International Law- Week 2- sources

International Law- Week 2- sources - The Sources of...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
The Sources of International Law Readings: Harris, Chapter 2/ Evans Chapters 4,5,6 In order for the World Court to apply any asserted rule of international law, must be shown to be a product of one or more of the three law-creating processes: 1) treaties 2) international customary law 3) the general principles of law recognized by civilised nations 4) subsidiary sources -Significant because it rules out other potential law-creating processes such as national law, moral postulates or the doctrine of international law. - Article 38 of the Statute of the World Court discusses this. -Fundamental principle of law that a special rule goes before a general law. **Asylum Case-------Colombia v. Peru (1950) -Peruvian leader attempts an unsuccessful rebellion against Peru in 1948. Peruvian govt gives warrant for his arrest. -Leader granted asylum by Colombia in Peruvian embassy. Colombia requests permission from Peru for leader's safe passage from embassy, through Peru, and into Colombia. Peru refuses. -Peru maintains that Colombia cant unilaterally grant asylum over Peru's objection. -Colombia asks ICH to declare that Colombia had properly granted asylum, pursuant to a recognized regional practice of granting asylum in such political cases. - In addition to the rules arising from agreements, Colombia relied on an alleged regional or local custom peculiar to Latin-American States. -Must prove that this custom established in a manner that it is binding on other Party (Peru), in accordance with a consistent and uniform usage practised by the States in question. -Colombia shows a large number of cases in which diplomatic asylum granted and respected BUT has not shown that the alleged rule of unilateral and definitive qualification was invoked -Court cannot find that Colombian govt has proved existence of a custom, BUT even it could show a custom existed between certain Latin-American states only, it could not be invoked against Peru which, far from having adhered to it-on the contrary, repudiated it by refraining from ratifying the Montevideo Conventions of 1933/39. -Issue: Whether there is a custom so established that it is binding to allow Colombia to grant political asylum. -Colombian government must prove that it was rule binding on other party in constant and uniform usage practiced by other party. -a.k.a "a general practice accepted as law"- custom -Colombia argued that according to treaties in force (Bolovian, Havana,
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Montevideo on Political Asylum) they were entitled to decide if asylum should be granted and their unilateral decision binding on Peru. -Much contradiction in practice, fluctuation, and discrepancy in the exercise of diplomatic asylum and in the official views on various occasions, INCONSISTENT, ratified by some states, rejected by others. -ALSO, even if custom existed, could not be invoked against Peru who
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 09/04/2010 for the course GOVT 380 taught by Professor Tannenwald,n during the Spring '07 term at Cornell University (Engineering School).

Page1 / 21

International Law- Week 2- sources - The Sources of...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online