May it please the court, my name is Jevilyn Ruiz, counsel for the Applicant.

I will
address the third and fourth submissions, respectively.
In my discussion, I will demonstrate that, first, the Marthite Convention ceased to
be in effect as of April 2 2012, and in any event, Agnostica did not breach the
Convention, and second Reverentias removal of the software at the Marthite extraction
facilities violated international law.
With respect to the first point your honors, Agnostica submits that it lawfully
terminated the Convention on 2nd of April 2012 on the grounds of material breach,
fundamental change of circumstances, and error.
The sale of 75% of the total quantity of Marthite to international pharmaceutical
companies following the ILS report which exceeded for as much ten times its maximum
permitted quantity constitutes a material breach of the Convention. Material breach is the
violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose of the
treaty. The preamble of relevant Convention provides for its main purpose which is to
ensure reliable supply of Marthite to those for whom it holds cultural significance.
Marthite sale outside Reverentia is prohibited unless the annual supply exceeded by
25% than the local demand. Hence, Reverentia acted in contrast to the object and
purpose of the Convention.
Agnostica terminated the Convention in the light of fundamental change. Article
61 of the VCLT provide for the conditions under which a change of circumstances may
be invoked. First, it must affect circumstances existing at the time of the conclusion of
the treaty which have not been foreseen by the parties at the moment of conclusion. The
rise of the demand by the international pharmaceutical companies was a change
unforeseeable to the parties. At the time of the conclusion of the Convention the parties
did not expect the significant sale of Marthite outside the Thanatosian Plains.
Reverentian is the only ethnic group needs the mineral Marthite. Either Agnostica or
Reverentia do not acknowledge the medical use of Marthite in modern medical science
and cannot even forecast this change. Second, the change must be fundamental and
the effect of the change must radically transform the extent of the obligations to be
performed. The newly discovered medical use of the Marthite constitutes a fundamental
change, because it radically transformed the obligation still to be performed.which was
originally to provide for the traditional practitioners in Reverentia. Third, the
circumstances existence must have constituted an essential basis of the parties
consent to be bound by the treaty. The Convention was concluded out of respect for
traditional Reverentian medicine and its users. It was the essential basis of the consent
of the parties.
Error is another ground which validates Agnosticas termination of the
Convention. In the case, Agnostica concluded the Marthite Convention under the
consideration that the Marthite is virtually unknown outside the Thanatosian Plains and
that it is without significant value outside its traditional uses. Therefore, the medical use
of marthite constituted an essential condition for the conclusion of the Convention.
Consequently, the newly discovered medical use of the mineral provides a ground for
Agnostica to invoke Article 48 VCLT.
Agnostica in any event, did not breach the Convention. The respondent may
contend that Agnostica breached article 6 of the Convention which provides for the free
movement of Marthite through Marthite Control Act. This act is justified due to a state
necessity. A state may only invoke this if the following conditions are met. First, it should
be the only way for the State to safeguard its essential interest against a grave and
imminent peril which should not be merely apprehended or contingent. 1 Second, the
act should not seriously impair an essential interest of another State towards which the
obligation exists. The passage of the the said law is a measure taken by Agnostica
following Reverentias removal of the software which constitutes an imminent peril since
it endangered the supply of Marthite. This in turn endangered the children all over the
world depending on the benefits of Marthite. The ban did not seriously impair an
essential interest of the other State. The interest relied on must outweigh all other
considerations, not merely from the point of view of the acting State but on a reasonable
assessment of the competing interests. The interest of the traditional practitioners of
Reverentia in no way outweighs the medical interest of the international community.
With respect to the second issue, Agnostica submits that the removal of the
software at the Marthite extraction facilitates violated international law. Reverentia is
deprived of its property. The software is the inseparable part of facilities which should be
owned by Agnostica. Without software, the facilities cant even properly work. Agnostica
owned the proprietary right of the facilities under the Marthite Convention. According to
the article 2 in the Marthite Convention, There can be no doubt that Agnostica own the
proprietary of the facilities which mentioned above under the Marthite Convention. The
ownership of the software continued even after the termination of the Convention. Once
a treaty created a right, it achieved permanence. Hence, the removal of the software is a
disregard of Agnosticas ownership to the software which Agnostica enjoys immunity
1
from acts of other states.
The removal of the software cannot be considered as a lawful countermeasure
against Agnostica under international law since the convention was not in effect after
April 2012. It cannot also be considered as such since the requirements of
countermeasure were not met. First, the injured State must have called upon the State
committing the wrongful act to discontinue its wrongful conduct or to make reparation. As
pointed out previously, the unilateral termination was justified and lawful, hence
Agnostica did not commit any wrongful act. Second, the countermeasure must be
proportionate. For a countermeasure to be legal, it must be proportional to the injury.
The legal injury suffered by Reverentia, due to the termination of the MC, the removal of
the software was disproportionate to the massive shortages of Marthite and hence
unlawful. Third, it must be reversible. The effect of the measure was thus irreversible
inasmuch as the severe shortages could not have been rectified even if the software
was reinstated, as Marthite production has never varied by more than 5%.
With all the points taken and discussed Applicant respectfully requests that this Court

finds requests the Honorable Court to adjudge and declare that:

A. Reverentias encouragement of East Agnosticas referendum violated Agnosticas

territorial integrity, the principle of non-intervention, and the United Nations

Charter generally;
B. The purported secession and subsequent annexation of East Agnostica are

illegal and without effect, and therefore East Agnostica remains part of the

territory of the Federal Republic of Agnostica;

C. The Marthite Convention ceased to be in effect as of 2 April 2012 and, in any

event, Agnostica breached the Convention;

D. Reverentias removal of the software from the Marthite extraction facilities

violated international law.