
	Where results make sense

Topic: Nicaragua v United States

Related Topics

International Court of Justice

LaGrand case

ICJ

International law

History of Nicaragua

International Criminal Court

Nicaraguan Campaign Medal

List of international public law topics

World Court

Jeane Kirkpatrick

Sandinista National Liberation Front

Customary international law

United Nations Charter

United Nations

Noether current

In the News (Sat 28 Nov 09)

Northern Trust

Marvin Harrison

Peter Chernin

Gary Locke

Match Play

Penelope Cruz

Mickey Rourke

AR Rahman

Danny Boyle

Hugh Jackman

	Nicaragua v. United States - Definition, explanation
		The United States of America was a case heard by the International Court of Justice in which it was alleged that the United States had violated international law by supporting Contra guerrillas in their war against the Nicaraguan government and by mining Nicaragua's harbors.
		The United States argued that the Court did not have jurisdiction, with U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick dismissing the Court as a "semi-legal, semi-juridical, semi-political body which nations sometimes accept and sometimes don't." The court disputed such claims, although among the judges themselves significant debate centered around the court's powers and jurisdictions.
		Nicaraguas dealings with the armed opposition in El Salvador, although it might be considered a breach with the principle of non-intervention and the prohibiton of use of force, did not constitute "an armed attack" which is the wording in art.
	www.calsky.com /lexikon/en/txt/n/ni/nicaragua_v__united_states.php (552 words)

	Nicaragua / ICJ :: ICJ Judgement 27 June 1986
		The United States is under an obligation to "respect" the Conventions and even to "ensure respect" for them, and thus not to encourage persons or groups engaged in the conflict in Nicaragua to act in violation of the provisions of Article 3.
		In the instant case, however, the United States, while invoking the multilateral treaty reservation to challenge the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court, had in the meantime persistently claimed that the multilateral treaties, which constitute the very basis of its reservation, should alone be applied to the case in dispute.
		Nicaragua had also joined with the Salvadoran rebels in the organization, planning and training for their acts of insurgency, and had provided them with command-and-control facilities, bases, communications and sanctuary which enabled the leadership of the Salvadoran rebels to operate from Nicaraguan territory.
	www.sandinovive.org /17b/JugmntJune27-86.htm (6290 words)

	Nicaragua v. US -- Merits
		The United States remains firmly of the view, for the reasons given in its written and oral pleadings that the Court is without jurisdiction to entertain the dispute, and that the Nicaraguan application of 9 April 1984 is inadmissible.
		Nicaragua claims furthermore that certain military or paramilitary operations against it were carried out, not by the contras, who at the time claimed responsibility, but by persons in the pay of the United States Government and under the direct command of United States personnel, who also participated to some extent in the operations.
		Nicaragua dates the beginning of the activity of the United States to "shortly after" 9 March 1981, when, it was said, the President of the United States made a formal presidential finding authorizing the CIA to undertake "covert activities" directed against Nicaragua.
	www.gwu.edu /~jaysmith/nicus3.html (17166 words)

	SUMMARY: Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) (Merits) ...
		In response to an argument of the United States, the Court considers that the divergence between the content of the customary norms and that of the treaty law norms is not such that a judgment confined to the field of customary international law would not be susceptible of compliance or execution by the parties.
		In the instant case, however, the United States, while invoking the multilateral treaty reservation to challenge the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court, had in the meantime persistently claimed that the multilateral treaties, which constitute the very basis of its reservation, should alone be applied to the case in dispute.
		Nicaragua's intervention in El Salvador in support of the Salvadoran insurgents was, Judge Schwebel held, admitted by the President of Nicaragua, affirmed by Nicaragua's leading witness in the case, and confirmed by a "cornucopia of corroboration".
	www.lossless-audio.com /usa/1067814854.htm (8485 words)

	Nicaraugua v US
		The United States remains firmly of the view, for the reasons given in its written and oral pleadings that the Court is without jurisdiction to entertain the dispute, and that the Nicaraguan application of 9 April 1984 is inadmissible.
		Nicaragua claims furthermore that certain military or paramilitary operations against it were carried out, not by the contras, who at the time claimed responsibility, but by persons in the pay of the United States Government, and under the direct command of United States personnel, who also participated to some extent in the operations.
		Nicaragua dates the beginning of the activity of the United States to 'shortly after' 9 March 1981, when, it was said, the President of the United States made a formal presidential finding authorizing the CIA to undertake 'covert activities' directed against Nicaragua.
	lawofwar.org /nicaraugua_v_us.htm (16724 words)

	Nicaragua v. United States: Definition and Links by Encyclopedian.com
		The United States of America, was a judgement by the International Court of Justice that the United States had violated international law by supporting Contra guerrillas in their war against the Nicaraguan government, and by mining Nicaragua's harbors.
		The United States refused to abide by the Court's decision, even though it was obligated to do so under international law.
		The United States then refused to participate in the merits phase of the proceedings, but the Court found that the US refusal did not prevent it from deciding the case.
	www.encyclopedian.com /ni/Nicaragua-v.-United-States.html (313 words)

	CASE CONCERNING MILITARY AND PARAMILITARY ACTIVITIES IN AND AGAINST NICARAGUA
		On 9 April 1984 the Ambassador of the Republic of Nicaragua to the Netherlands filed in the Registry of the Court an Application instituting proceedings against the United States of America in respect of a dispute concerning responsibility for military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua.
		The dispute before the Court between Nicaragua and the United States concerns events in Nicaragua subsequent to the fall of the Government of President Anastasio Somoza Debayle in Nicaragua in July 1979, and activities of the Government of the United States in relation to Nicaragua since that time.
		Nicaragua claims furthermore that certain military or paramilitary operations against it were carried out, not by the contras, who at the time claimed responsibility, but by persons in the pay of the United States 22 Government, and under the direct command of United* States personnel, who also participated to some extent in the operations.
	www.angelfire.com /la3/malagar/Nicaragua.htm (6865 words)

	Spartanburg SC \| GoUpstate.com \| Spartanburg Herald-Journal
		He testified about Nicaragua economic damage, including the loss of fuel as a result of the attack in the oil storage facilities at Corinto, the damage to Nicaragua's commerce as a result of the mining of its ports, and other economic damage.
		The United States had signed the treaty accepting the Court's decision as binding, but with the exception that the court would not have the power to hear cases based on multilateral treaty obligations unless it involved all parties to the treaty affected by that decision or the United States specially agreed to jurisdiction.
		The United States of America, by directing or authorizing over Rights of Nicaraguan territory, and by the acts imputable to the United States referred to [2], has acted, against the Republic of Nicaragua, in breach of its obligation under customary international law not to violate the sovereignty of another State.
	www.goupstate.com /apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=NEWS&template=wiki&text=Nicaragua_v._United_States (2741 words)

	Nicaragua v. United States of America@Everything2.com
		In April of 1984 the government of Nicaragua, led by Daniel Ortega Saavedra, filed case against the United States of America, under President Ronald Reagan, claiming that the actions of the United States were in violation of international law.
		Finally, appraising the United States activity in relation to the criteria of necessity and proportionality, the Court cannot find that the activities in question were undertaken in the light of necessity, and finds that some of them cannot be regarded as satisfying the criterion of proportionality.
		The Court finds it clearly established that the United States intended, by its support of the contras, to coerce Nicaragua in respect of matters in which each State is permitted to decide freely, and that the intention of the contras themselves was to overthrow the present Government of Nicaragua.
	www.everything2.com /index.pl?node_id=1176442 (2014 words)

	Nicaragua v. US
		Nicaragua capitalized on U.S. acceptance of the optional clause to file suit against the United States before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which claimed compulsory jurisdiction.
		The United States also refused to appear before the court during the final hearings on the merits and never recognized the ICJ rulings as binding.
		First was a preliminary ruling on provisional measures (May 10, 1984) calling on the United States to cease all interventions and refusing to dismiss the case.
	www.gwu.edu /~jaysmith/Nicaragua.html (842 words)

	Nicaragua
		The United States was well aware that Nicaragua alleged that its conduct was a breach of international obligations before the present case was instituted; and it is now aware that specific articles of the 1956 Treaty are alleged to have been violated.
		Secondly, it is claimed by the United States that it is fundamental to the jurisprudence of the Court that it cannot determine the rights and obligations of States without their express consent or participation in the proceedings before the Court....
		The allegation, attributed by the United States to Nicaragua, of an ongoing conflict involving the use of armed force contrary to the Charter is said to be central to, and inseparable from, the Application as a whole, and is one with which a court cannot deal effectively without overstepping proper judicial bounds.
	www.law.nyu.edu /kingsburyb/fall03/intl_law/unit2/Nicaragua.html (4516 words)

	SUMMARY: Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) ...
		Since the dispute with Nicaragua, in its opinion, clearly falls within the terms of the exclusion in the declaration of 6 April 1984, it considers that the 1946 Declaration cannot confer jurisdiction on the Court to entertain the case.
		The Governments of the United States of America and the Republic of Nicaragua should each of them ensure that no action is taken which might prejudice the rights of the other Party in respect of the carrying out of whatever decision the Court may render in the case.
		Nevertheless, claims that Nicaragua is violating their security may properly be made by the United States and acted upon by the Court, for the rights at issue in the case "do not depend", Judge Schwebel held, "upon narrow considerations of privity to a dispute before the Court.
	library.lawschool.cornell.edu /cijwww/icjwww/idecisions/isummaries/inussummary840510.htm (1621 words)

	bailey83221: Appraisals Of The ICJ's Decision: Nicaragua V. United States (Merits).
		In the case of the World Court, it is the community of nations that confers that authority and under the Court's Statute, its jurisdiction is conferred solely by the consent of the nations whose disputes it is called to adjudicate.
		United States and the actions of both the Court and the United States Government in connection with it are of special importance to those who are concerned with international law.
		In April 1984, the United States received information that the Government of Nicaragua was about to file a claim against it in the International Court concerning the role of the United States in the ongoing Nicaraguan civil war.
	bailey83221.livejournal.com /57749.html (783 words)

	Nicaragua Network
		The Nicaragua Network is a national network of local committees which has worked for 27 years to change US government policy toward Nicaragua.
		With the exception of U.S. Ambassador Paul Trivelli and the International Republican Institute (IRI), all the persons interviewed believed that the government of the United States had gone beyond what was appropriate and correct in its involvement in the electoral process.
		We heard many times that the United States has intervened continuously in Nicaragua but that the current electoral interference is particularly heavy-handed.
	www.commondreams.org /news2006/0711-10.htm (868 words)

	Use of U.S. Forces Abroad
		United States naval forces suppressing piracy landed on the northwest coast of Cuba and burned a pirate station.
		Four United States vessels demonstrated and landed various parties (one of 200 marines and sailors) to discourage piracy and the slave trade along the Ivory coast, and to punish attacks by the natives on American seamen and shipping.
		The United States intervened to protect lives and property during a Dominican revolt and sent more troops as fears grew that the revolutionary forces were coming increasingly under Communist control.
	www.history.navy.mil /wars/foabroad.htm (8276 words)

	Nicaragua vs. United States at AllExperts
		The Court ruled in Nicaragua's favor, but the United States refused to abide by the Court's decision, on the basis that the court erred in finding that it had jurisdiction to hear the case.
		The United States refused to participate in the merits phase of the proceedings, but the Court found that the US refusal did not prevent it from deciding the case.
		The United States had signed the treaty accepting the Court's decision as binding, but with the exception that the court would not have the power to hear cases based on multilateral treaty obligations unless it involved all parties to the treaty or United States specially agrees to jurisdiction.
	en.allexperts.com /e/n/ni/nicaragua_vs._united_states.htm (656 words)

	Nicaragua (08/07)
		Nicaragua is a constitutional democracy with executive, legislative, judicial, and electoral branches of government.
		Nicaragua maintains an embassy in the United States at 1627 New Hampshire Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20009 (tel.
		Nicaragua also is a member of the Organization of American States (OAS), the Non-aligned Movement (NAM), the International Atomic Energy Commission (IAEA), the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), and the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI).
	www.state.gov /r/pa/ei/bgn/1850.htm (3577 words)

	ASIL Insights: Pre-emptive Action to Forestall Terrorism
		The UN Charter is a treaty binding upon the United States and other UN member states.
		Clearly, the threat of large-scale terrorism with weapons of mass destruction was not foreseen when the Charter was drawn up, and one could argue that the other conditions of the Vienna Convention allowing suspension of a treaty obligation under changed circumstances have been met as well.
		The Court decided in that case that the United States, by supporting and aiding the "Contras" in their attempt to overthrow the Nicaraguan government, had breached its obligation under customary international law not to intervene in the affairs of another State.
	www.asil.org /insights/insigh88.htm (508 words)

	NPR : Observers Warn of U.S. Manipulation in Nicaragua
		There is no doubt that the United States has again become a political player in the country of 5 million.
		"Nicaragua is one of those key countries right now," Meyer says, "that actually has the possibility of perhaps having a left leader in power that would support Chavez, and not as being as supportive to the United States government."
		And as much as the United States might be a boogeyman to the left in Nicaragua, Chavez is hated by the right -- and opponents of Ortega have brought him into the equation, too, citing his influence as a reason not to vote for Ortega.
	www.npr.org /templates/story/story.php?storyId=6423982&ft=1&f=1001 (671 words)

	U.S. - Nicaragua Agreement, 1999
		Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Nicaragua Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Material from the Pre-Hispanic Cultures of the Republic of Nicaragua
		The Government of the United States of America shall offer for return to the Government of the Republic of Nicaragua any material on the Designated List forfeited to the Government of the United States of America.
		The Government of the Republic of Nicaragua agrees that at the end of three years from the effective date of this Agreement, it will inform the Government of the United States of America of steps it has taken toward achieving regional import restriction agreements.
	exchanges.state.gov /culprop/ni99agr.html (588 words)

	20 Years of Women's Human Rights Action \| MADRE: An International Women's Human Rights Organization
		In the summer of 1983, a group of women from Nicaragua's national women's association and the Ministry of Health for the Autonomous Region of the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua extended an invitation to a small group of women in the United States.
		The plaintiffs' testimonies were so moving that Kathy Engel, a young poet-activist in the United States, decided to produce a dramatic reading based on the trial transcript.
		Instead, we have stood united against Bush's war on the world, including his assaults on civil and political rights, women's reproductive health, international law and the priorities of women and families at home and abroad.
	www.madre.org /articles/int/fall03nl.html (2096 words)

	Central Intelligence Agency
		The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is the United States' foreign intelligence agency, responsible for obtaining and analyzing information about foreign governments, corporations, and individuals, and reporting such information to the various branches of the US government.
		In the early 1980s, the CIA funded and armed the Contras in Nicaragua, forces opposed to the Sandinista government in that country, until the Boland Amendment forbade the agency from continuing their support.
		The activities of the CIA have caused considerable political controversy both in the United States and in other countries, often nominally friendly to the United States, where the agency has operated (or been alleged to).
	www.i2osig.org /cia.html (1107 words)

	UNHCR - Search UNHCR
		United States of America - Justice at Last or More of the Same?Detentions and Trials after Hamdan v.
		In March the Jewish community established the Israelite Community of Nicaragua with a board of directors.
		by that provision was interpreted by the International Court of Justice in Nicaragua v.
	www.unhcr.org /cgi-bin/texis/vtx/home?id=search&results=refworld&sort=fulldate&skip=10&query=nicaragua (321 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)