1. Is international law moving towards having more subjects? If yes, why? 2. Difference in the scope of legal personality of states and other subjects of international law. 3. Consequences of peculiarities of legal personality in international law.

4. Comment the statement: "No rule of international law, in the view of the Court, requires the structure of a State to follow any particular pattern, as is evident from the diversity of forms of State found in the world today." (Case concerning Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion (1975), ICJ). 5. Comment the statement: "The first condition of statehood is that there must exist a government actually independent of that of any other state...If a community, after having detached itself from the parent state, were to become, legally or actually, a satellite of another, it would not be fulfilling the primary conditions of independence and would not accordingly be entitled to recognition as a state." (Hersch Lauterpacht) 6. Comment the statement: "If individual States were free to determine the legal status or consequences of particular situations and to do so definitely, international law would be reduced to a form of imperfect communications, a system of registering the assent or dissent of individual States without any prospect of resolution. Yet it is, and should be more than this a system with the potential for resolving problems, not merely expressing them." (James Crawford).

7. International legal personality of international organizations.

8. Definition of an international organization.

9. Types of international organizations.

10. Rights and obligations of international organizations.

11. General issues of responsibility of international organizations.

12. Definition of "express powers". On what basis do international organizations derive their express powers?

13. Definition of "implied powers".

14. Consequences of ultra vires decisions of international organizations. 15. The international legal position of non-governmental organizations.