Universal-MigrationHRlaw-PG-no-6-Publications-PractitionersGuide-2014-eng

MIGRATION AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW | 2931. Preliminary requirementsa) Jurisdiction (Temporal, material and territorial)International judicial and quasi-judicial bodies can adjudicate on anyalleged violation according to the law subject to their jurisdiction. Thisconcept is not to be confused with the “competence” of a court or tribunalto hear a particular case. In international law, jurisdiction of aninternational body equates with the reach of international responsibilityof a State. It divides, therefore, into three categories: temporal jurisdiction(jurisdiction ratione temporis—concerning the period of timewithin which the State is bound by the international obligation); materialjurisdiction (jurisdiction ratione materiae—concerning the limits ofthe subject-matter of the State obligation), and territorial jurisdiction(jurisdiction ratione loci—concerning the territorial reach of the State’sresponsibility).i) Temporal jurisdiction (“ratione temporis”)The basic principle of international law is that an international mechanismhas jurisdiction to adjudicate on alleged violations of internationallaw that occurred after the obligation to respect the obligation enteredinto force for the State concerned. 1250 This principle applies equally tointernational human rights mechanisms, so that they have jurisdictiononly over facts or acts that arose only after the entry into force of therelevant treaty for the State Party. 1251However, the principle applies differently to different situations:• Instantaneous fact/act: the simplest situation occurs when thefact or act to be contested is an instantaneous one. In this case,it suffices to check whether the act occurred before or after theentry into force of the relevant treaty; 1252• Continuous fact/act: when the breach of the obligation has acontinuing character, then the wrongful fact or act continues untilthe situation of violation is ended. Examples include enforced disappearancesor arbitrary detentions, when the person continuesto be disappeared (his whereabouts continue to be unknown) ordetained even after the entry into force of the treaty, regardless1250 See, Article 13, ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility. See, inter alia, Island of Palmas(Netherlands/USA), UNRIAA, vol. II (Sales No. 1949.V.1), p. 829, at p. 845 (1928); Affairedes navires Cape Horn Pigeon, James Hamilton Lewis, C.H. White et Kate and Anna, UNRIAA,vol. IX (Sales No. 59.V.5), p. 66, at p. 69 (1902). See also, Northern Cameroons (Cameroonv. United Kingdom), ICJ, Preliminary Objections, 2 December 1963, ICJ Reports 1963, p. 15,at p. 35; Certain Phosphate Lands in Nauru (Nauru v. Australia), ICJ, Preliminary Objections,26 June 1992, ICJ Reports 1992, p. 240, at pp. 253–255, paras. 31–36.1251 See, X. v. Germany, ECommHR, Application No. 1151/61, Recuil des decisions, p. 119 (1961).1252 See, Article 14.1, ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility.