Resolución de Naciones Xuníes

Una resolución de Naciones Xuníes ye una declaración formal adoptada por un organismu de la ONX. Cualquier organismu deliberativo puede emitir resolvimientos. Sicasí, na práutica la mayoría de resolvimientos emitir el Conseyu de Seguridá o l'Asamblea Xeneral. El calter d'estes disposiciones puede ser o non venceyante pa los Estaos miembros, en función de qué organismu la emita y baxu qué capítulu o artículu de la Carta invóquese.

 Resolvimientos de l'Asamblea Xeneral 
Dellos resolvimientos de l'Asamblea Xeneral, como les qu'afecten a cuestiones presupuestaries, asuntos internos o instrucciones a órganos de rangu inferior, son de xuru venceyantes. Sobre'l valor xurídicu de les demás resolvimientos, sobremanera de les dictaes en virtú de los artículos 10 a 14 de la Carta de les Naciones Xuníes, hubo históricamente un ampliu discutiniu. Sicasí, estos artículos referir a encamientos de l'Asamblea Xeneral, polo que les decisiones fundaes naquellos nun son venceyantes. Sicasí, hai que tener en cuenta que toes los resolvimientos de la ONX, inclusive les non venceyantes, contribúin a la creación de costume internacional (que ye una fonte del Derechu) y de práutiques interpretatives de la Carta de la ONX.

 Resolvimientos del Conseyu de Seguridá 

Según l'artículu 25 de la Carta, los Estaos miembros de la ONX convienen n'aceptar y cumplir les decisiones del Conseyu de Seguridá acordies con esta Carta. Ye aldericáu qué clase de resolvimientos del Conseyu de Seguridá taríen cubiertes por esta disposición: si, n'interpretación lliteral de la Carta, namái los resolvimientos adoptaos sol Capítulu VII de la Carta de la ONX (aición en casu d'amenaces a la paz, quebrantamientos de la paz o actos d'agresión) o si toos elles. La Corte Internacional de Xusticia, nuna opinión consultiva non venceyante (pero que, como toes los resolvimientos de la CIJ, ye xurisprudencia internacionalVease Manuel Díez de Velasco, Instituciones de Derechu Internacional Públicu, Tecnos, Madrid, 1988, vol. I, páx. 98: "Queden entá por precisar delles cuestiones respeuto de la xurisprudencia. D'elles queremos faer referencia, de primeres, a la esistencia dientro de la emitida pola Corte Permanente de Xusticia Internacional y la Corte Internacional de Xusticia de dos clares categoríes dende'l puntu de vista del Estatutu. Refiérome a la distinción ente sentencies y dictames de la Corte, que'l so valor venceyante ye bien distintu. Agora bien, la situación de fechu ye tamién distinta, especialmente pol usu indistintu como precedentes que la Corte vieno faciendo de les sos sentencies y dictames. Ello yá foi señaláu por De Visscher nel so cursu na Academia de L'Haya de 1929 (Visscher, Ch. «Les Avis Consultatifs de la CPJI», en Recueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International de La Haye, 1929, I, n. 26, p. 60) y foi desenvueltu más tarde por Sörensen, responder# por cola doctrina de la mesma Corte Permanente nos asuntos del Lotus y de la Alta Silesia y nel dictame sobre la Comisión Europea del Danubiu. Sörensen sienta l'afirmación categórica de que pa los efeutos d'usu de precedentes la Corte trata de pies d'igualdá sentencies y dictames (Sörensen, M. Les sources du Droit International, Copenhague, 1946, p. 168), afirmación que nos paez n'estremu convincente.") alrodiu de Namibia, de 21 de xunu de 1971, interpretó que, dáu'l compromisu asumíu polos Estaos miembros en virtú del artículu 25 y con base nel artículu 24,2 de la Carta, qu'atribúi al Conseyu de Seguridad poderes xenerales, ésti puede adoptar decisiones obligatories al marxe del Capítulu VII (veanse párrafos 108 y ss. de la opinión, especialmente'l 113). 

Ente la doctrina científica, que les sos opiniones tienen nulu valor xurídicu, nun hai alcuerdu unánime alrodiu de la obligatoriedá de los resolvimientos del Conseyu de Seguridá de la ONX, magar munchos espertos llegal y distintu persones y organismos, n'interpretación lliteral de la Carta, consideren que namái son venceyantes les que s'adopten sol Capítulu VII."Additionally it may be noted that the Security Council cannot adopt binding decisions under Chapter VI of the Charter" (De Hoogh, Andre. Obligations Erga Omnes and International Crimes, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 1996, p. 371)."Council recommendations under Chapter VI are generally accepted as not being legally binding". (Magliveras, Konstantinos D. Exclusion from Participation in International Organisations, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 1999, p. 113).
"Within the framework of Chapter VI the SC has at its disposal an 'escalation ladder' composed of several 'rungs' of wielding influence on the conflicting parties in order to move them toward a pacific solution... however, the pressure exerted by the Council in the context of this Chapter is restricted to non-binding recommendations". (Neuhold, Hanspeter. "The United Nations System for the Peaceful Settlement of International Apuestes", in Vence, Franz & Sucharipa-Behrmann, Lilly. The United Nations, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 2001, p. 66).
"The responsibility of the Council with regard to international peace and security is specified in Chapters VI and VII. Chapter VI, entitled 'Pacific Settlements of Apuestes', provides for action by the Council in case of international apuestes or situations which do not (yet) post a threat to international peace and security. Herein its powers generally confined to making recommendations, the Council can generally not issue binding decisions under Chapter VI". (Schweigman, David. The Authority of the Security Council Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 2001, p. 33).
"Under Chapter VI, the Security Council may only make recommendations but not binding decisions on United Nations members". (Wallace-Bruce, Nii Lante. The Settlement of International Apuestes, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 1998, pp. 47-4 ).
"The UN distinguishes between two sorts of Security Council resolution. Those passed under Chapter Six deal with the peaceful resolution of apuestes and entitle the council to make non-binding recommendations. Those under Chapter Seven give the council broad powers to take action, including warlike action, to deal with “threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression”. Such resolutions, binding on all UN members, were rare during the cold war. But they were used against Iraq after its invasion of Kuwait. None of the resolutions relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict comes under Chapter Seven." Iraq, Israel and the United Nations: Double standards?, The Economist, October 10, 2002.
"There are two sorts of security council resolution: those under 'chapter 6' are non-binding recommendations dealing with the peaceful resolution of apuestes; those under 'chapter 7' give the council broad powers, including war, to deal with 'threats to the peace... or acts of aggression'." Emmott, Bill. If Saddam steps out of line we must go straight to war, The Guardian, November 25, 2002.
"...there is a difference between the Security Council resolutions that Israel breaches (nonbinding recommendations under Chapter 6) and those Iraq broke (enforcement actions under Chapter 7)." Kristof, Nicholas D. Calling the Kettle Black, The New York Times, February 25, 2004.
"There is a hierarchy of resolutions... Chapter 6, under which all resolutions relating to the middle east have been issued, rellates to the pacific resolution of apuestes. Above that, there are the mandatory chapter 7 resolutions, which impose the clearest possible obligations, usually on a single state rather than on two or three states, which is what chapter 6 is there for. Chapter 7 imposes mandatory obligations on states that are completely out of line with international law and policy, and the United Nations has decided in its charter that the failure to meet those obligations may be met by the use of force." Jack Straw. alderiques de la Cámara de los Comunes, Hansard, Column 32, September 24, 2002.
"There is another characteristic of these resolutions which deserves a mention, and that is that they are under chapter 7 of the United Nations charter. Chapter 7 has as its heading 'Action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression'. This is the very serious chapter of United Nations rules, regulations, laws and principles, which the United Nations activates when they intend to do something about it. If the United Nations announces under chapter 7 that it intends to do something about a matter and it is not done, that will undermine the authority of the United Nations; that will render it ineffective.

There are many other resolutions under other chapters. Resolution 242 gets a bit of a guernsey here every now and then. Resolution 242 is under chapter 6, not chapter 7. It does not carry the same mandate and authority that chapter 7 carries. Chapter 6 is the United Nations trying to put up resolutions which might help the process of peace and it states matters of principle that are important for the world to take into consideration. Resolution 242 says that Israel should withdraw from territories that it has occupied. It also says that Israel should withdraw to secure and recognised boundaries and that the one is dependent upon the other. Resolution 242 says that, but it is not a chapter 7 resolution." Beazley, Kim, Waiting for blow-back (speech delivered in Parliament on February 4, 2003, The Sydney Morning Herald, February 5, 2003.
"There are several types of resolutions: Chapter 6 resolutions are decisions pursing the Pacific Settlement of Apuestes, and put forward Council proposals on negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, xudicial settlement, resort to regional agencies, and other peaceful means. Chapter 7 resolutions are decisions for Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, involving use of force and sanctions, complete or partial interruption of economic relations, rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic radio and other means of communication and the severance of diplomatic relations. Resolutions passed under Chapter 7 of the Charter are binding on all UN members, who are required to give every assistance to any action taken by the Council, and refrain from giving any assistance to the country against which it is taking enforcement action." Iran dossier crosses the Atlantic: Where to from here? (Microsoft Word document), Greenpeace position paper on Iran.

 Referencies 

 Ver tamién 
 Derechu internacional nel conflictu árabe-israelín

 Enllaces esternos 
 : Asamblea Xeneral, Conseyu de Seguridá y Conseyu Económicu y Social.
 Toes los resolvimientos del Conseyu de Seguridá, clasificaes per años.

Categoría:Organización de les Naciones Xuníes
Categoría:Diplomacia
Categoría:Derechu internacional