Tecola w hagos biography

Fallacy of

argumentum a fortiori

It is obvious that the Commission was wrong in its use of “virtual demarcation” in the

demarcation of the border between Ethiopia and Eritrea. Such action was beyond the scope of

its mandate. The Commission acknowledged the fact that both Ethiopia and Eritrea declined

to attend the Commission’s “invitation” to attend a meeting of the Commission to consider

“

further procedures to be followed in connection with the demarcation

” of the border.

That refusal of the parties should have ended the work of the Commission as an arbitration

body.

Tecola w hagos biography The way to fulfill our individual aspiration and our collective human purpose is to recognize and guarantee human rights universally not in its reduced form as an aspect of particular culture or as a reward for performance or as a privilege but as an inherent and fundamental attribute of being a person — a human being. They also attempted to deal, rather clumsily, with problems that were historic problems that had emasculated a people for generations. The armed forces shall at all times obey and respect the Constitution. They are promoting genocide and would be answerable to the International Criminal Court and any national courts.

However, once again the Commission imposed itself beyond its mandate without any

specific authorization from the parties to demarcate the border between Ethiopia and Eritrea

on the Commission’s own areal map.

The Commission cited as authority the

Beagle Channel case

, and in a footnote stated that

“The present case is not one involving the total non-cooperation of one Party, but rather

the non-cooperation of both Parties, though in differing ways and degrees.

Thus, the

observation of the

Beagle Channel

tribunal applies

a fortiori.

”

The Commission totally

misapplied the concept of “

a fortiori”

in that the exact opposite outcome would have

been the case, if the Commission had applied the concept it tried to use from the

Beagle

Channel case

correctly

I put great emphasis on the flawed use of a logical concept by

the Commission, for their entire competence to enter a final decision is based on such

fallacious inference from the

Beagle Channel case

. After all “reason [logic] is the life of

the law”

to quote the great common law jurist Sir Edward Coke (), and

generations of outstanding jurists and Supreme Court Justices in this very United States

of America.

Of course, the exception of Justice Oliver W. Holmes emphasis on

“experience” in no way minimizes the great importance of logic and proper inferences in

order to establish factual or legal matters.

“A fortiori”

as a contextual concept for its correct application is dependant on unique

facts to a particular case.

The form of argument identified in full as

argumentum a

fortiori

means in Latin that an argument with even stronger reason.

“In the art of rhetoric

i.e.

, speaking or writing for the acknowledged primary purpose of persuasion, the

fortiori

argument draws on the speaker&#;s and/or listener&#;s existing confidence in a

proposition to argue for a second proposition that is implicit in the first, ‘weaker’ (less

controversial and more likely to be true) than the first proposition, and therefore

deserving of even more confidence than the speaker and/or listener places in the first

proposition.”

The fallacy is obvious, as an example, if one takes some poison in very

small amount curing certain disease, but treating the disease with more poison will result

in death.

Accordingly, if one party in arbitration did not participate, some measure

against that belligerent party may be appropriate; however, the exact opposite is the effect

where both parties to an arbitration decline to participate in an arbitration process they

Beagle Channel case

52 INTERNATIONAL LAW REPORTS.

Sir Edward Coke,

COMMENTARY UPON LITTLETON 97b (Charles Butler ed., 18th ed., Legal

Classics Library ) ().

“[R]eason is the life of the law, nay the common law itself is nothing else

but reason; which is to be understood of an artificial perfection of reason, gotten by long study, observation

and experience, and not of every man&#;s natural reason; for Nemo nascitur artilex.”

Halper, Thomas () &#;Logic in Judicial Reasoning,&#;

Indiana Law Journal

: Vol.

Iss. 1, Article 2.

Available at:

Hans V. Hansen, Robert C. Pinto,

FALLACIES: CLASSICAL AND CONTEMPORARY READINGS

, Penn

State University Press, See also

Avi Sion, “

Judaic Logic,”