the republic of nicaragua v

8/13/2019 The Republic of Nicaragua V

1/28

The Republic of Nicaragua v. The United States of America [1]was a 1984 case of

theInternational Court of Justice(ICJ) in which the ICJ ruled in favor of Nicaraguaand

against the United tates and awarded re!arations to Nicaragua" #he ICJ held that the

U"" had violated international law$% su!!orting the Contrasin their re$ellion against

the Nicaraguan govern&ent and $% &iningNicaragua's har$ors" #he United tates

refused to !artici!ate in the !roceedings after the Court reected its argu&ent that the

ICJ laced urisdiction to hear the case" #he U"" later $loced enforce&ent of the

udg&ent $% theUnited Nations ecurit% Counciland there$% !revented Nicaragua fro&

o$taining an% actual co&!ensation"[*]#he Nicaraguan govern&ent finall% withdrew the

co&!laint fro& the court in e!te&$er 199* (under the later+ !ost,-.N+ govern&ent

of /ioleta Cha&orro)+ following a re!eal of the law re0uiring the countr% to see

co&!ensation"[]

#he Court found in its verdict that the United tates was 2in $reach of its o$ligations

under custo&ar% international law not to use force against another tate2+ 2not to

intervene in its affairs2+ 2not to violate its sovereignt%2+ 2not to interru!t !eaceful &ariti&e

co&&erce2+ and 2in $reach of its o$ligations under 3rticle I of the #reat% of

-riendshi!+ Co&&erce and Navigation $etween the 5arties signed at6anaguaon *1

Januar% 197"2

#he Court had 1 final decisions u!on which it voted" In tate&ent 9+ the Court stated

that while the U"" encouraged hu&an rightsviolations $% the Contras $% the &anual

entitledPsychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare+ this did not+ however+ &ae suchacts attri$uta$le to the U"" [4]

Contents

[hide]

1 acground

* 3rgu&ents

o *"1 Nicaragua

o *"* United tates

Judg&ent

o "1 -indings

o "* #he ruling

o " .egal clarification and i&!ortance

o "4 :ow the udges voted
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-name-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrashttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_minehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_minehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Councilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-law-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Fronthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violeta_Chamorrohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-HRW_report-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managuahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managuahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_in_Guerrilla_Warfarehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-a-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Backgroundhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Argumentshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Judgmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Judgmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Findingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#The_rulinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Legal_clarification_and_importancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#How_the_judges_votedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_of_Justicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrashttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_minehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Councilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-law-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Fronthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violeta_Chamorrohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-HRW_report-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managuahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_in_Guerrilla_Warfarehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-a-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Backgroundhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Argumentshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Judgmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Findingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#The_rulinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Legal_clarification_and_importancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#How_the_judges_votedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-name-1


2/28

4 #hird,!art% inter!retations

7 ;issent

Certain witnesses against the U

o "1 -irst witness< Co&&ander .uis Carrion

o "* econd witness< ;r" ;avid 6ac6ichael

o " #hird witness< 5rofessor 6ichael =lennon

o "4 -ourth witness< -ather Jean .oison

o "7 -ifth witness< >illia& :?!er

@ UN voting

8 ee also

9 Notes

1A Beferences

11 Dternal lins

acground[edit]

#he first ar&ed intervention $% the United tates in Nicaragua occurred under 5resident

#aft" In 19A9+ he ordered the overthrow of Nicaraguan 5resident JosE antos Fela%a"

;uring 3ugust and e!te&$er 191*+ a contingent of *AA U"" 6arines landed at the

!ort ofCorintoand occu!ied .eGnand the railwa% line to =ranada" 3 !ro,U""

govern&ent was for&ed under the occu!ation" #he 1914 r%an,Cha&orro

#reat%granted !er!etual canal rights to the U"" in Nicaragua and was signed ten da%s$efore the U"",o!erated 5ana&a Canal o!ened for use+ thus !reventing an%one fro&

$uilding a co&!eting canal in Nicaragua without U"" !er&ission" [7]

In 19*@+ under3ugusto CEsar andino+ a &aor !easant u!rising was launched against

$oth the U"" occu!ation and the Nicaraguan esta$lish&ent" In 19+ the 6arines

withdrew and left the National =uardin charge of internal securit% and elections" In

194+3nastasio o&oHa =arca+ the head of the National =uard+ ordered his forces to

ca!ture and &urder andino" In 19@+ o&oHa assu&ed the !residenc%+ while still in

control of the National =uard+ and esta$lished a dictatorshi! that his fa&il% controlled

until 19@9"[]

#he downfall of the regi&e is attri$uted to its e&$eHHle&ent of &illions of dollars in

foreign aid that was given to the countr% in res!onse to the devastating 19@*

earth0uae" 6an% &oderate su!!orters of the dictatorshi! $egan a$andoning it in the

face of growing revolutionar% senti&ent" #he andinista(-.N) &ove&ent organiHed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Third-party_interpretationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Dissenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Dissenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Certain_witnesses_against_the_UShttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#First_witness:_Commander_Luis_Carrionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Second_witness:_Dr._David_MacMichaelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Second_witness:_Dr._David_MacMichaelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Third_witness:_Professor_Michael_Glennonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Fourth_witness:_Father_Jean_Loisonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Fifth_witness:_William_H.C3.BCperhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#UN_votinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#See_alsohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Noteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Referenceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#External_linkshttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Howard_Tafthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Howard_Tafthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Santos_Zelayahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corinto,_Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le%C3%B3n,_Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granada,_Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan-Chamorro_Treatyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan-Chamorro_Treatyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_C%C3%A9sar_Sandinohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_(Nicaragua)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_(Nicaragua)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasio_Somoza_Garc%C3%ADahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Nicaragua_earthquakehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Nicaragua_earthquakehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Fronthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Third-party_interpretationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Dissenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Certain_witnesses_against_the_UShttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#First_witness:_Commander_Luis_Carrionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Second_witness:_Dr._David_MacMichaelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Third_witness:_Professor_Michael_Glennonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Fourth_witness:_Father_Jean_Loisonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Fifth_witness:_William_H.C3.BCperhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#UN_votinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#See_alsohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Noteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#Referenceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#External_linkshttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Howard_Tafthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Howard_Tafthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Santos_Zelayahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corinto,_Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le%C3%B3n,_Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granada,_Nicaraguahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan-Chamorro_Treatyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan-Chamorro_Treatyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_C%C3%A9sar_Sandinohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_(Nicaragua)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasio_Somoza_Garc%C3%ADahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Nicaragua_earthquakehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Nicaragua_earthquakehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista_National_Liberation_Front


3/28

relief+ $egan to eD!and its influence and assu&ed the leadershi! of the revolution" [@]3

!o!ular u!rising $rought the -.N to !ower in 19@9" #he United tates had long $een

o!!osed to the socialist -.N (co&&unist in the 198As [citation needed])+ and after the

revolution the Carter ad&inistration&oved 0uicl% to su!!ort theo&ocistaswith

financial and &aterial aid" >hen Bonald Beagantoo office+ he aug&ented the direct

su!!ort to an anti,andinista grou!+ called the Contras+ which included factions lo%al to

the for&er dictatorshi!" >hen Congress !rohi$ited further funding to the Contras+

Beagan continued the funding through ar&s sales that were also !rohi$ited $%

Congress"[8]

#here have $een no re!orted cases of Nicaraguan ar&ed intervention against the

United tates"[citation needed]

3rgu&ents[edit]

Nicaragua[edit]

Nicaragua chargedarfare&anual was to 2&oderate2 the eDisting Contra activities" [9]

#he United tates argued that the Court did not have urisdiction+ with U""

a&$assador to the United NationsJeane Lir!atricdis&issing the Court as

a 2se&i,legal+ se&i,uridical+ se&i,!olitical $od%+ which nations so&eti&esacce!t and so&eti&es don't"2[9]

It is noteworth% that the United tates+ the defaulting !art%+ was the onl%

6e&$er that !ut forward argu&ents against the validit% of the udg&ent of

the Court+ arguing that it !assed a decision that it 'had neither the urisdiction

nor the co&!etence to render'" 6e&$ers that sided with the United tates in

o!!osing Nicaragua's clai&s did not challenge the Court's urisdiction+ nor its

findings+ nor the su$stantive &erits of the case" [1A]

Judg&ent[edit]

#he ver% long udg&ent first listed *91 !oints" 3&ong the& that the United

tates had $een involved in the 2unlawful use of force"2 #he alleged

violations included attacs on Nicaraguan facilities and naval vessels+ the

&ining of Nicaraguan !orts+ the invasion of Nicaraguan air s!ace+ and the

training+ ar&ing+ e0ui!!ing+ financing and su!!l%ing of forces (the 2Contras2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Salvadorhttp://www.gwu.edu/~jaysmith/nicus3.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIAhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_in_Guerrilla_Warfarehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_in_Guerrilla_Warfarehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-middle-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeane_Kirkpatrickhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-middle-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-middle-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-UN_Chronicle-10http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=5http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Salvadorhttp://www.gwu.edu/~jaysmith/nicus3.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIAhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_in_Guerrilla_Warfarehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_in_Guerrilla_Warfarehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-middle-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeane_Kirkpatrickhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-middle-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-UN_Chronicle-10http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=5


5/28

and seeing to overthrow Nicaragua's andinista govern&ent" #his was

followed $% the state&ents that the udges voted on" [11]

Findings[edit]

#he court found evidence of an ar&s flow $etween Nicaragua and insurgentsin l alvador $etween 19@9,81" :owever+ there was not enough evidence

to show that the Nicaraguan govern&ent was i&!uta$le for this or that the

U res!onse was !ro!ortional" #he court also found that certain trans$order

incursions into the territor% of =uate&ala and Costa Bica+ in 198*+ 198 and

1984+ were i&!uta$le to the =overn&ent of Nicaragua" :owever+ neither

=uate&ala nor Costa Bica had &ade an% re0uest for U intervention l

alvador did in 1984+ well after the U had intervened unilaterall%"[*]

23s regards l alvador+ the Court considers that in custo&ar% international

lawthe !rovision of ar&s to the o!!osition in another tate does not

constitute an ar&ed attac on that tate" 3s regards :onduras and Costa

Bica+ the Court states that+ in the a$sence of sufficient infor&ation as to the

trans$order incursions into the territor% of those two tates fro& Nicaragua+ it

is difficult to decide whether the% a&ount+ singl% or collectivel%+ to an ar&ed

attac $% Nicaragua" #he Court finds that neither these incursions nor the

alleged su!!l% of ar&s &a% $e relied on as ustif%ing the eDercise of the right

of collective self,defence"2[1*]

Begarding hu&an rights violations $% the Contras+ 2#he Court has to

deter&ine whether the relationshi! of the contras to the United tates

=overn&ent was such that it would $e right to e0uate the Contras+ for legal

!ur!oses+ with an organ of the United tates =overn&ent+ or as acting on

$ehalf of that =overn&ent" #he Court considers that the evidence availa$le

to it is insufficient to de&onstrate the total de!endence of the contras on

United tates aid" 3 !artial de!endenc%+ the eDact eDtent of which the Court

cannot esta$lish+ &a% $e inferred fro& the fact that the leaders were selected

$% the United tates+ and fro& other factors such as the organisation+training and e0ui!!ing of the force+ !lanning of o!erations+ the choosing of

targets and the o!erational su!!ort !rovided" #here is no clear evidence that

the United tates actuall% eDercised such a degree of control as to ustif%

treating the contras as acting on its $ehalf""" :aving reached the a$ove

conclusion+ the Court taes the view that the Contras re&ain res!onsi$le for
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-icj-11http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=6http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=6http://www.gwu.edu/~jaysmith/nicus3.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customary_international_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customary_international_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-icj-cij.org-12http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-icj-11http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicaragua_v._United_States&action=edit&section=6http://www.gwu.edu/~jaysmith/nicus3.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customary_international_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customary_international_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States#cite_note-icj-cij.org-12


6/28

their acts+ in !articular the alleged violations $% the& of hu&anitarian law"

-or the United tates to $e legall% res!onsi$le+ it would have to $e !roved

that that tate had effective control of the o!erations in the course of which

the alleged violations were co&&itted"2[1*]

#he Court concluded that the United tates+ des!ite its o$ections+ was

su$ect to the Court's urisdiction" #he Court had ruled on * Nove&$er $%

11 votes to one that it had urisdiction in the case on the $asis of either

3rticle (i"e" co&!ulsor% urisdiction) or the 197 #reat% of -riendshi!+

Co&&erce and Navigation $etween the United tates and Nicaragua" #he

Charter !rovides that+ in case of dou$t+ it is for the Court itself to decide

whether it has urisdiction+ and that each &e&$er of the United Nations

undertaes to co&!l% with the decision of the Court" #he Court also ruled $%

unani&it% that the !resent case was ad&issi$le"[1A]

#he United tates thenannounced that it had 2decided not to !artici!ate in further !roceedings in

this case"2 3$out a %ear after the Court's urisdictional decision+ the United

tates too the further+ radical ste! of withdrawing its consent to the Court's

co&!ulsor% urisdiction+ ending its !revious 4A %ear legal co&&it&ent to

$inding international adudication" #he ;eclaration of acce!tance of the

general co&!ulsor% urisdiction of the International Court of Justice

ter&inated after a ,&onth notice of ter&ination delivered $% the ecretar% of

tate to the United Nations on Kcto$er @+ 1987" [1]

3lthough the Court called on the United tates to 2cease and to refrain2 fro&

the unlawful use of force against Nicaragua and stated that the U was 2in

$reach of its o$ligation under custo&ar% international law not to use force

against another state2 and ordered it to !a% re!arations+ the United tates

refused to co&!l%" []3s a !er&anent &e&$er of the ecurit% Council+ the

U"" has $een a$le to $loc an% enforce&ent &echanis& atte&!ted $%

Nicaragua"[14]Kn Nove&$er + 198 the United Nations =eneral

3sse&$l%!assed+ $% a vote of 94, (l alvador+ Israel and the U voted

against)+ a non,$inding resolutionurging the U to co&!l%"[4]

The ruling[edit]

Kn June *@+ 198+ the Court &ade the following rulinghitloc O Co" had contracted to $u% this

sugar fro& C"3"/"+ $ut after it was seiHed+ the% $ought it directl% fro& the Cu$an

govern&ent" 3fter receiving the sugar+ however+ -arr+ >hitloc O Co" did not !a% the

Cu$an govern&ent , instead+ the% !aid C"3"/"'s legal re!resentative+ a$$atino"

#he !laintiff+ the National an of Cu$a(acting on $ehalf of the Cu$an govern&ent)

filed alawsuitin the United tates ;istrict Court for the outhern ;istrict of New

Poragainst thedefendant+a$$atino+ to recover the &one% !aid for the sugar" #he

;istrict Court and theCourt of 3!!ealsruled in favor of the defendant+ and the case was

a!!ealed to the u!re&e Court"

#he issue taen $% the u!re&e Court was whether to a!!l% the 3ct of tate doctrine+

which would u!hold the legalit% of the eD!ro!riation $ecause it was an official act of

another countr%+ not su$ect to 0uestion in U"" courts"

#he defendant contended that the doctrine was ina!!lica$le for three reasonshitewrote a 2dis&a%ed2 dissenting o!inion+ asserting that the Court's

a!!lication of the act of state doctrine was too rigid , &ore so+ in fact than the doctrine

as a!!lied $% other countries"

u$se0uent develo!&ents[edit]

Not sur!risingl%+ the a$$atino case !rovoed an u!roar in the U"" Congress" efore

the case could $e reviewed $% the ;istrict Court (on re&and)+ Congress !assed the so,

called econd :icenloo!er 3&end&ent(or a$$atino 3&end&ent) that revoed this

!resu&!tion in favor of the validit% of the act of state doctrine that the a$$atino court

had esta$lished" #he 3&end&ent was retroactive and su$se0uentl% found constitutional

$% the ;istrict court and the Cu$an $an's co&!laint was dis&issed" >hile this

a&end&ent to the -oreign 3ssistance 3cthas clarified that courts &a% !roceed with an

adudication on the &eritsunless the 5resident states that such adudication &a%

e&$arrass foreign !olic% efforts+ the a&end&ent has $een construed ver% narrowl% $%

su$se0uent court decisions"

GUARANTY TRUST CO. OF NEW YORK v. UNITED

STATES.

304 U.S. 126(58 S.Ct. 785, 82 L.Ed. 1224)

GUARANTY TRUST CO. OF NEW YORK v. UNITE STATES.

N!. 5"".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erie_doctrinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_jurisdictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_jurisdictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_common_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Banco_Nacional_de_Cuba_v._Sabbatino&action=edit&section=3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byron_Whitehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Banco_Nacional_de_Cuba_v._Sabbatino&action=edit&section=4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Hickenlooper_Amendmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sabbatino_Amendment&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Assistance_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=On_the_merits&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erie_doctrinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_jurisdictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_common_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Banco_Nacional_de_Cuba_v._Sabbatino&action=edit&section=3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byron_Whitehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Banco_Nacional_de_Cuba_v._Sabbatino&action=edit&section=4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Hickenlooper_Amendmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sabbatino_Amendment&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Assistance_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=On_the_merits&action=edit&redlink=1


13/28

A#$%&d' #*+ 2829, 19-8.

&*d&d' A/#0 25, 19-8.

opinion, STONE TL3S00%6 #! /$&6 12"128 :t&:t!:00 !tt&d

#. ;!+: W. v6, ! N&< Y!#= Ct, !# /&tt!:.

#. S E. W+t=, A66t. Att. G&:., !# t+& U:t&d Stt&6.

TOP

#. ;%6t*& STONE d&0v&d t+& !/:!: ! t+& C!%#t.

T+& /#:*/0 >%&6t!:6 !# d&*6!: #&


14/28

Stt&6. O: N!& 7, 1917, t+& B#!v6!:0 G!v:&:t http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/28http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/724http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/28


15/28

#&v&d t+& ?%d$&:t !# /&tt!:, +!0d:$ t+t t+& N&< Y!#= 6tt%t&! 0tt!:6 d!&6 :!t #%: $:6t !#&$: 6!v&$:. 2 C#., 91 F.2d898. !v&d t+& /!#t:*& ! t+& >%&6t!:6 :v!0v&d,


16/28

/#!$tv& #$+t, t 6 : *t :!t+:$ !#& t+: #&6vt!:, !#&*&/t!:, :t#!d%*&d !# t+& /%0* &:&t, :d &>%00 //0*0& t!00 $!v:&:t6. St!#, ;., : U:t&d Stt&6 v. !#, 2" F&d.C6. /. -29,--, N!. 15-7-. R&$#d0&66 ! t+& !# ! $!v:&:t :d:d&/&:d&:t0 ! t+& #!0 /#!$tv& !:*& t+!%$+t 6%*&:t t! ?%6t

t, t+& #%0& 6 6%//!#t0& :!< &*%6& t6 &:&t :d dv:t$&&t&:d t! &v *t&:, :*0%d:$ t+& d&&:d:t,


17/28

#&&:*& t! t+& /%0* /!0* 6%//!#t:$ t+& #%0& t+t 0tt!: d!&6:!t #%: $:6t d!&6t* 6!v&$: 6 &>%00 //0*0& t! 00$!v:&:t6


18/28

*. U:t&d Stt&6 v. B&!/0& ! Stt& ! C0!#:, 297 U.S. 175, 18", 5"S.Ct. 421, 425, 8 L.Ed. 5"7.

W& #& %:0& t! d6*: : t+& *6&


19/28

%:t0 #&*!$:t!: ! t+& S!v&t G!v:&:t t+&


20/28

#&*!$:&d.4T+&


21/28

:t!:06. T+& !:& !/t&6 !:0 t! v0dt& t! 0t&d &t&:t *t6 ! d& *t! $!v:&:t

A6 +6 0#&d &&: :!t&d, t+& #%0& :%00% t&/%6 #&6t6 !: t+& /%0*/!0* ! /#!t&*t:$ t+& d!&6t* 6!v&$: #! !66!:6 ! t6 !http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/265/573http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/265/573http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/265/573http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/265/573


22/28

: 0/6& ! t& t t+& 66$:&:t. T+& >%&6t!: 6 %&:*&6 ! t+& :&$0&*t! t6 !%&:*&6 ! t+&R%66: G!v:&:t6 0%#& t! /#!6&*%t& t+& *0. B#!!, %:d /0& ! 0tt!:, t+t t+& " 6tt%t!# /!d +d #%: &!#& t+&

66$:&:t !&:d6 $:6t :! /!0* ! /#!t&*t:$ t+& d!&6t*6!v&$:. It d&/#v&6 t+& U:t&d Stt&6 ! :! #$+t, !# t+& /#!!d&!:6t#t&6 t+t t+& U:t&d Stt&6 :&v *>%#&d #$+t #&& ! /#&&6t:$ :#t, t+& #%:::$ ! 0tt!:6 $:6t t6 66$:!#,


23/28

T+& 6 :!t+:$ : &t+ d!*%&:t t! 6%$$&6t t+t t+& U:t&d Stt&6%#& !# &t : $#&t #$+t6 t+: t6 t#:6!# !# t+tt+& B#&6d&:t & &&*%tv& *t!: /%#/!#t&d !# :t&:d&d t! 0t!# d:6+ t+& #$+t6 ! t+& d&t!#


24/28

MINGTAI FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE CO., LTD., !o"po"#ion, P$in#i%%App'$$n#,

(.UNITED PARCEL SER)ICE, *+in' 'n#i#-

Uni#'/ P"!'$ In#'"n#ion$, In!., *+in''n#i#-, D'%'n/n#App'$$''.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Argued and Submitted March !, """.

#iled Ma$ %&, """.Michael '. (od)ic* +argued, -orter, roff / (od)ic*, (ong Beach, California, for

the plaintiff0appellant.-aul T. #riedman +argued and Ruth N. Borenstein, Morrison / #oerster, San

#rancisco, California, for the defendants0appellees.Alisa B. 1lein +argued, United States 2epartment of 3ustice, 'ashington, 2.C.,

for the amicus.

Before4 56SCANN(A7N, 'AR2(A' and #(8TC98R, Circuit 3udges.K'C3NN.3IN+ Circuit Judgee &ust deter&ine whether adherence to the >arsaw Convention $% the 5eo!le's

Be!u$lic of China also $inds #aiwan"

76ingtai -ire O 6arine Insurance Co"+ .td" (26ingtai2)+ insured a !acage+ shi!!ed $%

=e&tronics Cor!" fro& #ai!ei+ #aiwan to an Jose+ California+ which was lost en route

$% United 5arcel ervice+ the air carrier" 6ingtai alleged that the lost !acage contained

co&!uter chi!s worth Q8+474"8A and $rought suit against United 5arcel ervice and

United 5arcel International+ Inc" (collectivel% 2U52)+ in the Northern ;istrict of Californiaalleging+ inter alia,loss of cargo under the Convention for the Unification of Certain

Bules Belating to International #rans!ortation $% 3ir+ Kct" 1*+ 19*9+ 49 tat" AAA+ #""

No" 8@ (194)+ re!rinted in note following 49 U""C"3" R 4A1A7 (the 2>arsaw

Convention2 or the 2Convention2)"

U5 answered that the Convention did not a!!l%+ and that its air carrier lia$ilit% was

therefore li&ited to the Q1AA released value !rovided $% the air wa%$ill" U!on the

!arties' cross,&otions for su&&ar% udg&ent+ the district court so held+ concluding that

#aiwan+ which is not a signator% to the Convention+ was not $ound $% the 5eo!le's

Be!u$lic of China's (2China2) adherence to the Convention" #he district court therefore

u!held the li&itation on lia$ilit% !rovided $% the air wa%$ill+ and entered su&&ar%

udg&ent in 6ingtai's favor in the a&ount of Q1AA"

6ingtai a!!eals"1

77#he Convention onl% a!!lies to shi!&ents $etween territories of signatories+ otherwise

referred to as 2:igh Contracting 5arties"2 See>arsaw Convention+ art" 1(*) (re!rinted

in note following 49 U""C"3" R 4A1A7)" #he !arties do not dis!ute that #aiwan is nota
http://www.leagle.com/decision/19991319177F3d1142_11184#fid1http://www.leagle.com/decision/19991319177F3d1142_11184#fid1


25/28

:igh Contracting 5art%+ nor that China isa :igh Contracting 5art%" #hus+ the sole

0uestion !resented is whether China's status as a :igh Contracting 5art% is sufficient to

$ind #aiwan to the ter&s of the Convention"

China signed the Convention with the declaration that the Convention 2shall of course

a!!l% to the entire Chinese territor% including #aiwan"2 * Christo!her N" hawcross O

Lenneth 6" eau&ont+Air Law31@ (5eter 6artin et al" eds"+ 4th ed"19@@) (199@su!!le&ent)" 6ingtai's argu&ent on a!!eal largel% consists of the assertion that the

United tates' recognition of China and derecognition of #aiwan re0uire this court to

honor China's declaration that its adherence to the Convention $inds #aiwan" #he

!arties agree that the 0uestion of #aiwan's status+ that is+ whether derecognition

rendered #aiwan $ound $% China's adherence to international agree&ents+ is a

0uestion for the !olitical $ranches+ rather than the udiciar%" #he !arties &erel% dis!utewhat the !olitical $ranches have deter&ined #aiwan's status to $e"

A#he deter&ination of whether China's adherence to the Convention $inds #aiwan

conflates two distinct areas of foreign relations< the effects of foreign sovereignrecognition+ and the status of treaties" It is aDio&atic that 2the conduct of foreign

relations is co&&itted $% the Constitution to the !olitical de!art&ents of the -ederal

=overn&ent [and] that the !ro!riet% of the eDercise of that !ower is not o!en to udicial

review"2 United States v. Pin,17 U"" *A+ ***,*+ * "Ct" 77*+ 8 ."d" @9

(194*) accord Oet!en v. "entral Leather "o.,*4 U"" *9@+ A*+ 8 "Ct" A9+ * ."d"

@* (1918) see also #aiwan v. United States $ist. "t. for the %. $ist. of "al.,1*8 -"d@1*+ @18 (9th Cir"199@) (recogniHing 2the S!ri&ac% of the Decutivein the conduct of

foreign relations' and the Decutive ranch's lead role in foreign !olic%2) (0uoting &irst%at'l "ity (an v. (anco %acional de "u)a,4A U"" @79+ @@+ 9* "Ct" 18A8+ *

."d"*d 4 (19@*))" #hus+ the u!re&e Court has re!eatedl% held that the Constitutionco&&its to the Decutive ranch alone the authorit% to recogniHe+ and to withdraw

recognition fro&+ foreign regi&es" See, e.g., (anco %acional de "u)a v. Sa))atino,@U"" 98+ 41A+ 84 "Ct" 9*+ 11 ."d"*d 8A4 (194) (25olitical recognition is eDclusivel%

a function of the Decutive"2)" 2[B]ecognition of a foreign sovereign conclusivel% $inds

the courts+2 Pin,17 U"" at **+ $ecause deter&ining 2[w]ho is the sovereign+ de

!ureor de facto,of a territor% is not a udicial+ $ut a !olitical 0uestion+2 *ones v. United

States,1@ U"" *A*+ *1*+ 11 "Ct" 8A+ 4 ."d" 91 (189A)" #hus+ whether China is the

sovereign+ de !ureor de facto,of the territor% of #aiwan is a !olitical 0uestion+ and2[o]$ections to the underl%ing !olic% as well as o$ections to recognition are to $e

addressed to the !olitical de!art&ent and not to the courts"2 Pin,17 U"" at **9"i&ilarl%+ 2govern&ental action """ &ust $e regarded as of controlling i&!ortance2 in

deter&ining the status of treaties" (aer v. "arr,9 U"" 18+ *1*+ 8* "Ct" 91+ @

."d"*d (19*) (0uoting #erlinden v. A+es,184 U"" *@A+ *87+ ** "Ct" 484+ 4

."d" 74 (19A*)) see also #hen v. elende-,9* -"d 871+ 874 (9th Cir"199)(recogniHing that whether a treat% re&ains in force after a change in the sovereign

status of one of the signatories is a !olitical 0uestion)" #hus+ courts answer 0uestions
http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/315%20U.S.%20203http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/246%20U.S.%20297http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/128%20F.3d%20712http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/128%20F.3d%20712http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/406%20U.S.%20759http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/376%20U.S.%20398http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/376%20U.S.%20398http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/137%20U.S.%20202http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/369%20U.S.%20186http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/184%20U.S.%20270http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/92%20F.3d%20851http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/315%20U.S.%20203http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/246%20U.S.%20297http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/128%20F.3d%20712http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/128%20F.3d%20712http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/406%20U.S.%20759http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/376%20U.S.%20398http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/376%20U.S.%20398http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/137%20U.S.%20202http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/369%20U.S.%20186http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/184%20U.S.%20270http://www.leagle.com/get_cited/92%20F.3d%20851


26/28

regarding the status of treaties following a change in the sovereign status of one of the

relevant entities $% deferring to the !olitical $ranches' understanding of the resulting

o$ligations" See id.(deferring to the deter&ination of the Decutive ranch regarding

the status of a treat% following inga!ore's inde!endence fro& the United Lingdo&)"

-or eDa&!le+ in "lar v. Allen,the u!re&e Court considered whether a 19* treat%

with =er&an% re&ained in force following >orld >ar II+ 2since =er&an%+ as a result ofits defeat and the occu!ation $% the 3llies+ [] ceased to eDist as an inde!endent national

or international co&&unit%"2 1 U"" 7A+ 714+ @ "Ct" 141+ 91 ."d" 1 (194@)"

BecogniHing that this !resented a !olitical 0uestion+ the Court si&!l% considered

whether the actions and state&ents of the 2!olitical de!art&ents2 evinced an

understanding that the treat% re&ained in force" See id.i&ilarl% here+ we loo to the

state&ents and actions of the 2!olitical de!art&ents2 in order to answer whether+following recognition of China and derecognition of #aiwan+ China's adherence to the

>arsaw Convention $inds #aiwan"

B3s this court has noted+ 2[w]hen the United tates esta$lished relations with [China] in19@9+ it severed di!lo&atic relations with #aiwan"2 #aiwan v. United States $ist.

"t.,1*8 -"d at @14"*:owever+ the 5resident's 6e&orandu& effecting this change

acnowledged that+ des!ite the ter&ination of di!lo&atic relations with #aiwan+ the

United tates still wished to &aintain 2co&&ercial+ cultural and other relations with the

!eo!le of #aiwan without official govern&ent re!resentation and without di!lo&atic

relations"2President's e+orandu+ for All $epart+ents and Agencies /elations With

the People on #aiwan,re!rinted in 19@9 U""C"C"3"N" + @7" #hus+ the 5resident's

6e&orandu& directed that 2[e]Disting international agree&ents and arrange&ents in

force $etween the United tates and #aiwan shall continue in force """"2 0d.

Congress+ in turn+ for&aliHed this continuing relationshi! $% enacting the #aiwanBelations 3ct+ ** U""C" RR A1,1 (23ct2)+ 2to !rovide a structure for Sthe

continuation of co&&ercial+ cultural+ and other relations $etween the !eo!le of theUnited tates and the !eo!le on #aiwan"'2 #aiwan v. United States $ist. "t.,1*8 -"d at

@14 (0uoting ** U""C" R A1(a)(*))" #he 3ct !rovides thate will not do so" >e caution+ however+ that we do

not inde!endentl% deter&ine the status of #aiwan instead+ we &erel% recogniHe and

defer to the !olitical de!art&ents' !osition that #aiwan is not $ound $% China's

adherence to the >arsaw Convention"

777-or the foregoing reasons+ the >arsaw Convention does not a!!l% to the lost air cargo

in this case and the district court !ro!erl% u!held the li&itation of lia$ilit% in the air

wa%$ill"3--IB6;"
http://www.leagle.com/decision/19991319177F3d1142_11184#fid3http://www.leagle.com/decision/19991319177F3d1142_11184#fid3

the republic of nicaragua v

Documents