Papers by Giovanny Vega-Barbosa
Revista de la Faculdade de Direito da Universidad Federal de Uberländia, 2019
The controversy between Nicaragua and Colombia before the
ICJ now concerns maritime delimitation ... more The controversy between Nicaragua and Colombia before the
ICJ now concerns maritime delimitation beyond 200 nm. One of the main
legal issues in this case is whether international law allows for
delimitation to take place where alternative bases of continental shelf
entitlement, namely, natural prolongation and distance, are opposed. As
alleged by Nicaragua, its natural prolongation extends beyond 200 nm and
overlaps with Colombia’s distance-based continental shelf entitlement.
Nicaragua endorses the principle of equal division and accordingly,
advocates for the viability of maritime delimitation. In Colombia’s view,
the distance criterion has priority and trumps natural prolongation. In
this work, the author analyses the legal discourse already voiced on the
occasion of the dispute in the East China Sea, in order to identify
instances of parallelism and symbiotic contribution with the question of
the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nm in the Western
Caribbean Sea
This article addresses the legal issues arising out of the potential ratifi cation of the UN Conve... more This article addresses the legal issues arising out of the potential ratifi cation of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea by Colombia. The authors posit that the majority of the concerns previously deterring Colombia from ratifi cation have progressively disappeared. Yet, they transitorily discourage ratifi cation due to Colombia’s current claim of historic rights in the San Andrés Archipelago.
In the 2017 Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean Case, the International Court of Justice st... more In the 2017 Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean Case, the International Court of Justice stated that “in appropriate circumstances” maritime delimitation claims beyond 200 nm may be admitted before the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf issues a recommendation. This is a deviation from the Court’s previous approach in the 2016 Nicaragua v. Colombia (Preliminary Objections) Case. This article follows the evolution of the international case law with respect to the admissibility of outer continental shelf delimitation claims absent a final and binding outer limit, and highlights the positive implications of the International Court’s most recent formula.
Resumen Las particularidades del medio ambiente Ártico han propiciado un importante debate académ... more Resumen Las particularidades del medio ambiente Ártico han propiciado un importante debate académico en relación con la suficiencia de su régimen legal internacional actual para garantizar una protección adecuada. Al respecto, se evidencia una enorme tensión entre aquellos que defienden la idoneidad de la Convención de Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho del Mar como herramienta efectiva para encauzar los esfuerzos de protección, y aquellos que destacan que las especialísimas necesidades del Ártico no pueden ser adecuadamente abordadas bajo la égida de este instrumento. Los autores abogan por una protección efectiva a partir de la utilización eficiente de los instru-mentos disponibles y sobre la base de la cooperación. Océano Ártico – medio ambiente – Consejo Ártico Abstract The particularities of the Arctic environment have encouraged a strong debate over the sufficiency of its current legal regime to guarantee an adequate and sufficient protection. In this context, a strong tension is discernible between those who sustain that protection efforts over this area can be effectively channeled through the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and those who believe that the very special needs of the Arctic cannot be addressed under such a general instrument. The authors advocate for an effective protection through the efficient utilization of the available resources, and on the basis of cooperation.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) recently set the arena for a timely discussion of the qu... more The International Court of Justice (ICJ) recently set the arena for a timely discussion of the question of the admissibility of a claim of continental shelf rights beyond 200 nm, absent a recommendation by the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS). The litigation concerned the Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia beyond 200 nautical miles from the Nicaraguan Coast (NICOL II). In its 17 March 2016 Judgment on Preliminary Objections, the ICJ dismissed Colombia’s preliminary objections against the jurisdiction of the Court and the inadmissibility of Nicaragua’s first claim. While the ICJ upheld Colombia’s contentions against the admissibility of Nicaragua’s second submission – a rather unusual request for the establishment of a provisional regime of conduct in the area of overlapping entitlements pending delimitation – the case will now move to the merits with respect to Nicaragua’s request for the Court to adjudge and declare:
“The precise course of the maritime boundary between Nicaragua and Colombia in the areas of the continental shelf which appertain to each of them beyond the boundaries determined by the Court in its Judgment of 19 November 2012.
El presente escrito tiene como propósito aproximarse de manera teórica y descriptiva a los proble... more El presente escrito tiene como propósito aproximarse de manera teórica y descriptiva a los problemas jurídicos sustanciales y procedimentales planteados por un eventual litigio de delimitación marítima ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia, en el supuesto en que el territorio de uno de los Estados desaparecería con posterioridad a la emisión del fallo. El presente escrito complementa la literatura actualmente existente en relación con la potencial desaparición de los Estados-Isla como consecuencia del cambio climático y el incremento del nivel del mar, y sobre la capacidad del derecho internacional para proveer una respuesta satisfactoria. Sin perjuicio de la elucidación descriptiva del derecho internacional relevante a cada uno de los problemas jurídicos referidos, los autores promueven la delimitación marítima como herramienta que puede y debe complementar las actuales estrategias de los Estados-Isla frente a la conservación de sus recursos naturales e independencia, no obstante la desaparición de su territorio como consecuencia de la inhabitabilidad o el sumergimiento.
Traducción del fallo de la Corte Internacional de Justicia en el caso de la 'Caza de ballenas en ... more Traducción del fallo de la Corte Internacional de Justicia en el caso de la 'Caza de ballenas en el Antártico' 174 30 suministradas en el plan de investigación del jarpa ii -Deber de cooperación con la Comisión y su comité científico -Japón cumplió satisfactoriamente las exigencias del párrafo 30 en lo relativo al jarpa ii.
The present article purports to make a theoretical approach to the phenomenon of “domestic” viole... more The present article purports to make a theoretical approach to the phenomenon of “domestic” violence, within the framework of the international corpus juris on the protection of women against the type of violence that affects them in a special or disproportionate manner. The aforementioned will be analyzed in light of States’ obligation of prevention, making particular emphasis on the Inter-American system on the protection of human rights and, transversally, of the European and Universal systems. This analysis will permit us to sustain the existence of additional and reinforced obligations of prevention, including a duty of surveillance, as well as to illustrate about the practical dilemmas which derive from the conflict between, on one hand, the obligation of prevention, and on the other, the obligation to respect women’s right to private and family life.
Translations by Giovanny Vega-Barbosa
Traducción al Castellano de la Decisión de la Corte Internacional de Justicia relativo a la Caza ... more Traducción al Castellano de la Decisión de la Corte Internacional de Justicia relativo a la Caza de Ballenas en el Antártico.
Talks by Giovanny Vega-Barbosa
On 7 February 2018, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (the Court, IACtHR) issued the much ... more On 7 February 2018, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (the Court, IACtHR) issued the much awaited advisory opinion (A/O) concerning the obligations of States Parties to the American Convention on Human Rights (American Convention, ACHR) in respect of infrastructural works creating a risk of significant environmental damage to the marine environment of the Wider Caribbean Region. This entry sets out the main findings of the Court, including its approach to the extraterritorial application of the American Convention. With the text of the A/O currently available in Spanish only (here), this post seeks to provide an annotated summary of the A/O to EJIL:Talk!’s readership in the English speaking international law world.
El 16 de septiembre de 2013, Nicaragua volvió a invocar el Artículo XXXI del Pacto de Bogotá para... more El 16 de septiembre de 2013, Nicaragua volvió a invocar el Artículo XXXI del Pacto de Bogotá para demandar a Colombia ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia (la Corte). ¿Qué pide Nicaragua? Nada nuevo. Nicaragua repite ante la Corte una pretensión marítima que tiene como propósito apropiarse de áreas en el mar Caribe que nos pertenecen. Por tratarse del segundo caso entre Nicaragua y Colombia ante la Corte, se le conoce a este procedimiento como Nicol II. Aunque existe una tercera demanda, radicada el 26 de noviembre de 2013, aquí sólo analizaremos el contenido de Nicol II. Este 17 de marzo la Corte dirá si tiene competencia para estudiar el reclamo nicaragüense. No decidirá nada de fondo. ¿Por qué? Porque Colombia objetó la competencia de la Corte.
El 16 de septiembre de 2013 comenzó un nuevo pleito entre Colombia y Nicaragua ante la Corte Inte... more El 16 de septiembre de 2013 comenzó un nuevo pleito entre Colombia y Nicaragua ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia de La Haya. En esta oportunidad, Nicaragua le pidió a la Corte que le reconozca derechos de exploración y explotación dentro de la plataforma continental colombiana. En marzo de 2016, la Corte se declaró competente en este caso y por eso tendrá que decidir si ese país centroamericano tiene derecho a una delimitación de su plataforma continental más allá de las 200 millas náuticas.
Mediante comunicado de prensa, el Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores confirmó que el Gobierno co... more Mediante comunicado de prensa, el Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores confirmó que el Gobierno colombiano decidió presentar “el documento por medio del cual Colombia respondió todos y cada uno de los puntos y argumentos planteados por Nicaragua en el proceso sobre la ‘Cuestión de la Delimitación de la Plataforma Continental entre Nicaragua y Colombia más allá de las 200 millas náuticas desde la costa nicaragüense’”. Con su decisión de actuar en “cumplimiento con el cronograma establecido por la Corte Internacional de Justicia”, en “cumplimiento de los plazos establecidos por la Corte”, y de presentar una “contramemoria”, Colombia compareció ante la Corte en las dos demandas presentadas por Nicaragua.
El Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Colombia emitió ayer un comunicado en el que informó qu... more El Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Colombia emitió ayer un comunicado en el que informó que la Corte Internacional de Justicia (CIJ) de La Haya aceptó y declaró admisibles dos contrademandas contra Nicaragua, en el caso de las “Supuestas Violaciones de Derechos Soberanos y Espacios Marítimos en el Mar Caribe”. Así, Colombia abre la puerta a un análisis de soberanía del que puede salir mal librado.
Uploads
Papers by Giovanny Vega-Barbosa
ICJ now concerns maritime delimitation beyond 200 nm. One of the main
legal issues in this case is whether international law allows for
delimitation to take place where alternative bases of continental shelf
entitlement, namely, natural prolongation and distance, are opposed. As
alleged by Nicaragua, its natural prolongation extends beyond 200 nm and
overlaps with Colombia’s distance-based continental shelf entitlement.
Nicaragua endorses the principle of equal division and accordingly,
advocates for the viability of maritime delimitation. In Colombia’s view,
the distance criterion has priority and trumps natural prolongation. In
this work, the author analyses the legal discourse already voiced on the
occasion of the dispute in the East China Sea, in order to identify
instances of parallelism and symbiotic contribution with the question of
the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nm in the Western
Caribbean Sea
“The precise course of the maritime boundary between Nicaragua and Colombia in the areas of the continental shelf which appertain to each of them beyond the boundaries determined by the Court in its Judgment of 19 November 2012.
Translations by Giovanny Vega-Barbosa
Talks by Giovanny Vega-Barbosa
ICJ now concerns maritime delimitation beyond 200 nm. One of the main
legal issues in this case is whether international law allows for
delimitation to take place where alternative bases of continental shelf
entitlement, namely, natural prolongation and distance, are opposed. As
alleged by Nicaragua, its natural prolongation extends beyond 200 nm and
overlaps with Colombia’s distance-based continental shelf entitlement.
Nicaragua endorses the principle of equal division and accordingly,
advocates for the viability of maritime delimitation. In Colombia’s view,
the distance criterion has priority and trumps natural prolongation. In
this work, the author analyses the legal discourse already voiced on the
occasion of the dispute in the East China Sea, in order to identify
instances of parallelism and symbiotic contribution with the question of
the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nm in the Western
Caribbean Sea
“The precise course of the maritime boundary between Nicaragua and Colombia in the areas of the continental shelf which appertain to each of them beyond the boundaries determined by the Court in its Judgment of 19 November 2012.