Open AccessThe Binding Force of the Nuclear Disarmament Obligation upon North Korea and Its Legal Implication under International Law
Author(s) -
Diajeng Wulan Christianti,
Jaka Rizkullah
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
padjadjaran
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2460-1543
DOI - 10.22304/pjih.v7n1.a7
Subject(s) - obligation , disarmament , preamble , nuclear weapon , political science , treaty , law , state (computer science) , constitution , customary international law , international law , international community , public international law , engineering , channel (broadcasting) , electrical engineering , algorithm , computer science , politics
Article VI of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) requires all state parties to disarm nuclear weapon. Following its official withdrawal from NPT in 2003, North Korea maintains to develop its nuclear weapon and conducts several nuclear tests. Moreover, it even proudly declared as a nuclear state in its Constitution's preamble. It also argues that the nuclear weapon developments and tests were conducted within their territory and, currently, North Korea is not bound by any treaty prohibiting such developments and tests. The statement is strongly opposed by the international community, particularly their neighboring states: Japan and South Korea. This article argues that the obligation to disarm nuclear weapon deriving from the NPT still binds North Korea since such obligation has reached the status of customary international law and consequently binds every state unless such state persistently objects the rule from the beginning of its formation. In this case, North Korea has failed to prove itself as a persistent objector due to the fact it used to be a party to the NPT. This article also argues that, according to 2001 ILC Articles, Japan and South Korea still have a proper legal basis to claim for reparation against North Korea despite the fact that they are not specifically affected by North Korea’s conducts.