Sobre el estatus consuetudinario del artículo 3 común a los cuatro Convenios de Ginebra de 1949 y el Protocolo Adicional II de 1977

Nicolás Bianchi

Autores/as

Nicolás Bianchi

Palabras clave:

derecho internacional humanitario, convenios de ginebra, artículo 3 común, protocolo II, conflictos armados no internacionales, costumbre internacional, práctica física, práctica verbal, moralismo, desenredo, ius cogens, ratificación generalizada

Resumen

La presente investigación se propone evaluar la manera en que algunos organismos internacionales han analizado el estatus consuetudinario del artículo 3 común a los cuatro Convenios de Ginebra de 1949 y el Protocolo Adicional II de 1977, aplicables a los conflictos armados no internacionales. Se pretenderá cuestionar dichas evaluaciones por los serios problemas metodológicos que presentan, y concluir que el carácter consuetudinario de estas normas, aunque limitado, solo puede fundarse en su extendida aceptación por vía convencional.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Nicolás Bianchi

Estudiante de grado de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Buenos Aires.

Citas

VI.A. Jurisprudencia, resoluciones y opiniones consultivas

Comisión de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas, Resolución 1993/66

Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, Tercer Informe sobre la Situación de Derechos Humanos en Colombia, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.102, Doc.9, 26/02/99.

Corte Internacional de Justicia, Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua c. Estados Unidos), Fondo, 27/06/1986, y votos de Sir Robert Jennings y Roberto Ago.

Corte Internacional de Justicia, Case Concerning the Continental Shelf (Yamahiriya Árabe Libia c. Malta), Fondo, 03/06/1985

Corte Internacional de Justicia, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Opinión Consultiva del 08/07/96, solicitada por la Asamblea General.

Corte Internacional de Justicia, North Sea Continental Shelf, Fondo, 20/02/1969.

Tribunal Penal Internacional para la Ex Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadić, Caso N° IT-94-1-I (“Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction”), 02/10/95.

Tribunal Penal Internacional para la Ex Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Dario Kordic, Mario Cerkez, Caso N° IT-95-14/2-PT (“Joint Defense Motion to Dismiss the Amended Indictment Based on the Limited Jurisdictional Reach of Articles 2 and 3”), 02/03/99.

Tribunal Penal Internacional para la Ex Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalic, Zdravko Mucic, Hazim Delic, Esad Landzo (“Celebici”), Caso N° IT-96-21-T (“Judgement”), 16/11/98.

Tribunal Penal Internacional para Ruanda, Prosecutor v. Akayesu, Caso N° ICTR-96-4-T (“Judgement”), 02/09/98.

VI.B. Doctrina

BANGERTER, Olivier, “Reasons why armed groups choose to respect international humanitarian law or not”, en International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 93 N° 882, Junio 2011, pp. 353-384.

BARBERIS, Julio A., Formación del derecho internacional, Ábaco, 1994

BAXTER, Richard, “Treaties and Custom”, en Recueil des Cours, Vol. 129, 1970, pp. 26-106.

BELLINGER, John B. y HAYNES, William J., “A US government response to the International Committee of the Red Cross study”, en International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 89 N° 886, Junio 2007, pp. 443-471.

BLUM, Gabriella, “Re-envisaging the international law of internal armed conflict: a reply to Sandesh Sivakumaran”, en 22 EJIL 265, Febrero 2011, pp. 265-271.

BOTHE, Michael et al., New Rules for Victims of Armed Conflicts, Martinus Nijhoff, 1982.

CHENG, Bin, “Custom: The Future of General State Practice in a Divided World”, en The Structure and Process of International Law 513, R. Macdonald & D. Johnston Eds., 1983, pp. 513-554.

CICR, “Practice Relating to Rule 96. Hostage-Taking”, consultado en [https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule96] el 28/07/16.

CICR, Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, 1987.

CORN, Geoffrey S., “Regulating Hostilities in Non-International Armed Conflicts”, en 91 International Law Studies 281, Ukraine Forum, 2015, pp. 281-322.

FORSYTHE, David P., “Legal Management of Internal War: The 1977 Protocol on Non-International Armed Conflicts” en AJIL, Vol. 72 N° 2, Abril 1978, pp. 272-295.

GOLDSMITH, Jack y Posner, Eric, “Understanding the Resemblance Between Modern and Traditional Customary International Law”, en 40 Virginia Journal of International Law 639, 2000, pp. 639-672.

HENCKAERTS, Jean-Marie y DOSWALD-BECK, Louise, Customary International Humanitarian Law Volume I: Rules, ICRC, 2005

HENCKAERTS, Jean-Marie, “Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law”, en International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 87 N° 857, pp. 175-197

KALSHOVEN, Frits, Reflections on the Law of War: Collected Essays, Martinus Nijhoff, 2007.

KLEFFNER, Jann K., “The Applicability of International Humanitarian Law to Organized Armed Groups”, en International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 93 N° 882, Junio 2011, pp. 325-357.

MERON, Theodor, “Geneva Conventions as Customary Law”, en AJIL Vol.81 N° 2, Abril 1987, pp. 348-370.

MERON, Theodor, “On the Inadequate Reach of Humanitarian and Human Rights Law and the Need for a New Instrument”, en AJIL Vol. 77 No.3, Julio 1983, pp. 589-606.

MERON, Theodor, “Revival of Customary Humanitarian Law”, en AJIL Vol. 99 N° 4, Octubre 2005, pp. 817-834.

NIETO NAVIA, Rafael, “International Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) and International Humanitarian Law”, en Man’s Inhumanity to Man: Essays on International Law in Honour of Antonio Cassese, Kluwer Law International, 2003, pp. 595-640.

PETRASEK, David, “Moving Forward on the Development of Minimum Humanitarian Standards”, en AJIL Vol. 92, Julio 1998, pp. 557-563.

PICTET, Jean, Development and Principles of International Humanitarian Law, Martinus Nijhoff, 1985.

SASSOLI, Marco, “Taking Armed Groups Seriously: Ways to Improve Their Compliance with International Humanitarian Law”, en Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies, Vol. 1 N° 1, 2010, pp. 5-51.

SCHMITT, Michael N., The Syrian Intervention: Assessing the Possible International Law Justifications, en International Law Studies Vol. 89, 2013, pp. 744-756.

SOHN, Louis B., “Unratified Treaties as a Source of Customary International Law” en Realism in Law-Making: Essays on International Law in Honor of Willem Riphagen, Bos & H. Siblesz, 1986, pp. 231-246.

STIGALL, Dan E. y BLAKESLEY, Christopher L., “Non-State Armed Groups and the Role of Transnational Criminal Law During Armed Conflicts”, en George Washington International Law Review Vol. 48, 2015, pp. 1-42.

WOOD, Elizabeth J., “Armed Groups and Sexual Violence: When Is Wartime Rape Rare?” en Politics & Society, Vol. 37 N° 1, Marzo 2009, pp. 131-161.

ZEGVELD, Liesbeth, Accountability of Armed Opposition Groups in International Law, Cambridge University Press, 2002.