Conclusion and prayer for relief

For all the reasons stated above, Applicant requests that the Court to adjudge and declare:

1. That the Court may exercise jurisdiction over all claims in this case, since the Andler government is the rightful government the Republic of Aprophe;

2. That Rantania is responsible for the illegal use of force against Aprophe in the context of Operation Uniting for Democracy;

3. That Rantania may not permit its officials to execute the judgment in caseTurbando, et al., v. The Republic of Aprophe since the exercise of jurisdiction by Rantanian courts was in contradiction with the rules of international law;

4. ThatAprophe’s destruction of a building of the Mai-Tocao Temple did not violate international law.

Respectfully submitted,

Agents for the Applicant.

1 Statute of the International Court of Justice, 26 June 1945, art. 36 [hereinafter I.C.J. Statute].

2 See I.C.J. Statute, supra note 1 art. 38.

3 D.J. Harris, Cases and Materials on International Law, 6th ed. (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2004) at 145 [hereinafter Cases and Materials on International Law].

4 Donald K. Anton, Penelope Mathew, International Law Cases and Materials (New-York: Oxford University Press, 2005) at 51 [hereinafter International Law Cases and Materials].

5 Tinoco Arbitration, Aguilar-Amory and Royal Bank of Canada claims (Great Britain v. Costa Rica) 18 October 1923, Reports of international arbitral awards, Vol. 1, at 380.

6 United Natons Security Counsil, Letter dated 8 March 1950 From the Secretary-General to the President of the Security Counsil Transmitting a Memorandum on the Legal Aspects of the Problem of Representation in the United Nations S/1466 at 6 [hereinafter Legal Aspects of the Problem of Representation in the UN].

7 Who is a legitimate government in exile? Towards normative criteria for governmental legitimacy in international law, in Guy Goodwin-Gill/Stefan Talmon (eds.), The Reality of International Law. Essays in Honour of Ian Brownlie (Oxford University Press, 1999) at 536 [hereinafter Talmon].

8 Ibid.

9 See International Law Cases and Materials, supra note 4 at 47.

10See Talmon, supra note 7 at 509.

11Compromis at para. 24.

12See International Law Cases and Materials, supra note 4 at 50.

13See Cases and Materials on International Law, supra note 3 at 156.

14Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 23 May 1969, UN Doc. A/Conf. 39/27 entered into force on 27 Jan. 1980, art. 7.

15 See Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)) Preliminary objections, at para. 44.

16 Request for Advisory Opinion, Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of independence of Kosovo, 22 July 2012, I.C.J. at para. 109.

17 Recognition by the United Nations of the Representation of a Member State, ga Res 396 (V) 1950.

18 See Legal Aspects of the Problem of Representation in the UN, supra note 6 at 6.

19International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 19 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976, art. 25.

20See Talmon, supra note 7 at 512.

21See Talmon, supra note 7 at 521.

22Ibid 514.

23See Talmon, supra note 7 at 500.

24 Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention and Interference in the Internal Affairs of States, 9 December 1981 A/RES/36/103 [hereinafter Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention].

25 Ibid.

26Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961, entered into force on 24 April 1964. United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 500, art 43.

27Compromis Annex III art. 83.

28European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber decision of 2 May 2007 as to the admissibility of App. No. 71412/01 Agim Behrami and Bekir Behrami v. France , and App. No. 78166/01 Ruzhdi Saramati v. France, Germany and Norway, at para. 27.

29 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, G.A. Res. 2625(XXV), GAOR, 25th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/8082 (1970) [hereinafter Declaration Concerning Friendly Relations].

30 Responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, A/Res/56/83, 56^th Sess., 2002, art.1 [hereinafter Responsibility of States].

31 See International Law Commission, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-third Session, A/56/10 Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally wrongful acts with commentaries, art. 2 at 34 [hereinafter Responsibility of States Draft Articles].

32 See Responsibility of States, supra note 30 art.12 .

33 See Responsibility of States Draft Articles, supra note 31 at 55.

34Charter of the United Nations, 26 June 1945, art. 35 [hereinafter UN Charter].

35Ibid art. 33.

36See UN Charter, supra note 34, art. 39.

37Ibid art. 10.

38See UN Charter, supra note 34, art. 2(3).

39See Declaration Concerning Friendly Relations, supra note 29.

40Ibid.

41Definition of Aggression United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX), 14 December 1974, art. 3.

42See International Law Cases and Materials, supra note 4 at 50.

43Compromis at para. 38.

44See Inadmissibility of Intervention, supra note 24.

45Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S.), 1986 I.C.J. 14, at § 292.

46Compromis Annex I art. 1.

47Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law, 5th ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge university press, 2003) at 98.

48 Statute of the International Court of Justice, 26 June 1945, art. 38(1).

49 Charter of the United Nations, 26 June 1945, art. 2.

50 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, G.A. Res. 2625(XXV), GAOR, 25th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/8082 (1970).

51 Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, 6^th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003) at 321 [hereinafter Principles of Public International Law].

52 Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law, 6th ed. (New-York: Cambridge university press, 2008) at 699.

53 Ibid.

54 See Case Concerning Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy), 2010, I.C.J.

at 1.

55 See Case Concerning Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy), I.C.J., Memorial of The Federal Republic of Germany, 12 June 2009, at para.132.

56 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 23 May 1969, UN Doc. A/Conf. 39/27 entered into force on 27 Jan. 1980, art. 53.

57 Judgment of the Italian Court of Cassation, Ferrini v. Germany case, № 5044/4, 11 March 2004.

58 Michele Potesta, “State Immunity and Jus Cogens Violations: The Alien Tort Statute Against the Backdrop of the Latest Developments in the Law of Nations” (2010) 28.2 BJIL 582.

59 Areopag, Prefecture of Voiotia v. Federal Republic of Germany, Case No. 11/2000, Judgment of 4 May 2000.

60 See Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of Congo (Congo v. Rwanda) (2006) I.C.J. at para. 65.