JUS5540 - Public International Law

Marking criteria for written examination

This  guide is used by examiners for grading elective courses at the Faculty of Law. The guide is common to all elective courses at the bachelor’s and master’s degree levels and individual legal courses.

Note that the required prerequisite knowledge for courses at the bachelor’s level is different from elective courses at the master’s level. All criteria are to be included in the overall assessment. Each candidate is assessed individually with regards to the course's learning requirements; the active normal distribution curve is not implemented.

Marking Criteria Guide

Course information

Course code and name  JUS5540 – Public International Law
Syllabus/achievement requirements  Autumn 2023
Formal prerequisite knowledge

Masters Level course.

Students must fulfill one of the following requirements:

Passed 1st - 3rd year of the 5-year degree Master of Laws (Master i rettsvitenskap at UiO) (or exams that qualify for exemption for these) or hold a 5-years Master’s degree in Laws (Master i rettsvitenskap at UiO) or equivalent. 
 
Examination

Two written individual Memos:

Memo (1) maximum 1500 length including footnotes (approved/not approved) Mandatory requirement

Memo (2) maximum length 4000 words including footnotes  (A-F)

Evaluation Criteria for the Memos
The memo should include legal arguments for the formulation of the draft language of the Security Council resolution:
1) Whether the preamble provides guidance as to the object and purpose of the resolution,
2) Whether there are arguments explaining presentation of facts in the resolution,
3) Whether there is examination of a particular situation or issue,
4) Whether it seeks to affirm existing rules of public international law,
5) Whether it seeks to apply existing international law,
6) Whether it seeks to depart or override existing international law in a    particular case or in a general manner,
7) Whether it intends to impose binding obligations on states or authorize actions by third parties that would otherwise be illegal, or whether it makes non-binging recommendations to promote peace and security,
8) Whether there are statements regarding the Security Council's own role and procedures (for example including reference to acting under Chapter VII),
9) Whether there is reference to other sources, such as prior resolutions by the Security Council, reports by the UN Secretary-General,

10) Whether authorizing or non-authorizing language is preferred, 11)Whether the proposed language intends to make a determination of law,

12)Whether it is advisable to pursue clear or vague language, 13)Whether there is or is not intent to establish precedent,

14)Whether the language is particularistic or generalized, 

15)Are there justifications offered for the proposed action or statement?

Students may discuss choice of emotive words: Concerned, Grieved, Deplored, Condemned, Alarmed, Shocked, Indignant, Censured and use of instructive words:
Decide, Call upon, Recommend, Request, Urge, Warn, Demand. Students may also discuss choice of whether to refer to specific numbers (such as 101 civilians killed) or instead opt for inexact amounts. They may discuss whether to identify the nationality, race, religion, gender, age of victims in the factual presentation.

The grading will also be based on the quality of the analysis and the reference to relevant PIL sources, including treaties (discussing relevant provisions of the UN Charter), customary international law, caselaw, or academic articles or books.
Last updatet  10.05.2024

Assessment criteria for the written examination

Grades  Overall guidelines for setting grades

F?rsteinntrykk, lesbarhetF?rsteinntrykk, lesbarhetF?rsteinntrykk, lesbarhetOverall impression and readability, knowledge and content, reflection and Independence.

F?rsteinntrykk, lesbarhetF?rsteinntrykk, lesbarhet

 

 Struktur, juridisk metode og fremstillingsevneStructure, legal methodology and reasoning

Language and formal skills
A: Excellent
B: Very good 

A: An excellent performance, clearly outstanding. The candidate demonstrates excellent judgment and a high degree of independent thinking.

B: The candidate demonstrates sound judgment and a very good degree of independent thinking

Kandidaten viser meget god vurderingsevne og selvstendighet

 

The exam answer:

  • gives clear and precise answers to the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).
  • demonstrates excellent/very good knowledge and overview of the topic of the exam question and learning outcomes of the course.
  • distinguishes in an excellent/very good manner between what is essential compared with what is unessential/irrelevant, and distinguishes in an excellent/very good manner between what is certain and what is doubtful. 
  • demonstrates a high degree of independence in ability to reason critically and independently based on the literature and teaching of the course.
  • demonstrates an excellent/very good awareness of the legal-political dimensions of the topic of the question.

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • excellent/very good ability to find and formulate legal issues, including distinguishing between various problems and principal and subsidiary questions, as well as an ability to put these questions into their correct context.
  • excellent/very good ability to discuss questions in a professionally sound and judicious manner, and utilise available legal materials and facts in accordance with professional methodological principles. 
  • excellent/very good ability to dimension the answer sensibly.

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • excellent/very good command of language, exposition skills and level of accuracy

 
C: Good

A good performance in most areas. The candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree of judgment and independent thinking in the most important areas.

The exam answer gives clear and precise answers to the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).

The exam answer:
answers the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).
demonstrates good knowledge and overview of the topic of the exam question and learning outcomes of the course.
distinguishes well between what is essential in relation to what is unessential/irrelevant, and distinguishes well between what is certain and what is doubtful.
demonstrates to some degree an independent ability to reason critically and independently based on the literature and teaching of the course.
demonstrates a good ability to see legal-political dimensions of the topic of the question.
The exam answer gives clear and precise answers to the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).The exam answer:

  • answers the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).
  • demonstrates good knowledge and overview of the topic of the exam question and learning outcomes of the course.
  • distinguishes well between what is essential in relation to what is unessential/irrelevant, and distinguishes well between what is certain and what is doubtful.
  • demonstrates to some degree an independent ability to reason critically and independently based on the literature and teaching of the course.
  • demonstrates a good ability to see legal-political dimensions of the topic of the question.
  • The exam answer gives clear and precise answers to the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).Eksamensbesvarelsen gir klare og presise svar p? sp?rsm?lene som stilles i oppgaven(e).

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • good ability to find and formulate legal issues, including an ability to distinguish between various problems and principal and subsidiary questions.
  • good ability to discuss questions in a professionally sound and judicious manner, and utilise available legal materials and facts in accordance with professional methodological principles.
  • good ability to dimension the answer sensibly.

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • good command of language, exposition skills and level of accuracy

 

D: Satisfactory
E: Sufficient 
 

D: A satisfactory performance, but with significant shortcomings. The candidate demonstrates a limited degree of judgment and independent thinking.

E: A performance that meets the minimum criteria, but no more. The candidate demonstrates a very limited degree of judgment and independent thinking.

 

The exam answer:

  • gives inadequate/vague answers to the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).
  • demonstrates moderate/some knowledge and overview of the topic of the exam question and learning outcomes of the course.
  • demonstrates moderate/little ability to distinguish between what is essential in relation to what is unessential/irrelevant.
  • demonstrates moderate/little ability to reason critically and independently based on the literature and teaching of the course.
  • demonstrates moderate/little ability to see legal-political dimensions of the topic of the question.

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • moderate/little ability to find and formulate legal issues, including an ability to distinguish between various problems.
  • moderate/little ability to discuss questions in a professionally sound and judicious manner, and utilise available legal materials and facts in accordance with professional methodological principles.
  • moderate/little ability to dimension the answer sensibly.


 

 

 

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • satisfactory/relatively poor command of language, exposition skills and level of accuracy

 
F: Fail  F: A performance that does not meet the minimum academic criteria. The candidate demonstrates an absence of both judgment and independent thinking.

The exam answer:

  • does not answer the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).
  • lacks knowledge and overview of the topic of the exam question and learning outcomes of the course.
  • lacks the ability to distinguish between what is essential in relation to what is unessential/irrelevant.
  • lacks the ability to reason critically and independently based on the literature and teaching of the course.
  • lacks the ability to see legal-political dimensions of the topic of the question.

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • an inability to find and formulate legal issues, including an ability to distinguish between various problems.
  • an inability to discuss questions in a professionally sound and judicious manner, and utilise available legal materials and facts in accordance with professional methodological principles.
  • an inability to dimension the answer sensibly.

 

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • poor command of language, exposition skills and level of accuracy

 

 

 

Published Nov. 5, 2018 8:12 AM - Last modified May 10, 2024 10:29 AM
E-mail this page