Jose A. Benzaquen Perea
The Legal Encyclopedia-2020 edition defines “international responsibility as the institution aimed at restoring international order or the mere normality of international life in the face of conduct that is harmful to the different members of international society attributable to certain international subjects, either states or international organizations, which carry the obligation of reparation”.
Consequently, it is configured when there is a violation of international law against a state, and therefore there is an obligation to repair the damage caused.
The responsibility among the subjects of international law is found in a formal way with the appearance of Public International Law, being in accordance with the accepted definition that “it is the accumulation of norms and principles that regulate the international rights and obligations of States and other organisms, as well as individuals as subjects of rights and obligations”.
However, I consider that responsibility already appears - although not with the current formality - with human groups, family clans, tribes; when respect was demanded between them, and that own right that is born when the right of others ends.
Subsequently, we are classifying International Law in an Ancient Period, where I locate the Empire of the Incas, which covered a large part of the territories of South America, with its capital Cuzco, Peru, who exercised a humanization of the right to the pre Inca cultures; a Greco-Roman Period; a Middle Period; a Modern Period, with the Treaty of Peace of Westphalia of 1648 that ends the 30 years’ war in Europe; and, a Contemporary Period, from 1899, the year in which the codification of International Law begins, to date.
Each period of time has its own characteristics of relationship; However, with the creation of the United Nations (UN) on October 24, 1945 in San Francisco, USA, with the aim of maintaining peace and security in the States, we began a coexistence within a legal framework international, in a world organization integrated by the participation of 193 States in their capacity of members.
Likewise, the Charter of the United Nations appears, which expresses a valid aspiration to “Create conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations originating from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained.”
Therefore, we now have a global multilateral treaty (United Nations Charter) in which the Pacta Sunt Servanta principle prevails, which becomes the obligation to fulfill an agreed commitment.
Regarding the institution of the International Responsibility of States, it appears before the United Nations and we find it in international jurisprudence when the Permanent Court of International Justice in its judgment of July 26, 1927 declared “that it is a principle of international law, that the violation of a commitment carries with it the obligation to repair the fault committed, the reparation being an indispensable complement for the due application of an agreement, without it being necessary that this has been stipulated in it. Subsequently, the International Responsibility of States is regulated in the International Law Commission of the United Nations, in accordance with the functions of the General Assembly, which in Article 13, paragraph 1, is “to promote the progressive development of the International Law and its codification” UN.
This Commission has made significant progress in coding projects, complementing its work with the responsibility also of international organizations.
In the codification articles of the Commission already approved, the first stipulates that “Every internationally wrongful act of a State gives rise to International Responsibility”, which leads to knowing that it constitutes an illegal act, which is answered in the approved article 3:
“There is an internationally wrongful act of a State when:
a) A behavior consisting of an action or omission is attributable according to International Law to the State and
b) This behavior constitutes a violation of an international obligation of the State”.
On the other hand, this responsibility generally arises as consequence of acts of State bodies, which we call “State acts”, but they can also arise from particular acts.
Returning to the aspect of reparation, it is not punitive and can be implemented in the:
a. Restoration of things to their original situation (restutio integrum).
b. Internal sanctions that the responsible State takes against its agents to satisfy the State that has suffered the damage,
c. Satisfactions of a moral order, and
d. Payment of compensation.
In the current international context, the State is required to be responsible and the legal norm that it has infringed must be evoked and that it must be true and in force, with a real existence within Public International Law. Therefore, as mentioned, there is a loss as a consequence of an action, which can be configured as subjective and objective. As for the subjective, it occurs when the wrongful act is attributed to the State, in accordance with the principles of International Law; and the objective element is the violation of the international obligation.
At the same time, international responsibilities of the States have appeared with norms that are applied in a concrete way to certain areas such as: international trade, Human Rights, environmental protection, investments, integration, etc.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, I consider that more than the codification of international laws, there is an obligation to coexist in this globalized world in peace and harmony, with common objectives that every state shares for the good of its populations.
We cannot continue to live among the misunderstandings of Peoples, Nations and States. We face similar objectives: the welfare of the population, the welfare of the person, with their rights and obligations, but in harmony, in peace.
Such situation will lead us to better understand our societies, let us be states of solidarity, as I have been able to perceive in the State of Qatar, with its people and with its authorities. We all share the same aspirations.
Are we able to do it? I think very positively, we just need frank dialogue, because in between is the permanence of a planet where we have appeared to live well.
We are passing beings and other generations will come.
