International Court of Justice — Jurisdiction — Unilateral application — American Treaty on Pacific Settlement, 1948 (“Pact of Bogotá”)

Treaties — Binding international agreements — Role of unilateral proclamations in establishing existence of an agreed boundary — Whether 1952 Santiago Declaration establishing boundary between Chile and Peru — Treaty interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Articles 31 and 32 — Whether tacit agreement existing between Chile and Peru on their maritime boundary — Role of subsequent treaties in ascertaining tacit agreement — Whether 1954 Special Maritime Frontier Zone Agreement acknowledging existence of tacitly agreed boundary — Whether lighthouse arrangements confirming existence of agreed boundary — Extent of tacitly agreed boundary — Whether fishing and enforcement activities indicating extent of tacitly agreed boundary — Whether developments in law of the sea indicating extent of tacitly agreed boundary — Whether Bákula Memorandum indicating extent of tacitly agreed boundary — Starting point of tacitly agreed boundary — 1929 Treaty of Lima — Whether 1930 Mixed Commission determining starting point of maritime boundary — Whether starting point of maritime boundary coinciding with end point of land boundary

Sea — United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982 — Articles 74 and 83 — Customary international law — Maritime boundary delimitation — Single maritime boundary — All-purpose maritime boundary — Territorial sea — Exclusive economic zone — Continental shelf — Three-stage approach — Equidistance — Relevant circumstances — Proportionality — Relevant coast — Relevant area — Tracé parallèle — Arcs of circle — Whether Peru having sovereign rights and jurisdiction in area beyond 200 nautical miles from Chile’s coast but within 200 nautical miles of Peru’s coast

International tribunals — African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights — Jurisdiction — Temporal jurisdiction — Date of entry into force of Protocol to African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1998 — Continuing nature of alleged violations — Subject-matter jurisdiction under Article 3 of Protocol — Personal jurisdiction — Optional Declaration under Article 34(6) of Protocol — Admissibility of application — Exhaustion of local remedies — Whether application filed without undue delay

Human rights — Political rights — Right to non-discrimination — Freedom of association — Right to participate in public affairs — Tanzania barring independent candidates from standing for election to political office — Whether justification for any restrictions on exercise of rights — Relevance of international standards — Whether Tanzania violating Articles 2, 3, 10(2) and 13(1) of African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Human rights — Treaties — Interpretation — African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981, Articles 13 and 60 — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, Article 27 — International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility 2001, Article 32 — Tanzania’s obligations under international law — Whether domestic law justifying non-compliance with international obligations — Whether Tanzania violating Articles 2, 3, 10(2) and 13(1) of African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights — Whether Tanzania having obligation to provide reparation — Obligation under international law to provide adequate reparation where violation of international obligation caused harm — State responsibility — Customary norm — Article 27 of Protocol to Charter

Treaties — Application — Principle of non-retroactivity — African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981 — Protocol establishing the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1998 — Jurisdiction of the Court — Whether extending to acts occurring before entry into force of Protocol — Relationship between substantive rights and obligations and institutional machinery for their enforcement

Damages — Reparations — Claim for damages for violations of African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981 — Pecuniary damages — Non-pecuniary or moral damages — State responsibility — Fundamental international law principle — Obligation to provide adequate reparation where violation of international obligation caused harm — Article 27 of Protocol to Charter — Evidence — Whether sufficient — Whether damage arising from facts of case and violations of Charter — Whether violation of Charter sufficient per se to establish material damage — Whether judgment on merits constituting sufficient reparation

Air — Legal regime of international aviation — Chicago Convention, 1944 — Environmental protection — Rights of State of landing and take-off — Whether extending to regulating aircraft of foreign registration above the high seas and in air space of other States — Whether such regulation required to be based on multinational agreement

Environment — Treaties — Greenhouse gases — Emission allowances — European Union scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading — Inclusion of aviation activities in that scheme through Directive 2008/101/EC — Whether certain international agreements and principles of customary international law could be relied upon to challenge validity of Directive 2008/101/EC — Whether Directive 2008/101/EC contravening Chicago Convention, 1944 — Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1997 — Open Skies Agreement between European Union and United States of America, 2007 — Customary international law

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Union — Treaty to which all European Union States party — Whether binding on European Union — Chicago Convention, 1944

State responsibility — American Convention on Human Rights, 1969 — Obligation to respect rights and domestic legal effects — Articles 1(1) and 2 as basis for international State responsibility — American Convention on Human Rights as lex specialis vis-à-vis general international law — State responsibility for actions and omissions by public authorities and private individuals — International humanitarian law — Article 3 of 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II — Interpretation of American Convention on Human Rights — State obligations to protect civilians in non-international armed conflict

Human rights — Right to life — Right to humane treatment — Right to personal liberty — Obligation to respect rights — American Convention on Human Rights, 1969 — Condition to ensure right to life — Duty to investigate violations of that right — Non-identification of victims as result of massacre and grave lack of compliance with State’s duty to protect — No limitation of victims to those identified — Right to humane treatment of family members — No evidence required of grave impact on emotional well-being — Whether Colombia violating Articles 4, 5 and 7, in relation to Article 1(1) of American Convention on Human Rights

Human rights — Rights of the child — American Convention on Human Rights, 1969, Article 19 — Scope of this right — Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, Articles 6, 37, 38 and 39, and Additional Protocol II to the 1949 Geneva Conventions — Interpretation of American Convention on Human Rights — International corpus juris for child protection — Special vulnerability of children in domestic armed conflict — Whether Colombia violating Article 19, in relation to Article 1(1) of American Convention on Human Rights

Human rights — Right to freedom of movement and residence — Differentiated situation of displaced persons — State obligation of preferential treatment and positive steps to reverse effects — Evolutive interpretation of Article 22(1) of American Convention on Human Rights, 1969 — Right to not be forcefully displaced within a State Party — Whether Colombia violating Article 22, in relation to Article 1(1) of American Convention on Human Rights

Human rights — Right to fair trial and right to judicial protection — American Convention on Human Rights, 1969, Articles 8 and 25 — Restrictive and exceptional scope of military criminal jurisdiction — Assessment of effectiveness of domestic administrative proceedings — Result of administrative proceedings taken into account in reparations — Criteria — Length of criminal proceedings — Complexity — Procedural activity of interested party — Conduct of judicial authorities — Pertinence of criteria depending on circumstances of case — State duty to start investigations promptly and ex officio — Procedural activity of interested parties not decisive if limited as result of threats and displacement — Complexity of case linked to acts and omissions by State — Whether Colombia violating Articles 8 and 25, in relation to Article 1(1) of American Convention on Human Rights

International tribunals — Inter-American Court of Human Rights — Preliminary objections by Colombia — Exhaustion of domestic remedies — American Convention on Human Rights, 1969, Article 46 — Content of preliminary objection tied to merits of case — Loss of “preliminary nature” — Partial acknowledgement of international responsibility — Competence of Court — Judgment on Preliminary Objections — Judgment on Merits, Reparations and Costs

Damages — Reparations — Monetary and other — Colombia to investigate liability of masterminds, direct perpetrators, collaborators and those who acquiesced to massacre — Colombia individually to identify executed and disappeared victims and family members — Colombia to establish mechanism with victim representation for compliance with reparations — Colombia to provide treatment to family members of victims as long as necessary and without cost — Colombia to ensure security conditions for displaced family members and inhabitants to enable their return — Colombia to build a monument in remembrance of massacre — Colombia to implement permanent education programme on human rights and international humanitarian law for Colombian Armed Forces — American Convention on Human Rights, 1969, Article 63(1)

Human rights — Eviction and demolition of housing of Roma community — Whether unlawful and arbitrary interference with one’s home — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, Article 17 — Right to equality before law and equal protection of the law — Article 26 of Covenant — Discrimination on the ground of race or ethnic origin — Article 2 of Covenant

International tribunals — United Nations Human Rights Committee — Jurisdiction — Admissibility — Whether communication admissible — Optional Protocol to Covenant, Article 5(2) — Whether matter being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement — Optional Protocol, Article 2 — Whether information provided by authors sufficient — Whether allegations substantiated — United Nations Human Rights Committee

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Customary international law — South African Constitution — Domestication of international agreements — Application of customary international law — Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1998 — Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act 2002 — Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1984 — Alleged acts of torture committed in Zimbabwe by and against Zimbabwean nationals — Whether South African Police Service having power to investigate — Whether South African police having duty to investigate — Presence of an accused for the purposes of investigation — Universal jurisdiction — Limiting principles — South Africa’s domestic and international powers — Obligations to prevent impunity

International criminal law — Jurisdiction — Universal jurisdiction — Crimes against humanity — Investigation and prosecution — Alleged acts of torture committed in Zimbabwe by and against Zimbabwean nationals — Whether South African Police Service having power and duty to investigate international crimes committed outside of South African territory — Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act 2002

Human rights — Torture — Nature of prohibition of torture — Universal jurisdiction — Duty to investigate — Whether extending to acts committed on the territory of another State by foreign nationals not present in the forum State — The law of South Africa

Diplomatic relations — Special missions — Immunity and inviolability from criminal jurisdiction — Customary international law — State agreeing to receive special mission — Whether customary international law requiring that State secure inviolability and immunity from criminal jurisdiction of members of special mission — Nature of immunity — Whether operation of such immunity restricted to official acts

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Customary international law — Whether domestic constitutional principles providing bar or impediment to a judge giving effect to customary international law — Whether existence of UN Convention on Special Missions, 1969 precluding courts from recognizing a rule of custom on same subject matter — Whether unresolved uncertainties in scope and field of application of customary rule providing a reason for declining to give effect to the rule at common law — Whether recognizing a rule of immunity for members of special missions was inconsistent with Section 134 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988

Treaties — UN Convention on Special Missions, 1969 — Whether UN Convention on Special Missions representing a codification of customary international law regarding special missions

Human rights — Bill of Rights 1689 — Whether recognition of a rule of customary international law granting immunity from criminal prosecution of torture violating Bill of Rights

Comity — Special mission immunity — Whether special mission immunity a matter of law or comity — The law of England