International Law | NEW24

 Definition and concept of international law

• In every society, regardless of its size, the establishment of a legal framework is imperative for its functioning and development. This framework, commonly known as municipal laws, serves a dual purpose. It is permissive, granting individuals the opportunity to form legal relationships with associated rights and duties. Simultaneously, it takes on a restrictive role, serving as a mechanism to punish those who engage in wrongful actions. However, in the contemporary global landscape, the need for a broader framework has emerged. International laws have stepped in to bridge this gap, providing a structure through which interstate relations can be nurtured and developed on a global scale.

•  The term "international law," also known as the Laws of Nations, was first coined by Jeremy Bentham in 1780. Within the realm of international law, each sovereign entity is referred to as a "state," reflecting the recognition of countries as distinct actors subject to a common set of legal principles governing their interactions on the international stage.

Meaning

• Indeed, the modern international law system has evolved over the past four centuries, shaped significantly by the ideas and contributions of writers and jurists from the 16th to the 18th centuries. During this period, these thinkers played a crucial role in formulating and establishing many of the fundamental principles that underpin contemporary international law. Their insights have left a lasting impact on the structure and development of the legal framework governing interactions between sovereign states.

• Exactly, international laws comprise a set of rules, agreements, and treaties that carry binding force between countries. These rules are crafted collaboratively as nations converge to establish regulations they believe will be mutually beneficial for their citizens. Importantly, international law operates as an independent system, existing beyond the legal framework of any specific state and providing a framework for interactions on the global stage.

What is the aim of international law?

The existence of international law indeed stems from heightened interstate engagement. Its primary objective is to uphold international peace and security among diverse states. Additionally, international law serves various purposes, such as facilitating diplomatic relations, fostering cooperation on global issues, promoting human rights, regulating trade, and providing a framework for resolving disputes peacefully. Its multifaceted nature reflects the complexities of the interconnected global community.

•  Certainly, another crucial objective of international law is the promotion of friendly relations among member states of the international community, exemplified by organizations like the United Nations. By establishing norms and principles, international law seeks to create a framework that encourages cooperation, mutual respect, and collaboration among nations, fostering an environment conducive to peaceful coexistence and diplomatic engagement.

•  International law plays a pivotal role in providing for basic humanitarian rights. It sets forth principles and treaties aimed at safeguarding fundamental human rights on a global scale. These rights include protection from discrimination, torture, and arbitrary detention, as well as the promotion of principles such as the right to life, liberty, and a fair trial. The international legal framework strives to ensure the dignity and well-being of individuals, transcending national boundaries in its commitment to upholding humanitarian values.

• Certainly, one of the essential roles of international law is to provide a mechanism for solving international problems through cooperation. By establishing frameworks for dialogue, negotiation, and collaboration, international law seeks to address global challenges such as conflicts, environmental issues, and economic disparities. This cooperative approach encourages nations to work together to find peaceful and mutually beneficial solutions, contributing to the stability and progress of the international community.

• International law includes provisions that aim to restrain states from using threats or force against the territorial integrity of other states. This principle is fundamental to maintaining global peace and stability. Additionally, international law supports the right to self-determination for people, recognising their autonomy in shaping their political, economic, and social systems. By discouraging aggression and affirming the right to self-determination, international law strives to foster a world where states respect each other's sovereignty and individuals can participate in determining their own destiny.

•  I'm glad the summary resonates with your understanding. The commitment to diplomacy and cooperation, as facilitated by international law, plays a crucial role in fostering a more stable and harmonious global community. If you have any more questions or if there's anything else you'd like to discuss, feel free to let me know.

Who are the subjects of international law?

Entities with legal personality, possessing specific rights and duties under the international legal system, are often referred to as "subjects of international law." This term encompasses not only states but also international organisations and, in certain contexts, individuals and non-state entities that are recognised as having legal standing in the international arena. The concept acknowledges the diverse actors that play roles within the framework of international law, each with its own set of rights and responsibilities.

Indeed, the state is traditionally regarded as the primary and original subject of international law. States hold a central role in the international legal system, enjoying rights and shouldering obligations. However, it's important to note that international law has evolved to recognise and regulate the actions of other entities as well. This includes international organisations, non-state actors, and, in certain contexts, individuals. The dynamic nature of international law accommodates a broad spectrum of subjects, reflecting the complexities of the global community.

• While states are the primary subjects of international law, there is a growing recognition that individuals can also be subjects of certain rights and responsibilities in the international legal system. The concept of individual rights in international law has expanded over time, particularly in the realm of human rights. Individuals may have standing in international legal proceedings, especially in cases related to human rights abuses, war crimes, or crimes against humanity. This recognition underscores the evolving nature of international law to include a broader range of actors beyond states.

•  Absolutely, international organisations, formed through treaties among states, are recognised as subjects of international law. These entities, like the United Nations and others, possess legal personality, enabling them to enter into agreements, enjoy rights, and assume responsibilities within the international legal framework. International organisations play crucial roles in addressing global issues, facilitating cooperation among member states, and contributing to the development and implementation of international law.

• While multinational companies operate across multiple nations, they do not possess legal personality in the same way that states or international organisations do under traditional international law. However, their activities are subject to various national and international legal frameworks, including trade agreements, investment laws, and human rights standards. The regulation of multinational companies involves a complex interplay of domestic and international laws, aiming to ensure responsible business conduct and accountability for their actions on a global scale.

Correct, each category—states, international organisations, and, to a certain extent, individuals and multinational companies—can be considered subjects of international law, each with its own set of rights and duties. This recognition reflects the evolving nature of international law, which encompasses a diverse range of actors beyond traditional state entities. This framework seeks to establish a system where various participants contribute to global governance, cooperation, and the protection of shared interests.

Realist Theory

The theory you're describing aligns with the traditional or classical view of international law, often referred to as the "Monist" perspective. According to this theory, only nation-states are considered subjects of international law. It stems from the idea that international law originates with and is primarily concerned with the relationships between sovereign states. In this view, states are seen as distinct and separate entities with their own rights, obligations, and capacities to engage in legal relations on the international stage. It contrasts with the more modern "Pluralist" perspective, which acknowledges a broader range of subjects, including international organisations, individuals, and other entities.

• Indeed, Professor L. Oppenheim, a notable figure in international law, was a staunch supporter of the monist perspective. His belief emphasised that the law of nations, or international law, primarily revolves around relations between sovereign states. From this standpoint, he argued that the primary subjects of international law should indeed be nations or states. This perspective underscores the traditional view that sovereign states are the principal actors and participants in the international legal system.

• Critics of the monist theory point to its limitations in explaining certain historical and contemporary situations, such as the treatment of slaves and pirates under international law. The theory, centred on states as the primary subjects, faces challenges in addressing the rights and status of individuals who may not fall neatly into the category of state actors.

For example, the recognition of rights for slaves and the classification of pirates as enemies of mankind demonstrate instances where international law extends beyond the scope of state-centric relationships. These cases highlight the evolving nature of international law to encompass the rights and protections of individuals, even in situations that may not align with the traditional state-centric perspective.

Fictional Theory

The perspective you're describing aligns with the individualistic or humanitarian view of international law. According to this viewpoint, the ultimate subjects of international law are individuals, and the legal order is designed for their well-being. Proponents of this theory argue that nation-states are essentially aggregates of individuals and that the primary focus of international law should be the protection of individual rights and interests.

This perspective emphasises the importance of recognising the human dimension in international relations and law and advocating for the promotion and protection of individual rights on the global stage. It stands in contrast to the traditional state-centric views and reflects the evolving nature of international law to address the rights and dignity of individuals in the international community.

Indeed, Professor Hans Kelsen is associated with the individualistic or monistic perspective in international law. He contends that the duties of states under international law ultimately boil down to the duties of individuals within those states. According to Kelsen's theory, there is no fundamental distinction between international law and municipal (domestic) law. Instead, both legal orders are seen as interconnected, with international law essentially being applicable to individuals.

In this monistic view, the idea is that states, as legal entities, derive their authority and obligations from the individuals that constitute them. Kelsen's perspective blurs the traditional boundaries between domestic and international law, emphasising the interconnectedness of legal norms and their ultimate impact on individuals.

Functional Theory

You've highlighted a key aspect of the functional theory of international law. Unlike the extreme positions of realism and fictionalism, the functional theory recognises that both states and individuals can be subjects of modern international law, each possessing recognised rights, duties, and obligations. This perspective acknowledges the evolving nature of the international legal system, which extends legal standing to various entities beyond traditional state actors.

• Furthermore, the Functional Theory recognises the emergence of international organisations, such as the African Union, as legitimate subjects of international law. This broad and inclusive view reflects the contemporary understanding of the diverse actors contributing to the functioning and development of the international legal framework.

• Absolutely, in the present times, the recognition of individual rights is prominently reflected in international legal instruments like the International Covenant on Human Rights. This signifies a shift towards acknowledging individuals as direct subjects of international law, possessing certain rights and duties.

Additionally, international organisations, including the United Nations, have been recognised as subjects of international law. The International Court of Justice's acknowledgment of the United Nations as an international person capable of having rights and duties reinforces the idea that various entities, beyond just states, play significant roles in the contemporary international legal landscape. This recognition reflects the complexity and inclusivity of the modern international legal system.

Branches of International Law

Jus Gentium

The term "laws of nations" in Latin is often referred to as "jus gentium." These are a set of rules that govern relationships between nations and are not part of a specific legal code or statute. Jus gentium encompasses principles and norms that are considered customary in international relations, providing a basis for the interactions and conduct between sovereign states.

Jus Inter Gentes

The term "law between the peoples" is not a commonly used legal term, and its meaning may vary depending on the context. However, if it is intended to convey the idea of agreements and treaties mutually accepted by both countries, it might align with the concept of international agreements or treaties between sovereign states. These agreements are typically negotiated and entered into by nations, outlining specific terms and obligations that both parties agree to uphold.

Various Scholars on International Law

Certainly, various eminent scholars and international jurists have provided diverse interpretations of international law. It's a multifaceted field, and different experts may emphasise different aspects. Some highlight its role in regulating relations between sovereign states, while others stress its evolving nature to include individuals and non-state entities. Overall, international law is often described as a system of rules and principles governing the conduct of states and other international actors in the global community. The interpretations may vary, reflecting the dynamic and interdisciplinary nature of international law.

•  Professor L. Oppenheim's definition encapsulates a widely recognised understanding of international law. His definition characterises international law as a body of rules, both customary and conventional, that are regarded as legally binding by civilised states in their interactions with one another. This definition underscores the consensual and mutually acknowledged nature of international law among sovereign states, highlighting the importance of both established customs and formal agreements in shaping the legal framework governing international relations.

• Torsten Gihl's definition aligns with the idea that international law governs the relations within the international community or society of states. This characterization emphasises the collective nature of international law, highlighting its applicability to interactions among states on the global stage. The term "International Community" underscores the interconnectedness and shared legal framework that binds states together, reflecting the idea that these rules of law are meant to regulate behaviour and maintain order in the international arena.

• J.L. Brierly's definition aligns closely with others, stating that the Law of Nations or International Law consists of rules and principles of action that are binding upon civilised states in their relations with each other. This definition emphasises the normative and obligatory nature of international law, indicating that it imposes certain standards of conduct on states as they interact within the international community. The use of the term "civilised states" reflects the historical context in which such definitions were formulated.

•  Professor John W. F. "Ian" Grey's definition aligns with the conventional understanding of international law. His statement emphasises that international law, or the Law of Nations, comprises a set of rules that typically regulate the conduct of states in their interactions with each other. This definition underscores the normative aspect of international law, highlighting its role in guiding and governing the behaviour of sovereign states on the global stage.

•  Lord Coleridge's definition in Queen v. Keyn (1876) succinctly characterises international law as "that collection of usages which civilised states have agreed to observe in their dealings with one another." This definition captures the consensual nature of international law, emphasising the importance of agreements and usages that have been accepted by civilised states in their interactions. It reflects the idea that the rules and norms of international law are rooted in mutual consent and cooperation among sovereign states.

Is international law really a law?

The question of whether international law is considered a "true law" or merely a set of rules backed by morality is indeed a longstanding and debated issue among jurists. This debate often centres around the nature of enforcement and the sources of authority in international law.

Some argue that international law lacks a centralized enforcement mechanism akin to domestic legal systems, leading them to view it more as a code of conduct guided by moral principles. Others, however, contend that international law is indeed a true law, akin to domestic legal systems, emphasising that it is binding upon states and individuals.

This debate underscores the unique characteristics of international law, which operates in a decentralized and sovereign-centric system, distinguishing it from the more centralized legal systems within individual states.

Austin’s View: International law is not a true law.

Exactly, your summary captures the key tenets of John Austin's legal positivism. According to Austin, for something to be considered law, it must be a command issued by a recognized sovereign authority, and the threat of sanctions is crucial for ensuring compliance. This perspective contrasts with natural law theories that emphasise moral principles as the foundation of law. Austin's focus on positive law, enacted by a sovereign and enforced through sanctions, has significantly influenced legal philosophy and discussions about the nature of law.

• Your analysis is accurate and aligns with the critique often raised against applying Austin's legal positivism directly to international law. Since international law lacks a centralised sovereign authority with the power to issue commands and enforce sanctions universally, some legal positivists argue that international laws may be considered more as ethical or moral guidelines than "true law" in the positivist sense.

• In this perspective, the absence of a centralised legislative authority in international law challenges the traditional positivist criteria for what constitutes law. Critics argue that the effectiveness and recognition of international laws often rely on consent, custom, and shared moral values among states rather than a top-down legislative authority. This debate reflects the ongoing discussion about the nature and foundations of international law within legal philosophy.

Oppenheim’s View: International Law

Your analysis aligns with the broader perspective of legal realism, which differs from Austin's legal positivism. Legal realists, like Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., argue that laws are essentially a body of rules for human conduct within a community. They emphasise that the enforceability of these rules doesn't necessarily require a sovereign legislative authority but is often contingent on the common consent or acceptance of the community.

This view acknowledges that legal rules can emerge from various sources, including custom, judicial decisions, and social practices, without strict reliance on a centralized legislative authority. It allows for the recognition of legal norms that may not fit the traditional positivist mould but are still considered binding within a community based on social acceptance and enforcement practices.

Types

Your categorization is generally accurate, but there is a more commonly recognised division within international law. The main branches of international law are typically categorised as follows:

• Public International Law: This is the most well-known category and deals with the relationships between sovereign states and international entities. It includes areas such as human rights law, humanitarian law, the law of the sea, and international environmental law.

• Private International Law (or Conflict of Laws): This branch focuses on resolving legal disputes involving individuals, corporations, or other private entities that have connections to multiple countries. It aims to determine which legal jurisdiction's laws should apply in a given case.

• Supranational Law: This term is often used to describe legal systems that exist above and beyond the laws of individual states. It is closely associated with regional organisations that have legal authority over their member states, such as the European Union.

• Your mention of "Supranational Law" is accurate in the context of regional organisations, but it's important to note that it is often considered a subset or an application within the broader categories of public and private international law.

Merits and demerits of international law

State’s Interest Protection

Indeed, international laws play a crucial role in providing a framework that helps protect the interests of states, particularly those with less power or influence. These laws establish norms and principles that guide the behaviour of states, promoting stability and predictability in international relations. They contribute to the protection of smaller or less powerful states by providing a platform for diplomatic interactions, conflict resolution, and the pursuit of justice.

The principles of sovereignty, non-aggression, and the right to self-determination embedded in international law aim to create a more equitable and just global order where all states, regardless of their size or power, have the opportunity to thrive and safeguard their interests within a rules-based system.

Your summary accurately captures the significance of international organisations like the World Food Programme in protecting the interests of states through humanitarian efforts. These organisations operate within the framework of international law, demonstrating the cooperative nature of the global community in addressing pressing issues such as hunger and emergencies. The practical application of international law in supporting less powerful or vulnerable states reflects the commitment to collective well-being and the pursuit of shared goals on the global stage.

Human Being Welfare

• Absolutely, international law has played a crucial role in promoting the welfare of human beings, particularly through treaties and agreements that focus on fundamental human rights, justice, and equality. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a prime example of such efforts. Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, the UDHR sets out a comprehensive framework for the protection of basic human rights and freedoms on a global scale.

• International treaties and declarations, including the UDHR, provide a shared foundation for nations to uphold principles such as the right to life, liberty, and security; freedom from torture and slavery; and the right to work and education. These instruments serve as a testament to the collective commitment of the international community to safeguard the dignity and well-being of all individuals.

Unity and Strength

• Your example of global warming aptly illustrates how international law has fostered a sense of interdependence among nations. Issues like climate change transcend national borders, and the collective actions of all states are necessary to address these global challenges effectively. In the case of global warming, the emissions from one country can have widespread consequences, impacting the environment and populations across the globe.

• International laws and cooperation, such as the Paris Agreement, are essential for coordinating efforts to combat issues like climate change. This interdependence highlights the interconnectedness of states and emphasises the need for collaborative solutions that go beyond individual national capacities. It underscores the role of international law in promoting unity and addressing shared challenges for the benefit of the global community.

Demerits

No Apparent Authority

• Your summary encapsulates the key nuances of the enforcement challenge in international law. The reliance on the cooperation and compliance of sovereign states, combined with the absence of a centralised enforcement authority, indeed poses significant challenges. While bodies like the International Court of Justice play a crucial role in settling disputes and providing authoritative decisions, their effectiveness ultimately hinges on states voluntarily adhering to these rulings.

• The ongoing discussions within the international community to strengthen mechanisms for compliance and enforcement reflect the evolving nature of international law. Efforts to enhance the efficacy of international legal frameworks are essential for addressing global challenges and fostering a more robust and just international system.

No legislative machinery

Your summary accurately captures the nuanced dynamics of international law. Balancing state sovereignty with collective global goals is indeed a delicate task. The flexibility in interpreting international laws, rooted in treaties and conventions, reflects the intricate interplay of national interests within the broader framework of a shared international legal system. Achieving a harmonious balance that fosters cooperation and addresses global challenges remains an ongoing challenge for the international community. This delicate equilibrium is crucial for navigating the complexities of a world where states pursue both their own interests and contribute to collective well-being.

Lack of effective sanctions

• The absence of a strong and universally applicable enforcement mechanism in international law can contribute to challenges in ensuring compliance. Unlike domestic legal systems, where sanctions can be more directly applied, international law relies heavily on the cooperation and willingness of states to adhere to legal norms.

• While some international organisations and agreements have established dispute resolution mechanisms, the enforcement of decisions often relies on the voluntary compliance of states. The lack of a consistent and authoritative global enforcement mechanism can, at times, create a situation where states may feel less constrained when violating international laws.

• Efforts to strengthen compliance mechanisms and enhance the enforcement capabilities of international institutions are ongoing discussions within the international community. Achieving more effective enforcement remains a complex and evolving aspect of international law.

Inability to intervene

You accurately reference Article 2(7) of the United Nations Charter, which states that the United Nations shall not intervene in matters that are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state. This principle is rooted in respect for state sovereignty and non-interference in domestic affairs.

• While this principle safeguards national sovereignty, it can, at times, limit the ability of international law to address certain internal issues within states. This limitation is intentional, as the UN Charter seeks to strike a balance between maintaining global peace and respecting the autonomy of individual nations. The effectiveness and strength of international law, particularly in addressing internal matters of states, are indeed influenced by this principle and the broader dynamics of state sovereignty.

• Your comprehensive overview of international law aptly captures its foundational principles, sources, and overarching objectives. Indeed, international law is designed to be binding between countries, promoting security, peace, and cooperation on a global scale. The recognition that individuals can also be subjects of international law underscores the evolving nature of this legal framework.

• The reference to Article 38 of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Statute effectively highlights the recognized sources of international law, including customs, treaties, and general principles. The multifaceted goals of international law, encompassing the maintenance of world order, peacekeeping, dispute resolution, and the protection of fundamental rights, underscore its significance in the international arena.

However, as you rightly note, there are challenges and shortcomings in the international legal system that impact international relations. These challenges often stem from the complexities of state interactions, the absence of a centralized enforcement mechanism, and the varying interpretations and applications of international norms. Addressing these issues remains an ongoing endeavour within the international community.

Historical overview

Your historical perspective is accurate. While the modern international system as we know it has evolved over the last few centuries, the fundamental concepts of international law indeed have roots in much earlier periods. The treaty between Lagash and Umma in 2100 BC stands out as an early example of formalised agreements between distinct political entities. This historical pact represents an early attempt at establishing rules and norms to govern interactions between sovereign states or city-states.

Throughout ancient history, various cultures engaged in diplomatic relations, alliances, and treaties, laying the groundwork for principles that would later be formalised in modern international law. Understanding these historical antecedents provides valuable insights into the gradual development of the international legal system over millennia.

The examples you provide further illustrate the early foundations of international agreements. The inscribed treaty between Lagash and Umma, specifying a defined boundary, reflects an early attempt at establishing clear terms to govern relations between neighbouring city-states. This demonstrates the recognition of the importance of delineating borders and respecting mutual territorial integrity.

The later treaty between Rameses II of Egypt and the King of Hittites, over 1,000 years later, exemplifies the continuation of diplomatic practices. This treaty, aiming for eternal peace and brotherhood, underscores the enduring human desire for stability and cooperation between sovereign entities.

These historical instances highlight the gradual development of principles that would later be integral to modern international law, such as the importance of defined boundaries, the pursuit of peace, and the establishment of diplomatic relations.

Your summary captures the essence of the Treaty of Westphalia's profound impact on shaping modern international law. The principles of state sovereignty and non-intervention introduced by the treaty laid the foundation for the development of public international law. This historical agreement played a crucial role in restructuring the European political landscape after a prolonged period of conflict and contributed to establishing the basis for the present-day international system.

While recognising the diverse historical origins of international law, the Treaty of Westphalia remains a key reference point for understanding the evolution of the contemporary international legal framework. Its principles have endured and continue to influence the dynamics of state interactions and the structure of the international order.

Scope of International Law

Interstate relations and their regulation

• Your explanation effectively outlines the evolution and importance of international law, particularly in the context of state subjects. The natural interrelationship between civilised states led to the establishment of rules, regulations, and treaties to facilitate harmonious interactions. The codification of international law, including the emergence of international criminal law, reflects the need for a structured and legal framework to govern various aspects of state relations.

• Your mention of the diverse subject matters covered under International Criminal Law, such as extradition treaties, refugees, human rights, and sustainable development, underscores the comprehensive nature of this legal field. It highlights the adaptation of legal principles to address contemporary global challenges, emphasising the dynamic and evolving nature of international law.

International organisations

It seems like your message was cut off. If you have specific questions or if there's a particular aspect of international organisations you'd like to discuss, feel free to provide more details or ask your question again!

• Your summary captures the key functions of the World Bank well. It serves as a vital institution for addressing economic development challenges, especially in developing countries. If you have additional inquiries or if there's another aspect of international organisations you'd like to delve into, don't hesitate to let me know!

• Your description of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is accurate. The IMF indeed plays a significant role in helping countries manage their balance of payments and providing financial assistance during times of economic challenges. The Sovereign Debt Restructuring Mechanism is a crucial aspect, aiming to facilitate fair negotiations between debtor countries and creditors, preserve the value of assets, and ensure the rights of creditors are upheld. If you have more questions or if there's another area you'd like to explore, feel free to ask!

• Your summary of the European Union's objectives is accurate. The European Union (EU) was indeed established with the aim of promoting economic cooperation, scientific and technological development, and fostering solidarity among its member countries. The EU's focus on internal trade has been a key driver for economic integration within the region. Additionally, the EU has played a significant role in maintaining peace and stability, particularly considering its historical roots in fostering post-war cooperation. If you have more questions or if there's another area you'd like to explore, feel free to let me know!

• Your description of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is accurate. SAARC is indeed focused on promoting peace, regional harmony, and cooperation among the South Asian nations. The organisation aims to foster collaboration across various sectors, including scientific and technological development, to enhance the overall well-being and progress of its member countries. If you have more questions about SAARC or any other topic, feel free to ask!

•  Your overview of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is accurate. ASEAN plays a crucial role in fostering integration and cooperation among its 10 member countries across various dimensions, including economic, social, political, military, educational, and socio-cultural aspects. If you have further questions about ASEAN or if there's another topic you'd like to explore, feel free to let me know!

• Your summary of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is accurate. The SCO is indeed an intergovernmental international organisation that aims to facilitate cooperation across various domains, including politics, trade, economy, technology, and culture. The organisation's objective includes joint efforts to maintain peace and security in the region, highlighting its commitment to stability and collaboration among member states. If you have more questions about the SCO or any other topic, feel free to ask.

Shake effect DOWNLOAD

You have to wait 30 seconds.

BEATMARK