-
The Inter-American Juridical Committee
The Inter-American Juridical Committee (CJI) is one of the principal organs of the Organization of American States (OAS), which comprises 35 member states of the Americas. The CJI is the OAS’s advisory body for legal matters, and its purpose is to promote the progressive development and codification of international law and to propose standards for harmonizing the laws of the Hemisphere’s countries. In contrast to other OAS organs, rather than a political or diplomatic body it is a technical one, composed of 11 members proposed by the member states and elected by the OAS General Assembly. Once elected, its members no longer represent their countries but the states as a whole, and they enjoy the broadest technical autonomy (OAS Charter, Art. 102). The CJI has its headquarters in the city of Rio de Janeiro (OAS Charter, Art. 105), holds two meetings a year, and has the General Secretariat’s Department of International Law (DIL) as its technical secretariat. Each year, the CJI must submit a report on its activities to the General Assembly.1x The annual reports of the Inter-American Juridical Committee may be found at the following link: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/annual_reports.asp.
To discharge its functions, the CJI must undertake the studies and work entrusted to it, primarily, by the General Assembly. In addition to those mandates, one of the CJI’s most important and distinctive characteristics is its authority to undertake, on its own initiative, such studies and work as it deems appropriate (OAS Charter, Art. 100); in this it differs from its counterpart, the International Law Commission of the United Nations, which cannot include on its agenda topics not arising from a specific mandate. The CJI’s capacity for initiative is precisely what affords it broad freedom of action and decision, which can be seen in the high proportion of issues on its work agenda taken up through that power of initiative. -
The work and the agenda of the Inter-American Juridical Committee
The richness and variety of the topics on which the CJI has been working can be seen in the agenda adopted for its 104th regular session, which is to be held in March 2024.2x Inter-American Juridical Committee. Agenda for the 104th Regular Session of the Inter-American Juridical Committee [CJI/RES.283 (CIII-O/23)], 2023. The issues on that agenda arising from a request made by the OAS General Assembly are the following: the exceptional use of force in the inter-American context; the principles of international law on which the inter-American system is founded, as the normative framework that governs the work of the OAS and relations among the member states; strengthening the accountability regime in the use of information and communication technologies; legal implications of sea level rise in the inter-American regional context; corporate responsibility of manufacturers and sellers of weapons in the area of human rights; and – the most recent mandate – updating the 2020 Inter-American Model Law 2.0 on Access to Public Information. The following topics on its work agenda were adopted on its own initiative: particular customary international law in the context of the Americas; the guide on the law applicable to foreign investments; contracts between merchants with a contractual weak party; new technologies and their relevance for international jurisdictional cooperation; development of inter-American guidelines on the participation of victims in criminal proceedings against acts of corruption; approach to the new outer space law; impact of technologies based on artificial intelligence on human rights, with a special focus on children and adolescents; and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and awards (the latter two of which are the most recent additions).
As can be seen, the variety and nature of the Committee’s topics is broad, and its studies are at different stages of development. Some of them were taken up only very recently, while others are almost nearing conclusion.3x The development of the topics that make up the Inter-American Juridical Committee’s agenda can be followed at the following link, in the section related to the current agenda and completed topics: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/inter-american_juridical_committee.asp.
Each of these topics is assigned to a rapporteur, who is responsible for producing a draft or project that is then presented for discussion by the plenary at the Committee’s meetings. Generally, the CJI’s studies conclude with a final report that is conveyed to the political bodies of the OAS for their information and due consideration; that was the case, for example, with the report on ‘New technologies and their relevance for international jurisdictional cooperation’,4x Inter-American Juridical Committee. New Technologies and Their Relevance for International Jurisdictional Cooperation [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.696/23 rev. 1], 2023. which was presented to the OAS Permanent Council at its meeting of August 23, 2023, and forwarded to its Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs for analysis. The document proposes 32 recommendations for updating and modernizing legal cooperation through the use of communications and information technologies, with the goal of assisting the work of legal operators, including judges, lawyers, and central authorities. It has a particular focus on the processing of cases and the use of letters rogatory, where it proposes the use of electronic files, the processing of electronic domiciles before judicial organs, the use of videoconferencing, and the signing of documents with digital or scanned signatures. The report recognizes that legal proceedings should be guided by the principle of evolving interpretation, provided that the innovations are legally permissible and technically and economically feasible. -
The results of the Inter-American Juridical Committee’s work and its impact on international law
The CJI’s final documents may be limited to a report on the development of a given topic; they may contain a declaration; and they may also contain – like the report described above – a series of specific recommendations for the member states. Other alternatives include proposed principles, model laws, model legislation, guidelines, directives, and so on. Ultimately, they are instruments of soft law.
Nevertheless, the nature and effects of the soft law issued by the CJI – which, as seen before, is not a body composed of government representatives but of persons elected in their individual technical capacity – are more similar to those of international doctrine. The fact that the Committee comprises jurists of the highest authority in the region, elected by the member states of an international organization, means that we are dealing with a collegiate doctrine that has an even greater weight than the individual positions of other international academics and experts. From this we can conclude that the soft law produced by the CJI can be highly valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it is approved by the General Assembly or the Organization’s other political bodies.
That notwithstanding, the way in which the General Assembly finally deals with these contributions can invest them with a different substance. Thus, once the CJI’s proposals have been received, the General Assembly has several options. First, it can offer any comments it deems relevant and refer the matter back for further consideration by the CJI. Alternatively, it can take note of them and leave them as a frame of reference or simple recommendations for the member states: i.e. as soft law in the strict sense. In addition, however, the General Assembly also has the power to adopt the Committee’s documents by means of a resolution. In that case, in addition to having technical authority, they will also have the necessary political backing to be considered soft law issued by a governmental entity and, accordingly, may reflect a collective opinio juris.
As an example of this, in recent years the General Assembly approved two initiatives that arose from within the CJI: the Updated Principles on Privacy and Personal Data Protection of 2021,5x Organization of American States. Updated Principles on Privacy and Personal Data Protection [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.20], Secretariat for Legal Affairs, Department of International Law, Washington, D.C., 2022. The text of the Updated Principles may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/dil/personal_data_protection_Current_Development_CJI.asp. and the Inter-American Model Law 2.0 on Access to Public Information of 2020.6x Organization of American States. Inter-American Model Law 2.0 on Access to Public Information [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.12], Secretariat for Legal Affairs, Department of International Law, Washington, D.C., 2020. The text of the Model Law may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/dil/access_to_information_Proposed_Model_Law.asp. Both instruments are having a major impact throughout the region, as many countries have been updating their domestic laws and public policies in line with the documents’ contents and have even established the guarantor and supervisory bodies recommended therein. Given their importance, those two topics will be addressed in further detail below.
More recently, at its March 2023 session, the CJI adopted a report on compulsory primary education.7x Inter-American Juridical Committee. Compulsory Primary Education [CJI/doc.690/23 rev. 1], 2023. The text of the report may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/themes_recently_concluded_Compulsory_primary_education.asp. The resolution through which it was adopted urges OAS member states to ensure the full enjoyment of primary education and to consolidate the free, compulsory, and universal nature of this human right, which the CJI itself describes as a fundamental obligation of immediate realization. It also recommends that the member states identify alternatives for providing technical and financial assistance to those of the region’s countries that face problems in implementing it. The CJI also approved the Declaration of Inter-American Principles on the Legal Regime for the Creation, Operation, Financing, and Dissolution of Non-Profit Civil Entities,8x Inter-American Juridical Committee. Declaration of Inter-American Principles on the Legal Regime for the Creation, Operation, Financing, and Dissolution of Non-Profit Civil Entities [CJI/RES.282 (CII-O/23) corr. 2], 2023. The text of the Declaration may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/themes_recently_concluded_Legal_regime_for_creation_operation_financing_dissolution_non-profit_civil_entities.asp. which is intended to facilitate the life cycle of such entities in accordance with international and national standards and best practices. Finally, at the same March 2023 meeting, the CJI approved the Declaration of Inter-American Principles on Neurosciences, Neurotechnologies, and Human Rights,9x Inter-American Juridical Committee. Declaration of Inter-American Principles on Neurosciences, Neurotechnologies, and Human Rights [CJI/RES.281 (CII-O/23) corr. 1], 2023. The text of the Declaration may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/themes_recently_concluded_Neuroscience_neurotechnologies_and_human_rights.asp. which sets out a series of proposals that seek to link advances in neuroscience and the development of neurotechnologies to the protection of such human rights as the right to dignity, identity, privacy, and physical and mental health, and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
In recent years, the CJI has adopted a series of important instruments. Thus, in 2022, it adopted the Declaration on the Inviolability of Diplomatic Premises as a Principle of International Relations and its Relation to the Concept of Diplomatic Asylum,10x Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2022 [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.682/22], 2022, p. 299-304. the report on International Law and State Cyber Operations,11x Organization of American States. Report on International Law and State Cyber Operations [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.12], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2020. and a Declaration on International Law.12x Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee, 2022, loc. cit., p. 12-13. In 2021, it approved recommendations for the adoption of domestic legislation to regulate fireworks and pyrotechnic articles in the Americas13x Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2021 [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.657/21], 2022, p. 130-137. and proposals for an inter-American legal framework to strengthen social and economic resilience in the region in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath.14x Loc. cit., p. 158-168. In 2020, it adopted a set of Guidelines for Binding and Non-binding Agreements15x Organization of American States. Guidelines for Binding and Non-binding Agreements [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.614/20 rev. 1, corr. 1], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2020. and, in 2019, a Guide on the Law Applicable to International Commercial Contracts in the Americas.16x Organization of American States. Guide on the Law Applicable to International Commercial Contracts in the Americas [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.577/19 rev. 1, corr. 2], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2019. This is just to mention, by way of example, the most recently concluded studies.Model Law 2.0 on Access to public Information
As noted above, despite its non-binding nature, the CJI’s work has been used as a tool to promote domestic legislation in several of the region’s countries. The best example of this is the Inter-American Model Law 2.0 on Access to Public Information. This model law’s most immediate antecedent was the 2010 Model Law on the same topic. As of 2000, only four of the Hemisphere’s countries had adopted public information access laws: the United States, Canada, Chile, and Belize. However, between 2011 and 2016 – i.e. after the 2010 Model Inter-American Law was adopted – six more countries were added to that list (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Guyana, Panama, and Paraguay), while other countries such as Peru and Mexico embarked on processes to amend their existing laws. Currently, Panama, Paraguay and Uruguay are among the countries engaged in revising their domestic legislation, others like Ecuador just adopted a new law, while several others have created the relevant guarantor bodies as a mechanism to ensure the effective enforcement of public information access laws in line with the guidelines, requirements, and characteristics proposed by the model law.
Model Law 2.0 arose from a mandate that the General Assembly issued in 2017 to the Department of International Law, in its capacity as the CJI’s Technical Secretariat. The DIL began its work with an intensive consultation process among a wide variety of stakeholders: guarantor bodies already established in the region, lawmakers, academics, civil society, and other social actors, with additional support from the regional Transparency and Access to Information Network (RTA). A survey was also distributed among more than 4,000 individuals and institutions, including the Inter-American Commission of Women (CIM) and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and over the course of two years up to four workshops were held with the participation of more than 150 specialists from 15 countries and representatives of more than 26 NGOs. As expected, the outcome was a draft text that not only reflected the highest standards of practice in public information access, but also considered the viewpoints of a wide variety of actors, all of whom were involved in public information access issues in the region and who contributed a range of perspectives. As had been expected, the text of the 2010 Model Law underwent significant modifications in areas such as the determination of the parties subject to its regime; governmental obligations in the area of active transparency, which were expanded; the establishment of a more restricted and transparent regime of exceptions; the setting of clearer requirements for the creation of the applicable guarantor bodies; and the allocation of broader competencies.17x For further details on some of the issues included in the text of Model Law 2.0, see: D. Negro. ‘El impacto del derecho internacional en los ordenamientos jurídicos internos de América Latina: el acceso a la información pública y sus alcances’, in Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana, Vol. 16, No. 1, Spain, 2022, p. 16-43. The text of that article can also be found at: https://e-revistas.uc3m.es/index.php/REIB/article/view/7014/5487. Thus, the draft Model Law 2.0, which was sent to the CJI by the DIL and consisted of 72 articles, was adopted by the Committee with only one modification. That version was subsequently conveyed to the OAS General Assembly, which adopted it without modifications in 2020. Against that background, and as was the case with the 2010 Model Law, it is hoped that the standards contained in Model Law 2.0 can be gradually incorporated into the countries’ domestic law. This example demonstrates the importance that soft law can have when it is designed and devised through a broad participatory process, as was the case with this model law.
Moreover, despite Model Law 2.0’s recent adoption, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has already cited it in its judgments. Thus, in the case of Flores Bedregal et al. v. Bolivia,18x Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Case of Flores Bedregal et al. v. Bolivia. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of October 17, 2022. Series C No. 467, para. 133 and footnote 178. the Court highlighted the regional consensus among the OAS states regarding the importance of access to public information and referred to the standards contained in Model Law 2.0. The Inter-American Court’s judgment showcases the enormously important role that the CJI’s soft law can play, the different ways in which it can be used, and the impact it can have not only as a reference point for the domestic legal systems of the region’s countries, but also for the inter-American system in general and, in this case, the inter-American human rights system.
Model Law 2.0 was also the first inter-American instrument to incorporate a gender perspective from its design stage. This means that the text went beyond the mere adoption of inclusive language and identified those issues with a greater impact on women’s lives and dealt with them with heightened sensitivity. Thus, major efforts were made to identify those topics where the disclosure of information without the need for a specific request could have a positive impact on the creation of more favorable conditions for that sector of the population.Principles on Privacy and Personal Data Protection
The Updated Principles on Privacy and Personal Data Protection, adopted by the CJI in 2021 and by the General Assembly later that year, provide a second example. As the name suggests, these principles were also an update of a previous CJI work. They were intended to adopt – and, when appropriate, adapt to the region’s needs and realities – the standards of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), in force since May 2018. Reference was also made to the Protocol amending the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data (CoE Convention 108+), open for signature in 2018, the Personal Data Protection Standards for Ibero-American States of the Ibero-American Data Protection Network (RIPD), adopted in 2017, and the 2016 update to the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Privacy Framework.
As has been the case with many of the topics dealt with on the CJI’s agenda, the rapporteur first drafted a proposal for comments from the other Committee members and then distributed the draft to the member states and other stakeholders; comments were received from Argentina, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, and Uruguay, as well as informal remarks from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Several organizations – including the Ibero-American Data Protection Network (RIPD), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and the Inter-American Commission of Women (CIM) – also made significant contributions.
As with Model Law 2.0 on access to public information, this broad consultation process ensured that the standards set out in the final text enjoyed general acceptance, and they were subsequently adopted by the OAS General Assembly without modification. The text contains 13 principles addressing such issues as: the lawful purposes for the use of personal data and loyalty in their collection; transparency and consent; the relevance and necessity of data processing; limited retention of data; confidentiality; security of personal data; accuracy of data; ARCOP rights (access, rectification, cancellation, objection, and portability) available to data owners; sensitive data; accountability of operators; cross border data flows; exceptions; and the functions and powers of protection authorities. In the months following their adoption, the principles were socialized and presented at more than 14 international forums, ensuring the broad dissemination of their content. This will undoubtedly facilitate greater awareness on the part of the actors responsible for adopting and implementing the standards in the region’s countries.
These examples demonstrate the impact that soft law developed by an OAS body such as the CJI can have when it is built based on a broad consultation process and then widely socialized among the actors responsible for its implementation. -
The advantages of the soft law adopted by the Inter-American Juridical Committee
We cannot ignore the fact that the soft law adopted by the CJI may, in some cases, offer specific advantages over international treaties. It is true that the latter, by creating binding obligations, invest international relations with legal certainty. But it is precisely because of the binding nature inter-American conventions acquire once they are ratified that many states try to neutralize the standards or contents of those obligations during the negotiation phase in order to better adjust them to their interests. Since it is free of that political component, the soft law created by the CJI invariably uses a technical perspective to incorporate the highest standards contained in comparative legislation and the best practices found in the region.
At the same time, there are many inter-American conventions that, in order to protect the integrity of the text, do not allow signatories to lodge reservations. And frequently, because of its discomfort with a single clause in a convention, a state can choose not to ratify the treaty, with which a magnificent opportunity for the universalization of the legal framework in question is lost. The soft law created by the CJI is much more flexible in its implementation. Thus, the Committee’s instruments allow states to gradually and progressively incorporate the various standards they contain, in accordance with their own particular legal requirements (for example, the need for prior constitutional or legislative reforms); their public policy needs (which do not necessarily call for the enactment of a law); internal social demands or pressures (frequently, interest groups actively lobby authorities to prevent a treaty’s ratification); and the resources the state has for achieving effective implementation.
This last issue is by no means a minor one. Thus, for example, in the case of the Model Law on the Simplified Corporation, adopted by the CJI in 2012,19x Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2012 [OEA/Ser.G, CP/doc.4826/13], 2013, p. 70-86. as well as with the Model Law 2.0 on access to public information and the Principles on Personal Data Protection described above, many countries did not establish the ad hoc registry or the relevant guarantor body until sometime after the substantive parameters provided for in each of these instruments had been incorporated into their domestic law. The inability to fund the creation of those mechanisms or entities at the time was often the main reason for this. Ultimately, however, the permeability of soft law allowed each country to advance at its own pace, with the final result being systems that comprised both the rules and the institutions necessary in each case. International treaties do not allow this progressive implementation because all their obligations arise and must be assumed at the same time and on an equal basis.
It is undeniable that some areas of international law in the sphere of interstate relations still need to be regulated directly through conventions. But there are a growing number of areas in which the harmonization of countries’ domestic laws is exactly what generates the greatest impact, as it guarantees people the same level of protection regardless of the jurisdiction in which they are located or in which they have to lodge a claim. That harmonization is undoubtedly achieved most successfully by means of soft law. It is not uncommon, for example, that in the field of private international law some legal systems pose obstacles to the enforcement of a judgment, after a long judicial process, arguing the international public order exception. At the same time, in the specific area of personal data protection, the lack of harmonization regarding protection and guarantees between some countries can end up seriously affecting the free cross border flow of data and therefore international trade. Particularly in those areas where the law applies to or relates to the protection of individuals’ rights and interests, and where adequate and effective legal and judicial cooperation is required, harmonization plays an even more relevant and effective role than the adoption of international obligations.
Another important point that must be borne in mind is that once adopted, international treaties are difficult to modify or amend to incorporate new developments and challenges arising both domestically and internationally. Such changes are increasingly frequent and far-reaching, and soft law allows for periodic adaptation processes to address that situation. As has already been seen, Model Law 2.0 on access to public information was a response to the need to expand and modernize the standards contained in its predecessor, the Model Law of 2010, which, despite its great importance when it was adopted, had with the passage of time – and precisely because of its broad impact – become outdated. In the case of the Model Law on the Simplified Corporation, the possibility of expanding it to include guidelines on the liquidation and dissolution of those companies was discussed some years after its adoption. The issue of personal data protection also provides another important example. In 2012, the CJI adopted principles on the subject20x Inter-American Juridical Committee. Proposed Statement of Principles for Privacy and Data Protection in the Americas [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/RES.186 (LXXX-O/12)], 2012. The text of the proposal may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/docs/themes_recently_concluded_Protection_of_Personal_Data_report_CJI-res_186_LXXX-O-12.pdf. and, in 2015, a legislative guide.21x Inter-American Juridical Committee. Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee: Privacy and Data Protection [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.474/15 rev. 2], 2015. The text of the report may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/dil/docs/CJI-doc_474-15_rev2.pdf. However, given that a more or less homogeneous perspective on the issue in the region had not yet emerged, the CJI’s contributions did not translate into the General Assembly’s approval, and they lost momentum. In 2018, however, the General Assembly itself requested that the Committee update those principles and as already explained, in 2021 they were presented by the CJI and finally adopted by the General Assembly. The role played by the two forerunners described above cannot be ignored, however, in that they gradually made the states aware of the need for the Americas to adopt rules in an area that is of such importance today.
Such a process would be unthinkable if an international treaty were involved. For example, the 1994 Inter-American Convention on the Law Applicable to International Contracts, which has received only two ratifications, was never amended or corrected even though the main reason why the countries failed to ratify it was the presence of inconsistencies between the translations into the Organization’s four official languages. Unfortunately, a General Assembly resolution adopted in 1997 only allows such errors in inter-American conventions to be corrected within 90 days of their adoption.22x Organization of American States. General Assembly. Procedure for Correcting Errors in Treaties and Conventions for which the Organization of American States is Depository [AG/RES. 1484 (XXVII-O/97)], 1997. The text of that resolution may be found at: http://www.oas.org/Juridico/english/ga-res97/Eres1484.htm.
Many years had to go by before the CJI, in 2019, adopted the Guide on the Law Applicable to International Contracts in the Americas, which endorsed the main contributions made by the 1994 Convention: the recognition of the principle of autonomy of choice in international contracts, the use of the closest connection rule for situations in which the law to be applied to a commercial contract had not been chosen, and the possible use of non-state law in resolving commercial disputes. The Guide was an attempt to assist – this time through soft law – the member states’ domestic legal systems in incorporating those elements, which, at the time of the adoption of the 1994 Convention, were considered cutting edge but never implemented.
A more specific matter of no minor importance is the relationship that the CJI has forged with a wide network of contacts, in conjunction with the consultation processes carried out by its technical secretariat, the Department of International Law. This has invested its recommendations and proposals with significant legitimacy, as the number of actors and experts who contribute to enriching and improving the contents of its instruments, is constantly increasing. Among the many initiatives pursued toward that goal, the CJI holds a joint meeting every two years with the legal advisors of the member states’ foreign ministries. These meetings discuss some of the topics on the Committee’s agenda and also receive proposals for the inclusion of new topics, reflecting the specific needs and interests of the legal advisory offices. In matters of private international law, the CJI and the DIL maintain direct and permanent contact with the Hague Conference on Private International Law (with which it has also been organizing joint meetings with the foreign ministries’ legal advisors responsible for that area) and the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT), the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), and the American Association of Private International Law (ASADIP). It would be impossible to list all the actors who belong to that broad network, but these few examples demonstrate the extensive interactions that the CJI carries out beyond the framework of the OAS and the good results that it has been obtaining through them. -
A brief final reflection
The Organization of American States is the only forum in the region that includes its 35 independent States. One of its main functions is the codification and progressive development of international law. One of its most essential bodies, and one of the oldest as well, is the Inter-American Juridical Committee, in charge of channeling and implementing this work. One of the basic principles on which the OAS Charter is based is that international law is the norm of conduct among its member states. In this framework, the Inter-American Juridical Committee is called to continue building legal standards and giving legal security to multilateral relations through the codification and progressive development of Inter-American law, thus contributing to the strengthening of international law as a whole, including private international law.
In fact, the CJI can be considered the body that has recently made the most contributions in the field of private international law, a task that for quite some time was left aside by the Organization. Thus, in addition to the efforts outlined above, in October 202223x Organization of American States. General Assembly. International Law [OEA/Ser.P, AG/doc.5790/22 rev. 1], 2023, p. 132. the General Assembly asked the CJI to continue to include on its agenda a greater number of topics related to the analysis of private international law, in order to reactivate its work on the regional development of that topic. It also asked the Committee, if necessary, to propose updating some of the legal instruments in this area and/or to put forward ‘new convention or protocol texts’ that could be submitted to the General Assembly for consideration. The Assembly itself pointed out that any such texts had to reflect the practice of the states, as well as the region’s particular circumstances and specific needs.
Knowing, studying and promoting the work of the Inter-American Juridical Committee is a task that will inevitably contribute to the strengthening of a world order and the rule of law. We hope to have contributed to arouse interest in the work of this important regional body. Bibliography Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Case of Flores Bedregal et al. v. Bolivia. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of October 17, 2022. Series C No. 467.
Inter-American Juridical Committee. Proposed Statement of Principles for Privacy and Data Protection in the Americas [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/RES.186 (LXXX-O/12)], 2012.
Inter-American Juridical Committee. Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee: Privacy and Data Protection [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.474/15 rev. 2], 2015.
Inter-American Juridical Committee. Declaration of Inter-American Principles on Neurosciences, Neurotechnologies, and Human Rights [CJI/RES.281 (CII-O/23) corr. 1], 2023.
Inter-American Juridical Committee. Declaration of Inter-American Principles on the Legal Regime for the Creation, Operation, Financing, and Dissolution of Non-Profit Civil Entities [CJI/RES.282 (CII-O/23) corr. 2], 2023.
Inter-American Juridical Committee. Agenda for the 104th Regular Session of the Inter- American Juridical Committee [CJI/RES.283 (CIII-O/23)], 2023.
Inter-American Juridical Committee. Compulsory Primary Education [CJI/doc.690/23 rev. 1], 2023.
Inter-American Juridical Committee. New Technologies and Their Relevance for International Jurisdictional Cooperation [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.696/23 rev. 1], 2023.
Negro, Dante. ‘El impacto del derecho internacional en los ordenamientos jurídicos internos de América Latina: el acceso a la información pública y sus alcances’, in Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana, Vol. 16, No. 1, Spain, 2022.
Organization of American States. General Assembly. Procedure for Correcting Errors in Treaties and Conventions for which the Organization of American States is Depository [AG/RES. 1484 (XXVII-O/97)], 1997.
Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2012 [OEA/Ser.G, CP/doc.4826/13], 2013.
Organization of American States. Guide on the Law Applicable to International Commercial Contracts in the Americas [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.577/19 rev. 1, corr. 2], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2019.
Organization of American States. Inter-American Model Law 2.0 on Access to Public Information [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.12], Secretariat for Legal Affairs, Department of International Law, Washington, D.C., 2020.
Organization of American States. Report on International Law and State Cyber Operations [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.12], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2020.
Organization of American States. Guidelines for Binding and Non-binding Agreements [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.614/20 rev. 1, corr. 1], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2020.
Organization of American States. Updated Principles on Privacy and Personal Data Protection [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.20], Secretariat for Legal Affairs, Department of International Law, Washington, D.C., 2022.
Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2021 [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.657/21], 2022.
Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2022 [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.682/22], 2022.
Organization of American States. General Assembly. International Law [OEA/Ser.P, AG/doc.5790/22 rev. 1], 2023.
- * The opinions expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and in no way compromise the official position of the Organization of American States.
-
1 The annual reports of the Inter-American Juridical Committee may be found at the following link: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/annual_reports.asp.
-
2 Inter-American Juridical Committee. Agenda for the 104th Regular Session of the Inter-American Juridical Committee [CJI/RES.283 (CIII-O/23)], 2023.
-
3 The development of the topics that make up the Inter-American Juridical Committee’s agenda can be followed at the following link, in the section related to the current agenda and completed topics: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/inter-american_juridical_committee.asp.
-
4 Inter-American Juridical Committee. New Technologies and Their Relevance for International Jurisdictional Cooperation [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.696/23 rev. 1], 2023.
-
5 Organization of American States. Updated Principles on Privacy and Personal Data Protection [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.20], Secretariat for Legal Affairs, Department of International Law, Washington, D.C., 2022. The text of the Updated Principles may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/dil/personal_data_protection_Current_Development_CJI.asp.
-
6 Organization of American States. Inter-American Model Law 2.0 on Access to Public Information [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.12], Secretariat for Legal Affairs, Department of International Law, Washington, D.C., 2020. The text of the Model Law may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/dil/access_to_information_Proposed_Model_Law.asp.
-
7 Inter-American Juridical Committee. Compulsory Primary Education [CJI/doc.690/23 rev. 1], 2023. The text of the report may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/themes_recently_concluded_Compulsory_primary_education.asp.
-
8 Inter-American Juridical Committee. Declaration of Inter-American Principles on the Legal Regime for the Creation, Operation, Financing, and Dissolution of Non-Profit Civil Entities [CJI/RES.282 (CII-O/23) corr. 2], 2023. The text of the Declaration may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/themes_recently_concluded_Legal_regime_for_creation_operation_financing_dissolution_non-profit_civil_entities.asp.
-
9 Inter-American Juridical Committee. Declaration of Inter-American Principles on Neurosciences, Neurotechnologies, and Human Rights [CJI/RES.281 (CII-O/23) corr. 1], 2023. The text of the Declaration may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/themes_recently_concluded_Neuroscience_neurotechnologies_and_human_rights.asp.
-
10 Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2022 [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.682/22], 2022, p. 299-304.
-
11 Organization of American States. Report on International Law and State Cyber Operations [OEA/Ser.D/XIX.12], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2020.
-
12 Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee, 2022, loc. cit., p. 12-13.
-
13 Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2021 [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.657/21], 2022, p. 130-137.
-
14 Loc. cit., p. 158-168.
-
15 Organization of American States. Guidelines for Binding and Non-binding Agreements [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.614/20 rev. 1, corr. 1], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2020.
-
16 Organization of American States. Guide on the Law Applicable to International Commercial Contracts in the Americas [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.577/19 rev. 1, corr. 2], Inter-American Juridical Committee, Washington, D.C., 2019.
-
17 For further details on some of the issues included in the text of Model Law 2.0, see: D. Negro. ‘El impacto del derecho internacional en los ordenamientos jurídicos internos de América Latina: el acceso a la información pública y sus alcances’, in Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana, Vol. 16, No. 1, Spain, 2022, p. 16-43. The text of that article can also be found at: https://e-revistas.uc3m.es/index.php/REIB/article/view/7014/5487.
-
18 Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Case of Flores Bedregal et al. v. Bolivia. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of October 17, 2022. Series C No. 467, para. 133 and footnote 178.
-
19 Organization of American States. General Secretariat. Annual Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee to the General Assembly, 2012 [OEA/Ser.G, CP/doc.4826/13], 2013, p. 70-86.
-
20 Inter-American Juridical Committee. Proposed Statement of Principles for Privacy and Data Protection in the Americas [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/RES.186 (LXXX-O/12)], 2012. The text of the proposal may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc/docs/themes_recently_concluded_Protection_of_Personal_Data_report_CJI-res_186_LXXX-O-12.pdf.
-
21 Inter-American Juridical Committee. Report of the Inter-American Juridical Committee: Privacy and Data Protection [OEA/Ser.Q, CJI/doc.474/15 rev. 2], 2015. The text of the report may be found at: https://www.oas.org/en/sla/dil/docs/CJI-doc_474-15_rev2.pdf.
-
22 Organization of American States. General Assembly. Procedure for Correcting Errors in Treaties and Conventions for which the Organization of American States is Depository [AG/RES. 1484 (XXVII-O/97)], 1997. The text of that resolution may be found at: http://www.oas.org/Juridico/english/ga-res97/Eres1484.htm.
-
23 Organization of American States. General Assembly. International Law [OEA/Ser.P, AG/doc.5790/22 rev. 1], 2023, p. 132.
Surinaams Juristenblad |
|
Artikel | The Inter-American Juridical Committee of the OAS and its Contributions to International Law |
Trefwoorden | Organization of American States, Inter-American Juridical Committee, codification, progressive development of international law, soft law |
Auteurs | Dante Mauricio Negro Alvarado * xThe opinions expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and in no way compromise the official position of the Organization of American States. |
DOI | 10.5553/SJB/056266842023060003009 |
Toon PDF Toon volledige grootte Samenvatting Auteursinformatie Statistiek Citeerwijze |
Dit artikel is 7 keer geraadpleegd. |
Dit artikel is 7 keer gedownload. |
Dante Mauricio Negro Alvarado, 'The Inter-American Juridical Committee of the OAS and its Contributions to International Law', Surinaams Juristenblad Aflevering 3 2023, DOI: 10.5553/SJB/056266842023060003009
The Organization of American States is the oldest regional organization in the world. Although it was established in 1948, its origins date back to the First International Conference of American States held in 1889, which brought together the countries of the Americas that were independent at the time, and which subsequently built a legal regime through the adoption of international treaties, the implementation of cooperation mechanisms, and the creation of bodies of various types. Thus, at the Third International Conference of American States in 1906, the International Board of Jurists was created, which was later incorporated into the general structure of the OAS as the Inter-American Juridical Committee. Over its more than 100 years of existence, the Committee has continued to promote the codification and progressive development of international law, adapting to the new challenges and needs posed by the passage of time. This document presents the Committee’s achievements and will showcase the major contributions it continues to make to international law, both in the Americas and worldwide. |
Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in
- The Inter-American Juridical Committee
- The work and the agenda of the Inter-American Juridical Committee
- The results of the Inter-American Juridical Committee’s work and its impact on international law
- The advantages of the soft law adopted by the Inter-American Juridical Committee
- A brief final reflection
- Bibliography
- ↑ Naar boven