ACDI - Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional

ISSN-e: 2145-4493

ISSN: 2027-1131 

Los tratados en el tiempo y los derechos humanos: un análisis desde la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos

Carlos Enrique Arévalo Narváez, Paola Andrea Patarroyo Ramírez

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/acdi/a.5290
Enviar este artículo (Es necesario iniciar sesión)
Escanee aquí para descargar

Resumen


El presente escrito analiza la cuestión de los tratados en el tiempo en el marco del alcance que la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos le ha dado al ejercicio interpretativo de los convenios sobre las materias propias de su jurisdicción. Las partes 1 y 2 introducen los elementos esenciales de la interpretación de los tratados en el derecho internacional general, proporcionando elementos para la aplicación de la aproximación evolutiva como una herramienta hermenéutica, planteando, así mismo, el aparente debate que existe entre dicha aproximación y el uso de la conducta subsiguiente como criterios interpretativos. La parte 3 estudia el impacto del fenómeno de la fragmentación en el derecho internacional de los derechos humanos, evidenciando, a través de la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, la aplicación de reglas del derecho internacional general para interpretar la Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos. Finalmente, se arriba a conclusiones sobre la interpretación en el tiempo de los tratados en materia de derechos humanos, como resultado del contraste entre la aplicación intertemporal que la Corte ha hecho de la Convención Americana, el Reporte sobre Fragmentación de la Comisión de Derecho Internacional en 2008 y los hallazgos preliminares del Grupo de Estudio sobre Acuerdos y Prácticas Subsiguientes respecto de la interpretación de tratados y el asunto del paso del tiempo.


Palabras clave


Interpretación de tratados, tratados en el tiempo, derechos humanos, Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, acuerdos subsiguientes.

Referencias


Conventions

Inter-American Convention on Human Rights, San José, Costa Rica, 22 November 1969, 1144 UNTS 123.

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Convention (Protocol II), 8 June 1977, 1125 UNTS 609.

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1155 UNTS 331, 8 ILM 679.

International documents

Harvard Law School, Research in International IMW, part III. Law of Treaties, Introductory report presented by Georg Nolte to the Study Groups on Treaties Over Time, Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and arbitral tribunals of ad hoc jurisdiction relating the subsequent agreements and the subsequent practice.

International Law Commission, Fifty-eighth Session, Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission, Finalized by Martti Koskenniemi, Official Re-cords of the United Nations General Assembly, Sixty-first Session, 2006, A/61/10.

Second report on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the in-terpretation of treaties, by Georg Nolte, 26 March 2014.A/CN.4/671.

Special Agreement seizing the International Court of Justice of the boundary dispute between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger, Jointly notified to the Court on 20 July 2010.

Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1964, vol. I, UN Doc A/ SER.A/1964.

Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1966, vol. II, UN Doc A/ CN.4/L.117.

Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2013, UN Doc. A/68/10. A. Chapter IV. Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties.

International judgments

Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia. ICJ Reports, 191.

Air Transport Arbitration Award (USA v. France), Award of 22 December 1963, UNRIAA, vol. XVI.

Beagle Channel Arbitration (Argentina v. Chile), 1977, ILR 52, 93. Bankovic v. Belgium and others, Decision of 12 December 2001, Admissibility, ECHR 2001-XII, p. 351.

Case concerning Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), 2015, ICJ Reports 2015.

Case concerning Kasikili/Sedudu Island (Bostwana v. Namibia), 1999, ICJ Re-ports 1999.

Case concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain (Qatar v. Bahrain), ICJ Reports 1995.

Case concerning maritime dispute (Peru v. Chile), 2014, ICJ Reports 2014.

Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Ni-caragua v. United States of America), Merits, ICJ Reports 1986, 134.

Case concerning the Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Judgment of 13 July 2009, ICJ Reports 2009.

Case concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment of 25 September 1997, ICJ Reports 1997.

Case concerning the Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v Uruguay), Merits, April 20, 2010 ICJ.

Case concerning Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan (Indonesia/Malaysia), ICJ Reports 2002.

Case concerning the Temple of Prêah Vihéar (Cambodia v. Thailand), Judgment of 15 June 1962, ICJ Reports 1962.

Case concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States of America v. Iran), 24 May 1980.

ECHR, Felbrudge v. Netherlands, Judgment 23 April 1986, Case

/1984/80/127.

Ireland vs. UK, ECtHR, Serie A vol. 25.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Artavia Murillo and others (In Vitro Fertilization) v. Costa Rica, Preliminary exceptions, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of November 28, 2012, Serie C No. 257.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Barrios Altos v. Peru, Merits, Judgment March 14, 2001, Serie C No. 75, paras. 41-44.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of February 2, 2001, Serie C No. 72.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala, Merits, Judgment of November 25, 2000, Serie C No. 70.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Cruz Sánchez v. Peru, Preliminary Exceptions, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of April 17, 2015, Serie C No. 292.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers v. Peru, Merits, Re-parations and Costs, Judgment of July 8, 2004, Series C No. 110.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Herrera Ulloa v. Costa Rica, Preliminary Objec-tions, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of July 2, 2004, Serie C No. 107.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez, Interpretation of the Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits and Reparations, Judgment of November 26, 2003, Serie C. No. 102.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Las Palmeras v. Colombia, Preliminary Objections, Judgment of February 4, 2000, Serie C No. 67, para. 33.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Massacres of El Mozote v. El Salvador, Preliminary Exceptions, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of October 25, 2012, Serie C No. 292.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community, Judg-ment of August 31, 2001, Serie C No. 79.

I/A Court H. R., Case of Ricardo Canese v. Paraguay, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of August 31, 2004, Serie C No. 111.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Mapiripán Massacre v. Colombia, Merits, Repara-tions and Costs, Judgment of September 15, 2005, Serie C No. 134.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Moiwana Community v. Suriname, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of June 15, 2005, Serie C No. 124.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters v. El Salvador, Preliminary Objections, Judgment of November 23, 2004, Serie C No. 118.

I/A Court H. R., The Right to Information on Consular Assistance. In the Fra-mework of the Guarantees of the due Process of Law, Advisory Opinion OC-16/99 of October 1, 1999.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Saramaka Indigenous Community v. Suriname, Preliminary Exceptions, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of August 12, 2008, Serie C No. 185.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Sarayaku Indigenous Community v. Ecuador, Me-rits, and Reparations, Judgment of June 27, 2012, Serie C No. 245.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of March 29, 2006, Serie C No. 146.

I/A Court H. R., Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of June 17, 2005, Serie C No. 125.

I/A Court H. R., Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin and others v. Trinidad and Tobago, Judgments, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, 21 June 2002, IACtHR, Serie C No. 94.

I/A Court H. R., Rights of migrant children in the context of migration and/or in need of international protection, Advisory Opinion OC-21/14 of August 19, 2014, Serie A No. 21.

I/A Court H. R., The Right to Information on Consular Assistance. In the Fra-mework of the Guarantees of the due Process of Law, Advisory Opinion OC-16/99 of October 1, 1999, Serie A No. 16.

Island of Palmas Case (Netherlands, United States), 2 R. Int’l Arb., Awards 831.

Korea - Measures Affecting Government Procurement (19 January 2000), WT/DS163/R, para. 7.96.

Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Nami-bia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), ICJ Reports 1971.

S. S. Wimbledon, PCIJ, Serie A No. 1.

The Effect of Reservations on the Entry into Force of the American Convention on Human Rights, Advisory Opinion OC-2/82, Serie A No. 2, 1982.

The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law, Advisory Opinion OC-16/99 of October 1, 1999, Serie A No. 16.

Tyrer v. The United Kingdom, ECtHR, 1978, Serie A No. 26.

Young Loan Arbitration (Belgium, France, Switzerland, United Kingdom and United States/ Germany), 59 ILR 494 (1980).

Articles

Boisson de Chazournes, L., Subsequent Practice, Practices and “Family-Resem-blance”, Towards embedding Subsequent Practice in its Operative Milieu - A Multi-Actor Perspective, IRPA Working Paper, GAL Series No. 1/2013.

Elias, T. O., “The Doctrine of Intertemporal Law”, 74 Am. J. Int’l L., 285 (1980).

Haraszti, G., Some Fundamental Problems in the Law of Treaties, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1973, p. 18.

Helmersen, S., “Evolutive Treaty Interpretation: Legality, Semantics and Distinctions”, EJLS, 2013, 6, (I).

Higgins, R., “A Babel of judicial voices? Ruminations from the bench”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2006, 55.

McLachlan, C., “The principle of Systematic Integration and Article 31 (3) (c) of the Vienna Convention”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2005, 54, p. 280. ICLQ vol. 54, April 2005.

Simma, B. & Puylkowski, D., “Of Planets and the Universe: Self-contained Regimes in International Law”, 17 EJIL 2006.

Books

Annuaire de l’lnstitute de droit international, 1956, 46.

Aust, A., Modern Treaty Law and Practice, Oxford University Press, 2013.

Burguogue, A., The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Oxford, 2011.

Gardiner, R., Treaty Interpretation, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008.

Lauterpacht, H., The Function of Law in the International Community, Oxford University Press, 1933.

Sinclair, I., The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Thirlway, H. W. A., International Customary Law and Codification, Sijthoff, Leiden, 1972.

Watts, A., Pronto, A. & Wood, M., The International Law Commission 1999-2009, volume IV. Treaties, Final Draft Articles, and Other Materials, Oxford University Press, 2010.

Book chapters

Brownlie, I., “The Rights of Peoples in Modem International Law”, in Crawford, J. (ed.), The Rights of Peoples, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1988.

Bollecker, B., « L’Avis Consultatif du 21 Juin 1971 dnas l’affaire de la Namibie (Sud-Ouest Africain) », Annuaire Francais de Droit International, 1971, 17.

Caflisch, L. & Cancado Trindade, A., “Les conventions americaine et européenne des droits de l’homme et le droit international général”, 108 RGDIP vol. 108 (2004).

Ferrer Mac-Gregor, E., “Interpretación conforme y control difuso de convencionalidad. El nuevo paradigma para el juez mexicano”, en Carbonell, M. & Salazar, P. (coords.), La reforma constitucional de dere-chos humanos: un nuevo paradigma, México, Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas - UNAM, 2011.

Fox, H., “Article 31 (3) (a) and (b) of the Vienna Convention and the Ka-sikili/Sedulu Island Case”, in Fitzmaurice, M., Treaty Interpretation and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Greenwood, S., “Unity and diversity in international law”, in Andenas, M. & Bjorge, E., A Farewell to Fragmentation, Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Letsas, G., “The Truth in Autonomous concepts: How to Interpret the ECHR”, EJIL, 2004, 2.

Pinto, M., “El principio pro homine. Criterios de hermenéutica y pautas para la regulación de los derechos humanos”, en La aplicación de los tratados de derechos humanos por los tribunales locales, Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), Buenos Aires, Editorial del Puerto, 1997.

Salvioli, S., “Un análisis desde el principio pro persona sobre el valor jurídico de las decisiones de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Hu-manos”, en En defensa de la Constitución: libro homenaje a Germán Bidart Campos, Ediar, Buenos Aires, 2003, pp. 143-155.

Sheeran, S., “The Relationship of international human rights law and general international law: hermeneutic constraint, or pushing the boundaries?”, in Sheeran, S. & Rodley, N., Routledge Handbook of International Human Rights Law, 2013.

Villiger, M., “The Rules on Interpretation: Misgivings, Misunderstan-dings, Miscarriage? The ‘Crucible’ Intended by the International Law Commission”, in Canizzaro, E., The Law of Treaties Beyond the Vienna Convention, Oxford University Press, 2011.

Wachsmann, P., « Les methodes de l’intérpretation des conventions à la protection des droits de l’homme », in SFDI, La protection des droits de l’homme et l’évolution du droit international, Coll. 1998, Pedone, Paris, 1998.


El archivo PDF seleccionado se debe cargar aquí si su navegador tiene instalado un módulo de lectura de PDF (por ejemplo, una versión reciente de Adobe Acrobat Reader).

Si desea más información sobre cómo imprimir, guardar y trabajar con PDFs, Highwire Press le proporciona una guía útil de Preguntas frecuentes sobre PDFs.

Por otro lado, puede descargar el PDF directamente a su ordenador donde podrá abrirlo con un lector de PDF. Para descargar el PDF, haga clic en el enlace anterior.


Métricas