Legal Entities Entitled to Invoke International Responsibility

Maria Krivenkova

Özet


The paper is devoted to the consideration of one of the most pressing problems of invocation to international legal responsibility: the definition of the circle of subjects entitled to make claims against a violator of the norms of international law. Taking into account the existing mandatory and recommendatory norms of international law, as well as the existing practice of international judicial bodies, the paper emphasizes the need for a clear definition of the legal category "victim", since it is that which has the right to call an offender to justice. When determining a victim, three situations may exist: when the obligation is violated in relation to one state, when the obligation is violated with respect to a group of states and when the interests of the international community as a whole are violated. At the same time, in classical bilateral relations, only the directly injured state has the right to call to account, regardless of the seriousness of such relations, which does not prevent the third states from expressing their concern about the situation. However, in the event of a breach of obligations towards the international community as a whole, even if there is a directly affected subject of international law, the entire international community, on which behalf the United Nations has the right to claim, has the right to appeal.


Anahtar Kelimeler


International responsibility, Internationally wrongful act, Invocation of responsibility, Claim, International community, Third state.

Tam Metin:

PDF (English)

Referanslar


Bird, A. (2010). Third State Responsibility for Human Rights Violations. EJIL, 21, 883–900.

Crawford, J. (2013). State Responsibility: The General Part. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gusseinov, L. G. (2000). International responsibility of states for violation of human rights. Kiev: State and Law Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.

International Court of Justice (2001). La Grand case (Germany v. United States of America). URL: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/104/7738.pdf

International Court of Justice (2004). Case concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America). URL: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/128.

Lanovoy, V. (2016). Complicity and its Limits in the Law of International Responsibility. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

Scobbie, I. (2002). The Invocation of Responsibility for the Breach of ‘Obligations under Peremptory Norms of General International Law’. EJIL, 13, 1201-1220.

United Nations (2000). United Nations International Law Commission and the ILA Director of Studies. First Report of the International Law Association (ILA) Study Group on the Law of State Responsibility. URL: http//www.ila-hq.orgencommitteesstudy_groups.cfmcid1014

United Nations (2001). Comments and Observations Received from Governments. Doc. A/CN.4/515/Add.1. URL: http://legal.un.org/ilc/publications/yearbooks/english/ilc_2001_v2_p1.pdf

United Nations (2001). Responsibility of States for International Wrongful Acts. Doc. A/Res/56/83. URL: http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_6_2001.pdf

United Nations (2001). State Responsibility. Doc. A/CN. 4/517. P.17. URL: http://legal.un.org/ilc/publications/yearbooks/english/ilc_2001_v2_p1.pdf




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v7i4.1825

Refback'ler

  • Şu halde refbacks yoktur.




Telif Hakkı (c) 2018 Journal of History Culture and Art Research

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.