The Protection of the Right to Freedom of Expression in International Human Rights Law: an Overview

This paper provides an overview on the protection of the right to freedom of expression in international human rights law. It addresses the scope of this right and focuses on the exceptional circumstances in which this right might be restricted. According to international law, a restriction must be provided by law, pursue a legitimate aim and be necessary to achieve this particular legitimate aim. Additionally, the restriction shall be the least restrictive measure capable of achieving the legitimate aim pursued. In other words, freedom of expression may only be limited if the restriction meets the requirements of legality, legitimacy, necessity and proportionality, as defi ned by international human rights law

As imunidades jurisdicionais do Estado e o papel do Tribunal Internacional de Justiça na proteção diplomática

Este trabalho tem dois objetivos centrais: o estudo das imunidades jurisdicionais do Estado, em especial os aspectos relevantes à disputa entre a Alemanha e a Itália julgada em 2012 pelo Tribunal Internacional de Justiça, e a análise da proteção diplomática, em especial o seu exercício por meio da apresentação de uma reclamação no Tribunal Internacional de Justiça, como mecanismo adequado para a resolução da questão das reparações decorrentes das violações de direito internacional humanitário perpetradas pela Alemanha durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial. O Tribunal Internacional de Justiça, em Imunidades Jurisdicionais do Estado, concluiu pela inexistência de uma exceção à imunidade de jurisdição do Estado no caso de violações de direito internacional humanitário. Entendendo pela impossibilidade da aplicação da exceção territorial à imunidade do Estado em relação aos atos jure imperii praticados pelas forças armadas estrangeiras, pela inexistência de uma exceção à imunidade do Estado em caso de violações de normas de jus cogens e pela independência entre o reconhecimento da imunidade do Estado e a existência de recursos alternativos para os requerentes apresentarem sua reclamação contra o Estado estrangeiro, o Tribunal Internacional de Justiça concluiu que a imunidade de jurisdição da Alemanha havia sido violada pelos tribunais italianos em casos como Ferrini, nos quais os requerentes pleiteavam reparação pelos danos sofridos em decorrência das violações de direito internacional humanitário cometidas pela Alemanha durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial. A sentença do Tribunal Internacional de Justiça tem como consequência impedir esses requerentes de pleitear reparação contra a Alemanha nos tribunais italianos. Por essa razão, e na impossibilidade de se obter reparação por meio dos recursos internos da Alemanha, os requerentes italianos dependem da adoção das suas reclamações pela Itália, que pode exercer a proteção diplomática em seu favor. Tendo em vista a existência de um ato ilícito internacional atribuído à Alemanha, a Itália pode exercer a proteção diplomática em nome dos nacionais italianos, vítimas desse ato ilícito, que tenham esgotado os recursos internos disponíveis na Alemanha. Entendemos que, em razão da natureza das violações perpetradas pela Alemanha contra as vítimas italianas, que constituíram violações de normas de jus cogens e, consequentemente, de obrigações erga omnes, todos os Estadosteriam legitimidade para exercer a proteção diplomática em favor das vítimas italianas – ou para proporem uma ação popular – contra a Alemanha, pleiteando reparação pelos danos sofridos por essas vítimas. A proteção diplomática pode ser exercida por todos os meios pacíficos de solução de controvérsias e, portanto, pode ser exercida por meio da apresentação de uma reclamação no Tribunal Internacional de Justiça. Mesmo em se tratando de uma reclamação visando a reparação por violações de normas de jus cogens, o Tribunal Internacional de Justiça deve ter jurisdição para poder julgá-la. Por essa razão, o exercício da jurisdição pelo Tribunal Internacional de Justiça dependerá do consentimento da Alemanha, tendo em vista que a jurisdição do Tribunal Internacional de Justiça é baseada no consentimento das partes.This paper has two main objectives: the study of the jurisdictional immunities of the State, in particular the relevant aspects to the case between Germany and Italy decided by the International Court of Justice in 2012, and the analysis of diplomatic protection, in particular its exercise through the presentation of a claim to the International Court of Justice, as an adequate mechanism to settle the matter of reparation for damages caused by violations of international humanitarian law committed by Germany during World War II. The International Court of Justice, in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State, concluded that State immunity prevails even in the event of violations of international humanitarian law. Acknowledging that the territorial tort exception does not apply to acts jure imperii committed by foreign armed forces, that there is no jus cogens exception to State immunity and that the granting of immunity does not depend on the availability of alternative means for the claimants to seek reparation, the International Court of Justice decided that Germany’s immunity from jurisdiction had been violated by Italian courts in cases such as Ferrini, in which the claimants sought reparation for damages suffered as a result of violations of international humanitarian law committed by Germany during World War II. The judgment of the International Court of Justice prevents those claimants to seek reparation against Germany in Italian courts. For this reason, and for being unable to obtain redress through Germany’s domestic remedies, the Italian claimants depend on the espousal of their claims by Italy, which may exercise diplomatic protection on their behalf. In view of the existence of an internationally wrongful act attributed to Germany, Italy may exercise diplomatic protection on the behalf of its nationals, victims of this wrongful act, provided they had exhausted Germany’s domestic remedies. Due to the nature of the violations perpetrated by Germany against the Italian victims, that amounted to violations of jus cogens and, therefore, violations of erga omnes obligations, all States should have legal standing to exercise diplomatic protection on behalf of the Italian victims – or to file an actio popularis – against Germany, seeking reparation for damages suffered by those victims. Diplomatic protection can be exercised by any of the methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes and, therefore, can be exercised by the presentation of a claim to the International Court of Justice. Notwithstanding the fact that the seeks reparation for violations of jus cogens norms, the International Court of Justice must have jurisdiction in order to hear the claim. For this reason, the exercise of jurisdiction by the International Court of Justice will depend on the consent of Germany, as the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice is to be found on the consent of the parties

The Angola–Brazil Bilateral Investment Treaty: an introduction to its dispute settlement mechanism

This article presents an overview of the Angola–Brazil BIT and briefly analyses the dispute settlement mechanism for investment disputes provided for by that agreement. The ratification of the BIT by Brazil a few years ago means that Brazilian investors are now able to seek protection to their investments in Angola through the bilateral dispute settlement mechanism established by the BIT. Although Investor-State arbitration is not envisaged in the agreement, Brazilian investors can request Brazil to act on their behalf bringing their claims before the Joint Committee for conciliation and, if this proves unsuccessful, initiating State-State arbitration proceedings against Angola

Studies in Law. Research Papers

Słowo wstępne: "Drodzy Czytelnicy, Prezentujemy Państwu kolejny numer naszego periodyku. W tym bogatym zbiorze wypowiedzi przedstawicieli doktryny prawa i praktyki prawniczej znalazło się miejsce dla prac autorów z różnych dziedzin prawa. Analizowane zagadnienia odnoszą się w szczególności do problematyki prawa konstytucyjnego, prawa cywilnego, prawa pracy, prawa karnego. Zgromadziliśmy cenne spostrzeżenia autorów z różnych ośrodków akademickich – tak z Polski, jak i z zagranicy. Obok interesujących artykułów naukowych oraz glos przedstawiamy też niemałą liczbę innych tekstów, przede wszystkim recenzji publikacji naukowych i sprawozdań pokonferencyjnych. Mamy nadzieję, że ten, jak i przyszłe numery czasopisma stanowić będą dla Państwa interesującą lekturę, skłaniającą do refleksji nad poruszanymi tematami i prowokującą do tworzenia kolejnych prac naukowych. Liczymy, że zechcą Państwo publikować je – jak do tej pory – na łamach czasopisma „Studia Prawnicze. Rozprawy i Materiały”. Życzę inspirującej lektury!"(...

Studia Prawnicze. Rozprawy i Materiały 2021, nr 1 (28)

Z wprowadzenia: "Glosowana uchwała Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 13 marca 2020 r., III CZP 44/191, została podjęta w sprawie z powództwa Fabryki […] S.A. w W.2 przeciwko Skarbowi Państwa – Staroście J. o ustalenie wypowiedzenia opłaty rocznej z tytułu użytkowania wieczystego za nieuzasadnione. Stanowiła odpowiedź na zagadnienie prawne przedstawione do rozstrzygnięcia w trybie art. 390 § 1 k.p.c., przez Sąd Okręgowy w J., które brzmiało: „Czy uchybienie przez właściwy organ lub użytkownika wieczystego – wynikającego z art. 80 ust. 1 ustawy z dnia 21 sierpnia 1997 r. o gospodarce nieruchomościami3 – 14-dniowego terminu do wniesienia sprzeciwu od orzeczenia samorządowego kolegium odwoławczego skutkuje oddaleniem powództwa czy odrzuceniem pozwu?”."(...