Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in ... - Courses

Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua
(Nicaragua v. United States of America), ICJ Reports 1986.
Facts
a. The United States had at first been supporting the new government after the
fall of Somoza in 1979. By 1981, the US had suspended aid because the US
claimed that the Nicaragua “democratic coalition government” was supporting
guerrillas in El Salvador.
b. Two main armed opposition groups, the Fuerza Democratica Nicaraguense
(FDN) and Alianza Revolucionaria Democratica (ARDE), developed
operating within Honduras and Costa Rica with the alleged covert support of
the US.
c. The Republic of Nicaragua filed an application on April 9, 1984 for
proceedings against the US citing their support for military and paramilitary
activities in and against Nicaragua. These included armed attacks against
Nicaragua, incursions into territorial waters, aerial trespass, indirect and direct
means to coerce the Nicaraguan government, operations involved in mining
Nicaraguan ports, attacks on ports, oil installations, and naval bases.
Additionally, Nicaragua requested a reward of 370,200,000 to cover damages,
including killings of Nicaragua nationals, resulting from violations of
international law.
d. The US first requested that the case be removed from the list. This was
denied by the Court citing that the case would remain on the list until the ICJ
delivered its final judgment. The US refused to attend and the ICJ decided
that it would still decide the case by request of Nicaragua and because the US
only decided not to participate after provisional measures had already been
finished.
e. El Salvador attempted to file a Declaration of Intervention, but the Court
denied the declaration due to lack of relation to the current phase of
proceedings on August 15, 1984.
Questions
a. Does the ICJ have jurisdiction to try this case
b. Did the US violate principles of international law concerning use of force
c. Did the US violate the sovereignty of Nicaragua under general and
customary international law
d. What is the US required to do if they are found guilty of Nicaragua’s
claims
Decisions
a. The ICJ does have jurisdiction to try this case. Under Article 36, paragraph
2of the Vienna Convention, the state affected by the decision of Court on the
dispute under multilateral treaty gives the court its jurisdiction under
definition as a legal dispute. In addition, the US declared acceptance to
jurisdiction. The ICJ also determined that based on the Treaty of Friendship,
Commerce and Navigation between the US and Nicaragua that it did indeed
have jurisdiction.

. The US indeed did violate use of force under international law, as stipulated in
the UN Charter, Art. 2, para. 4, in addition to the General Assembly resolution
2625, “Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly
Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the Charter of
the UN.” The US has violated international law in its numerous attacks on
Nicaraguan territory, including in Puerto Sandino, Corinto, Potosi Naval Base,
San Juan del Sur, and on patrol boats between 1983-84, in addition to its
support of the military and paramilitary forces, and laying of mines in internal
and territorial waters of Nicaragua. This violated the Hague Convention No.
VIII which states that the laying of mines in the internal waters of another
State cannot be done without warning or notification, as it is also a violation
of humanitarian law.
c. The ICJ ruled that the US did jeopardize the right to sovereignty and political
independence as stipulated by general and customary international law. This
especially considered the idea that States should not threaten the territorial
integrity and political independence of any State, in addition to not
intervening in another State’s domestic matters. The US violated this by
training, arming, equipping, financing, and supporting military and
paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua. Additionally, because the US
directed and authorized flights in Nicaraguan territory for the purpose of
interfering with domestic affairs, Nicaragua’s sovereignty was again violated.
This ruling invokes the principle of non-intervention.
d. The ICJ ruled that the US should immediately cease from restricting access to
Nicaraguan ports and requested that they stop laying mines and provide
reparations to Nicaragua for all their breaches of customary international law,
and in violation of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation of
1956. The requested payment by Nicaragua cannot be granted by the ICJ at
this time, however, especially since the US did not appear before the Court.
Principles
a. The key international law principles in this case are sovereignty, political
independence, humanitarian law and use of force.
b. The ICJ used customary and international to determine whether the US had been
acting in violation. Specifically, it cited the UN Charter and The Montevideo
Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, the Charter of the Organization of
American States, the Hague Convention VIII of 1907, and the Treaty of
Friendship, Commerce and Navigation of 1956.
Conclusion
Citing numerous treaties and conventions governing international law, after extensive
analysis, the ICJ ruled that the US had acted in violation of the territorial sovereignty,
political independence principles in addition to use of force and humanitarian law. These
tenets of international law have been violated resulting from US support to the Contra
forces in numerous forms, placing mines in the internal waters of Nicaragua, flying in
their airspace, and attacks on specific locations.

Bibliography
Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua
(Nicaragua v. United States of America), ICJ Reports 1986.
1907. Hague Convention VIII. (18 October 1907).
1933. Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States (26 December 1933).
1945. Charter of the United Nations (24 October 1945).
1948. Charter on the Organization of American States (13 December 1951).
1956. Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation (21 January 1956).
Submitted
Khara Boender, November 19, 2009