The compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under the Pact of Bogotá

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18800/dys.202301.001

Keywords:

Pact of Bogota, International Court of Justice, Compulsory jurisdiction, Conflict resolution

Abstract

Article XXXI of Pact of Bogotá (1948) created the obligation for States parties to submit their disputes to the International Court of Justice “in conformity with” article 36 paragraph 2 of its Statute. In this regard, Honduras held the position that Article XXXI required each State party to make a declaration in accordance with its Statute in order to unilaterally bring the case to the International Court of Justice in the case concerning Border and transborder armed actions (Nicaragua v. Honduras). Then, a question arises: what is the relationship between these two articles? After analyzing international law, jurisprudence and doctrine, the conclusion is that these articles are not related to each other because they are two independent titles of jurisdiction whose differences are found in the source of the State consent, to whom they apply and the disputes that can be settled by the International Court of Justice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Elvira Méndez Chang, Pontifical Catholic University of Peru

    Magíster en Derecho Internacional Económico por la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (PUCP). Profesora principal del Departamento Académico de Derecho de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (PUCP) y Directora del Instituto de Estudios Internacionales (IDEI – PUCP).
    Contacto: emendez@pucp.edu.pe

Downloads

Published

2023-09-29

Issue

Section

Temas de Derecho Internacional Público

How to Cite

The compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under the Pact of Bogotá. (2023). Derecho & Sociedad, 60, 1-35. https://doi.org/10.18800/dys.202301.001