Summaries of Judgments, AdNot an official documentrs of the Internationa
l Court of Justice
HAYA DE LATORRECASE
Judgmentof 13June1951
The Hayade la TorrecasebetweenColombiaand Peru, Inits Judgment,theCourtexamines,inthefirstplace,the
withCubaasinterveningParty, wasbroughtbeforetheCourt admissibilityofthe CubanGovernment's intervention. That
underthefollowingcircumstances: the CourtconfersonStatespartiestoaconvention,the inter-
ln a J~~~~~~~ deliveredon be^ ;!oh, 1950, the pretationof whichis:inissue,hadfilec'aDeclarationofInter-
cour taddefinedthelegalrelationsbetweellcolombiaand ventioninwhichitsetforthitsviewsc mcernintheintep-
Peruinregardtoquestionswhichthose state sadsubmitted tationof the HavanaConvention.Th, :overnmentof Peru
toit,concerningdiplomaticasylumingenera,land,inpartic- contendedthat the Interventionwasinadmissible:thatitwas
,,la, the asylumgranteon J~~~ 3rd/4th, 1949,by the Out time, and was inthe natureofan attempt a
ColombianAmbassadorat Limato VictorF.aulHap de la thirdStateto a,gainsttheJudgrrentofNovember20th.
Torre;theCourthadfoundthat, inthiscase,theasylumhad In regad to thatpoilit,the Courtobscrvesthat everyinter-
notbeengrantedin withtheConlrentionon~s~- ventionisincidentaltotheproceedingsinacase,that,conse-
lumsignedat H~~~~ in 1928.~ft~t~he~ ~ d ~ :ha~db~en quently*a declaratiollfiledas an interventiononlyacquires
uponvhertoputanendtoteaprotectionimproperlygrantedbyd that characterifitactuallyrelatestothe subject-matterofthe
surrenderingtherefugee.Colombiarepliedthattodeliverthe pendingproceedings-Thesubjectmatterofthepresentcase
refugee would be not only to disregard the ~~d~~~~~of relatestoa newquesl<on-the surrenderofHayadelaTorre
be^ 20th,butalsoto violatetheH~~~~~Convention; to the Peruvianauthorities-which wascompletely outside
andsheinstitutedproceedingsbeforethecour by an~~~li- the Submissionsof tliepartiesand was inconsequencenot
cationwhichwasfiledonDecember 13th.1950. decidedbytheJudgmentofNovember20th.Inthesecircum-
stances, the point which it is necessary to ascertain is
In her Application,and duringthe ~roceclure,Colombia whethertheobjectoftheinterventionistheinterpretationof
askedthe Courtto state inwhat mannerthe Judgmentof the Havana Conventionin regard to the question whether
November20th, lg50* was to be executed*and, further- Colombiaisunderanobligationtosurrendertherefugee:as,
more, to declarethat, in executingthatJudgment,shewas accordingtothereprc:sentatiof theGovernmentof Cuba,
also asked the Court to state in whatru,forColombia theinterventionwasbased on thefactthatitwasnecessaryto
shouldexecutethe Judgment. Shefurtherasked, first, the interpreta newaspect oftheHavanaConvention,theCourt
mjectionofthe Colombian SubmissionrequestingtheCourt decidedto admitit.
tostate,solely,that shewasnot boundto sunrender Hade Courtgoes on to discussthe merits.observes that
la Torre, and, secondly,for a declarationthat the asylumbothpartiesareseekil%toobtainadecisionastothe manner
ought tohave ceasedimmediatelyafterthe ,deliveryof the in whichtheJudgmentofNovember 20this tobeexecuted.
Judgmentof November20&, 1950,andthatit mustin any ThatJudgment, decidingOn the the
case cease forthwith,in order thatPeruvijustice might confined itself toefining the legal relations which the
resumeitsnormalcoursewhichhadbeen suspended. HavanaConventionhadestablished,inregardtothismatter.
betweenthe parties;tdid notgiveanydirectionstothepar-
InitsHayadelaTorrejudgment theCourttieclared: ties, andonlyentailedforthemtheobligationofcompliance
bya unanimousvotethat it isnotpartoftheCourt'sjudi- withtheJudgment.HIowevert,he formin whichthe parties
cialfunctionto m&e a choiceamongthedifferentwaysin haveformulatedtheirsubmissionsshowsthattheydesirethat
whichtheasylummaybebroughttoanend; theCourtshouldmakt:achoiceamongthevariouscoursesby
thirteevotes agsinstOne,that Colomhiais underno whichthe asylummight beterminated. These courses are
obligationto surrenderHaya de la Torreto the Peruvian conditionedbyfaas lmdpossibilitieswhichto a verylage
authorities; extent, the pmies alonein a toappm,iatc. A
choice among themcould not be based onlegal consider-
bya unanimousvotethatthe asylum oughttohaveceased ations, but only on groundsof practicabilityor of political
and must be brought anend.gmentofovemker20th, 1950, expediency. Consequently, itis not part of the Court's
judicialfunctionto makesucha choice,and itis impossible
Continued on next pagefor it to give effectto the submissionsof the partiesin thitiesintheirprosecutionofa politicalrefugee,and wouldbe
respect. greatlyexceedingthefindingsoftheCourtinitsJudgmentof
Asregardsthe surrenderoftherefugee,thisisanewques- November 20th; such assistancecouldnotbe admittedwith-
tion,whichwasonly brought before the CourtbytheAppli- outanexpressprovisiontothateffectinthe Convention.As
cationofDecember13th. 1950,and whichwas notdecided concernsHayade la Torre,the Court declaredin its Judg-
by the Judgment of Novelmnbe2 r0th. Accordingto the mentofNovember20th.ontheonehand, thatithadnotbeen
HavanaConvention,diplomilticasylum,which is a provi- provedthat,beforeasylumwasgranted,hehad beenaccused
sional measure for the temprary protection of political of comlnoncrimes;ontheotherhand, it foundthatthe asy-
offenders,mustbe terminatet.ssoonaspossible. However, lumhaclnotbeengrantedtohiminconformitywiththe Con-
theConventiondoesnotgive acompleteanswertothe ques- vention.Consequently,andinview oftheforegoingconsid-
tionof the mannerin which zrnasylum mustbe terminated. erations, Colombiais not obliged to surrender him to the
Astopersonsguiltyofcommoncrimes, itex:pressly requires Peruvianauthorities.
thatthey besurrenderedtoth,~l:ocalauthoriti~F.orpolitical Finally, theCourt examines thePeruvian submissions
offendersit prescribes thegrant of a safe-conductfor the which <:olombiaaskedittodismiss,concerningthetermina-
departurefromthe country. Ebuta safe-conductcan onlybe tion of the asylum.The Court statesthat theJudgment of
claimedifthe asylumhasbeenregularly grantedandrnain- November20th, declaringthat theasylumwas irregularly
tainedandiftheterritorialStiitehasrequired thattherefugee grantedentailsa legalconsequence,namely, thatof putting
shouldbesentoutofthecountry.Forcasesinwhichthe asy- anend tothisirregularitybyterminatingtheasylum.Peruis
lumhas not been regularlygrantedand wherethe:territorial thereforelegally entitled to claimthat the asylum should
State hasmade no such demnnd,the Convention makes no cease.However,Peruhasaddedthattheasylumshouldcease
provision.Tointerpretthissilenceasimposirrganobligation "in orderthat Peruvianjusticemayresumeitsnormalcourse
to surrender the refugeewolilldbe repugnantto the spirit whichhasbeen suspended."Thisaddition,whichappearsto
whichanimatedtheConventioninconformitywiththe Latin involvethe indirectclaim forthe surrenderof the-rkfugee,
Americantraditioninregard toasylum, atraclitionin accord- cannot beacceptedbytheCourt.
ancewith which a politicalrr:fugeeoughtnot to be surren- The Court thus arrives atthe conclusionthat the asylum
dered. There isnothingin drattraditionto !indicatethat an mustcease,but thatColombiaisnotboundto dischargeher
exceptionshouldbemadeincaseofanirregularasylum.Ifit obligationby surrenderingthe refugee.There is no contra-
had beenintendedto abando~tlhattradition, an expresspro- dictionbetweenthese twofindings,sincesurrenderis notthe
visiontothateffectwouldhare beenneeded.The silenceof only mannerinwhichasylummaybeterminated.
the Conventionimplies that:it was intendedto leave the Havingthusdefined,inaccordancewiththe HavanaCon-
sions inspiredby considerationsof convenienceor simple- vention,thelegalrelationsbetweenthepartieswithregardto
politicalexpediency. thematters referredto it, theCourt declaresthatithas com-
pleted itstask. Itis unableto giveanypracticaladviceasto
It is truethat, in principle,asylumcannotbe opposedto thevariouscourseswhichmightbefollowedwitha viewto
the operationof the nationalljustice, and tlie safetywhich terminating theasylum, since,by sodoing, itwoulddepart
arises from asylumcannot be construed IS a protection fromitsjudicialfunction.But itcanbeassumedthatthepar-
againstthelawsandthejuriscliction othelegallyconstituted ties, now that their mutual legalrelationsavebeen made
tribunals.TheCourtdeclaredthisinits Judgmentof Novem- clear,willbeabletofindapracticalandsatisfactorysolution,
ber20th.Butitwould be anelltirelydifferentthingtosaythat seekingguidancefrom thoseconsiderationsofcourtesy and
thereisanobligationtosurrenderapersonaccusedofapolit- good naighbourlinesswhich, in matters of asylum, have
ical offence because thesy:lumwas irregular.'Ibatwould alwaysheld a prominent placein the relationsbetweenthe
amountto renderingpositiveassistancetothe local authori- Latin AmericanRepublics.
Summary of the Judgment of 13 June 1951