Friday, 30 December 2011

WE WON IT BACK!


8th INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2011
The Road to Hong Kong; UiTM emerged Victorious
Lead Counsel   : Prosecutor (Farhan)
Co-Counsel : Prosecutor(Shazwina)
Lead Counsel : Defence(Hannah)
Co-Counsel : Defence(Ellena)







First Day
This year’s International Humanitarian Law Moot was held in Universiti of Malaya. The competition was held for 2 days and UiTM sent one team for both sides, Farhan Zafry bin Faiz and Shazwina Binti Ahmad Mazli for the prosecution, Ellena Binti Razif and Nor Hannah Binti Nasir for the defence.

The day of the competition began like any other competition would, with fear and trepidation, butterflies in everyone’s stomach. But it was the unnerving confidence of Dr. Irwin in us which kept us going. When we arrived at Universiti of Malaya, everyone got down to business right away. We went to the canteen and practiced our oral presentation right away. Breakfast came and went, and not long after that we were called to get ready for the preliminary rounds in our respective waiting rooms. The team had a pleasant surprise when the Jessup 2012 team paid them a surprise visit straight from the airport when they arrived from India that very morning, and it only served as a morale boost for the IHL mooters as their seniors and Miss Umi sacrificed their time to rest just to give moral support to them.

The first preliminary rounds went well for both sides with the UiTM team getting good reviews from the guest judges. One of the mooters was no longer a ‘virgin’ as the competition was the first time she mooted. The prosecution team went against Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin and the defence team went against Universiti Utara Malaysia. Constructive criticisms were a must and we took it as a motivation for us to do better in the second preliminary round. The second round also went well but the judges were more critical and pointed out our inefficiencies thus making us more determined to improve ourselves for the better. The prosecution team went against Universiti Utara Malaysia and the defence team went against Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin for the second preliminary round. When it finished, the team waited with bated breath for the results. Almost an hour was spent with everyone relieved that the preliminary rounds were over but tense to know the results and which four teams managed to continue to the semi-final rounds. The wait was soon over as everyone was called to the Tun Suffian Auditorium for the announcement of the results. The UiTM contingent all screamed with joy when both the prosecution and defence managed to advance to the semi-final round. The other two teams who managed to advance were Kolej Damansara Utama (KDU) for the prosecution and Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM) for the defence. We went back home for the day and our thoughts were circled around the obvious possibility that both UiTM’s prosecution and defence team were to go against each other in the semis. The next day held too many possibilities but Dr. Irwin advised us to get ample rest so that we would be refreshed for the next day.



Day 2
The second day of the competition started with a pleasant surprise with both UiTM’s prosecution and defence team going up against each other in the first semi-final round. Both the teams were relaxed and actually had fun as they have practiced countless of times together before the competition and that round was just like practice to them.
Semi- Final
Prosecutor ( MARA ) v Defence ( MARA )

But, winning the round never left their minds and both teams battled it out evenly. The senior mooters were also present for the round and the God and Goddess of mooting; Shairil Farhana Ruslan and Izzat Asyraf Zamri came to give the team moral support. The round was interesting as we had a very ‘colourful’ judge whom provided us with numerous anecdotes on life and the legal world. We were smiling from ear to ear after the impromptu short lecture. After the first round, the prosecution went against the defence team from USIM and the defence went against the prosecution form KDU. It was tense and the round was fierce. After both the semi-final rounds ended, the teams went to lunch and mingle with other participants while waiting for the results. Not long after that, all the participants were called to the Tum Suffian auditorium for the announcement of the result. It was truly a nail-biting moment as both teams could make it or break it. The announcement of which prosecution team which made it went first. Screams of joy erupted from the UiTM’s contingent when the prosecution team managed to advance to the finals.
Both Farhan and Shazwina were speechless and only managed to contain their tears of happiness. The happiness was cut to a halt when the defence team did not manage to make it to the finals. The adage ‘nothing is fair in love and war’ could not have been more apt for the situation. The defence team put up a strong fight and were truly remarkable but it was sad that the judges did not think that way too. It was the defence team from USIM that managed to advance to the final round



Final Round
The final round was held at the Tun Suffian auditorium and the judges were distinguished ones including Datuk Mary Chin, a High Court judge and a representative from the International Committee of the Red Cross and an international humanitarian law expert. It was truly a grand affair. The finals started around 4pm with an almost full auditorium of audiences.

 After battling it out and giving it our all, the curtain was set. After the judges made their deliberation, everyone was called back into the auditorium for the announcement of the winner of this year’s 8th International Humanitarian Law Moot Court Competition. Before announcing the winning team, the best oralist was announced. It was won by Mohd Azim form USIM’s defence team. The moment of truth arrived and everyone was holding their breath. When the Dean of the Law Faculty of Universiti Malaya announced ‘and the winner of the 8th International Humanitarian Law Moot Court Competition is Team 103 from Universiti Teknologi MARA! Farhan and Shazwina were shell-shocked and could not wipe the smile off their faces. They went down to receive the trophy and the rest is history… UiTM Shah Alam will represent Malaysia in the 10th International Humanitarian Law Moot Competition in Hong Kong March next year. Bon Voyage!

*** The Faculty awarded all four mooters with the “Tun Zaki Foundation : Award of Excellence” at the Annual Law Dinner on the 9th of December 2011, in Shah Alam Convention Centre

prepared by: Shazwina,Farhan,Hannah,Ellena

Monday, 31 October 2011

Auditions for Jessup 2014 Squad

Those who did not win automatic entry into the squad by winning one of the best oralist prizes at the recent Inter-Part Moot 2011, please turn up for an audition for selection into the squad at Cempaka Moot Court today, 6.00 pm. Just prepare one ground for submission based on the Inter-Part Moot question. 'Planktons' need not apply. You were selected last year when you were in Asasi. The new 'auditionees' will be joining you and the best oralist prizes winner as the new 'bilis' squad for Jessup 2014.

Friday, 14 October 2011

It's Back People!


                                              Join us and become our next superstar mooters!

DEAN'S CUP CHALLENGE 2011- THE MOOT PROBLEM



IN THE MOOT COURT OF APPEAL OF UITM SHAH ALAM
IN THE STATE OF SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN
APPEAL NO: W-007-TF OF 2011

BETWEEN
MARIA MERCEDES                                                                                   …APPELLANT
AND
ASPA LEE LAH                                                                                        …RESPONDENT

(In the matter of Civil Suit No: J-2627-EX 2011 in the
Moot High Court of UiTM Shah Alam in the State of Selangor Darul Ehsan)

Between
Maria Mercedes                                                                                                     …Plaintiff

And
Aspa Lee Lah                                                                                                    …Defendant

Material Facts

1.            Pedro Blanco and Aspa Lee Lah was a happily married couple, living in the luxurious neighbourhood of Mont Kiara. They have been together for 10 years on top of 7 years of courtship before.

2.            Pedro earns a steady income in “Grouch R Us”, a consultant firm specialising in strategies for monopolising markets. Due to increasing competition from young upstarts at the firm, Pedro decided the only way to get ahead is to get a doctorate to boost his curriculum vitae. He then went ahead and applied to pursue a doctorate in Competition Law at London School of Law (LSL), much to the chagrin of Aspa when this was eventually relayed to her. Aspa herself is a practicing lawyer of 12 years experience with Beh, Lee Lah & Co, but despite her persistent and constant persuasion, she did not manage to convince Pedro to change his mind. It was with a heavy heart that she let Pedro leave for London.

3.            It was in LSL that Pedro then met one Maria Mercedes, a curvaceous blonde with luscious lips and flowing locks that seemed a million miles apart from the cold and calculative Aspa. As Pedro spent more time with Maria, he further realised that this relationship would be good for his personal gain as well, seeing that Maria told him that she has numerous business contacts and Pedro could utilise that to bargain his way up in Grouch R Us.

4.            Pedro is not known to be a swinging Casanova but there was just something about this Maria that led Pedro to leave behind his stoic beliefs and embrace this new found way of abandon. Maria even knew of the existence of Aspa and convinced Pedro that all will be well and asked him to divorce Aspa so that they can be together. Driven with lust and desire, Pedro went back and immediately filed for divorce, citing Aspa’s constant lack of attention and putting her work before their marriage life as the main reason. Pedro immediately instructed for divorce proceedings to be taken out, and predictably did not seem to have pondered the repercussions that would follow.

5.            Shell-shocked, Aspa pondered on for days on what had befallen her until she stumbled across Pedro and Maria one day having lunch outside. Once Aspa found out about the adulterous affair between Pedro and Maria, her grief and sorrow quickly turned into anger and vengeance. She set out a scheme and formulated a plan to get even with the two lovebirds. Aspa followed Maria around, engaged private investigators to track her every day schedule and had nailed Maria’s daily habit to a tee. Eventually, she devised a clever way to seek revenge against the two of them after procuring enough information about Maria.

6.            Aspa created a bogus Facebook account, using the pseudonym of one “Dr. Irwan Shah Abdullah”, purportedly a neurosurgeon currently based in Singapore, on the pretext of getting close to Maria and getting the necessary information for her to use in the divorce proceedings and to turn the table against Pedro. Aspa knew that Pedro would not find out about her doings as she knew very well Pedro is technologically illiterate, and would not have time to even bother with checking the online network.

7.            Aspa used information relating to Maria’s personal life to make it appear as such that Maria had met “Dr. Irwan” before during one of the social events that Maria was accustomed to. Soon enough, what started as a fling had developed into something beyond, and Maria, the ever flirtatious one is overtly convinced that this Dr. Irwan would be able to provide more to her than Pedro could. Dr. Irwan seemed more poised, more assured in his future and it practically convinced Maria to leave Pedro. Once Maria had told Dr. Irwan of her current relationship with Pedro, Dr. Irwan had persuaded her to leave the “two timing dimwit”.

8.            The online relationship went on until Aspa was confident that she had what was necessary for her to use the evidence of this infidelity by Pedro. She was overjoyed when she managed to convince Maria not to give some business to Pedro but to Dr. Irwan instead.  

9.            By the time the news broke that Dr. Irwan was just a sham, Maria had already cut ties with Pedro. Maria threw a fit and proceeded with filing a civil suit against Aspa for misrepresentation and inducement.

10.         The matter was brought forth and furiously litigated before Alfonso Alejandro J (now JCA), known in the legal fraternity as one of, if not the most brilliant and outstanding judicial mind in the Commonwealth and one that has set numerous novel precedents through vigorous exercise of judicial activism. In August 2011, Alfonso Alejandro J delivered the following judgment:
In the first place, Miss Aspa here is an advocate and solicitor. Surely she would be in a good position to appreciate that her actions are well within the law. I do not think that such an experienced practitioner of the legal fraternity would have fallen into such a rage of jealousy and would discard her ethical practices to pursue this personal vendetta of hers.
Let us take the first matter pleaded. Miss Maria claimed that there had been a misrepresentation in inducing her to believe the existence of this fictitious character. One that she only knew through some online social networking interface. One that she had voluntarily engaged with without any form of inducement whatsoever. She had taken upon herself to let a stranger befool and trick her into believing that this Dr. Irwan Shah exists and she was ready to abandon this Pedro chap in a split second. This cannot stand on the basis that misrepresentation can only be upheld if an existing fact was misrepresented. In this case, was the fact that this Dr. Irwan Shah is alive and well and intended to marry Miss Maria an existing fact? I believe the answer is in the negative, and I thereby dismiss the first prayer sought.
Secondly, Miss Maria claimed that Aspa had deliberately and knowingly induced her to break a contract. Let us examine the facts. Miss Maria had disclosed, again to a stranger at that point, that she is in the midst of agreeing a deal with MyGrouper Inc, to procure the right to bring in and market a new revolutionary office management software, Easy Office or as it is better known, Easy-O. Miss Maria revealed that she has orally agreed to give the project to Pedro to act as consultant for the matter, but had a change of heart when this Dr Irwan Shah said “he” had a better candidate and that they can snag a more handsome profit out of the transaction if she agreed to hand it over to Dr. Irwan instead. Again, I find no basis for Miss Maria to claim that this had amounted to an interference with the contract. It was a mere suggestion on the part of Dr. Irwan, or Miss Aspa, whichever way you look at it, and I hold that such statements are not one that is sufficient to sustain the prayer sought.
Above all, I find her behaviour totally deplorable and reek of opportunism. I am a strong believer in maintaining and protecting the holiness of a family institution and Miss Maria’s actions in causing the downfall of one is, in my regard, appalling.
I accordingly dismiss both claims of Miss Maria, with costs to be taxed. I am very well aware that this ruling has great implications as it involves a novel interpretation of the law, but one which I am reassuringly accustomed to. I am therefore allowing Miss Maria to file an appeal with the Moot Court of Appeal UiTM as matters of great public importance are at stake here. I am confident that my views are correct and that the appellate court would also agree with the findings that I have made.”
11.         On 1st September 2011 Maria Mercedes filed an appeal with the Moot Court of Appeal UiTM on the following grounds:

11.1.   That there was a tort of misrepresentation on the part of Aspa Lee Lah when Aspa Lee Lah deliberately and knowingly represented herself to be one “Dr. Irwan Shah Abdullah” for fraudulent purposes; and

11.2.     That there was interference to a contract by Aspa Lee Lah when she caused Maria Mercedes to breach a contract with one Pedro Blanco.


INSTRUCTIONS

1.         Clarifications on the moot question can be submitted to the following email address:
            azinuddin.karim@gmail.com

2.         The dateline for submission of clarifications:
            Date    : 15 October 2011
            Time    : 5.00 p.m.

3.         Clarifications are only limited to the factual matrix contained in the moot question.

4.         The full set of clarifications (if any) will be provided through the Moot Club, the manner of which will be informed at a later date

THE WORKSHOP

I will let the pictures to tell the story =)

It was a full-house workshop! *claps*


                                                     our first speaker: Tuan Hurman Hussain
                                                      the judges for the demonstration

                                             our second speaker: Ruzaini Zulkifli


                                                                 

                                           The President & Vice President of Moot Club








Special thanks to:
-Kodie Hassan(President)
-Hidayah Kamsani(Vice-president)
-Zuraini Alimusa ( The Program Director)
-The committee( including the ad hoc)
-The mooters
-The Participants

Saturday, 1 October 2011

MOOT WORKSHOP 2011


The guest speakers for this workshop are:

1. Hurman Hussain

 One of the Jessup mooter in 2005. Currently he is the Magistrate in Telok Datok. Last year, the case of Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya was brought before him and later, the case was transferred to the Shah Alam High Court

2. Ruzaini Zulkifli
   He was the President of UiTM Moot Club in 2009 and mooted in Jessup Competition twice- 2008&2009.

3.Hazralika Hamzah
   Also known as the 'Goddess' in the UiTM Moot Club. She won the best oralist award in the Jessup Moot Competition National Rounds 2010. Currentlty she is one of the chambering students in Thomas Philip.

OFFICIAL AUDITION RESULTS

OFFICIAL RESULT: INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW MOOT COMPETITION AUDITIONS 28.10.2011

1.Hannah Nasir
2. Farhan Zafry
3.Shazwina Mazli
4.Ellena Razif
5.Dayang mazidah
6.Marlysa
7.Afif Daud
8.Zaidatul Aqila

Congratulations to the top four. They will represent our university in the IHL Moot Competition next month.

Friday, 23 September 2011

The List

This is the list of mooters who will be selected to represent our university in International Humanitarian Law Competition 2011. The selection will be made through an evening audition next Wednesday (28/9/2011). A brief discussion with Miss Ummi will take place at the moot court tomorrow.

Good Luck and all the best!

1. Hannah Nasir
2.Ellena razif
3.Farhan Zafry
4.Marlysa Razak
5.Dayang Mazidah
6. Afif 'Bam' Daud
7. Zaidatul 'Lala' Aqila
8. Shazwina Mazli
9. Asmarina Sakila

IHL MOOT PROBLEM 2011


Asia-Pacific Moot Court National Rounds 2011


Moot Problem

PROSECUTOR  v. DAVID DABAR

Before the International Criminal Court at The Hague


1. Vanilia obtained its independence in 1959. It is bordered by the Maxicum Sea on the east with a coastline of more than 500 kilometres, by the Republic of Berryland to the south and west and the Republic of Mingolia to the north. Vanilia is federal state divided into three provinces and has a population of around 20 million people. It is populated by the Lemi people who are mostly Protestant and Swarohi speaking (56% of population) and by the Nomag people who are Catholic and Nomagi speaking (32% of population). The Nomag people, though spread across the country, are in the majority in the province of Losovo, which borders Berryland. Many believe that the Nomags came to Vanilia from Berryland during the colonial period as indentured labourers. Others think that Losovo is in fact the original land of the Nomags, and that they later spread from Losovo into Berryland. It was made part of Vanilia only because of the existing colonial administrative divisions at the time of independence. Owing to the circumstances of the independence of the three countries which left many issues unresolved, Vanilia continues to have border disputes with its neighbours Mingolia and Berryland. There have been sporadic border incidents with exchange of fire across the borders.

2. After the independence, Vanilia adopted a political system of representative democracy with a multiparty system. The President appoints the leader of the party which wins the majority in the legislative elections as Prime Minister, who then chooses the members of his cabinet among elected deputies. The People's United Democratic Party (PUDP) has formed the successive governments since independence. Though the PUDP claims to be secular and have countrywide support, it is mainly supported by the Lemis. Its main political agenda is said to be the protection and promotion of Lemi rights and well-being (which feel that they were discriminated against as a minority during the colonial era). The Federal Democratic Party (FDP) has been the main opposition party and openly claims to protect the interests of the Nomags.

3. There is a general resentment among Nomags that they have been neglected by the successive governments and are not proportionately represented in the political decision-making which has resulted in the neglect of their welfare and economic development. The Nomag community has been demanding since the proclamation of the Federal Constitution that the Nomagi language be declared as an official language of Vanilia. Successive governments have refused to accept the demand. Some organisations also claim that the Nomags are under-represented in the main sectors of economy and discriminated against in the public service. Ever since independence, some Nomag groups have been spearheading the idea of an independent Losovo state.

4. In January 2008, general elections were held in Vanilia. The PUDP again obtained the majority of seats in the federal legislative assembly and formed the government. Three months later, in the provincial elections, the FDP won an overwhelming majority in the Losovo Provincial Assembly and formed the executive council. In August 2008, a radicalized faction of the FDP established the Nomag Democratic Resistance Alliance (NDRA), with the avowed objective to obtain the independence of Losovo. David Dabar, elected to the Losovo Provincial Assembly on behalf of the FDP and in charge of law and order affairs in the Losovo Executive Council was seen as the figurehead of the NDRA. Several support groups were formed in different regions of Vanilia with similar goals. Media reports in Losovo indicated that this was the result of disenchantment with the successive federal governments and disappointment with the failure to achieve a fair representation of Nomag interests at the federal level.

5. In Rizoba, the capital city of Losovo, on 15 October 2008, the day of Vanilia's independence, a demonstration of around 500 people belonging to the NDRA hoisted a "Losovo national flag", while desecrating and burning the Vanilia national flag. On the same night, five people belonging to the NDRA were arrested in their residences and charged under the Respect for National Symbols Act. These arrests led to street protests in different parts of Vanilia. After these incidents, a group called the Vanilia Patriotic Forum (VPF) was formed in Rizoba mainly consisting of Lemi people. It claimed that its main objective was to protect the sovereignty and political integrity of Vanilia and that it would support the federal government to the greatest possible extent to achieve these objectives. The VPF opened its central secretariat in the 'Pleasant Gardens' area of Rizoba, which was predominantly a Lemi-inhabited area, and actively started to recruit new members, both men and women. The NDRA also started to accelerate its recruitment and declared, on 30 November 2008, that it was breaking away from the FDP. David Dabar was proclaimed the chief of the NDRA under whose leadership the NDRA would campaign for the achievement of the independence of Losovo. Dabar remained a member of the Losovo Executive Council.

6. A few days later, on 5 December 2008, students from the Rizoba University formed the Nomag Student Alliance (NSA) and announced that they would establish co-ordination with other groups fighting for Nomags' rights. On 8 December 2008, the NSA issued a call for the indefinite boycott of classes in the University which they declared would be enforced, if necessary, in "militant forms". During the following weeks, factory workers, journalists and university teachers also formed pro-independence associations. In Losovo, the situation became more and more tense with regular protests and demonstrations during the month of January 2009.
                                                                 
7. On 2 February 2009, the NDRA convened a meeting in which the NSA and other pro-independence associations took part. In the discussions, the participants agreed that they should all coordinate their work and activities for the independence of Losovo and seek the necessary national and international support. The final declaration indicated that all associations would take guidance from the NDRA and its leader David Dabar.

8. On 3 February 2009, there were several attacks on the Lemis of Losovo in five towns near the provincial border, leading to the loss of 126 lives with 239 people injured. The media reported that the increased level of violence in the last months made it difficult to identify who was responsible for the attacks. However, it was strongly believed by the government of Vanilia, and the most important newspapers of Vanilia, including those based in Losovo, that the NSA was behind these attacks.

9. Several newspapers published a report based on an NDRA internal document, which said that the organization would strive towards eliminating the influence of Lemi in Losovo. Government authorities of Vanilia confirmed the expulsion of Lemis out of Losovo into the neighbouring provinces. Temporary camps were set up by the Vanilia government near the border to shelter the displaced families. Neither the NDRA nor the NSA deny their involvement in the forced expulsion of Lemis, but alluded in their press releases that Lemis that had left the province would be welcomed back in only after Losovo had achieved independence and on the condition that they would swear allegiance to the new state of Losovo.

10. On 10 February 2009, a pro-Lemi TV channel reported that increasing attacks on Lemi residences in Rizoba by NSA members were to be expected. The same evening, David Dabar went around the Pleasant Gardens area along with NDRA members and ordered the latter to erect roadblocks to control the movement of residents. He explained to the media that they wanted to check every movement through the locality, in particular to protect the Lemis from growing violence. The NDRA cadres said that they would not allow any one to enter the area. On the same night, NSA members easily went into Pleasant Gardens without being stopped by NDRA roadblocks. The NSA members, divided into groups, went to the residences and forcibly brought out more than 400 Lemi residents into the area's main square. The NSA members divided the residents into two groups: men in one group and women and children in another. They were told that they would be brought to the border until their safety would be ensured in Rizoba. After an hour, several trucks left the area without any hindrances.  The trucks were granted unimpeded passage out of Pleasant Gardens through NDRA roadblocks. On 12 February, media reported that the Lemi people from the Pleasant Gardens locality were taken by the NSA and kept in camps, 60 kilometres away from Rizoba. The media of Berryland also highlighted that the camps were actually located just across the border, on the territory of Berryland, though this territory remained a contentious one as Vanilia also claimed it despite an arbitral award in favour of Berryland, which was disputed by Vanilia.

11. Responding to criticism, Dabar declared that the NDRA's aim was secession from Vanilia. There was no intention to target or injure Lemi civilians. On the contrary, measures had been taken to ensure their protection from the disorganised violence caused by the federal government's acts. He said, however, that the NDRA also expected Lemi civilians to appreciate the genuine demand of Nomag people, otherwise it would become difficult in such tense situations to control the emotionally stirred-up and politically agitated Nomag population. He further invited humanitarian organisations, including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to visit the camps.

12. The Prime Minister of Vanilia, Nijimon Yavi, issued a stern warning to those involved in the displacement of Lemi people and deployed security forces in Losovo with the backup support of 300 army soldiers. In the next few days, it was reported that, across Vanilia, several attacks had taken place on property of the Vanilian government, as well as on private property. There were instances of weapon-wielding young men attacking Lemi people, and in different incidents 39 people were killed. In some instances, Lemi people from Losovo were again forced to leave their residence and flee to other provinces. Several groups claimed responsibility for some of the attacks. The month of March witnessed continuous protests by NDRA supporters across Vanilia but mainly in the province of Losovo. Vanilian security and intelligence forces arrested a chain of weapons suppliers operating from Berryland whom they claimed the NDRA was acquiring weapons from.

13. On 22 May 2009 at around midnight, a camp of the security forces on the outskirts of Rizoba was attacked by armed men and in the pitched battle that ensued between the armed men and security forces, the camp site was in ashes by the next morning. 156 bodies of the security forces and 53 unidentified bodies were recovered from the site. It was reported by local officials that armed men were continuing their attacks on government property, mainly offices and vehicles, as well as on Lemi people and their property. Three highways connecting Losovo with other cities in Vanilia were blocked by armed youths at Losovo borders.

14. On 28 May 2009, David Dabar convened a press conference and declared that the NDRA would organise a rally the next day and declare the independence of Losovo. On 29 May 2009, thousands of people gathered on the Rizoba University grounds. Dabar greeted the crowds and thanked them for being supportive of the cause of the liberation of Losovo. He announced that the FDP government had issued a declaration of independence. Losovo was now an independent sovereign country. The NDRA was soon to be in control of the entire province. He said that from now on, the Losovo administration was going to be in the hands of Nomag and for the interests of the Nomags. All Nomags in other parts of Vanilia were welcome to settle in Losovo to participate in the development of the new country.  Adopting a warning tone, he said that non-Nomag people could remain in Losovo. However, he added, all, including Lemi people, should respect the law of the country. At the end of the meeting, he introduced Wilson Mula, leader of the FDP, and announced that he would be leading the interim government for the next one year, until a new constitution was drafted and a constitutionally-elected government took over.

15. On 2 June 2009, Berryland recognised Losovo, followed by Mingolia on 4 June. In an extension of solidarity to a fellow people, the Berryland government waived the visa requirement for Losovo citizens for one year, which it said would help stabilising Losovo. The Berryland Prime Minister also promised to extend the necessary support to the newly formed Losovo government.
                                                  
16. With regard to international relations, in his first press conference, Mula announced that Losovo wished to maintain friendly relations with all countries and that it would succeed to all multilateral international treaties to which Vanilia was a party that dealt with human rights and international humanitarian law. With regard to other treaties, including bilateral treaties, they would be reviewed within the next two years. The first official act of the new government was to grant by decree Losovo citizenship to all Lemis residing in the province. Other residents were to be granted citizenship at their request if they undertook to live in Losovo and swore allegiance to the new State. A new law on citizenship was soon to be adopted.

17. On 5 June 2009, the Prime Minister of Vanilia, Nijimon Yavi, said on national television that Losovo province was an integral part of Vanilia and blamed neighbouring countries, in particular Berryland. Supporting the NDRA and its secessionist stance constituted an unacceptable intrusion in Vanilia's internal affairs in violation of the UN Charter and would be dealt with in an appropriate manner. In manifest contradiction with the situation on the ground, he said that Vanilian security forces were in total control of the situation in Losovo, that they would take into custody the main leaders of the NDRA soon, and that they would try them in accordance with law. Meanwhile, NDRA fighters continued to be in direct confrontation with Vanilian forces at the Losovo borders. The NDRA successfully thwarted the Vanilian security forces' attempts to gain control of Losovo territory, let alone to re-take control of Rizoba. The Vanilia government called for international support and expressed concerns about the security of the Lemi people in Losovo.

18. On 8 June 2009, a message was circulated among NDRA and NSA members that Vanilian forces were employing civilians to counter the NDRA control. In the night of 9 June 2009, more than 500 Vanilian forces were attacked when they moved into Losovo, but nonetheless managed to come within 100 kilometres of Rizoba. Fierce fighting continued through the night resulting in heavy casualties on both sides.

19. During the night of 10 June, NDRA fighters patrolling Rizoba and reinforcing their control over the city took control of the VPF secretariat office. They found around 150 people, including women and children, having taken their quarters in the building. Interrogated by the NDRA, they replied that because of the continuing fear of attacks against them, they had taken refuge in the secretariat's premises to spend the night. After searching the premises, 16 Vanilia-manufactured weapons were found in one of the rooms located at the back of the building. When questioned about the weapons, the occupants said they knew nothing about them. The NDRA fighters then separated the women and children, and took the men along with them. The next morning, David Dabar declared that they had successfully thwarted an attempt of Vanilian forces, wearing civilian clothing, taking shelter in the VPF secretariat to imminently attack, in co-ordination with other forces entering Losovo, the new government of Losovo.

20. On 11 June 2009, the 'Losovo Messenger' daily published the details of 108 people who were taken into custody by the NDRA during the night of 10 June. It further reported that the details were provided by the family members who were there on that night at the VPF secretariat and all were confirmed as not belonging to Vanilian forces. On the same evening VPF members convened a press conference and introduced 12 members who were reported to have escaped from the hands of the NDRA fighters. They declared that they were ill-treated and subjected to severe beatings. When journalists asked about the others that were taken away, they said they were doubtful whether they were still alive. In response to these allegations, the NDRA issued a statement that all those who were questioned on the night of 10 June at the VPF secretariat were either active supporters of the Vanilian forces, if not members thereof. It added that the NDRA had successfully thwarted the attempt of Vanilian forces in the garb of civilians, and that they were no longer in their custody. However, the NDRA failed to clarify the whereabouts of those who were taken away. On 22 June 2009, newspapers reported that the human remains of 15 persons were found in a suburban area. They were later identified as some of those who were taken by the NDRA on 10 June.

21. In the last week of June 2009, it was reported by the media that the camps, in which Lemis were kept since the 10 February 2009, were evacuated and the people were allowed to go. It was further reported that most had not returned to Rizoba. It was unclear whether they had been prevented to return or did not wish to return because of the security situation.

22. As the situation worsened, on 6 July 2009, the Minota Economic Forum (MEF), a regional organisation working for economic co-operation in the region, appealed to all parties to restrain themselves and to declare a ceasefire, and requested the United Nations Security Council to intervene in the matter. It further invited the Vanilian government and the FDP to Geneva to negotiate a solution to the conflict. The Vanilian government expressed its willingness and nominated a ten-member delegation. The FDP also expressed its willingness to send a delegation provided that the issue of secession remained non-negotiable. The FDP nominated its delegation headed by Mr William Tanatia, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the interim government of Losovo.

23. Meanwhile, both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch had reported violations of international humanitarian law by both sides: killings, torture, displacement of civilians, attacks on civilians and destruction of civilian property. At the instance of several complaints to Office of the Prosecutor, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) initiated proceedings against several individuals from both sides of the conflict.

For the purpose of the present case against David Dabar, the prosecutor decided to bring the following charges against him:

I.  David Dabar was charged, on 26 July 2009, with the crime against humanity of 'deportation or forcible transfer of population' under Article 7(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Criminal Court  for acts committed during the incidents that took place in Rizoba city on or about the 3 and 12 February 2009.

II.  David Dabar was charged, on 26 July 2009, with the war crime of 'taking of hostages' under Article 8(2)(c)(iii) of the Statute of the International Criminal Court for acts committed during the incidents that took place in Rizoba on or about 12 February 2009 and thereafter.

III. David Dabar was charged, on 26 July 2009, with the war crime of 'killing' under Article 8(2)(a)(i) of the Statute of the International Criminal Court for acts committed during the incidents that took place in Rizoba on or about 10 June 2009.

24. Based on the warrant issued by the ICC Prosecutor, and confirmed by a pre-trial chamber of the ICC, plain-clothed Vanilian security forces took David Dabar into custody from his residence in Rizoba on 5 August 2009 and surrendered him to the ICC for trial.


PREPARATION OF THE BRIEF

You have been nominated to act either the prosecution or defence for David Dabar in relation to the THREE (3) charges above.

In preparing the brief, the counsels for both Prosecution and Defence are expected to establish the following issues:

-     The type (s) of armed conflict that is applicable to the present case

-    The Elements of Crimes for each of the 3 charges against David Dabar based on the United Nations Doc. PCNICC/2000/1/Add.2 (2000)

-    Written and oral arguments on behalf of the Prosecution and Defence are to be confined to these THREE (3) charges only. 

-     Other relevant issues and jurisprudence that are applicable to the present case

The following information are to be noted:

-    Vanilia is a party to the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their two Additional Protocols of 1977.

-     Vanilia ratified the Statute of the International Criminal Court on 25 October 2006.

-   Questions relating to jurisdiction of the ICC need not be raised unless they are substantially linked to the merits of the case.


-   STATUTE OF THE ICC: ELEMENT OF CRIMES

  • Article 7 (1) (d)  -  Crime against humanity of deportation or forcible transfer of population

Elements of Crimes

1. The perpetrator deported or forcibly transferred, without grounds permitted under international law, one or more persons to another State or location, by expulsion or other coercive acts.

2. Such person or persons were lawfully present in the area from which they were so deported or transferred.

3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the lawfulness of such presence.

4. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.

5. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.


  • Article 8 (2) (c) (iii) - War crime of taking hostages

Elements of Crimes

1. The perpetrator seized, detained or otherwise held hostage one or more persons.

2. The perpetrator threatened to kill, injure or continue to detain such person or persons.

3. The perpetrator intended to compel a State, an international organization, a natural or legal person or a group of persons to act or refrain from acting as an explicit or implicit condition for the safety or the release of such person or persons.

4. Such person or persons were either hors de combat, or were civilians, medical personnel or religious personnel taking no active part in the hostilities.

5. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established this status.

6. The conduct took place in the context of and was associated with an armed conflict not of an international character.

7. The perpetrator was aware of factual circumstances that established the existence of an armed conflict.


  • Article 8 (2) (a) (i) - War crime of wilful killing

Elements of Crimes

1. The perpetrator killed one or more persons.

2. Such person or persons were protected under one or more of the Geneva Conventions of 1949.

3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established that protected status.

4. The conduct took place in the context of and was associated with an international armed conflict.

5. The perpetrator was aware of factual circumstances that established the existence of an armed conflict.
                                                      

Monday, 19 September 2011

UiTM Moot Club's Eidul Fitri Celebrations 2011

There was a carnival atmosphere in UiTM's Law School as the mooters celebrated Hari Raya 2011. In keeping with the club's reputation of also being a food club, the 'pot luck' mode of contribution resulted in too much food being available. For the first time in Moot Club history, there was food left over. Here are the pictures.




































Even the senior mooters from the Jessup 2010 National Championship team showed up. Faez Razak is not around as he is now in King's College London doing his LL.M.













Here is some of the great food brought by various members of the club.














 











 


 


















There were games after the first round of eating and the mooters worked off some of the weight gained.












At the end of the day, after multiple visits to the buffet table, there was still so much food left over. Therefore, the only thing left to do was to 'bungkus' and take it back home. Kodie (Moot Club President) and Hidayah (Moot Club Vice-President), led by example.




















Photographer for the day: Marlyza