The special jurisdiction for peace in Colombia: possible International conflicts of jurisdiction
This research discusses the issues of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace in Colombia regarding its international jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, and applicable law to its proceedings will be discussed in order to identify the scenarios where the SJP could com...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=7730456 |
| Source: | Jurídicas, ISSN 1794-2918, Vol. 17, Nº. 2, 2020, pags. 29-52 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
This research discusses the issues of
the Special Jurisdiction for Peace in
Colombia regarding its international
jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction,
personal jurisdiction, and applicable
law to its proceedings will be discussed
in order to identify the scenarios where
the SJP could come across a forum
conflict. Thus, the scope of jurisdiction
of the International Criminal Court (ICC),
the application of the complementary
principle, amnesty recognition in foreign
forums, universal jurisdiction, and
extradition will be studied vis-à-vis the
SJP. More importantly, this paper will
help to understand the relation between
the SJP and foreign forums regarding
res judicata and judgment recognition.
The principal objective of this paper is
to identify in which scenarios the SJP
would come across with an international
conflict of jurisdiction. Methodologically,
this research draws on both theoretical
and analytical methods. It refers to both
domestic and international law, and
case-law to determine the applicable
legal framework to the SJP. By the same
token, it analyzes in which scenarios
conflicts of jurisdiction issues would arise
and how these issues could undermine
SJP’s effectiveness. In short, this paper
concludes that the SJP has overlapping
jurisdiction with the ICC. Likewise,
it draws upon the idea that foreign
governments could instate parallel
proceeding should they find that amnesty
and pardon in Colombia are not grounds
for dismissing criminal charges or civil
liability lawsuits in their own jurisdiction. |
|---|