Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia |
Texto Completo: | https://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/12364 |
Resumo: | This present paper aims to verify the legality of the Peruvian government unilateral act of withdrawing the invitation to the State of Venezuela to participate at the VIII Summit of the Americas, which took place at Lima, Peru’s capital. For that it was adopted an analytical approach, through the case study method, based on a bibliographical and documental research. Considering the Summit institucionality, as well as the Quebec Declaration of 2001, it was identified three requirements to the legality of such an action: 1) the democratic rupture; 2) the implementation ofconsultations in hemispheric, regional or subregional mechanisms which were existent at the time of the Quebec Declaration; 3) the decision must be taken by the consensus of the Revision and Implementation Summit Group (GRIC) members. In the present case, the action adopted had ballast on a legitimate reason, but it was decided by whom had no competence to do so, usurping the specific and exclusive GRIC’s competence and, with that, turnedinto a conduct that breached the international law |
id |
UNIJ-1_e7b6b61cd1ff81c04bfb517481b7f7c7 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.revistas.unijui.edu.br:article/12364 |
network_acronym_str |
UNIJ-1 |
network_name_str |
Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit?Foi lícito o ato peruano de impedir a participação da Venezuela na VIII Cúpula das Américas?VIII Summit of the AmericasQuebec Declaration of 2001VenezuelaPeruVIII Cúpula das AméricasDeclaração de Québec 2001VenezuelaPeruThis present paper aims to verify the legality of the Peruvian government unilateral act of withdrawing the invitation to the State of Venezuela to participate at the VIII Summit of the Americas, which took place at Lima, Peru’s capital. For that it was adopted an analytical approach, through the case study method, based on a bibliographical and documental research. Considering the Summit institucionality, as well as the Quebec Declaration of 2001, it was identified three requirements to the legality of such an action: 1) the democratic rupture; 2) the implementation ofconsultations in hemispheric, regional or subregional mechanisms which were existent at the time of the Quebec Declaration; 3) the decision must be taken by the consensus of the Revision and Implementation Summit Group (GRIC) members. In the present case, the action adopted had ballast on a legitimate reason, but it was decided by whom had no competence to do so, usurping the specific and exclusive GRIC’s competence and, with that, turnedinto a conduct that breached the international lawO presente estudo tem por objetivo analisar a legalidade do ato unilateral do governo peruano de retirar o convite ao Estado da Venezuela para participar da VIII Cúpula das Américas realizada em Lima, capital do Peru. Para tanto foi adotada uma abordagem analítica, por meio do método de estudo de caso, valendo-se de pesquisa bibliográfica e documental. Com base na institucionalidade do processo de Cúpula, bem como na Declaração de Quebec de 2001, foram identificados três requisitos para a legalidade de tal ação: 1) a ruptura democrática; 2) realização de consultas, mediante um dos mecanismos hemisféricos, regionais e sub-regionais existentes à época da Declaração de Quebec; 3) decisão tomada pelo consenso dos integrantes do Grupo de Revisão e Implementação da Cúpula – GRIC. No caso em tela, a medida adotada tinha lastro em motivo idôneo, porém foi decidida por quem não tinha a competência para fazê-lo, usurpando a competência específica e exclusiva do GRIC e, com isso, transformou-se em conduta que infringiu o Direito Internacional.EDITORA UNIJUI2022-11-23info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/1236410.21527/2317-5389.2022.20.12364Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia; v. 10 n. 20 (2022): REVISTA DIREITOS HUMANOS E DEMOCRACIA; e123642317-5389reponame:Revista Direitos Humanos e Democraciainstname:Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI)instacron:UNIJUIporhttps://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/12364/7184Copyright (c) 2022 Revista Direitos Humanos e Democraciahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCavalcanti, Igor de Holanda Weberbauer, Paul Hugo2022-11-23T17:53:03Zoai:ojs.revistas.unijui.edu.br:article/12364Revistahttps://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/oai2317-53892317-5389opendoar:2022-11-23T17:53:03Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia - Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit? Foi lícito o ato peruano de impedir a participação da Venezuela na VIII Cúpula das Américas? |
title |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit? |
spellingShingle |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit? Cavalcanti, Igor de Holanda VIII Summit of the Americas Quebec Declaration of 2001 Venezuela Peru VIII Cúpula das Américas Declaração de Québec 2001 Venezuela Peru |
title_short |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit? |
title_full |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit? |
title_fullStr |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit? |
title_sort |
Was the Peruvian state act of impeding Venezuela’s assistance to the VIII Summit of the Americas licit? |
author |
Cavalcanti, Igor de Holanda |
author_facet |
Cavalcanti, Igor de Holanda Weberbauer, Paul Hugo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Weberbauer, Paul Hugo |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Cavalcanti, Igor de Holanda Weberbauer, Paul Hugo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
VIII Summit of the Americas Quebec Declaration of 2001 Venezuela Peru VIII Cúpula das Américas Declaração de Québec 2001 Venezuela Peru |
topic |
VIII Summit of the Americas Quebec Declaration of 2001 Venezuela Peru VIII Cúpula das Américas Declaração de Québec 2001 Venezuela Peru |
description |
This present paper aims to verify the legality of the Peruvian government unilateral act of withdrawing the invitation to the State of Venezuela to participate at the VIII Summit of the Americas, which took place at Lima, Peru’s capital. For that it was adopted an analytical approach, through the case study method, based on a bibliographical and documental research. Considering the Summit institucionality, as well as the Quebec Declaration of 2001, it was identified three requirements to the legality of such an action: 1) the democratic rupture; 2) the implementation ofconsultations in hemispheric, regional or subregional mechanisms which were existent at the time of the Quebec Declaration; 3) the decision must be taken by the consensus of the Revision and Implementation Summit Group (GRIC) members. In the present case, the action adopted had ballast on a legitimate reason, but it was decided by whom had no competence to do so, usurping the specific and exclusive GRIC’s competence and, with that, turnedinto a conduct that breached the international law |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-11-23 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/12364 10.21527/2317-5389.2022.20.12364 |
url |
https://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/12364 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.21527/2317-5389.2022.20.12364 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/12364/7184 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
EDITORA UNIJUI |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
EDITORA UNIJUI |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia; v. 10 n. 20 (2022): REVISTA DIREITOS HUMANOS E DEMOCRACIA; e12364 2317-5389 reponame:Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia instname:Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI) instacron:UNIJUI |
instname_str |
Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI) |
instacron_str |
UNIJUI |
institution |
UNIJUI |
reponame_str |
Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia |
collection |
Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia - Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808845057544945664 |