Abstract
The concept of ius cogens norms is one of the most controversial issue in the international law. These norms were definied in the art. 53 of Vienna Convention on the law of treaties of 1969, according to which ius cogens norm it is a norm accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of the international law having the same character. This definition indicates that these norms limit the ability of States of creation or change the norms of the international law. However, the indicated definition does not include examples, scope and substance of ius cogens norms. In the commentary to the art. 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties the International Law Commission stated that substance of these norms will be worked out in the States’ practice and in the judicial decisions of international courts . Contrary to International Court of Justice Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), in its judicial decisions in great measure widened the scope and the substance of ius cogens norms. Consequently, IACtHR has developed a progressive case law in this realm. In separate opinion, in the case Caesar v. Trinidad and Tobago from 2005, judge A.A. Conçado Trindade concluded that the IACtHR, in identification of ius cogens norms, have done more than any other international court. In its judgements and advisory opinions IACtHR recognized that e.g. forced going missing, tortures, discriminations, extrajudicial executions are the infringements of ius cogens norms. Taking into consideration jurisprudence of the IACtHR it is hard to say on what grounds it was prescribed that a given norm is forming a part of ius cogens. This article analyses the way the IACtHR identified ius cogens norms. Therefore it was indispensable to define its competence ratione materiae. Next, taking into consideration the gravity and the nature of infringement and the fact that all infringements of human rights which have been described simultaneously constitute violation of other human rights, this paper is limited only to three of them. It also outlines what functions, in the jurisprudence of IACtHR, fulfil the attribution to the norms the status of ius cogens norms.
Highlights
Od kilkudziesięciu lat zauważalne jest coraz większe zainteresowanie, zarówno przedstawicieli nauki prawa międzynarodowego, jak i trybunałów
Podstawowym bowiem kryterium określającym granice jurysdykcji ATPCz w sprawach spornych oraz w zakresie wydawania opinii doradczych jest ochrona praw jednostek[29]
Conçado Trindade w opinii w sprawie praw nieudokumentowanych migrantów podkreślił, że prawo o odpowiedzialności prawnomiędzynarodowej wskazuje na szeroki i zupełny zakres norm ius cogens[152]
Summary
ATPCz, interpretując postanowienia AKPCz odniósł się do zakresu i treści norm ius cogens[12]. 32 KPT, uznał, że jest kompetentny do wydania opinii doradczej dotyczącej umowy międzynarodowej z dziedziny praw człowieka, która ma zastosowanie do państw amerykańskich, niezależnie od tego, czy została ona przyjęta poza OPA, lub której zakres podmiotowy nie ogranicza się tylko do państw członkowskich OPA24. ”Other Treaties” Subject to the Consultative Jurisdiction of the Court (Art. 64 American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-1/82 of September 24, 1982, Series A, No 1, pkt 14, s. Dostęp: 19 lipca 2017 r.; M.C. Parker, Notes: ”Other Treaties”: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights Defines Its Advisory Jurisdiction, „American University Law Review” 1983, vol 33, no. Poza systemem amerykańskim, znacznie poszerzył zakres jurysdykcji na różne dziedziny prawa międzynarodowego, w tym kwestie dotyczące określenia treści i zakresu norm ius cogens[28]. Podstawowym bowiem kryterium określającym granice jurysdykcji ATPCz w sprawach spornych oraz w zakresie wydawania opinii doradczych jest ochrona praw jednostek[29]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.