New challenges for the American lawyer in international human rights

Washington and Lee Law Review, Summer 1998 by Karamanian, Susan L

15. See Dorothy Q. Thomas, Advancing Rights Protection in the United States: An Internationalized Advocacy Strategy, 9 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 15, 24 (1996).

16. Louis Henkin, Human Rights and State "Sovereignty," 25 GA. J. INT'L & COMP. L. 31, 38 & n.28 (1996) (citing RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF THE FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW OF THE UNITED STATES 702 cmt. n (1987) [hereinafter RESTATEMENT]).

17. Id. at 38. In a similar vein, the International Court of Justice has written that these norms, which include "principles and rules concerning the basic rights of the human person,"

are the concern of all states; "they are obligations erga omnes." Barcelona Traction, Light & Power Co. (Belg. v. Spain), 1970 I.C.J. 4, 32 (Feb. 5).

18. Siderman de Blake v. Republic of Argentina, 965 F.2d 699, 714 (9th Cir. 1992) (citing Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 23, 1969, art. 53, 1155 U.N.T.S. 332, 8 I.L.M. 679), cert. denied 507 U.S. 1017 (1993); Committee of U.S. Citizens in Nicaragua v. Reagan, 859 F.2d 929, 940 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (same); National Coalition Gov't of Burma v. UNOCAL, Inc., 176 F.R.D. 329, 345 n.l8 (C.D. Cal. 1997) (same). 19. David F. Klein, A Theory for the Application of the Customary International Law of Human Rights by Domestic Courts,13 YALE J. INT'L L. 332, 351 (1988). 20. RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF THE FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW OF THE UNITED STATES 102 cmt. k (1987). 21. Id.

22. Id. 102(2).

23. Statute of International Court of Justice, art. 38(1), 59 Stat. 1055, 1060, 3 Bevans 1179, 1187 (1945).

24. Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F.2d 876, 880 (2d Cir. 1980) (quoting The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677, 700 (1990)). Furthermore,

jurists and commentators. . . by years of labor, research and experience have made themselves peculiarly well acquainted with the subjects of which they treat. Such works are resorted to by judicial tribunals, not for the speculations of their authors concerning what the law ought to be, but for trustworthy evidence of what the law really is.

Id. at 880-81 (quoting The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. at 700). 25. Id at 881.

26. See Richard B. Lillich, The Constitution and International Human Rights, 83 AM. J. INT'L L. 851, 857 (1989).

27. U.N. CHARTER, reprinted in INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS 10.1 (Richard B. Lillich ed., 2d ed. 1990) [hereinafter INSTRUMENTS]. 28. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217A(III), U.N. GAOR, 3d Sess., U.N. Doc. A/810 (1948).

29. Henkin, supra note 16, at 34.

30. U.N. CHARTER art. 1(3), reprinted in INSTR S, supra note 27, at 10.2. 31. Id. art. 55(c), reprinted in INSTRUMENTS, supra note 27, at 10.5. Article 56 provides that Member States "pledge themselves to take joint and separate action in cooperation with the Organization for the achievement of the purposes set forth in Article 55." Id. art. 56, reprinted in INSTRUMENTS, supra note 27, at 10.5.

32. Thomas Buergenthal, International Human Rights Law and Institutions: Accomplishments and Prospects, 63 WASH. L. REv. 1, 6 (1988). Professor Buergenthal also notes that the Universal Declaration "ranks with the Magna Carta, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, and the American Declaration of Independence as a milestone in mankind's struggle for freedom and human dignity." Id.; see Henkin, supra note 16, at 40 n.31 (stating that Universal Declaration "is perhaps the most important document, excepting only the U.N. Charter"). 33. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, supra note 28, art. 1. 34. Id. arts. 3-5, 9, 12, 18-20. 35. Id. arts. 23, 26.