TFL Vsebine / Revija Pravnik

3

Meddržavno sodišče je z odločitvijo obiter dicta v zadevi Barcelona Traction potrdilo obstoj obveznosti erga omnes in s tem naznanilo pomemben korak od bilateralnega razumevanja mednarodnopravnih obveznosti k priznanju splošnega interesa v mednarodnem pravu. Vendar pa sodišče teh obveznosti ni nadalje opredelilo z vidika vsebine, nastanka in posledic njihovih kršitev, zato avtorica ugotavlja, da so bile vzpostavljene kot Potemkinova vas. Kljub temu pa gre za zelo pomembno odločitev, saj je delovala kot vodilo razvoja sekundarnih pravil o uveljavljanju odgovornosti držav v primerih kršitev obveznosti erga omnes (partes), kot so vsebovane v Členih o odgovornostih držav za mednarodno protipravna dejanja. Poleg tega je Meddržavno sodišče v poznejši sodni praksi razjasnilo pomen in posledice kršitev teh obveznosti v praksi. Zlasti pomembna je potrditev, da upravičenje za uveljavljanje odgovornosti držav za kršitev obveznosti erga omnes (partes) vključuje upravičenje za uveljavljanje odgovornosti države kršiteljice pred Meddržavnim sodiščem tudi s strani držav, ki niso neposredno prizadete s protipravnim dejanjem, pri čemer morajo biti ob tem izpolnjeni pogoji za pristojnost sodišča za odločanje v konkretnem primeru. To je sodišče izrecno potrdilo v nedavni sodbi o pristojnosti v primeru Uporaba Konvencije o preprečevanju in kaznovanju zločina genocida (Gambija proti Mjanmaru).

With its obiter dicta decision in the Barcelona Traction case, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) confirmed the existence of erga omnes obligations in international law and thus took an important step towards the recognition of the general interest in international law. However, the Court did not further pronounce on these obligations in terms of their content, ascertainment, or legal consequences. The author contends, that even though the Barcelona Tractions’s obiter dicta established a Potemkin village in international law, the Court’s pronouncement in this case was nevertheless significant as it acted as a driving force for the development of secondary rules on the enforcement of erga omnes (partes) obligations as enshrined in the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA). Moreover, the Court importantly clarified erga omnes (partes) obligations through its subsequent practice. One of the most significant pronouncements relates to the confirmation, that standing for the invocation of responsibility of states in cases of erga omnes (partes) obligations includes a standing of not directly injured states to initiate proceedings against the wrongdoing state before the ICJ, provided that conditions for the jurisdiction of the Court are met. The most recent confirmation of this was provided for in the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar) case.

Erga Omnes (Partes) Obligations in the Case Law of the International Court of Justice: the Barcelona Traction Case as a Driving Force of the Development of International Law