The escape Clause

“In any discussion on the place of the doctrine rebus sic stantibus as a principle of change capable of judicial application it is essential to keep in mind the distinction between two fundamentally different aspects of the doctrine. It is in the first instance a pseudo-legal assertion of the absence of any binding force in international law. It is the expression of the view that rule pacta sunct servanda does not apply to States with the same cogency as it applies to individuals for the simple reason they are States, and that their interests cannot be subject to an obligation existing independent of their own will”

The typical assumption of words in that statement are that a State is only something that exists externally

“the relation of States is one of independent units which make stipulations, but at the same time stand above the stipulations,”
“the doctrine rebis sic stantibus has been appealed to not only as a consequence, but also as the very proof of the States’ independence of the law”

I ask myself how does that apply to our “state of mind”
The state of mind stands above and independent of the law, a living conscious human being is an independent State.
The external State has no will of itself because it is merely an expressionless fictional construct written on paper
In so much as this is true unlike the individual where cogency means clear obligation to pacta sunt servanda individuals energizing the will of the external State are bound to pacta sunt servanda -agreement must be kept, as they make up the collective “stipulation”

“the relation of States is one of independent units which make stipulations, but at the same time stand above the stipulations”

stipulation – 1552, “engagement or undertaking to do something,” from L. stipulationem (nom. stipulatio), from stipulari “exact a promise.” Traditionally said to be from L. stipula “straw,” in ref. to some obscure symbolic act; this is rejected by most authorities, who, however, have not come up with a better guess. Meaning “act of specifying one of the terms of a contract or agreement” is recorded from 1750

The external “State” cannot absolve itself of its obligation to humanity of its own volition and is thereby bound to promise as it does not possess volition – cognisance – will, of itself, individuals that bind themselves, pacta sunct servanda, to the external “State” also cannot absolve themselves of obligations of the external “State” unless they also invoke rebis sic stantibus.
Release from the obligations to and of the external “State”.

Isaiah 65:13 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, my servants shall eat, but ye shall be hungry: behold, my servants shall drink, but ye shall be thirsty: behold, my servants shall rejoice, but ye shall be ashamed: rebus

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s