Bogotá Pact of 1948

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Entry of the Bogotá Pact in the United Nations Treaty Collection

The Bogotá Pact of 1948 - officially the American Treaty on Peaceful Dispute Settlement - is a treaty under international law by which a number of American states have committed themselves to resolving existing conflicts between them without the use or threat of violence and exclusively by peaceful means . The agreement between 15 Central and South American countries so far contains detailed rules for various methods of peaceful dispute settlement in order to achieve this goal.

The contract was signed on April 30, 1948 in the Colombian capital Bogotá and came into force on May 6, 1948. The depositary is the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States (OAS), which was founded on the same day and whose legal basis is the Bogotá Pact. After the Treaty of Rio and the OAS Charter, it was the third treaty to reorganize inter-American relations after the end of the Second World War . In addition, it was one of the first multilateral agreements that gave powers to the International Court of Justice, founded in 1945 . Since not all member states of the OAS have acceded to the agreement and because of the sometimes far-reaching reservations of some contracting parties, the Bogotá Pact is of little relevance in practice.

history

The flag of the Organization of American States, which was created at the same time as the conclusion of the Bogotá Pact and acts as its depository

From 1889 a number of treaties for the peaceful settlement of international conflicts had been concluded between the states of North , Central and South America . However, these had various shortcomings such as complex content and a small number of contracting parties. In addition, there were some contradictions between the treaties and the statutes of the League of Nations that came into being after the First World War . After the end of the Second World War , the Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and Peace took place in Mexico City from February 21 to March 8, 1945 , the results of which included the demand for a legal and organizational reorganization of inter-American relations. As part of this meeting, also known as the Chapultepec Conference, a resolution emphasized, among other things, the necessity of “consolidating the existing inter-American peacekeeping treaties into a uniform, organized and harmonious instrument”. During the ninth Pan American Conference, which was held three years later in Bogotá and which led to the establishment of the Organization of American States (OAS), the American Treaty on Peaceful Dispute Settlement was signed on April 30, 1948 . It specifies and expands the basic requirements contained in Articles 20 to 23 of the OAS Charter in this area and thus represents the special contract to which the OAS Charter refers in this regard. The agreement was signed at the conference by 21 states, 15 of which later became contracting parties. Mexico was the first country to join the treaty on November 23, 1948 , and Bolivia was the last country to join on April 14, 2011 .

From a legal and historical point of view, the Bogotá Pact was one of the first multilateral treaties that transferred competences to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) founded in 1945 . In addition, it was one of the first international agreements in which the contracting parties committed not only not to use force, but also to renounce the threat of force without restrictions. Despite the contract, military clashes broke out between the two contracting parties, Honduras and El Salvador, in July 1969 , which killed around 2,100 people and went down in history as the football war . El Salvador canceled its membership in 1950 on November 24, 1973. The government of the country justified this in the corresponding declaration with the lack of acceptance, which would be expressed in the small number of ratifications and the sometimes extensive reservations of individual contracting parties, as well as with conflicts between some provisions of the treaty and constitutional principles on sovereignty and integrity of the country, which did not exist at the time of El Salvador's accession to the Bogotá Pact.

The Bogotá Pact played a central role in the Border and Transborder Armed Actions case , which Nicaragua applied to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against Honduras in July 1986, over the question of the ICJ's jurisdiction. The subject of the lawsuit was the allegation that Honduras was supporting the guerrilla groups known as Contras , which were operating in Nicaragua against the then Sandinista government, with material, logistical and military aid. Although Honduras denied the jurisdiction of the ICJ, the ICJ unanimously accepted the case for a decision in December 1988, relying on Article 31 of the Bogotá Pact, which the contracting parties used to recognize the jurisdiction of the Court for certain issues, contrary to the Honduran position. Additional objections from Honduras related to Article 2 of the treaty, which declares the unsuccessful conclusion of direct diplomatic negotiations to be a prerequisite for attempts to resolve conflicts through other procedures, and Article 4, which provides for the conclusion of an ongoing procedure before a new dispute settlement procedure is opened. In this regard, the ICJ assessed the so-called Contadora process , a mediation initiative by Colombia , Mexico , Panama and Venezuela , both as a mutual admission of the unsuccessful bilateral negotiations and as a completed attempt to resolve the conflict, and thus decided against Honduras on these two points as well. Following an out-of-court agreement between the two countries, the proceedings were discontinued in December 1989 at the request of Nicaragua in May 1992 without a decision by the court.

In a procedure over border disputes between Nicaragua and Colombia in the Caribbean Sea , the ICJ confirmed Colombia's sovereignty over the archipelago of San Andrés and Providencia in a ruling of November 19, 2012 , but at the same time granted Nicaragua the right to use the surrounding marine area. The Colombian government rejected this ruling and subsequently withdrew from the Bogotá Pact on November 27, 2012. Colombia, which has not yet submitted a declaration of submission with regard to the jurisdiction of the ICJ, is no longer subject to the jurisdiction of the ICJ in conflicts with states party to the Bogotá Pact.

Content

The seat of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, to which the Bogotá Pact has given jurisdiction over judicial dispute resolution

The Bogotá Pact, registered under number 449 in the United Nations Treaty Collection , was concluded with the aim of permitting the definitive peaceful settlement of all inter-American conflicts of any kind within a reasonable time frame and thus all bilateral and regional ones that already exist in this area To replace the agreement. In Article 1, the contracting parties undertake to refrain from using or threatening to use force or other coercive measures in the event of a conflict and to use peaceful means to resolve their disputes at all times. In Articles 9 to 30, the contract initially regulates the settlement of disputes through the provision of good services and mediation by uninvolved third countries (Chapter 2) as well as the settlement of disputes by means of a settlement procedure by an investigation and mediation commission (Chapter 3).

Articles 31 to 37 (Chapter 4) deal with the resolution of conflicts through judicial proceedings, in particular the competence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for all disputes between the contracting parties regarding the interpretation of treaties, questions of international law , questions of violation of international obligations and Type and extent of reparations resulting therefrom. The contracting parties submit to the jurisdiction of the ICJ for these areas, provided that other dispute resolution procedures have not led to a solution. In the event of a disagreement between the conflicting parties about the jurisdiction of the ICJ, it is also responsible for deciding on this question. If the ICJ declares that it is not responsible because, in the opinion of the court, the dispute is regulated by existing contracts or falls under the national law of a country, the conflict is deemed to have ended. If, on the other hand, the ICJ denies its jurisdiction for other reasons, the contracting parties are obliged to resolve the conflict using the international arbitration procedure . Corresponding regulations are contained in Articles 38 to 49 (Chapter 5) of the contract, which contain requirements for the establishment and filling of ad hoc arbitration tribunals. Regardless of the provisions in Chapter 4, the contracting parties can use arbitration by mutual agreement for any dispute that arises between them.

Article 50 (Chapter 6) regulates the competence of the Security Council of the United Nations in the event of non-compliance with the obligations resulting for the contracting parties from a decision of the ICJ or an arbitration award. Before that, however, the conflicting party who accuses another party of such violations should propose a meeting of the foreign ministers to discuss the settlement of the differences. Article 51 (Chapter 7) gives the contracting parties the opportunity to request a legal opinion from the International Court of Justice via the Council of the OAS at the UN Security Council or at the UN General Assembly . The final Articles 52 to 60 (Chapter 8) contain the implementing and final provisions that regulate, for example, the accession of a country, the entry into force of the agreement and the withdrawal of a contracting party. According to Article 56, the contract should be valid indefinitely. Article 58 contains a list of the agreements that the Treaty supersedes.

Acceptance and criticism

Spread of the Bogotá Pact:
Dark green: Contracting parties
Light green: Signatory
states Turquoise: States that have terminated the treaty

As of June 2015 , the parties to the Bogotá Pact of 1948 are Bolivia , Brazil , Chile , Costa Rica , the Dominican Republic , Ecuador , Haiti , Honduras , Mexico , Nicaragua , Panama , Paraguay , Peru and Uruguay . In addition, Argentina , Cuba , Guatemala , the United States and Venezuela have signed but not ratified the treaty. The criticism from Argentina and the USA is directed in particular at the jurisdiction and role of the International Court of Justice. In addition to all of Chapter 4 and Article 50, Argentina also rejects the provisions on arbitration proceedings. The Bogotá Pact is also seen as too comprehensive in terms of its objectives, as this would make it difficult or impossible to implement certain aspects in practice. In addition, the possibility of far-reaching reservations by the contracting parties, the strict separation between judicial and arbitration proceedings as well as the comprehensive applicability of arbitration proceedings have been criticized.

With regard to the structuring of the legal basis of the Organization of American States, the Bogotá Pact is designed as one of the central instruments for regulating relations between the member states. In contrast to the United Nations Charter, which gives the Security Council of the United Nations and the General Assembly of the United Nations extensive powers in the area of ​​conflict resolution, the OAS Charter contains few general rules for the competences of the General Assembly, the permanent Council and General Secretariat as the three permanent bodies of the OAS. However, due to the small number of contracting parties and the reservations of various countries, the Bogotá Pact has so far only proven to be of limited effectiveness in practice, as the contracting parties have only used the mechanisms of the treaty in a few cases. For this reason, the agreement is largely meaningless in terms of its actual application. Rather, the relevant legal and organizational framework for conflict resolution and peacekeeping at the inter-American level, including the institutions of the Organization of American States, is formed by the OAS Charter together with the 1947 Inter-American Treaty on Mutual Assistance . This agreement, also known as the Treaty of Rio , has signed significantly more states with 22 contracting parties than the Pact of Bogotá, including all countries with the exception of Mexico that have ratified or signed the Bogotá Pact.

Consultations between foreign ministers have developed into the preferred method of conflict settlement between the American states, both at the bilateral level and within the framework of the OAS. The Permanent Council of the OAS also has general competences in the area of ​​settlement, mediation and arbitration proceedings on the basis of the OAS Charter, and makes frequent use of them. In addition, the Inter-American Committee on Peaceful Settlement ( Inter-American Committee on Peaceful Settlement ) has existed since 1970 , replacing the Inter-American Peace Committee founded in 1940 and serving as a subsidiary body of the permanent OAS Council. An important principle of the Organization of American States is to attempt solutions to inter-American conflicts at the regional level within the framework of the OAS regulations before United Nations (UN) organs such as the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly are involved. This approach, also known as the “Try OAS first” principle, which is contained in both the Bogotá Pact and the Treaty of Rio, was also included in a general form in the UN Charter.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d Hans Jürgen Schlochauer, Berlin 1960 (see references)
  2. ↑ Quoted from Hans Jürgen Schlochauer, Berlin 1960, p. 220 (see references)
  3. ↑ a b American Treaty on Pacific Settlement - "Pact of Bogotá": Signatories and Ratifications List of Signatories and Contracting States (English; accessed on July 14, 2009)
  4. ↑ International Court of Justice - Jurisdiction: Treaties ( Memento of February 10, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) (English; accessed on July 17, 2009)
  5. ^ Elihu Lauterpacht et al. (Eds.): International Law Reports. Volume 110. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1998, ISBN 0-52-158072-2 , pp. 475/476
  6. ↑ Honduras joined the agreement on January 13, 1950, El Salvador on August 15, 1950.
  7. ↑ American Treaty on Pacific Settlement - "Pact of Bogotá": El Salvador Denunciation Text of the exit declaration (English; accessed on July 14, 2009)
  8. ^ Border and Transborder Armed Actions. In: Peter HF Bekker: Commentaries on World Court Decisions (1987–1996). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Den Haag 1998, ISBN 9-04-110558-1 , pp. 63-69
  9. ↑ Press release 92/11 of the International Court of Justice of May 27, 1992 ( Memento of March 4, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) ( PDF file, approx. 61KB)
  10. ↑ Helen Murphy: Colombia leaves pact recognizing UN court rulings (accessed June 30, 2015)
  11. ^ American Treaty on Pacific Settlement (Pact of Bogota). Signed at Bogota, on April 30, 1948. In: United Nations Treaty Series (UNTS), Volume 30, 1949, No. 449, pp. 55-116 (English, French, Portuguese, Spanish). ( PDF file, approx. 5.5MB ).
  12. ↑ American Treaty on Pacific Settlement - "Pact of Bogotá": Argentina Reservation made at the time of signature Text of the Argentine treaty reservation (English; accessed on July 17, 2009)
  13. ^ A b Charles G. Fenwick: The Revision of the Pact of Bogota. In: American Journal of International Law . 48 (1) / 1954. American Society of International Law, pp. 123-126, ISSN  0002-9300
  14. ↑ a b c d G. Pope Atkins, Westport and London 1997 (see references)
  15. ↑ a b Malcolm N. Shaw, Cambridge 2008 (see references)
  16. ↑ See also Article 2 of the Bogotá Pact: American Treaty on Pacific Settlement - "Pact of Bogotá" (English; accessed on July 17, 2009)
  17. ↑ See Article 2 of the Treaty of Rio: Inter-American Treaty on Reciprocal Assistance (English; accessed on July 17, 2009)
  18. ↑ See also Article 52 of the UN Charter: Charter of the United Nations: Chapter VIII: Regional Arrangements (accessed July 17, 2009)

literature

  • Bogotá Pact of 1948. In: Karl Strupp (Hrsg.), Hans-Jürgen Schlochauer (Hrsg.): Dictionary of international law. Second edition. Verlag Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 1960, ISBN 3-11-001030-5 ; Volume 1, pp. 220/221
  • Conflict Resolution. In: G. Pope Atkins: Encyclopedia of the Inter-American System. Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport and London 1997, ISBN 0-31-328600-0 , pp. 93-100
  • International Institutions and Dispute Settlement: The Organization of American States. In: Malcolm Shaw : International Law. Sixth edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2008, ISBN 978-0-521-72814-0 , pp. 1030/1031

Web links

This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on July 24, 2009 .