Environmental Rights and Climate Rights Quirico, Ottavio
Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law,
10/2022, Volume:
10, Issue:
1
Journal Article
International legal hierarchy revisited Linderfalk, Ulf
Nordic journal of international law = Acta scandinavica juris gentium,
2011, Volume:
80, Issue:
1
Journal Article
Abstract
Increasingly, international legal arguments exploit the peculiar nature of obligations erga omnes. This practice raises questions about the precise legal status of norms expressing such ...obligations relative to other norms of international law. According to an oft-made suggestion, whether a norm is part of the international jus cogens or not, when it expresses obligations erga omnes it is hierarchically superior to all other norms of non-peremptory international law. This essay inquires into the justification of this theory – throughout the essay referred to as “the Theory on the Superior Status of Erga Omnes Obligations”. As shown in section 2, irrespective of whether inferential legal evidence exists or not, the Theory on the Superior Status of Obligations Erga Omnes can be explained by reference to the non-reciprocal character of such obligations. However, logic requires that the theory be restated to include also interdependent obligations and obligations erga omnes partes. As shown in section 3, although inferential legal evidence provides some support for the Theory on the Superior Status of Obligations Erga Omnes, the evidence is not entirely consistent. As shown in section 4, if the theory on the superior status of obligations erga omnes is adopted and applied on a wide scale, this will have detrimental effects on the overall understanding of international law. Rather than a more properly functioning international legal system, confusion and disorganization will ensue.
As an expression of the erga omnes nature of the legal obligations regarding the protection of human rights, many human rights treaties that establish bodies of experts allow the States Parties to ...make a complaint before those bodies against other Parties that don’t comply with the conventional obligations therein. Such interstate complaints are a hybrid mechanism aiming at supervising the application of the treaty, to solve controversies among States Parties and/or to prevent those controversies. In practice, however, interstate complaints are very rarely filed, mainly due to their high political component that makes them be considered an unfriendly act. Despite such infrequent use, it is somehow surprising that most of the complaints filed up to date have regarded exceptional situations that qualify as “crisis”, what seems to highlight that this mechanism could be particularly useful to address violations of human rights committed in times of exceptionality.
As an expression of the erga omnes nature of the legal obligations regarding the protection of
human rights, many human rights treaties that establish bodies of experts allow the States Parties to
...make a complaint before those bodies against other Parties that don t comply with the conventional
obligations therein. Such interstate complaints are a hybrid mechanism aiming at supervising the
application of the treaty, to solve controversies among States Parties and/or to prevent those
controversies. In practice, however, interstate complaints are very rarely filed, mainly due to their high
political component that makes them be considered an unfriendly act. Despite such infrequent use, it is
somehow surprising that most of the complaints filed up to date have regarded exceptional situations that
qualify as crisis , what seems to highlight that this mechanism could be particularly useful to address
violations of human rights committed in times of exceptionality.
Como expresión de la naturaleza erga omnes de las obligaciones jurídicas relativas a la
protección de derechos humanos, muchos tratados de derechos humanos que establecen órganos de
expertos permiten a los Estados Parte presentar quejas ante dichos órganos contra otras Partes que no
observan las obligaciones convencionales. Tales quejas interestatales son un mecanismo híbrido que
busca controlar la aplicación del tratado, solucionar las controversias entre Estados Parte y/o prevenir esas
controversias. En la práctica, no obstante, las quejas interestatales se interponen en raras ocasiones,
principalmente por causa de su alto componente político, que hace que sean vistas como un acto
inamistoso. Pese a este escaso uso, llama la atención que la mayoría de quejas interestatales presentadas
hasta la fecha se hayan referido a situaciones excepcionales calificables de crisis , lo que parece poner
de manifiesto que este mecanismo podría ser particularmente útil para hacer frente a las violaciones de
derechos humanos cometidas en períodos de excepcionalidad.
This work, the outgrowth of a joint reflection by French and German international lawyers, attempts to reconceptualize the doctrine of hierarchy in international law by emphasizing that a clear ...distinction should be drawn between primary rules, which encapsulate precepts for the protection of the basic values of the international community, and secondary rules, which determine the regime of legal consequences flowing from a breach of such rules of conduct.
Le droit international classique volontaire basé sur la notion absolue de la souveraineté étatique est remis en cause par l’émergence des règles impératives (jus cogens). A cet égard, la ...cristallisation des droits humains impératifs est le résultat du processus d’humanisation du droit international moderne où les règles impératives des droits humains de rangs supérieurs se situent au sommet. On peut estimer que l’acceptation des droits humains impératifs créée des obligations erga omnes de protection pour les États membres de la communauté internationale. Dans ce cadre, dans le cas de violations des droits humains impératifs, tous les États sont directement affectés, touchés et lésés par les violations en question et ont le droit d’agir. A cet effet, il nous semble que tous les États peuvent adopter des contre-mesures individuelles à l’encontre de l’État fautif, violateur des droits humains impératifs. Dans le cas de violations des droits humains impératifs, il nous paraît aussi que, sous certaines conditions, les États peuvent recourir à une intervention militaire à but humanitaire, même sans l’avis favorable du Conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies. Aussi, selon certaines conditions, les États peuvent fournir une aide humanitaire aux victimes des violations des droits humains impératifs survenues à l’extérieur de leur territoire, même sans le consentement de l’État territorial. Les États sont aussi tenus de réprimer les crimes de jus cogens commis à l’extérieur de leur territoire. Dans ce contexte, il nous semble que les États en appliquant la règle aut dedere aut judicare, peuvent poursuivre les étrangers suspectés d’avoir commis des crimes de jus cogens. Dans ce cadre, les États doivent appliquer la règle aut dedere aut judicare en respectant l’obligation de non refoulement afin de prévenir les violations des droits humains impératifs à l’étranger. Il nous paraît aussi que les États en appliquant la règle aut dedere aut judicare, doivent prévoir la compétence universelle des juridictions internes. A cet égard, les États peuvent exercer la compétence universelle à l’encontre des crimes de jus cogens commis à l’étranger par l’étranger et sur l’étranger. Dans ce cadre, il nous semble que les États peuvent exercer la compétence universelle absolue. A cet effet, un État peut déclencher une poursuite pénale à l’encontre de l’étranger suspecté d’avoir commis des crimes de jus cogens, même si ce dernier n’est pas présent et/ou en détention sur le territoire de l’État du for. Il nous semble aussi que, l’immunité des hauts représentants d’État, ainsi que les lois d’amnistie étrangères, ne peuvent pas empêcher l’État du for d’exercer la compétence universelle afin de protéger les intérêts généraux de la communauté internationale dans son ensemble.
Traditional international law based on absolute notion of state sovereignty, is challenged by theemergence of peremptory norms Çus cogens). In this respect, the crystallization of peremptory humanrights norms is the result of the process of humanization of modern international law where theperemptory human rights norms of superior ranks place at the summit. We could believe that theacceptance of peremptory human rights norms creates erga omnes obligations of protection for States,members of the international community. In this context, in the case of violations of peremptoryhuman rights norms, all States are directly affected and injured by the violations in question and have the right to react. To this end, we believe that all States can adopt individual countermeasures against the wrongdoer state, violator of peremptory human rights norms. In the case of violations ofperemptory human rights norms, under certain conditions, States may resort to military interventionfor humanitarian purposes, even without the autholization of the United Nations Security Council.Also, under certain conditions, States can provide humanitarian aid to victims of violations ofperemptory human rights norms occurred outside their territory, even without the consent of theterritorial state. States are also required to suppress jus cogens crimes committed outside their territory. In this context, we believe that States can apply the principle of aut dedere aut judicare and prosecute aliens suspected of jus cogens crimes. In this context, States that apply the principle of aut dedere aut judicare, must respect the obligation of non-refoulement to prevent violations of peremptory human rights norms abroad. It seems to us that States that apply the principle of aut dedere aut judicare must also apply the principle of universal jurisdiction before their internal courts. In this regard, States can exercise universal jurisdiction againsl jus cogens crimes committed abroad, by foreigners and against foreigners. In this context, we believe that States may exercise the absolute universal jurisdiction. To this end, a State may initiate criminal proceedings against alien suspected of jus cogens crimes, even if helshe is not present and/or in custody in the territory ofthe forum State. It also seems to us that the immunity of senior state representatives and foreign amnesty laws, cannot prevent the forum State to exercise universal jurisdiction in order to protect the general interests of the international community as a whole.
U nedavno okončanim postupcima pokrenutim od strane Maršalovih Otoka protiv tri nuklearne sile – Indije, Pakistana i Ujedinjene Kraljevine, Međunarodni sud je imao priliku odlučiti o pitanju postoji ...li obveza na nuklearno razoružanje u međunarodnom običajnom pravu te o sadržaju te obveze. Međutim, postupci su okončani već u prethodnoj fazi postupka, zaključkom Međunarodnog suda da između države tužiteljice i tri tužene države ne postoji „spor“ o kojem bi Sud bio nadležan odlučiti. Međutim, presude Suda potaknule su rasprave o pitanju postoji li takva obveza u međunarodnom običajnom pravu i zasigurno dovele do napretka u području nuklearnog razoružanja, pospješujući usvajanje novog Ugovora o zabrani nuklearnog oružja u srpnju 2017. godine. Rad započinjemo analizom prakse država i njihove pravne svijesti (opinio iuris) kako bismo pokušali dokazati postojanje obveze na nuklearno razoružanje, koja se iz članka VI. Ugovora o neširenju nuklearnog oružja postupno razvila i u sadržajno identičnu obvezu međunarodnog običajnog prava. Zatim argumentiramo da je takva obveza, zbog svoje važnosti, ujedno i obveza erga omnes karaktera, čiju su zaštitu pred međunarodnim pravosudnim tijelima, u slučaju povrede, ovlaštene zahtijevati sve države u međunarodnoj zajednici. Nastavljamo s analizom presude u postupku između Maršalovih Otoka i Ujedinjene Kraljevine te se kritički osvrćemo na određene sporne zaključke Suda, analizirajući njihove potencijalno negativne posljedice na buduće slučajeve pred Sudom. Konačno, ispitujemo mogućnost primjene, tzv. monetary gold načela u navedenim postupcima, odgovarajući na pitanje može li Međunarodni sud uopće odlučivati o pitanju nuklearnog razoružanja bez istovremenog sudjelovanja svih zainteresiranih stranaka u postupku.
Cum Grano Salis Lefeber, René
Leiden journal of international law,
03/1998, Volume:
11, Issue:
1
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
It has to date not been examined in-depth what correlative rights and obligations the breach of an erga omnes obligation or an erga omnes right may entail. In his Separate Opinion in the ...Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros case, Judge Weeramantry devotes one section to the legal consequences of the involvement of erga omnes obligations in inter partes judicial procedures. This editorial analyses the relevant parts of Judge Weeramantry's Separate Opinion and explores the impact it may have on future litigation involving erga omnes issues.
PDF