KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY

NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI – 580025, KARNATAKA

8th INTERNATIONAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Date: 20th and 21st August 2022

Page | 1

INDIAN ROOTS AND GLOBAL HEIGHTS

 INDEX

SN Details Page No
I. About the University 01
II. Official Schedule 02
III. Rules of the Competition 03
1. Definitions 03
2. Eligibility Criteria 03
3. Anonymity of the Teams 03
4. Registration 04
5. Team Code 05
6. Code of Conduct 05
7. Submission of Written Memorials 05
8. Structure of the Competition 06
9. Evaluation of Written Memorials 07
10. Evaluation of Oral Rounds 08
11. Trophies and Certificates 08
12. Scouting 08
13. Language and Entries 08
14. Dress Code 08
15. Removal of Difficulties 08
IV. Moot Proposition 09
V. Officers and Organising Committee 22
VI. Important Instructions and Contact 23
Details
VII. Annexure I 24

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. i

 ABOUT THE UNIVERSITY

The Karnataka State Law University was established in 2009 with the avowed object
of providing quality legal education in the State of Karnataka. It is only one of its kind and
unparalleled in India. It is making all efforts for the growth of legal education in Karnataka by
including appropriate components to professionally orient the students. The University has
catered to the needs and requirements of legal education bringing uniformity in methods of
imparting education and conducting examinations across the State providing appropriate
optional courses for horizontal mobility. It is the single largest affiliating Law University in
the country affiliating 108 law colleges spread over the entire State of Karnataka and operating
its own Law School at the main campus in Hubballi.

Our vision is “To transform Karnataka State into a legally conscious society, by providing
quality legal education that is professionally competent and socially relevant so as to realize
the constitutional primordial goal of social, economic and political justice and secure human
rights to every common man. Strive to promote the culture of law and justice in the institutions
of state, non-state organisations and every individual by providing informal legal education,
training and legal service. Above all, inculcate in everyone a spirit of high moral and human
values.” In this endeavour, the University is making all efforts through academic and extension
activities to realise the vision. The activities of the University are reinforced by its mission to
inter alia strive for excellence in professional legal education and research and establish
responsible institutions and produce altruistic individuals.

With a view to provide a suitable environment wherein the law students can hone and chisel
their professional skills, the KSLU has initiated an International Law Moot Court Competition.
This year, the University is hosting the Eighth International Law Moot Court Competition on
20th and 21st August 2022. The emphasis on international law is in keeping with the process of
globalization wherein the world is perceived as a global village. In this regard, providing
appropriate platform for young law students across the country to come in contact, interact and
understand each other is another incidental objective involved.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 1 of 24

 OFFICIAL SCHEDULE

SL.NO PARTICULARS DATES

1. Announcement of the Moot 13th July 2022

Proposition and Rules

2. Last Date for Registration by 12th August 2022

submitting Registration Form

3. Confirmation of the Registration 16th August 2022

4. Last date for Submission of Copies of 15th August 2022

Written Memorials

5. Inaugural Programme, Preliminary 20th August 2022

Rounds and Quarter Final Rounds

6. Semi Final Round, Final Round, 21st August 2022

Announcement of the Trophies and

Valedictory Programme

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 2 of 24

 RULES OF THE COMPETITION

1. DEFINITIONS
1.1. “Applicant” means that side of the Participating Team which argues on behalf of the
Applicant at any given point in the Competition.
1.2. “Competition” means the KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition -
2022.
1.3. “Organising Committee (OC)” means the Committee, including any other persons
specifically authorized for the administration and conduct of the Competition and all
events leading to the Competition.
1.4. “Team” means the Team duly registered under Rule 4 of these Rules.
1.5. “Team Code” means the Code given under Rule 5 of these Rules.
1.6. “Respondent” means that side of the Team which argues on behalf of the Respondent
at any given point in the Competition.
1.7. “Rebuttal” means the set of arguments that the Applicant shall raise at the end of the
main pleadings of all the Speakers.
1.8. “Scouting” means any Team member observing the Oral Round of a Team other than
that of the Team such member is associated with.
2. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
2.1. The Competition is open to all the students pursuing undergraduate LL.B. courses or
its equivalent for the academic year 2021-2022 conducted by any recognized
Institution/College/University. The postgraduate or diploma programmes students are
not eligible to participate.
2.2. Each Team shall consist of three members. Two members of the Team shall be
designated as Speakers and the third member shall be designated as the Researcher.
2.3. The members of the team shall be designated as Speaker and Researcher in the
registration form. Swapping of the designation of the members shall not be allowed
except with the prior permission of the organiser of the competition
3. ANONYMITY OF THE TEAMS
3.1. The Participating Teams shall adhere to confidentiality and identity of the Teams.
Disclosure of the identity of the Teams and Team members is strictly prohibited
except in the registration form
3.1. The participating Teams shall not reveal their identity in any form, except by means
of the Team Code assigned to them by the OC.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 3 of 24

 RULES OF THE COMPETITION

3.2. The Participating Teams shall not, in any way, reveal the identity of the Team, its
members or the Institution/ College/ University represented, in the Written Memorials
or in the course of the Oral Rounds. The Written Memorials shall not bear the logo,
name, etc. of the Team, its members or the Institution/ College/ University represented
by the Team
3.3. Any materials placed before the Bench or carried into the courtroom for the Oral
Rounds shall be devoid of any identification marks/ symbol of the Team or the
Institution/ College/ University represented.
3.4. Any wilful breach of Rule 3.1 to 3.3 of the above Rules of the Competition may attract
disqualification of the Team from the Competition or any other penalty as determined
by the OC.
4. REGISTRATION
4.1. The participating Team shall register by filling up the registration form of Annexure
I or form available on the Official Website and paying the registration fee.
4.2. The Participating Team is required to send a bona-fide letter issued by the appropriate
authority of their Institution/College/University along with the duly filled registration
form.
4.3. The registration fee is INR 3,000 per participating team.
4.5. The participating teams may pay the registration fee by way of a Demand Draft drawn
on any nationalised bank in favour of “The Finance Officer, KSLU” payable at
“Hubballi”. A scanned copy of the Demand Draft is to be emailed to the OC at
[email protected] on or before 15th August 2022 and hardcopy of the same shall
be sent to the OC while sending registration form.
4.6 The participation certificates for participating teams will be given on the basis of
Registration Form. It shall incumbent on teams to ensure that names are spelt and
presented correctly.
4.6. Any changes in the contact details of members of the participating team shall
communicate to the OC without any delay. This obligation to inform shall continue
throughout the course of the Competition, unless such a participating team withdraws
or is disqualified from the Competition.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 4 of 24

 RULES OF THE COMPETITION

5. TEAM CODE
5.1 A Team Code shall be assigned to the participating teams successful registered under
Rule 4 of the Rules of the Competition on 20th August 2022.
5.2 The participating team registered pursuant to Rule 4 of Rules of Competition, shall
not change its composition without informing the OC.
6. CODE OF CONDUCT
6.1 All the participants must behave in a dignified manner and not to cause any
inconvenience to the organizers.
6.2 Participants will be immediately disqualified from the competition if found
misbehaving, or causing nuisance, or making abusive statements, showing disrespect
towards judges, co-participants, or members of the host institution. Decision of the
organisers in this regard shall be final.
7. SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN MEMORIALS
7.1. Each participating team is required to prepare Written Memorials for both sides, i.e.,
the Applicant and the Respondent of the case.
7.2. The Written Memorials shall be identified solely by the Team Code assigned to the
Team pursuant to Rule 5.4 of the Rules of the Competition.
7.3. The Written Memorials shall consist of the following mandatory heads:
a. Cover page
b. Table of Contents
c. List of Abbreviations
d. Index of the Authorities
e. Statement of the Facts
f. Issues raised
g. Summary of the Arguments
h. Arguments advanced
i. Prayer
7.4 The Cover Page of a Written Memorial must contain the following information:
a. The Team Code in the upper right-hand corner.
b. The year of the Competition
c. The name of the case
d. The case number
e. The side for which the Written Memorials has been prepared
f. Name of the forum resolving the dispute

7.5. The List of Abbreviations shall include all abbreviations and acronyms (such as
AIR, SCC, ICJ, UNGA, UNSC, UN Charter etc.) used in the Written Memorials.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 5 of 24

 RULES OF THE COMPETITION

7.6. Presentation of the Written Memorials

a.The hard copy of Written Memorials shall be spiral bound only.
b.The hard copy of Written Memorials shall be printed on both sides.
c.The hard copies of the Written Memorials shall be identical to the soft copies of the
d.Written Memorials sent by the participating team. Once the Written Memorials are
submitted to the OC, no modifications/revisions/addition/deletion shall be allowed
e. The following colour scheme for the purpose of cover page shall be followed in
Written Memorials: Applicant–Blue Respondent –Red
f. Each Team shall send the soft copy of the Written Memorials for each side in PDF
form.
7.7. Foot Notes and Citations
a. The participating teams shall cite all authorities in the Written Memorials using
footnotes following the Bluebook Method of Citation (20th edition).
b. Footnotes shall be limited only to citations and in no case shall footnotes contain
running information or arguments.
c. The Written Memorials shall adhere to the following mandatory specifications: Paper
size: A4;
d. Font type: Times New Roman; Font size: 12; Line spacing: 1.5; Body of text:
Justified; Margin of 1 inch on each side of each page; No borders; Maximum Number
of pages:20
e. The footnotes format shall adhere to the following specifications: Font type: Times
New Roman; Font size: 10; Line spacing: 1; No additional space between two
footnotes; Body of text: Justified

8. STRUCTURE OF THE COMPETITION

8.1. Preliminary Rounds
8.1.1 The Preliminary Rounds will be held on the first day of the event. There shall be two
Preliminary Oral Rounds and each Team shall argue once as the Applicant and as the
Respondent.
8.1.2 The pairing of Teams for the Preliminary Oral Rounds shall be done by draw of lots
by the OC.
8.1.3 Each Oral Round will be for a period of 60 minutes including Rebuttals and Reply to
Rebuttals. Each participating team will be allotted 30 minutes (including Rebuttals or
Reply to Rebuttals, as the case may be). Any extension of time beyond this scheduled
period is subject to the discretion of the Bench.
8.2. Quarter Final Rounds
8.2.1 The top 8 Teams will be selected to the Quarter Finals. The rank of the teams shall be
decided on the basis of the total points earned after the two Preliminary Rounds.
8.2.2 If there is a tie between the teams in the total points, the rank will be determined on
the basis of the number of wins in the Preliminary Rounds.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 6 of 24

 RULES OF THE COMPETITION

8.2.3 The fixture of the Teams for the Quarter Finals shall be done by draw of lots.
Qualifying Teams shall pick the lots in the order of their ranks.
8.3. Semi Final Round
The top 4 Teams will be selected to the Semi Finals. The rank of the teams will be
8.3.1 decided on the basis of the total points earned after quarter Final Round.
The fixture of Teams for the Semi Finals shall be done by draw of lots. Qualifying
8.3.2
Teams shall pick the lots in the order of their ranks.
If there is a tie between the teams, it will be resolved on the basis of the Written
8.3.3 Memorials Score of the Teams.
In case the tie persists, it will be resolved by the toss of a coin.
8.4. Finals
8.4.1 The top 2 Teams out of the Semi Final will be selected to the Finals. The rank of the
teams will be decided on the basis of the total points earned in the quarter Final
Round.
8.4.2 The winner of the Competition shall be determined on the basis of the highest total
points awarded by the judges.
8.4.3 A tie will be resolved by considering the cumulative Oral Rounds Score awarded by
the Bench to each Team of the Competition. In case the tie persists, it will be resolved
by considering the Written Memorials Scores of the Teams.

9. EVALUATION OF WRITTEN MEMORIALS

Written Memorials will be assessed for 100 marks as per the following criteria:
Serial No Marking Criteria Maximum Marks
1. Knowledge of Law and Facts 10
2. Interpretation of law and Application to facts 10
3. Identification and Articulation of Issues and 10
Jurisdiction
4 Use of Authorities 10
5 Authoritativeness and Persuasiveness 10
6 Organization of Arguments 10
7 Clarity of Thought 10
8 Originality and Innovation 10
9 Presentation Style 10
10 General Impression 10
Total 100

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 7 of 24

 RULES OF THE COMPETITION

10. EVALUATION OF ORAL ROUNDS

Oral Rounds of the competition will be assessed for 100 marks as per the following
criteria:
Serial No Marking Criteria Maximum Marks
1. Knowledge of Law and Facts 10
2. Appreciation and Application of Facts 10
3. Interpretation and Application of Law 10
4. Use of Authorities 10
5. Response to Questions 10
6. Organization of Arguments 10
7. Clarity of Thought and Expression 10
8. Argumentative Skills and Creativity 10
9. Reference to Written Memorials in the course of 10
Oral Rounds
10 Court Mannerism 10
Total 100
11. TROPHIES AND CERTIFICATES
11.1 Participation Certificates will be given to all the participants of the competition.
11.2 The Trophies will be given in the Competition to;
a. Winners
b. Runners- Up
c. Best Lady Advocate
d. Best Gentleman Advocate
e. Best Written Memorials
12. SCOUTING
12.1 Any form of Scouting during the Competition is strictly prohibited and shall entail
disqualification of the Team from the Competition. The decision of the OC in this
regard shall be final and not subject to challenge.
13. LANGUAGE AND ENTRIES
13.1 Language of the Competition shall be English. The entries are restricted to 20 teams
on first come first serve basis.
14. DRESS CODE
14.1 The Dress Code for the Competition shall be as per the Bar Council of India
Rules for Advocates.
15. REMOVAL OF DIFFICULTY
15.1 If any difficulty arises in giving effect to any of the rules of the Competition, OC may
take such decisions as appear to be necessary for removal of the difficulty. The
decisions taken by OC shall be final and binding.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 8 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION
*
MOOT PROPOSTION
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
CASE CONCERNING THE USE OF FORCE, COMMISSION OF CRIME OF
GENOCIDE AND SITUATION OF ETHNIC VENETINS IN MILISOV CLAIMING
RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION
REPUBLIC OF MILISOV
(APPLICANT)
and
UNITED STATES OF VENETIN
(RESPONDENTS)
Order dated 20 February 2022
in
General List No. 78
The International Court of Justice, having regard to Article 48 of the Statute of the Court and
to Articles 31, 44, 45(1), 48, 49, and 80 of the Rules of Court;
Having regard to the Compromis filed in the Registry of the Court on 20 February 2022,
whereby the REPUBLIC OF MILISOV (“Milisov” or “Applicant”) instituted proceedings
against the UNITED STATES OF VENETIN (“Venetin” or “Respondent”) with regard to a
dispute concerning alleged violations of international law by Respondent;
Whereas, the Application was communicated to Respondents on the day it was filed;
Whereas, on 20 February 2022, Respondents informed the Registrar and the Agent of
Applicant of its intention to file a counter claim under Article 80 of the Rules of Court;
Whereas, the parties have appointed their respective Agents;
Whereas, at a meeting with the President of the Court on 20 February 2022, the Agents of
the Parties agreed to have all claims and counter claims heard together in a single set of
proceedings, and that all issues of jurisdiction and admissibility would be determined
alongside the merits;
Whereas, after negotiations, the Agents of the Parties jointly communicated the annexed
Compromise and Statement of Agreed Facts on 20 February 2022;
Whereas, without prejudice to any matter reserved in the Compromis, the Agents of the
Parties have agreed that they shall each submit one written Memorial and make oral pleadings
solely on the claims presented in the Statement of Agreed Facts on the Following Points for
consideration:
*
The Moot Court Proposition drafted exclusively for the 8th International Law Moot Court Competition –
2022, KSLU, Hubballi by Prof. Venkatachala G. Hegde, Professor and Chairman, Center for International
Legal Studies, School of International Studies Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 9 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION

1.Venetin’s Special Military Operation as an act of aggression and illegal and inconsistent
with the established rules of international law.
2. Venetin’s military and weaponry support to illegal armed group in Dojo region as an act
of terrorism and that it should cease and desist from this illegal act; and that it is against the
established rules of international law.
3. Venetin’s Special Military Operation as an act of self-defence and Dojo justified in
exercising the right to self-determination in accordance with established jurisprudence and
consistent with the rules of international law.
4. Milisov as violating human rights treaties for not being able to ensure its application to
ethnic Venetins

Taking into account the agreement of the Parties,

Adopts the Official Rules of the VIII International Law Moot Court Competition, 2022
organised by Karnataka State Law University (KSLU), Hubbali.
Done in English and in French, the English text being authoritative, at the Peace Palace, The
Hague, this twentieth day of February the year two thousand and twenty-two, in five copies,
one of which will be placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted to the
parties.
Registrar President
(Signed) (Signed)

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 10 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

SPECIAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF MILISOV (APPLICANT) AND THE UNITED STATES
OF VENETIN (RESPONDENT) TO SUBMIT TO THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF
JUSTICE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PARTIES CONCERNING THE USE
OF FORCE, COMMISSION OF CRIME OF GENOCIDE AND SITUATION OF ETHNIC
VENETINS IN MILISOV CLAIMING RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION
jointly notified to the Court on 20th February 2022
JOINT NOTIFICATION ADDRESSED TO THE REGISTRAR OF THE COURT:
The Hague, 20th February 2022
On behalf of Applicant, the Republic of Milisov, and Respondent, the United States of
Venetin, and in accordance with Article 40(1) of the Statute of the International Court of
Justice, we present our complements to the Secretariat of the International Court of Justice
and have the honour to transmit to you for submission to the International Court of Justice an
original of the Special Agreement of the Differences between the Applicant and the
Respondent concerning the use of force, commission of crime of genocide and situation of
ethnic Venetins in Milisov claiming right to self-determination signed in The Hague, The
Netherlands, on the twentieth day of February in the year two thousand twenty-two.

(Signed) (Signed)
Minister of External Affairs and Environment, Minister of External Affairs,
Republic of Milisov United States of Venetin

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 11 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION

SPECIAL AGREEMENT SUBMITTED TO THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF

JUSTICE BY REPUBLIC OF MILISOV AND THE UNITED STATES OF VENETIN TO
ADJUDICATE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEM CONCERNING THE USE OF
FORCE, COMMISSION OF CRIME OF GENOCIDE AND SITUATION OF ETHNIC
VENETINS IN MILISOV CLAIMING RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION

The Republic of Milisov (“Applicant”) and the United States of Venetin (“Respondent”)
(hereinafter “the Parties”);
Considering that differences have arisen between them concerning the use of force and other
matters;
Recognizing that the Parties have been unable to resolve these differences by direct
negotiations;
Inspired by the common desire of promoting the well-being of their peoples;
Desiring further to define the issues to be submitted to the International Court of Justice (“the
Court”) for resolution;
In furtherance thereof the Parties have concluded this Special Agreement:
Article 1
The Parties submit the legal questions contained in the Special Agreement containing facts
(together with Corrections and Clarifications to follow) (“the Case”) to the Court pursuant to
Article 40(1) of the Court’s Statute.
Article 2
a) It is agreed by the Parties that the Republic of Milisov shall appear as Applicant and the
United States of Venetin as Respondent, but such agreement is without prejudice to any
question of the burden of proof.
b) The rules and principles of international law applicable to the dispute, on the basis of which
the Court is requested to decide the Case, are those referred to in Article 38, paragraph 1, of
the Statute of the Court.
c) The Court is also requested to determine the legal consequences, including the rights and
obligations of the Parties, arising from its judgment on the questions presented in the Case.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 12 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION
Article 3
a) All questions of procedure and rules shall be regulated in accordance with the applicable
provisions of the Official Rules of the 2022.
b) The Parties request the Court to order that the written proceedings should consist of one
round of written Memorials presented by each of the Parties not later than the date set forth
in the Official Schedule of the 2022.
Article 4
a) The Parties shall accept any judgment of the Court as final and binding upon them and shall
execute it in its entirety and in good faith.
b) Immediately after the transmission of any judgment, the Parties shall enter into negotiations
on the modalities for its execution. In witness whereof, the undersigned, being duly
authorised, have signed the present Special Agreement and have affixed thereto their
respective seals of office. Done in The Hague, The Netherlands, this twentieth day of February
in the year two thousand twenty-two, in triplicate in the English language.

(Signed) (Signed)
Ambassador Ambassador
For the Government of the For the Government of the
Republic of Milisov United States of Venetin

STATEMENT OF AGREED FACTS

CASE CONCERNING THE USE OF FORCE, COMMISSION OF CRIME OF
GENOCIDE AND SITUATION OF ETHNIC VENETINS IN MILISOV CLAIMING
RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION (REPUBLIC OF MILISOV V. UNITED STATES
OF VENETIN)
1. The United States of Venetin, a country with a long historical antecedents and ambitions
to be the formidable power, possesses the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons
with one of the highest military expenditures. At its peak of the political power during 17th,
18th and 19th century, Venetin was regarded as one of the greatest maritime powers. In
addition to this, Venetin, with a population of over 140 million, has a vast landmass which
stretches over two continents. While its easternmost part lies within the continent of
Analopy, the remaining part falls within the continent of Elome. Its coastline stretches over

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 13 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION
35, 238 kms and has been regarded as one of the world’s largest and most resourceful with
abundant mineral and energy resources. Venetin is among one of the leading producers of
oil and natural gas accounting for nearly 20 per cent of the global output. Nearly 48% of
its overall budgetary allocation and economic output is attributed to oil and natural gas. As
per available figures for 2021-22, despite the effect of COVID surge, energy related
products accounted for 67% of its exports. It is estimated that by 2025 its basket of energy
products export would touch almost 75% of overall global trade. Venetin is the original
member of the United Nations and also the permanent member of the UN Security Council.
2. The Republic of Milisov, with its diverse population, is the second largest country located
on the western fringe of the Continent of Analopy bordering Venetin. Milisov, considering
its long and dynamic historically strategic location in the continent of Elome has evolved
into a multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic and multi-cultural society. It is home to almost 130
nationalities. Nearly 22% of Milisov’s population is made up of ethnic minorities. Ethnic
Venetins forming 17 % of Milisov’s total population have been historically living in the
southern and eastern part of the country. Milisov has a population of around 40 million
people. Senegoue is the capital of Milisov and its largest city. Milisov is among the poorest
countries in the Elome continent and also battles widespread corruption. However, due to
its extensive fertile land, Milisov had been one of the largest grain exporters in the world.
It has a coastline along the Gulag Sea and the Sea of Rene to the south and southeast,
respectively.
3. Venetin and Milisov are neighbours and share a border of 218 kms. Both countries have
strong cultural and linguistic ties for hundreds of years. Milisov’s native language is Milio
and many people are also fluent in Venetinian. Venetinian is the native language for about
a third of the population of Milisov, mainly in the southern and eastern parts of the country,
where a significant number of ethnic Venetins live.
4. Milisov remains the main transit route for Venetin’s natural gas sold to countries of Elome
Continent/Union. Milisov earns about $ 3 billion a year in transit fees, making it most
lucrative export service. Following Venetin’s launch of the Gas Stream pipeline through
an alternative route bypassing Milisovian territorial limits has reduced the volumes of gas
transit to a large extent in recent years.
5. After its independence in 1991 from the United States of Venetin, the Republic of Milisov
began pursuing total nuclear disarmament, giving up the third largest nuclear weapons
stockpile in the world and dismantling or removing all strategic bombers on its territory in

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 14 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION
exchange for various assurances from Elome Union. In 1994, Venetin had secured nuclear
warheads from Milisov through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for maintaining
a durable Peace in the region entered between both countries along with the Elome Union.
This Peace Framework MoU resulted in Milisov’s commitment to transfer all strategic
nuclear warheads to the Venetin and dismantle strategic launchers in its territory. The MoU
also confirmed the Venetin’s readiness to compensate Milisov for the value of the highly
enriched uranium in the warheads. The Elome Union had agreed to assist Milisov in
dismantling the launchers with specific security assurances that included Milisov acceding
to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) as a non–nuclear weapons state. In 2001,
another MoU between the CATA Maintenance and Supply Organization (CAMSO) and
Milisov on logistic support cooperation constituted the legal foundation to join the
Partnership for Peace (PfP) with a view to establishing co-operation in certain areas of
logistic support.
6. In 2005, Human Rights Council noted that "racism and xenophobia remain entrenched
problems in the Republic of Milisov. “The Patriots of Milisov”, a group in Milisov
promoted an extreme nationalist and racist platform and sometimes used neo-Nazi
symbols. In 2008, it posted on its official website highly provocative literature supporting
a mono-racial and mono-national society. Its leader M. Zolovasky canvassed that
“Milisovian racial social-nationalism is the ideology of “Patriots of Milisov” (this was the
title of his article published in a collection of ideological works and programme documents
“Milisovian Social Nationalism” and placed on the website). While the organization’s
ideologue K. Norosov openly wrote that “Restriction and control will be imposed on all
alien ethno-racial groups, with their subsequent deportation to their historical home. We
Milisovian social-nationalists view so-called “human races” as separate biological species
and consider only the White Elome Human Being” to be intelligent in the biological
understanding.”
7. Hate crimes became more common between 2005 and 2008 in the Republic of Milisov,
mostly due to informal youth groups. Since 2008, there had been a more explicit response
to such crimes by law enforcement and the justice system which had led to a decrease of
violent racial offences. Milisov has seen few incidents in both the frequency and the
severity of hate crimes since their high in the mid-2000s. Between 2006 and 2012, there
were 295 reported violent hate crimes and 13 hate-crime-related deaths. The Human Rights
Council noted that 2007 was the most violent year for Milisov in terms of racially

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 15 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION
motivated crimes with 88 registered assaults with 6 fatalities. The last reported death due
to a hate crime occurred in 2010. Milisovian authorities had faced widespread criticism for
their perceived inaction in the face of extreme social-nationalism.
8. From 2012 to 2014, the Republic of Milisov attempted to establish its legitimacy across
all the regions by assuring every Milisovian that his/her rights would be protected
regardless of their ethno-linguistic background. In 2014, the Republic of Milisov suffered
a coup. An elected government was violently overthrown by Milisovian nationalists
supported by external forces. Milisovian nationalists immediately set about enforcing a
“de-Venetin” programme that included banning the use of the ethnic Venetin language.
9. The new Milisovian nationalist government abolished the law allowing the use of their
native language by minorities that mainly included ethnic Venetin and other regional
languages. The Foreign Minister of the Venetin stated that “attack on the ethnic Venetin
language in the Republic of Milisov is a brutal violation of ethnic minority rights”.
10. Anti-Venetin acts by the ruling Milisovian nationalist forces led the federal regions of
Ronokov and Norovox population to rise in revolt and seek separation from the Republic
of Milisov. In February and March 2014, Venetin invaded and subsequently annexed the
Norovox Peninsula from Milisov. The Venetin annexation of Norovox saw a rise in anti-
Venetin sentiment with nationwide protests in Milisov providing nationalist political
groups unprecedented surge in popularity.
11. On 23 April 2014 a bloody conflict took place between highly armed two large groups,
one supporting a pro-Venetin stance and the other pro-Milisov at the town of Bergie
located in the Norovox region. The ensuing conflict finally resulted in the death of 92 pro-
Venetin activists. In addition, the ruling Milisov Government imposed more stringent
curbs on the usage of Venetin language by banning import of books and other digital
equipments from Venetin.
12. Regularity of such clashes between two opposing groups increased in Milisov. Milisov’s
two regions of Dynk and Jopa - collectively known as the Dyjo - were turned into self-
proclaimed republics by ethnic Venetins leading to a bloody conflict between the
government forces and the armed separatists. Milisov claimed that these armed groups
received a massive influx of weaponry from the Venetin. Milisov also asserted that these
efforts were to subordinate and compel it to forge a closer union with Venetin.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 16 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION
13. Milisov, as well as the Elome Union claimed that the Venetin had a hand in the conflict
that erupted in the Dyjo region and had so far killed more than 14,000 people. Venetin
strongly denies the allegation.
14. On 13 September 2014 and after extensive talks, Milisov, Venetin and the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Elome (OSCE) signed an agreement in Remik, the capital
of Sepelex, to end the Dyjo regional conflict and establish a lasting ceasefire. However, it
failed to end the conflict and was thus followed with a new package of measures, called
Remik II, which was concluded on 12 February 2015. This second agreement also failed
to stop the fighting.
15. On 28 March 2015, the Milisovian Parliament passed a controversial legislation making
WW II paramilitaries heroes of Milisov and made it a criminal offence to deny their
heroism. It had been alleged that one of the paramilitaries had collaborated with the Nazis
and participated in the Holocaust, while the other paramilitaries group had hand in
slaughtering thousands of Jews and 70,000-100,000 Poles on their own volition.
16. On 23 May 2017, the Milisovian Parliament approved the law that most broadcast content
should be in Milio in order to curb the number of Venetin speakers. Since then Venetin
language has also been barred from being taught in schools. Many ethnic Venetins born in
Milisov were not allowed to speak in public in their native language.
17. Milisov consistently demanded that the Venetin must cease its illegal actions in Dyjo.
Subsequently, Milisov instituted a case for provisional measure in the International Court
of Justice (ICJ) asking that the United State of Venetin must cease and desist from
providing all support to illegal armed groups that engage in acts of terrorism in Milisov. It
also sought the ICJ to hold Venetin accountable and pay appropriate compensation for the
support given to certain hostile groups in violation of applicable international law and
international humanitarian law. The 11 judges of ICJ decided that the United States of
Venetin and the Republic of Milisov must refrain from any action which may aggravate
the situation.
18. In early 2021, the extreme nationalist political party in Milisov started making open
derogatory references to the neighbouring Venetin calling it a ‘land of heretics’ and ‘blood
drinkers’. These statements reinforced the hate campaigns orchestrated by Milisov Reborn
(a group) and the group’s members were emboldened to further target ethnic Venetins in
the Republic of Milisov.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 17 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION
19. Milisov started building defence alliances with two other bordering nations- Salotal and
Gonoly having a history of protracted political and armed conflicts with Venetin. Their
animosity towards Venetin appeared in their official statements. In a Joint Statement dated
1 December 2021, the heads of these three States declared that they: ‘…have a common
political and military ambition, common friends and common foes; and therefore, they are
natural allies against the so-called superpower of the world’.
20. In late December 2021, with the completion of 795-mile Venetin’s Gas Stream Two
Pipeline which like Gas Stream One shipped gas straight from Venetin to the countries of
the Elome Union bypassing completely the existing transit pipeline through Milisov raised
nationalist temperatures.
21. In January 2022, the Venetin state media published stories of genocide and mass graves
full of ethnic Venetins in eastern Milisov. According to the UN Commission on Human
Rights (UNCHR), the numbers killed in Dojo from 14 April 2014 to 31 December 2021
were: 4,400 Milisovian troops; 6,500 Venetins-backed separatist troops; and 3,404
civilians.
22. Subsequently, on 1 February 2022, Venetin launched a ‘Special Military Operation’
against Milisov and declared that the operation shall continue till the following demands
are met: (a) Ethnic Venetins in the Republic of Milisov should be allowed to establish an
independent State on the coastal and forest regions adjacent to the United States of
Venetin; and (b) The Republic of Milisov should terminate the efforts to forge a defence
alliance with the Elome Union (EU).
23. Several world leaders, including permanent members of the United Nations, expressed
concern at this unilateral coercive measure undertaken by the Venetin. Negotiations were
held to persuade Venetin to desist from carrying out the so called massive `Special Military
Operations.’ The President of the United States of Venetin Chelovasky in a public
broadcast in the early hours of 15 February 2022 laid out the reasons for carrying out the
inevitable `Special Military Operations’. He asserted that this was the only way to stop the
continuing genocide of the minority population within Milisov, particularly ethnic
Venetins.
24. The United Nations Security Council met immediately and issued an appeal to stop this
unilateral action by Venetin. This Security Council Resolution was vetoed by Venetin
pointing out that the Special Military Operations were being carried out in self-defence.
Venetin also pointed out that the actions of Milisov in forging military alliance in

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 18 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION
contravention of existing Peace Alliances and Treaties threatened its borders and very
existence of its own minority population. Subsequent meetings of the United Nations
Security Council could not take any effective decision due to veto exercised by Venetin as
per the provisions of the United Nations Charter. The UN General Assembly held a long
discussion and passed a resolution calling upon both the parties to desist from use of force
and to resolve their differences by peaceful means.
25. Several countries from the Elome Union and other economically powerful countries within
the Analopy Continent promptly applied economic sanctions against Venetin for its
unilateral decision to use force to realize its diplomatic objectives. Venetin disregarding
these sanctions regime continued its Special Military Operations. However, it agreed to
continue its diplomatic negotiations with Milisov in a neutral venue.
26. Facing the international pressure to settle the matter peacefully and upon the appeals made
by the large membership of the United Nations, the United States of Venetin entered into
a Special Agreement with the Republic of Milisov. Both agreed to refer the matter to the
International Court of Justice vide Article 40(1) of the Statute of the International Court of
Justice, 1945. Both States are parties to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment
of the Crime of Genocide, 1948 (Genocide Convention, 1948). The United States of
Venetin had formally made reservation to Article VIII of the Genocide Convention, 1948
about its applicability to it. Both States are members of the UN and have ratified all major
treaties on human rights and humanitarian law.
The Court has framed following issues to be argued by both the sides:
A. The Republic of Milisov requests the Court to adjudge and declare that:
i. The United States of Venetin’s Special Military Operation is an act of aggression and illegal
and inconsistent with the established rules of international law.
ii. The United States of Venetin’s military and weaponry support to illegal armed group in
Dojo region is an act of terrorism and it should cease and desist from this illegal act; and that
it is against the established rules of international law.
B. The United States of Venetin requests the Court to adjudge and declare that:
i. The United State of Venetin’s Special Military Operation is an act of self-defence and
Dojo’s are justified to exercise the right to self-determination in accordance with established
jurisprudence and consistent with the rules of international law.
ii. The Republic of Milisov has violated the human rights treaties for not being able to ensure
human rights protection of ethnic Venetin.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 19 of 24

 MOOT PROPOSITION

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 20 of 24

 PATRON IN CHIEF

Prof. Ratna R. Bharamgoudar

Hon’ble Vice-Chancellor (Actg.)

PATRONS

Prof. C.S. Patil Prof. G.B. Patil Mohammed Zubair N. KAS

Professor of Law Registrar (Eva.) Registrar
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE

FACULTY CO-ORDINATORS

Mr. Girish K.C Dr.Rangaswamy D.

Assistant Professor of Law Assistant Professor of Law

Dr. Anu Prasannan Dr. Bhimabai Mulage

Assistant Professor of Law Assistant Professor of Law
KSLU’s 8th International Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 21 of 24
 STUDENT CO-ORDINATORS

STUDENT CO-ORDINATORS

Mr. Deepak Methre Ms. Rhea Mr. Purbayan Chakraborty

4th Year B.A., LL. B. 5th Year B.B.A., LL. B. 5th Year B.A., LL. B.

Ms. Aishwarya Ms. Dhruvi Sharma Ms. Aditi Naik

3rd Year B.B.A., LL. B. 3rd Year B.A., LL. B. 4th Year B.B.A., LL. B.

Ms. Yashita Desai Ms. Sirishree Mr. Aditya Shivalli

2nd Year B.B.A., LL. B. 2nd Year B.A., LL. B. 2nd Year B.A., LL. B.

Mr. Abhinav Bhosale Mr. Nithin Dodamani Mrs. Preeti R. Mugad

1st Year B.B.A., LL. B. 1st Year B.B.A., LL. B. 1st Year B.A., LL. B.

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 22 of 24

 INSTRUCTIONS AND CONTACT DETAILS

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS

1. The event will be the offline competition.

2. The organisers will not defray the travelling expenses of the participating teams.
3. The participants will be provided boarding and lodging on the days of the competition.

CONTACT DETAILS

POSTAL ADRESS

Co-ordinator

KSLU’s 8th International Moot Court Competition

Karnataka State Law University

Navanagar, Hubballi -580025, Karnataka

YOU CAN ALSO REACH OUT TO US AT:

[email protected]

FOR CLARIFICATION YOU CAN CONTACT

Dr. Anu Prasannan Dr.Rangaswamy D.

Faculty Co-ordinator Faculty Co-ordinator
Contact Number: 9535169274 Contact Number:9964286178

Mr. Purbayan Chakraborty Mr. Deepak Methre

Student Co-ordinator Student Co-ordinator
Contact No:7338445697 Contact No: 8762543895

Ms. Aishwarya Ms. Rhea

Student Co-ordinator Student Co-ordinator
Contact No:9481929037 Contact No: 8884129783

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 23 of 24

 ANNEXURE I

REGISTRATION FORM

1. Name and Address

of the Institution

2. Speaker 1
Name
Address
Photo certified by
the Head of the
Institution
Course
Year
Mobile
Email ID

3. Speaker 2
Name
Address
Photo certified by
the Head of the
Institution
Course
Year
Mobile
Email ID

4. Researcher
Name
Address
Photo certified by
the Head of the
Institution

Course
Year
Mobile
Email ID
5. Payment Details Mode of Payment:
DD No: Date:

Seal and Signature of Head of the Institution/College/University

KSLU’s 8th International Law Moot Court Competition Pg. No. 24