Translate this page:
Nota Bene. Books, journals, publishing technologies.
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate ☒
Library
 Your profile
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Back to contents

International Law and International Organizations
Reference:

Zverev P.G. The act of state doctrine and protection of human rights

Abstract: This article is dedicated to the issue of protection of human rights and the ability to implement the act of state doctrine in the cases of gross and systematic violations of human rights. The analysis of the act of state doctrine is conducted within historical retrospect, as well as within modern international and national legal precedent of foreign countries. The author determines the criterion for attribution of internationally wrongful actions of individuals and groups thereof towards one or another state. A special attention is given to the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts of the international law commission (2001). The article analyzes the opinions of the leading international jurists and the legal positions of the judges of the International Court of Justice. The goal of this research is to determine the parameters of the applicability of the doctrine of the state act within the framework of the international legal system of human rights protection.This research is based on a combination of specific historical, comparative-legal, formal-legal and political-legal methods.The main conclusions of the research are the following: 1) the inadmissibility of the use of the act of state doctrine to justify gross and systematic violations of human rights, including in times of armed conflicts; 2) the complementary role of national courts in applying international standards on the protection of human rights; 3) international lawmaking is an effective mechanism of the system of protection of human rights at both, the universal and regional levels. The scientific novelty of this research is that the issue of the act of state doctrine in the context of the international protection of human rights is comprehensively addressed for the first time in the Russian doctrine of international law.

Keywords:

attribution, human rights, doctrine of state act, International Court of Justice, ICTY, European Convention, International Law Commission, human rights violations, imputability, UN

This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article


References
1. Zverev P.G. Vmenenie povedeniya mirotvortsev Organizatsii Ob'edinennykh Natsiy // Sbornik statey Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii «Teoreticheskie i prakticheskie aspekty pravovoy nauki», 10 noyabrya 2014 g. – Ufa: Aeterna, 2014. – S. 24-26.
2. Zverev P.G. Primenimost' mezhdunarodnogo gumanitarnogo prava vo vremya mirotvorcheskikh operatsiy OON: monografiya. – M.: Yurlitinform, 2015. – 432 s.
3. Born G.B. International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, 3rd ed. – The Hague [etc.]: Kluwer Law International, 1996.
4. Brownlie I. System of the Law of Nations. State Responsibility. Part One. – Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983. – 302 p.
5. Christenson G.A. The Doctrine of Attribution in State Responsibility. – In: Lillich R.B. (Ed.) International Law of State Responsibility for Injuries to Aliens. –Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1983.
6. Crawford J. «First Report on State Responsibility», A/CN.4/490/Add.5.
7. Evans Paul v. Prosper Avril, Case ¹ 91-0399 [Elektronnyy resurs] Rezhim dostupa: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/diana/0399.asp
8. Filártiga v. Peña Irala 630 F. 2d 876, 889 (2nd Cir. 1980) [Elektronnyy resurs] Rezhim dostupa: http://openjurist.org/630/f2d/876/filartiga-v-pena-irala
9. Forti v. Suarez-Mason (N.D.CAL.1987) [Elektronnyy resurs] Rezhim dostupa: https://casetext.com/case/forti-v-suarez-mason
10. ILC Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, UN Doc. A/56/10 (2001).
11. Kadic v. Karadzic, 70 F. 3d 232, 250 (2nd Cir. 1995) [Elektronnyy resurs] Rezhim dostupa: http://uniset.ca/other/cs5/70F3d232.html
12. Kenneth P. Yeager v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 17 Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal Reports, 1987, vol. IV.
13. Lauterpacht H. The Development of International Law by the International Court. – Cambridge: Grotius Publications, 1982. – 430 p.
14. Loizidou v. Turkey, Judgment of 18 December 1996, ECHR Reports 1996-VI.
15. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment of 27 June 1986, International Court of Justice Reports 1986 (Nicaragua case).
16. Mosler H. The International Society as a Legal Community // Recueil des Cours de l'Academie de Droit International. – 1974. – ¹ IV, Vol. 140. – P. 1-320.
17. Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadić, Appeals Chamber, Judgment of 15 July 1999, IT-94-1-A (Tadić case), reprinted in 38 ILM, 1999, 1518, para. 129.
18. Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski [URL] http://www.icty.org/x/cases/ aleksovski/acjug/en/ale-asj000324e.pdf
19. Questions relating to settlers of German origin in Poland, Advisory Opinion of 10 September 1923, Permanent Court of International Justice, Series B, ¹ 6.
20. Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States (St. Paul, Minnesota, 1987).
21. Scelle G. Le phénomène juridique du dédoublement fonctionnel. – In: Schätzel W., Schlochauer J.J. (Eds.) Rechtsfragen der Internationalen Organisation-Festschrift Hans Wehberg. – Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann, 1956.
22. Second Report on State Responsibility, Document A/CN.4/425 & Add. 1 // Yearbook of the ILC, 1989, Vol. II, Part 1.
23. Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain; United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 124 S. Ct. 2739 (US, 2004) [Elektronnyy resurs] Rezhim dostupa: http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2003/2003_03_339
24. South West Africa (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), Joint Dissenting Opinion of Sir Percy Spender and Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice, ICJ Reports 1962.
25. United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran), International Court of Justice Reports, 1980
Nota Bene
 
For authors
 
Other
 
Our sites
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.