Retaliation in kind in international law

Abstract

International jurisprudence differs in the concept of this effect among the effects of international responsibility. This difference stems from the lack of consensus in jurisprudence regarding the desired goal of restoring the situation to what it was and its scope of application. Some aspects of jurisprudence see that restoring the situation to its previous state aims to cease the unlawful act and return to the status quo ante before the violation or action. Therefore, restoring the situation to what it was means stopping the unlawful act and returning to the situation prior to the commission of this act and removing its effects. This can be achieved through tangible measures such as releasing detained foreigners without lawful reason or returning seized or confiscated funds without fair and appropriate compensation. Restoring the situation to what it was may require legal measures by the responsible state, such as repealing a law or a judicial ruling contrary to the provisions of international law. However, restoring the situation to what it was poses difficulties and perhaps makes its applications limited, as circumstances often change between the occurrence of the harm and the resolution of the dispute, making it exhausting if not impossible to restore things to their previous state.