President Black of the Republic of Pasensya (RP) had a telephone conversation with President Blue of the People’s Republic of Conquerors (PRC). In that conversation, both leaders agreed that they will both pull-out all their vessels, civilian or otherwise, sea crafts and other ships from the hotly disputed Kalmado Shoal area within eight (8) days in order to de-escalate the situation. After eight days, all RP ships and vessels have left the area. However, several military and civilian ships carrying the PRC flag remained in the area and began construction of a dock that could provide fuel and other supplies to vessels passing by.
Assuming that President Black and President Blue both had full capacity to represent their states and negotiate with each other under their respective systems of government, and further assuming that both leaders acknowledge the existence of the conversation, is the verbal agreement via telephone binding under international law? Explain. (5%)
Assuming the answer to (a.) is in affirmative, does that agreement constitute a Treaty under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law on Treaties? (2%)
What are the sources of International Law? (2%)
What is opinio juris in International Law? (1%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
(a) Yes, the verbal agreement is binding; (b) no, it is not a VCLT treaty; (c) sources are conventions, custom, general principles, and subsidiary means; and (d) opinio juris is the belief that practice is obligatory. Under customary law, oral state
Unlock the full Political Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Under customary international law, what is the legal status of an oral agreement concluded between heads of state with full capacity?
Oral agreements by authorized heads of state are legally binding under customary international law.
Under Article 2(1)(a) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, why is a verbal telephone agreement not a VCLT treaty?
The VCLT applies exclusively to international agreements concluded in written form.
Which of the following is designated as a primary source of international law under Article 38(1) of the ICJ Statute?
Article 38(1) of the ICJ Statute lists international custom as a primary source of international law.
What does the concept of opinio juris denote in customary international law?
Choices available with full access.
Which element distinguishes customary international law from mere diplomatic habit, usage, or comity?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Binding Oral Agreements
Under customary international law and international jurisprudence such as the Eastern Greenland case, oral or verbal agreements entered into by heads of state possessing full capacity to represent their nations are legally binding upon the contracting states. International law does not mandate strict formal writing as an absolute prerequisite for international obligations to arise between sovereign nations. When authorized state representatives express clear consent to be bound during diplomatic negotiations or communications, an enforceable international obligation is created regardless of whether the agreement was transmitted verbally or recorded in writing.
2. VCLT Treaty Definition
Under Article 2(1)(a) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), a treaty is strictly defined as an international agreement concluded between states in written form and governed by international law. While unwritten or verbal international agreements remain valid and legally binding under customary international law, they do not qualify as treaties under the specific framework of the VCLT. The VCLT rules apply exclusively to written instruments, without impairing the inherent legal force of non-written international commitments.
3. International Law Sources
Under Article 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, the primary sources of international law are international conventions, international custom, and general principles of law, with judicial decisions and highly qualified teachings serving as subsidiary means. Customary international law requires state practice combined with opinio juris. Opinio juris sive necessitatis denotes the psychological element or legal conviction of states that a particular practice is rendered obligatory by international law, distinguishing legal custom from mere courtesy, usage, or diplomatic comity.