Case: Nicaragua vs UnitedStatesCase: Case Concerning the Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua vs United States) (Merits:focusing on matters relating to the use of force and self-defense)Overview: The case involved military and paramilitary activities conducted by the US against Nicaragua from 1!1 to 1!"#Nicaragua as$ed the %ourt to find that these activities violated international laFacts of the Case:In July 1979 the Government of President Somoza collapsed following an armed opposition led by the 'rente Sandinista de (iberacibn Nacional !S"#$ %&he new government ' installed by !S"# ' began to encounter armed opposition from supporters of the formerSomoza Governmentand e()members of the #ational Guard% &he *S ' initially supportive of the new government ' changed its attitude when+ according to the *S+ it found that #icaragua was providing logistical support and weapons to guerrillas in ,l Salvador%In -pril 19.1 it terminated *S aid to #icaragua and in September 19.1+ according to #icaragua+ the *S /decided to plan and underta0e activities directed against #icaragua1%&he armed opposition to the new Government was conducted mainly by 1$ 'uer)a *emocratica Nicarag+ense !2#$+ which operated along the border with 3onduras+and 4$,lian)a -evolucionaria *emocratica -52,$+ which operated along the border with 6osta 5ica+ see map of the region$% Initial support to these groups fighting against the #icaraguan Government called /contras1$ was covert% "ater+ the *S officially ac0nowledged itssupport for e(ample7 In 19.8 budgetary legislation enacted by the *nited States 6ongress made specific provision for funds to be used by *nited States intelligence agencies for supporting /directly or indirectly military or paramilitary operations in #icaragua1$%#icaragua also alleged that the *S is effectively in control of the contras+ the *S devised their strategy and directed their tactics and that they were paid for and directly controlled by *S personal and some attac0s were carried out by *S military ' with the aim to overthrow the Government of #icaragua% -ttac0s against #icaragua included the mining of #icaraguan ports and attac0s on ports+ oil installations and a naval base% #icaragua alleged that *S aircrafts flew over #icaraguan territory to gather intelligence+ supply to the contras in the field and to intimidate the population%uestions !efore the Court:1% *id the US breach its customary international la& obligation . not to intervene in the affairs of another State . &hen it trained/ armed/ e0uipped and financed the contra forces or encouraged/ supported and aided the military and paramilitary activities against Nicaragua14% *id the US breach its customary international la& obligation . not to use force against another State . &hen it directly attac$ed Nicaragua in 1!2 . 1!" and &hen its activities in bullet point 1 above resulted in the use of force18% %an the military and paramilitary activities that the US undertoo$ in and against Nicaragua be 3ustified as collective self-defence19% *id the US breach its customary international la& obligation . not to violate the sovereignty of another State . &hen it directed or authori)ed its aircrafts to fly over Nicaraguan territory and by acts referred to in bullet point 4 above1:% *id the US breach its customary international la& obligations . not to violate the sovereignty of another State/ not to intervene in its affairs/ not to use force against anotherState and not to interrupt peaceful maritime commerce . &hen it laid mines in the internal &aters and the territorial sea of Nicaragua1I6J decision7 *S violated 6I" in relation to bullet points 4+ 8+ 9 and : above% &he 6ourt re;ected the *S ;ustification of collective self)defence and held that *S violated the prohibition on the use of force%"elevant Findings of the Court:The US breached its customary international law obligation not to use force against anotherState: (1) when it directly attacked icaragua in 1!"# 1!"$% and (&) when its activities with the contra forces resulted in the threat or use of force'See paras 1!5 -461#The %ourt held that:1% &he prohibition on the use of force is a principlethat can be found in -rticle 49$ of the *# 6harter and in customary international law 6I"$%4% *se of force can be7 1$ /most grave forms of the use of force1 i%e% those that constitute an armed attac0$ and 4$ /less grave forms1 of use of force i%e% organizing+ instigating+ assisting or participating in acts of civil strife and terrorist acts in another State ' when the acts referred to involve a threat or use of force$%8% &he *S violated the 6I" prohibition on the use of force when it laid mines in #icaraguan ports and attac0ed its ports+ oil installations and a naval base% If however+ the force was used in collective self) defence+ then the *S was ;ustified in the use of force see below on self)defence$%9% &he *S violated the 6I" prohibition on the use of force when it assisted the contras by /organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces and armed bands< for incursion into the territory of another state1 and /participating in acts of civil strife