Humanity has always recognized that individuals should have the right to defend themselves from violence. In international law it’s given that the most fundamental aim of the Charter and the UN organization created by the Charter is to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. This has been seen many times throughout history as in the case of The Caroline case*. It stands to reason that any right to use force as an exception to the general prohibition on resort to force would be open to interpretation. The main goal is to allow a state to act in unilateral or collective self-defense only “if an armed attack occurs, however it can be seen throughout history that this can and has been flexible according to the situation. This Charter falls into one of two categories: scholarship, judicial decisions, and government policies that support the plain terms,and scholarship and government policies that advocate expanding the right to use force beyond its provisions. These two categories have various labels but are most commonly referred to as the “strict” interpretations versus the “broad” interpretations. Some refer to the groups as the “restrictivists” versus the “antirestrictivists.” The divergence of views can be explained to some extent by the differing assessments they make about the resort to military force. The UN Charter was drafted at the end of World War II, when commitment to ending the use of force was high. Fifty years later, perhaps frustrated by the lack of success with other peaceful means, writers in militarily powerful states urged relaxing of the rules against force to respond to things like terrorism, weapons programs, and computer network attacks. These arguments have been met by writers newly interested in whether the use of force can be justified under the principles of necessity. Rules beyond the UN Charter but equally important in the long history of normative thinking on killing in self-defense. An example in which a normal person might understand would be in the case of one of my clients. They had heard that someone had the intent to attack them and cause them physical harm, so they got a jump on their soon to be attacker and disabled them with a baseball bat. This ended the threat, but unfortunately also landed them in jail. The US government heard from sources that a terrorist attack was going to take place on American soil, and attacked before the terrorists had a chance to take action. You can see as a result that the situation can determine whether self defense is “right or wrong”. On and individual basis you can not defend yourself against violence until the attack has already taken place but in groups you have the right to defend yourself against and attack from another group. You can see how this would cause a bit of a headache.
An attorney is the most stressful job in the world. But even though that’s the case, it is one of the most noble jobs there is. Of course, there are other noble professions, but a lawyer can change the life of a person. Depending on the level of expertise and tactic of the lawyer, he can put the person in jail or free the person from legal obligations.
This is also true for International law. The primary role of an International legal defense attorney is to safeguard the client’s constitutional rights. The task of the lawyer is very crucial. It involves a lot of things such as performing legal research, interviewing the witness, creating exhibits to be used as court evidence, examining the crime scene, and a whole lot more.
A criminal defense lawyer is one of the highest paying jobs. The average salary is $79,000, although the salary ranges from $45,000 to $130,000. The more experienced and credible the lawyer is, the higher the pay. The internal legal defense attorney has the highest rate, but it takes a lot of studies and experience to reach the level of international legal defense lawyer.
Attorney Luis McDavid, a good friend of mine is also an internal legal defense attorney. He has been practicing law for 25 years. He has a successful career, but he is still single though. He devotes his entire life to his profession. Staying single is a personal choice because he feels that he will not be able to spend quality time with his family because he is so passionate with his profession. Although he does not have a family of his own, he still feels blessed though because he was able to help a lot of people through his practice.
He has two siblings, three nephews, and two nieces. He considers them as his family and so even if he was single, he prefers a big house so that they can sleep over whenever they visit him. Attorney McDavid is residing in a small town, but he is planning to move to Anniston, Alabama. He contacted several real estate agents in Anniston, but ultimately hired one from The Joey Crews Team because of their sterling reputation in the business of real estate. The agents presented a few property that matches his lifestyle and budget. Attorney Luis has three prospect properties, but still undecided. There are a lot of beautiful properties in Alabama, specifically in Anniston. So, whatever your preference, budget, and lifestyle, you can surely find one that suits you perfectly. Attorney Luis and his real estate agent will meet next week to finalize everything.
Image Credit: homeloanadvisor.co
I live in a condominium building. One morning as I stepped outside of my unit to head for work, two of my neighbors were in a noisy squabble, which immediately caught my attention. One of them whom I’ve known for 3 years has been living next to my unit. These two women were disputing over something. The other neighbor frenzied the hallways with angry tones of voice. First thing that came into my mind was to do something. Before any of them could cause a more serious trouble, it was a logical thing to act in between them. Loud voices and quarrels are against the rules and regulations of the condominium so they needed to calm down before anyone could call security. I took some time to help them get easy with the problem. I told them that there’s a better way to address this issue. I escorted my friend back to her unit and gave her both friendly and legal advice. I told her it’s a good idea to look for immediate actions and check into the insurance policy of the building.
That could be one situation I don’t encounter everyday. My typical day as an attorney normally starts at 6am having coffee while checking emails. I usually go out of my condo five minutes before 7am. But that situation in the hallway had disrupted my routine. I should have already been in the train bustling my way to the law firm office. But I can’t blame circumstances. It gave me a good reason to be late at work.
The reason of my neighbors’ early morning dispute was about a water leak damage. It’s actually a very common dispute faced by a building’s unit owners. The downstairs neighbor who was quite bad-tempered complained that lots of water has been dripping from the ceiling. The water leak was coming from the bathroom of my friend’s unit. It caused a look of catastrophe to the downstairs neighbor’s walling and carpeted floors and she’s asking my friend to pay for the water removal fee, as well as other damages in her unit. Seeking legal counsel to bring suit against my friend was also part of her plans.
Lucky for my friend, she has me, and we also have a friend who is an expert in water damage problems. His name is Jon and he is the owner of the website MyWebPal. From the site’s name, you can easily determine that Jon has nothing but help for people who would look for it. He has a page on that site dedicated to the problem that our friend is facing and when I called him to explain the situation, he was more than happy to come to our rescue.
Image Credit: seasonedcitizenprepper.com
While Jon took care of the water removal, my role as a friend was to be there for her and be her lawyer. The water leak was coming from her and the resulting damage was her responsibility. But she’s glad that it wasn’t a case of negligence like overflowing bathtub or anything like that. Working on the settlement was not a straightforward matter. It was not as simple as letting all the insurance company cover the damages. The big problem stemmed mainly from the neighbor’s motives. It’s been obvious that she wanted to take advantage of the situation. It was supposed to be a simple problem but she made it extensive that she wanted my friend’s money to pay for the purchase of a new carpet and cans of paints. It was something beyond our control. But my friend chose the higher road. She knew how to compose herself and assert her rights. She knew that raving and yelling back will do nothing to help solve a problem.
Image credit: mynacc.org
For pretty much 100 years, international law continues to be at the receiving end connected with continual complaints within the policy and instructional worlds. This law, also known as the legislation of nations, includes the internet of rules put together by states all over the world over hundreds of years via treaties and habitual methods, some regional, and a few worldwide. Its guidelines control problems from the really technical (exactly how our computer systems connect internationally or even the measures of airport terminal runways) to aspects of widespread global issues (guidelines regarding ships across the ocean or ozone air pollution) to the virtually all political for individual states (like whenever they can consider war or even the minimum standards for human rights).
The initial problem in international law stems from those political figures, commentators, and political researchers that view it as essentially inadequate, a point these people view as demonstrated from the moment the League of Nations neglected to implement the Versailles Agreement regime contrary to the Axis in the 1930s. However people who fully realize exactly how states connect with one another, regardless of whether diplomats or instructors, have long found this particular critique an unrealistic caricature. Although some rules have dissuasive control of some states, numerous or perhaps most significant rules, are often followed, with severe effects for violators, such as ostracism, two way reactions, or perhaps sanctions. A list of routinely respected rules is gigantic, from those found on worldwide trade to the legislation belonging to the marine to the management of diplomats towards the specialized areas mentioned previously. The majority of international assistance is based in a few legal rules.
The 2nd problem to international law originates from home-based attorneys and a few legal professors who stated that international law is not actually “law” since it does not have the framework of domestic law, particularly a professional or police force that may impose the guidelines. But this too is really a canard. Since the English law scholar H.L.A. Hart noted greater than a 50 years ago, you don’t have to have ideal enforcement to get a rule to be “law,” provided that the parties treat the policies as law. With international law, states definitely interact in a manner that exhibits they treat these rules as law. They anticipate these to end up being adopted and arrange unique opprobrium and reactions for law violators. Definitely, effective states will get away with a few legislation violations easier than fragile states, however that has nothing related to whether international law is law.