INAF5012 - Law And International Affairs - UN Environment Programme - Advise the New Conservative Minister of Foreign Affairs - Law Assignment Help

INAF5012: Law And International Affairs Assignment Help

Assignment Task:

PART I

On 1 May 2020, the UN Environment Programme concluded a convention in Stockholm, Sweden, on the evolving Climate Crisis by adopting the text of the long-awaited CO2 Treaty and opening the treaty for signature. The text of the treaty sets hard limits on every state party’s carbon emissions. Each state’s limits are calculated using a complex formula involving population, territorial size, regional climate etc. All parties to the treaty agreed to be bound to the limits established by the formula for their sate.

The treaty, once in force, also establishes an international organization, “The Carbon Council” responsible for calculating annual CO2 caps for each state and verifying emissions. Under the treaty, however, The Carbon Council has no authority to enforce the caps on states, hear complaints, or sanction states for exceeding their emission limits.

The Text of the CO2 Treaty stipulates:
Art 58: Signature

1. This treaty shall be open for signature by all States in Stockholm, Sweden on 1 May 2020 until 28 October 2021. After that date, the treaty shall remain open for signature in New York at United Nations Headquarters until 31 December 2025.

2. This treaty is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the
Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Art 59: Entry into Force
1. This treaty shall enter into force on the first day of the month in the second month following the date of the deposit of the 50th instrument of ratification, acceptance,
approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this treaty after the deposit of the 50th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the
treaty shall enter into force on the first day of the month in the second month following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance,
approval or accession.

Question 1
In a historic event in Stockholm, on 2 May 2020, Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, along with world leaders from 24 other states sign the CO2 Treaty. A catastrophic weather event in South East Asia leads the governments of 29 more states to sign the treaty by 1 June 2020. By the end of June, 52 states deposit their instruments of ratification with the Secretary-General.

Meanwhile, in Canada, unstable gas prices and the collapse of housing markets in urban centers in Ontario and BC are having a major impact on the domestic economy. The Green Party Minority Government that had been in power since October 2019 loses the confidence of the House of Commons on 15 June 2020. The Conservative Party builds a coalition and forms government on 1 July 2020. On that day, the new Conservative Government vows that they will not ratify the CO2 Treaty, as to do so would further cripple Canada’s struggling economy.

1. It is July 2, 2020. Advise the new Conservative Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada’s current and future obligations under the CO2 Treaty. (5 mark, 150 words max)

Question 2
The United States is one of the states that deposited its instrument of ratification of the CO2 Treaty with the Secretary-General in June 2020. At the end of 2021, The Carbon Council reports that American CO2 emissions far exceed the calculated limit under the Treaty for that year. The US argues that The Carbon Council failed to consider the severe cold weather and winter storms that hit the North Eastern US for almost two months, forcing CO2 emissions up as citizens fought to stay warm. Several European leaders push back against this assertion, arguing that it is clear from the US President’s Twitter feed that he had no intention of abiding by the terms of the Treaty and made no effort to ensure compliance.

Several European States announce that they will impose a series of measures on the US in response to their violation of the Treaty. The most significant sanction is the suspension of certain provisions under the Convention on International Civil Aviation, namely by limiting the number of US civil aviation flights that may fly over their airspace and land in their territory.

In response, the US President tweeted:

“Our so-called “friends” in Europe are shooting themselves in the knee! If they go through with these illegal sanctions, in my great and unmatched wisdom, I will pull the
US and TERMINATE the CO2 Treaty.”
The Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs, caught between allies, wants to know:

2. (a) Is the suspension of the Convention on International Civil Aviation by Europe on the US legal? If so, may Canada join the Europeans in imposing similar measures on the US in response to the US’s failure to comply with the CO2 Treaty? (

(b) What legal impact could US withdrawal from the CO2 Treaty would have on the treaty?

Question 3
Now almost 20 years old, Greta Thunberg is Sweeden’s Ambassador to the United Nations. The UN General Assembly calls an emergency session to address concerns over compliance with the CO2 Treaty and growing tensions between states stemming from the imposition of European measures on the US, which have had a disruptive impact on global travel patterns. Greta prepares to sail from Sweeden to New York but plans to stop first in Halifax in an effort to persuade Canada’s new Conservative minority government to ratify the CO2 Treaty. On route to Canada, Thunberg’ yacht, the Malizia II, a German Flagged vessel, is intercepted by an unmarked vessel 215 NM off the coast of Halifax by US right-wing climate deniers who call themselves “SMOG.” Members of SMOG board the Malizia II with the plan of holding Ms.
Thuberg hostage until she agrees to their demands. The unmarked vessel sails away, never to be seen again.

As they sail West, Thunberg and her crew members overpower the two SMOGs and restrain them in the hull. The Malizia II eventually arrives in Halifax. As they approach the port, Thunberg calls the Canadian Coast Guard and requests their assistance in arresting the SMOGs still on her ship. Once in Halifax, the Coast Guard and the RCMP board the ship. The RCMP arrests the two American SMOG members and informs Thunberg that they must temporarily seize the Malizia II as it is now a crime scene. Several phones and briefcases are also seized from the vessel by the RCMP for evidentiary purposes. Outraged by the RCMP’s actions, Swedish authorities demand that the ship and all documents be returned. American authorities are also calling for the repatriation of the two US SMOG members, asserting that Canada has no authority to prosecute them. SMOG has also brought a lawsuit in New York against Thunberg and Sweden for damages, claiming that she assaulted and detained two of their members, who were simply seeking to make a statement about climate change, not unlike her own efforts as a child.

3. The Minister of Foreign Affairs wants answers to the following questions:

(a) Does Canada have the legal authority to arrest and prosecute members of SMOG for their crimes on the Malizia II? Do any other states have grounds to prosecute SMOG members? If so, which is the stronger claim?

(b) Under international law, does Ms. Thunberg have to cooperate with the RCMP? Can the RCMP seize the ship and documents and communication devices belonging
to Ms. Thunberg? Does Sweden have a basis for contesting the seizures? Why/why not?

(c) Can Thunberg or Sweden be sued in the US? Why/ why not?
 

PART II

For several years, the citizens of Alberta have felt isolated and ignored by the Federal Government in Ottawa. Some believe that American oil companies have been trying to stoke this sense of isolation amongst Albertans to draw the province into closer relations with the US. The growing sense of disconnect and disenchantment with Ottawa was deeply exacerbated by the election of a Green Party minority in the 2019 Federal Election after promising to shut down all Alberta Oil Sands production of crude oil by 2025. The Green Party only received 4% of the vote in Alberta, and Alberta did not elect a single Green Party MP. In December 2019, the
Governor General delivered the Speech from the Thrown reaffirming the Government’s commitment to shutting down the oil sands despite the clear lack of support for this initiative in Alberta.

Immediately after the Thrown Speech, members of Parliament from Alberta, the Provincial Government in Alberta, and several prominent members of the business community called for a WEXIT referendum. Within weeks, armed militias form in Northern Alberta, taking up arms and securing various facilities, including the federally owned Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. Rallies and protests break out across the province. WEXIT movement hardliners, including duly elected members of the Provincial government, are arrested by the RCMP for allegedly trespassing on federal property. Federal prosecutors manage to convince federally appointed
judges to hold the hardliners in custody without bail pending trial. Despite months of growing tensions, Prime Minister May refuses to back down on her
government’s plans to limit and eventually outlaw the production of crude oil in Alberta. On 21, February 2020, the Premier of Alberta issues the following statement:

Prime Minister May’s actions are a blatant violation of the Constitution, which protects Alberta’s rights to develop its natural resources. Her plan to shut down the oil sands threatens the rights, economic safety and ultimate security of Albertans. Ms. May does not represent the people of Alberta, and the interests of Albertans are nor represented by her Government. As Premier, I have no choice but to call for a Referendum on WEXIT. On 29 February 2020, Albertans will go to the polls and have their say about whether they want to stay part of the Canadian federation or declare independence as is their right under international law.

The following day, at the invitation of Premier Kenney, units of the US Army from Idaho and Montana move into Alberta and reinforce the local civilian militias. They surround the Provincial Legislature and other key government buildings as well as key access points to the oil sands. Fearing an armed confrontation with the US, Canadian Forces in the province are ordered by the Prime Minister to stay on their bases and not engage the Americans. On 29 February, 55% of Albertans vote in the Referendum. Of those who do, 98% vote in favour of independence. Each of the polling stations is manned by armed military members from the US Army and civilian
militias.

On 1 March 2020. Premier Kenney declares Alberta’s independence and signs a bilateral treaty with the President of the United States. The treaty outlines- among other things- the continued provision of military support to Alberta in exchange for preferential prices on exported crude oil. Outraged, Prime Minister May refuses to accept the outcome of the referendum or the declaration of Albertan independence and calls on the UN to stop US aggression in Canada.

Question 4:
The Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs has asked you to brief her on several issues. She does not need you to conduct a legal assessment of the domestic legality of the Alberta referendum, lawyers from the Department of Justice have been asked to assess that issue. You should, therefore, consider both possibilities (that the referendum was legal and that it was illegal) when considering the international law implications of the referendum and the validity of Albertan
independence.

4. (a) Do Albertans have a right under international law to declare their independence? Is the Premier’s declaration of Albertan statehood valid under international law?

(b) Is the presence of US troops in Alberta lawful? If not, what various actions can the government of Canada lawfully take in response?

(c) What action could the UN take against the US, and is such action likely (why/why not)?

(d) Is the treaty between Alberta and the US valid under international law?

This INAF5012: Law Assignment as been solved by our Law experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.

Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.