A Large Cup of Opinio Juris and State Practice to Taste: The Recipe of Contemporary Customary International Law?

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.12804/acdi8.1.2015.03

Article Sidebar

PDF (Español (España)) HTML (Español (España)) Lector Inteligente (Español (España)) ePub (Español (España))

Published: Mar 16, 2015
Issue: Vol. 8 (2015): ACDI
Section Papers


Keywords: customary international law , customary international environmental law , international environmental law , opinio juris , international practice , contemporary international law , sources of international law costumbre internacional , costumbre internacional ambiental , derecho internacional ambiental , opinio juris , práctica internacional , derecho internacional contemporáneo , fuentes del derecho internacional. Coutume internationale , coutume internationale en matière d’environnement , droit international de l’environnement , opinio juris , pratique internationale , droit international contemporain , sources du droit international.

Main Article Content

Authors

Fabián Augusto Cárdenas Castañeda Pontificia Universidad Javeriana
Oscar Orlando Casallas Méndez Universidad de la Sabana
Abstract
The social international practice of contemporary international law does not correspond entirely to the one of the establishment of the icj. The world as to 1945 is definitely not the same of the 21st century. Such reality, has undoubtedly transformed international law and its vertebral components. That transformation includes the theory of the sources as a whole and all its kinds. From that perspective, the present research aims to revisit the traditional concept of customary international law by deciphering its two ingredients, in particular that of opinio juris, which will be tested by using contemporary scholarship and jurisprudence. After explaining some of the major difficulties of the classic concept of opinio juris, there will be a description of newer, contemporary and updated concepts. The foregoing will lead the discussion to demonstrate, whether it is in fact required to develop the classic definition of opinio juris, and whether it is suggested that it may be the only ingredient required in the recipe of contemporary customary international law.
Author Biographies

Fabián Augusto Cárdenas Castañeda, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana

Abogado (Diploma de Honor) y especialista de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia; llm en Derecho Internacional Público de la Universidad de Leiden (Países Bajos); doctorando en Ciencias Jurídicas. Miembro del Centro de Estudios de Derecho Internacional Francisco
Suárez S.J. de la Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; miembro fundador de la Academia Colombiana de Derecho Internacional y editor general de su blog Debate Global; miembro del Grupo de Investigación en Responsabilidad Internacional y Medio Ambiente de la Sociedad
Latinoamericana de Derecho Internacional; docente de Derecho Internacional en diversas universidades.

Oscar Orlando Casallas Méndez, Universidad de la Sabana

Abogado de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia y estudiante de Maestría en Derecho
Internacional de la Universidad de La Sabana. Correo electrónico: oocasallasm@unal.edu.co

How to Cite
Cárdenas Castañeda, F. A., & Casallas Méndez, O. O. (2015). A Large Cup of Opinio Juris and State Practice to Taste: The Recipe of Contemporary Customary International Law?. ACDI - Anuario Colombiano De Derecho Internacional, 8, 87–130. https://doi.org/10.12804/acdi8.1.2015.03
References

Abello, Ricardo, “Introducción al estudio de las normas de ius cogens en el seno de la Comisión de Derecho Internacional, CDI”, en El derecho internacional a la luz de los diferentes tribunales internacionales, Bogotá, 2011, en http://www.juridicas.unam.mx/publica/librev/rev/vniver/cont/123/cnt/cnt4.pdf

Baker, Roozbeh, “Customary International Law in the 21st Century: Old Challenges and New Debates”, European Journal of International Law, 2010, 21, (1), 2010, pp. 173-204, en http://ejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/1/173.full#sec-11

Boyle, Alan & Chinkin, Christine, The Making of International Law, Foundations of Public International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007.

Bradley, Curtis, The Chronological Paradox, State Preferences, and Opinio Juris, Duke-Geneva Institute of International Law, Geneva, 2013, en http://law.duke.edu/cicl/pdf/opiniojuris/panel_1-bradley-the_chronological_paradox,_state_preferences,_and_opinio_juris.pdf

Byers, Michael, Custom, Power and the Power of Rules, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2004.

Cárdenas, Fabián, “A Call for Rethinking the Sources of International Law: Soft Law and the Other Side of the Coin”, Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional, 2013, 33, pp. 355-403.

Cárdenas, Fabián & García, Felipe, “Desafíos interpuestos por el derecho internacional ambiental al derecho internacional clásico”, Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional, 2009, 2, p. 159.

Cárdenas, Fabián, “¿Reconoce la jurisprudencia de la CIJ una obligación general de protección ambiental?”, (próximo a publicarse en 2015).

Cárdenas, Fabián, “International Litigation and the Stamp of Postmodernity”, en Prieto Sanjuán, Rafael (ed.), Derecho de los litigios internacionales, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, 2015 (por publicarse).

Cheng, Bing, “United Nations Resolutions on Outer Space: ‘Instant’ International Customary Law?”, The Indian Journal of International Law, 1965, pp. 23-112.

Crawford, James (ed.), International Law Between Universalism and Fragmentation, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Netherlands, 2008.

D’Amato, Anthony, “The Concept of Special Custom in International Law”, American Journal of International Law, 2010, 63, p. 211, en http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1713426

D’Amato, Anthony, “Trashing Customary International”, American Journal of International Law, 1987, (101), en http://anthonydamato.law.northwestern.edu/adobefiles/a87a-trashing.pdf

D’Aspremont, Jean, “An Autonomous Regime of Identification of Customary International Humanitarian Law: Do Not Say What You Do or Do Not Do What You Say?”, in Van Steenberghe, R. (ed.), Droit international humanitaire: un régime spécial de droit international? Bruylant, 2013, en http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2230345

D’Aspremont, Jean, Formalism and the Sources of International Law, a Theory of the Ascertainment of Legal Rules, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011.

Dinstein, Yoram, The Interaction Between Customary International Law and Treaties, The Hague Academy Collected Courses, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, vol. 322, 2006, p. 325.

Elias, Olufemi, “Nature of The Subjective Element in Customary International Law”, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1995, 44, (3), pp. 501-520, en http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/761200?uid=3737808&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21103260829721

Evans, Malcolm (ed.), International Law, 1st ed., Oxford University Press, New York, 2003.

Finnis, John, Natural Law and Natural Rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1980.

Fitzmaurice, Malgosia (ed.), Fifty Years of the International Court of Justice, Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Fitzmaurice, Malgosia, “International Responsibility and Liability”, en The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 1010-1035.

Garzón Valdés, Ernesto, “Two Models of legal Validity”, en Paulson, Stanley (ed.), Normativity and Norms: Critical Perspective on Kelsenian Themes, Oxford University Press, New York, 1999, p. 263.

Goldsmith, Jack & Posner, Eric, “A Theory of Customary International Law”, in John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper, Nº 63, University of Chicago, 1998.

Guzman, Andrew, How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory, Oxford University Press, New York, 2008.

Hart, Herbert, The Concept of Law, 2nd ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994.

Henckaerts, Jean Marie & Beck, Louise, Customary International Humanitarian Law, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2009.

Hey, Ellen, Teaching International Law, State-Consent as Consent to a Process of Normative Development and Ensuing Problems, Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 2003.

Hillier, Tim, Source on Public International Law, Cavendish Publishing Limited, London, 1998.

Kammerhofer, Jorg, “Hans Kelsen in Post Modern International Legal Scholarship”, en D’Aspremont, Jean (ed.), International Legal Positivism in a Post-Modern World, Cambridge University Press, 2014, en http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2154526

Koskenniemi, Martti, From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal Argument, Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Lefkowitz, David, “(Dis)solving the Chronological Paradox in Customary International Law”, Canadian Journal of Jurisprudence, 2008, XXI.

Lepard, Briam, Customary International Law: A New Theory with Practical Applications, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2010.

Malanczuk, Peter, Modern Introduction to International Law, 7th ed., Routledge, New York, 1997.

Maljean-Dubois, Sandrine, “The Making of International Law Challenging Environmental Protection”, in Kerbrat, Yann & Maljean-Dubois, Sandrine (eds.), The Transformation of International Environmental Law, A Pedone & Hart, 2011, pp. 25-54.

Mendelson, Maurice, The Formation of Customary International Law, The Hague Academy Collected Courses, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, vol. 272, 1998.

Mullerson, Rein, “The Interplay of Objective and Subjective Elements in Customary Law”, en Wellens, Karel, International Law: Theory and Practice, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Netherlands, 1998.

Roberts, Anthea, “Traditional and Modern Approaches to Customary International Law: A Reconciliation”, American Journal of International Law, 2001, 95.

Sands, Philippe, Principles of International Environmental Law, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, New York, 2003.

Sharma, Surya, “Territorial Sea”, en Bernhardt, R. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, vol. 11, p. 328.

Shaw, Malcolm, International Law, 6th ed., Cambridge University Press, New York, 2008.

Stein, T., “The Approach of the Different Drummer: The Principle of the Persistent Objector in International Law”, Harvard International Law Journal, 1985.

Swaine, Eduard, “Rational Custom”, Duke Law Journal, 2002, 52, p. 559, en http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=342900

Uribe Vargas, Diego, La paz es una tregua: solución pacífica de las controversias internacionales, Unibiblos Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, 2003.

Uribe, Diego & Cárdenas, Fabián, Derecho internacional ambiental, Fundación Universitaria Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Bogotá, 2010.

Van Hoof, J. H., Rethinking the Sources of International Law, Kluwer Law and Taxation, The Netherlands, 1983.

Verdross, Alfred, Les principes généraux du droit dans la jurisprudence internationale, The Hague Academy Collected Courses, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, vol. 52, 1935.

Weisburd, Arthur, “Customary International Law: The Problem of Treaties”, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 21, p. 10.

Wilches Durán, Rafael, “Principio ambiental de precaución y contratación mercantil en derecho colombiano. Planteamiento del problema”, Vniversitas, 2011, 123, pp. 283-314.

Casos

Asylum (Perú vs. Colombia), ICJ, fallo del 20 de noviembre de 1950.

Barcelona Traction Company (Bélgica vs. España), ICJ, fallo del 5 de febrero de 1970.

Continental Shelf (Malta vs. Libya), ICJ, fallo del 3 de junio de 1985.

Fisheries (Reino Unido de la Gran Bretaña vs. Noruega), ICJ, fallo del 18 de diciembre de 1951.

Lotus (Francia vs. Turquía), ICPJ, fallo del 7 de septiembre de 1927.

Military and Paramilitary Activities in Nicaragua (Nicaragua vs. EE. UU.), ICJ, fallo del 27 de junio de 1986.

North Sea Continental Shelf (República Federal Alemana vs. Alemania/Dinamarca), ICJ, fallo del 20 de febrero de 1969.

Pulp Mills (Argentina vs. Uruguay), ICJ, fallo del 20 de abril de 2010.

Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal vs. Indica), ICJ, fallo del 12 de abril de 1960.

South West Africa (Etiopía vs. Sudáfrica), CIJ, fallo del 18 de julio de 1966.

Trail Smelter Arbitration (U.S. vs. Can.) March 1941, Reports of International Arbitration Awards, UN, 2006.

Query Statistics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Publcation metrics

2994 3933




 

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho de ser la primera publicación del trabajo al igual que licenciado bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License que permite a otros compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.