Autor: Ana María Idárraga Martínez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25058/1794600X.1050

This essay addresses the issue regarding the law making by the International Court of Justice in its contentious function. This problem is addressed from the analysis of the case concerning military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua. In particular, the essay analyses the determination of the effective control standard for the attribution of responsibility for acts of a person or group of persons, and the relevance of the so-called secondary rules in international law. Through a doctrinal and jurisprudential study, the author demonstrates the important role of secondary rules in international law, and therefore, the implications on domestic law of the law of the fact that secondary rules are created principally by international tribunals.

El presente ensayo aborda la temática de creación del derecho por parte de la Corte Internacional de Justicia en su función contenciosa, desde el análisis del caso relativo a las actividades militares y paramilitares en Nicaragua y contra Nicaragua. En especial se desarrolla la determinación del estándar de control efectivo para la atribución de responsabilidad por actos de particulares, y la relevancia de las denominadas reglas secundarias en el derecho internacional. Mediante un estudio doctrinal y jurisprudencial, la autora evidencia la importante función de las reglas secundarias en el derecho internacional y, por tanto, las implicaciones que tiene para el derecho que las reglas secundarias sean creadas, en gran medida, jurisprudencialmente.

O presente ensaio aborda a temática da criação de lei pelo Tribunal Internacional de Justiça na sua função contenciosa, a partir da análise do caso relacionado às atividades militares e paramilitares na Nicarágua e contra Nicarágua. Em especial, é desenvolvida a determinação do nível de controle efetivo para a atribuição de responsabilidade por ações particulares de indivíduos e a relevância das chamadas regras secundárias no direito internacional. Mediante um estúdio de doutrina e jurisprudência, a autora evidência a importante função das regras secundárias no direito internacional, por tanto, as implicações que ele tem para atribuir as regras secundárias são criadas, em grande medida, jurisprudencialmente.

Keywords: Effective control, state responsibility, secondary rules, law making and International Court of Justice.

Palabras claves: Control efectivo; responsabilidad de los Estados; reglas secundarias; creación de derecho y Corte Internacional de Justicia.

Palavras-chave: Controle efetivo, responsabilidade dos estados, regulamentos secundários, criação de direitos e Corte Internacional de Justiça.

Para citar este artículo:

Idárraga, A. (2019). Creación de reglas secundarias por la Corte Internacional de Justicia: Un estudio del “caso relativo a las actividades militares y paramilitares en Nicaragua y contra Nicaragua. Revista Misión Jurídica, 12, (17), 227-238.


Referencias

Aguiló, J. (1990). Sobre Definiciones y normas. Doxa. Cuadernos de Filosofía del Derecho, (08), Recuperado de: 273-282. https://doi.org/10.14198/DOXA1990.8.13

Ballesteros, V. (2013). La atribución al Estado del comportamiento de los particulares en el ámbito de la responsabilidad internacional (Doctoral). Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Albacete. Recuperado de: https://ruidera.uclm.es/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10578/3793/TESIS%20Ballesteros%20Moya.pdf?sequence=1

Corte IDH. Caso de la «Masacre de Mapiripán» Vs. Colombia. Sentencia de 15 de septiembre de 2005. Serie C No. 134. Recuperado de: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_134_esp.pdf

Crawford, J. (1998). State Responsibility: First report on State Responsibility. Recuperado de http://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_490.pdf

Crawford, J. (s. f.). State Responsibility. Recuperado de: http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1093

D´Aspremont, J. d’. (2011). Formalism and the sources of international law: a theory of the ascertainment of legal rules. New York: Oxford University Press.

Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries – 2001. (s. f.). State Responsibility, 114.

Estatuto de la Corte Internacional de Justicia. (s. f.). Recuperado de http://www.un.org/es/documents/icjstatute/chap2.htm

Farré, J. A. (1991). Dos guerras en Nicaragua. 1978-1988. Espacio, Tiempo y Forma, S. V, H.” Contemporánea, 291-312

Fenrick, W. (1998). Development of the Law of Armed Conflict through the Jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, The The Law of Armed Conflict: Into the Next Millenium: IV. International Law Studies Series. US Naval War College, (71), 77-118.

General Assembly of United Nations. (2001). Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8367-9_22

Higgins, R. (2003). The ICJ, the ECJ, and the Integrity of International Law. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 52, (1), 1-20

International Court of Justice. Case concerning United States diplomatic and consular staff in Tehran (1980). Recuperado de: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/64/064-19800524-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf

International Court of Justice. Case concerning military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua Vs. United States of America) (1986). Recuperado de: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/70/070-19860627-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf

International Court of Justice. Case concerning the Gabc̆íkovo-Nagymaros project (Hungary/Slovakia): judgment of 25 September 1997 (1997). Recuperado de: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/92/092-19970925-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf

International Court of Justice. Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights (1999). Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472563859

International Court of Justice. La Grand Case (Germany v. United States of America) (2001). Recuperado de: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/104/104-20010627-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf

International Law Comission. (s. f.). Draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations, 2011, 16.

International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law committed in the territory of the Former Yugoslavia – Appeals Chamber. Prosecutor Vs Dusko Tadic (1999). Recuperado de: http://www.icty.org/x/cases/tadic/acjug/en/tad-aj990715e.pdf

Jamil, H. (2016). Classification of Armed Conflict: An Analysis of Effective Control and Overall Control Tests. ISIL Year Book of International Humanitarian and Refugee Law, (16) 17, 185-211.

Kalshoven, F. (1991). State Responsibility for Warlike Acts of the Armed Forces. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, (40), 827-858.

Kurtz, J. (2010). The Paradoxical Treatment of the ILC Articles on State Responsibility in Investor-State Arbitration. ICSID Review, 25(1), 200-217. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/25.1.200

Linderfalk, U. (2009). State Responsibility and the Primary-Secondary Rules Terminology – The Role of Language for an Understanding of the International Legal System. Nordic Journal of International Law, 78(1), 53-72. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1163/157181009X397081

Mač ák, K. (2016). Decoding Article 8 of the International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Attribution of Cyber Operations by Non-State Actors. Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 21(3), 405-428. Recuperado de:https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krw014

C. (2016). Derecho internacional público / Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra. Recuperado de: http://unisabana22.gsl.com.mx:80/F?func=service&doc_library=CNA01&local_base=CNA01&doc_number=000001861&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA

Olleson, S. (2013). Internationally Wrongful Acts in the Domestic Courts: The Contribution of D… Leiden Journal of International Law, 615-642. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156513000277

Permanent Court of International Justice. Case concerning certain German interests in Polish Upper Silesia (The Merits), Germany v. Poland (1925). Recuperado de: http://www.worldcourts.com/pcij/eng/decisions/1926.05.25_silesia.htm

Perot, P. (2003). Tipos de reglas y el concepto de obligación jurídica. Isonomía, (19), 197-219.

Vázquez, M. (2005). Derecho Internacional Público. México: Editorial Porrúa, (22.a ed.). Recuperado de: http://cordovaluis.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/dip_fuentes-del-dip_modesto_seara_vazquez2.pdf

Skordas, A. (2002). ICJ: Guardian of Sovereignty or Catalyst for Integration Comment. International Legal Theory, 8, 49-74.

Teresita Mastaglia, G. (2016). Jurisdicción de La Corte Internacional De Justicia: Análisis De Los Casos Entablados Contra Chile. Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice: analysis of the cases against Chile., 12(1), 147-170. https://doi.org/10.23854/07192568.2016121Mastaglia147

Vallarta Marrón, J. L., & Serrano Migallón, F. (2014). Derecho internacional público / José Luis Vallarta Marrón ; presentación, Fernando Serrano Migallón. Recuperado de http://unisabana22.gsl.com.mx:80/F?func=service&doc_library=CNA01&local_base=CNA01&doc_number=000137196&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA

Villanueva Flores, R. (2018). Activismo judicial y límites del Derecho en la actuación de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Doxa. Cuadernos de Filosofía del Derecho, (41). https://doi.org/10.14198/DOXA2018.41.08

Von Staden, A. (2010). Towards Greater Doctrinal Clarity in Investor-State Arbitration: The CMS, Sempra, and Enron Annulment Decisions (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 1689872). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Recuperado de https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=168987