Case Study of Public International Law
Asylum case
Columbia v Peru ICJ, 1950
Principle: In order to get the validity of international customary law it has to satisfy the material test. That is the practice must be uniform and consistently.
Fact of the case: Victor Raul Haya de la Torre was a Peruvian national. In Oct 3rd, 1948 one military rebellion broke out in Peru which is organized and directed by the American People’s Revolutionary Alliance led by Haya de la Torre. The rebellion was unsuccessful. The Peruvian Government issued a warrant for his arrest on criminal charges related to this political uprising. He fled to the Columbian embassy in Lima seeking for asylum from them. Columbia the requested permission from Peru for Haya de la Torre’s safe passage from the Columbian embassy, through Peru, goes to Columbia. Peru refused to give such permission. Columbia then brought this suit against Peru in the International Court of Justice, based on the agreement made by both named Act of Lima.
Fact in issue:
1. Based on conventions, which in force between both countries, and in general from American international law, whether Columbia competent, as the country granting asylum, to qualify the offence for the purpose of said asylum?
2. Was Peru bound to give the guarantees necessary for the departure of the refugees from the country, with due regard to the inviolability of his person?
Decision of the case:
1. Columbia was not competent to qualify the nature of the offence by a unilateral and definitive decision binding on Peru.
2. Columbia was not entitled to claim that the Peru was bound to gives guarantees necessary for the departure of Haya de la Torre, with due regard to the inviolability of his person.
3. Peru counter-claim that Haya de la Torre was an accused of a common crime was rejected; therefore it was not in accordance with Article I, Paragraph I of the Havana convention.
4. Peru Counter-claim that the grant of asylum by the Columbian government to Haya de la Torre Torre
Columbia v Peru ICJ, 1950
Principle: In order to get the validity of international customary law it has to satisfy the material test. That is the practice must be uniform and consistently.
Fact of the case: Victor Raul Haya de la Torre was a Peruvian national. In Oct 3rd, 1948 one military rebellion broke out in Peru which is organized and directed by the American People’s Revolutionary Alliance led by Haya de la Torre. The rebellion was unsuccessful. The Peruvian Government issued a warrant for his arrest on criminal charges related to this political uprising. He fled to the Columbian embassy in Lima seeking for asylum from them. Columbia the requested permission from Peru for Haya de la Torre’s safe passage from the Columbian embassy, through Peru, goes to Columbia. Peru refused to give such permission. Columbia then brought this suit against Peru in the International Court of Justice, based on the agreement made by both named Act of Lima.
Fact in issue:
1. Based on conventions, which in force between both countries, and in general from American international law, whether Columbia competent, as the country granting asylum, to qualify the offence for the purpose of said asylum?
2. Was Peru bound to give the guarantees necessary for the departure of the refugees from the country, with due regard to the inviolability of his person?
Decision of the case:
1. Columbia was not competent to qualify the nature of the offence by a unilateral and definitive decision binding on Peru.
2. Columbia was not entitled to claim that the Peru was bound to gives guarantees necessary for the departure of Haya de la Torre, with due regard to the inviolability of his person.
3. Peru counter-claim that Haya de la Torre was an accused of a common crime was rejected; therefore it was not in accordance with Article I, Paragraph I of the Havana convention.
4. Peru Counter-claim that the grant of asylum by the Columbian government to Haya de la Torre Torre