Montevideo Treaty on International Penal Law: 1889–1989 - 100 years of treaty making on asylum issues

One hundred years have passed since the signing of the Montevideo Treaty on International Penal Law, and twenty years since both the OAU Convention governing the Specific Aspects of the Refugee Problem in Africa, and the American Convention on Human Rights (the Pact of Sanjosi) were concluded. In th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of refugee law 1989, Vol.1 (4), p.554-557
1. Verfasser: Johnsson, Anders B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:One hundred years have passed since the signing of the Montevideo Treaty on International Penal Law, and twenty years since both the OAU Convention governing the Specific Aspects of the Refugee Problem in Africa, and the American Convention on Human Rights (the Pact of Sanjosi) were concluded. In this editorial, the authors look briefly at the impact of these instruments on international refugee law and the institution of asylum. The Montevideo Treaty is mostly concerned with criminal jurisdiction, but also contains the very first provisions on asylum and refugee protection, and lays the groundwork for later development of the law. Twenty years of experience with the OAU Convention provide an opportunity to reflect on its contribution, both regionally and universally. This treaty, in particular, went into areas considered political and beyond the scope of legal regulation, and added significantly to the concept of ‘refugee’. It also directly invites attention to the causes of refugee exodus, by focusing on the objective conditions in the country of origin. The tranaux preparatoirts, moreover, throw helpful light on the intentions of the drafters with respect to the members of the liberation movements. Problematic questions of asylum, expulsion, non-rtfoultment, and voluntary repatriation are addressed, but the Convention also has its shortcomings, for example, in the areas of cessation, apd subversive activities. The American Convention on Human Rights regulates both substantive and procedural aspects of the protection of fundamental human rights. Significantly, it also contains clear dispositions on the right to asylum and the principle otnon-rtfoultment. It continues a long Latin American tradition, reflected in Article 22(8), in which the non-refoulenunt principle is unqualified. The regional importance of this instrument should not be underestimated, particularly for countries that have not ratified the basic refugee instruments.
ISSN:0953-8186
1464-3715
DOI:10.1093/ijrl/1.4.554