Aula 28 - Solução Pacífica de Conflitos

Summary

This lecture covers key concepts in international public law, focusing on state responsibility, peaceful conflict resolution, and dispute settlement mechanisms. It discusses the conditions under which a state may be held internationally responsible for violations of international law, as well as the different methods for resolving conflicts between states, including diplomatic negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and judicial tribunals. The session highlights both non-judicial and judicial approaches, emphasizing the role of international courts and arbitration in resolving international disputes and enforcing compliance with decisions. Practical examples, including the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court, are also presented.

Takeaways

• 😀 The international responsibility of a state arises when its actions, through its branches (executive, legislative, or judiciary), violate international law or cause damage to another state.
• 😀 States are liable for damages when a direct and immediate causal link between their actions and the harm caused to another state is proven.
• 😀 The severity and circumstances of the harm can influence the extent of a state's international responsibility, with more severe actions leading to greater liability.
• 😀 State responsibility may be excluded in cases of force majeure or legitimate measures authorized by a tribunal, which is considered a valid defense in some situations.
• 😀 Peaceful conflict resolution mechanisms between states can be non-jurisdictional (e.g., diplomatic negotiation, mediation) or jurisdictional (e.g., arbitration, international courts).
• 😀 Non-jurisdictional mechanisms involve third-party intervention to facilitate negotiation, whereas jurisdictional mechanisms involve a designated body that decides on the legal merits of the dispute.
• 😀 The UN Charter encourages peaceful resolution of conflicts through diplomatic negotiations, good offices, mediation, and conciliation, all aimed at preserving international peace and security.
• 😀 Mediation differs from conciliation in that mediators do not propose legal solutions but rather facilitate discussions, whereas conciliators actively provide legal guidance and suggest solutions.
• 😀 Arbitration allows parties to choose their arbitrators and the legal framework for resolving disputes, offering a more flexible and private alternative to international tribunals.
• 😀 International tribunals, like the International Court of Justice or the European Court of Human Rights, operate with pre-determined processes and appointed judges to resolve legal disputes between states and enforce judgments.
• 😀 Real-world case studies, such as the Maria da Penha case in Brazil, highlight the importance of international human rights mechanisms, particularly in cases where domestic legal systems fail to provide justice.

Q & A

What is the main topic discussed in this lecture?

The main topic discussed in the lecture is the peaceful resolution of conflicts between states in the context of public international law.

What was the focus of the previous meeting in this series of lessons?

The previous meeting focused on the international responsibility of states, specifically the conditions under which a state may be held responsible for violations of international law, including causality, damage reparation, and possible exclusions of responsibility.

What are the two main categories of conflict resolution mechanisms between states?

The two main categories of conflict resolution mechanisms between states are non-jurisdictional (diplomatic negotiation, good offices, mediation, conciliation) and jurisdictional (arbitration and international courts).

How does non-jurisdictional conflict resolution work?

Non-jurisdictional conflict resolution involves third parties who assist states in negotiating and finding a solution without imposing a legal decision. It includes diplomatic negotiations, good offices, mediation, and conciliation, where the intervening party does not impose a binding decision but helps the parties reach an agreement.

What is the role of good offices in conflict resolution?

Good offices refer to when a third party helps facilitate communication between conflicting states that have stopped direct negotiations, aiming to bring them back to the negotiating table.

What distinguishes mediation from conciliation in conflict resolution?

In mediation, the mediator helps the parties negotiate without proposing solutions or legal judgments. In contrast, in conciliation, the conciliator suggests specific solutions or frameworks for resolving the dispute, often with legal insights.

What is the role of international courts in conflict resolution?

International courts, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or regional human rights courts, provide a judicial resolution to disputes between states. These courts have pre-established rules and structures for addressing legal conflicts, and their decisions are binding on the states involved.

What is the difference between arbitration and international courts?

In arbitration, the parties involved choose the arbitrators, the applicable law, and the procedures, providing more flexibility. In contrast, international courts have pre-established judges and procedural rules, and the decisions made are binding by international law.

How does arbitration work in international conflicts?

In arbitration, states agree to submit their dispute to an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators, who will resolve the conflict based on the chosen legal framework. The parties may select the number of arbitrators and the applicable law, and the resulting decision is binding.

What is the significance of the Maria da Penha case mentioned in the lecture?

The Maria da Penha case is significant because it highlights how international human rights bodies, like the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, can intervene when domestic legal systems fail to provide justice. In this case, the Commission's involvement led to the creation of the Maria da Penha Law, which protects Brazilian women from domestic violence.