial and similar penalty for treason or spying. Nevertheless, Alto state has not implemented the death penalty against any of its own citizens for any offence for several decades.
Einer then refuses to comply with their obligations under a trading treaty with Alto, until they receive appropriate reparation.
Comment on whether either state may have incurred any state responsibility in the scenario above, and if so, what would be the appropriate form of reparation.
Turn on thread page Beta
Public International Law Coursework watch
- Thread Starter
- 28-01-2017 18:50