ASYLUM CASE (COLOMBIA

VS PERU)
INTL 5530: Issues in International
Law
Webster University Thailand
September 2015

BACKGROUND

1948 by Victor Raul Haya de la Torre

Arrest warrant

Military rebellion

January 3rd 1949

Torre fled to the Colombian Embassy in Lima

Ambassador to grant him asylum

Declared him a political refugee

The Colombian Ambassador requested necessary guaranties for the departure of

Torre

Twice from the Peruvian Government

The Convention of Asylum of February 20th, 1928

The Peruvian Government did not hold itself responsible for the safe-conduct of
Torre

Governments debating the protection of Torre

On April 6th, 1949, the Peruvian Government decided to take this matter to the
International Court of Justice

The two governments drew up an agreement on submitting their ongoing

dispute to the court

SUBJECTED CONVENTIONS
1. The Bolivian Agreement on Extradition of July 18th 1911:

During the Bolivian Congress, the Governments of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador,

Venezuela and Peru signed this agreement to recognize the conformity of
asylum with the principles of international law.

2. The Convention on Asylum at the Sixth International Conference

of American States in 1928 or the Havana Convention of 1928:

The American Republics signed a convention on Asylum ratified by Brazil,

Costa Rica, Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, Cuba, Guatemala, Mexico, El Salvador,
Nicaragua, Panama, Uruguay and the Dominican Republic.

COURT PROCEEDINGS

Diplomatic asylum: the court stated that it is a requirement to gain

consent from the territorial state

In this case, Peru, to the qualification of asylum

Colombia is the state granting asylum and it was important to

establish if the decision was binding on Peru under the treaty of
Havana Convention of 1928, the Montevideo Convention of 1933
and other international law or regional custom

Peru in fact did not ratify to the Montevideo Convention of 1933

Not binding on Peru in addition to the low number of ratifications

by the Peru with other customary international law

The court highlights the fact that Colombia was not qualified to
accuse an offence on Peru based on unilateral and definitive
decision

COURT PROCEEDINGS CONT

Colombia of not been able to prove its statements with consistent

and uniform usage by relevant States

The Havana Convention or customary law stated that only if the

territorial state requests the asylum grating state to send the
person granted asylum outside its national territory, will the
territorial state have the obligation to grant safe passage.

As Peru did not ask Torre to leave its national territory, it does not
have the obligation to provide safe passage for him

COURT PROCEEDINGS CONT

Though the asylum seeker was accused of a common crime, which is political in this
case, under Article 1 of the Havana Convention

Article 2, Asylum may not be granted except in urgent cases and for the period of time
strictly indispensable for the person who has sought asylum to ensure in some other way
his safety.

Torre sought asylum three months after his rebellion, which cancels out the state of
emergency to flee

According to the Havana Convention, asylum cannot be opposed to the operation of

justice.

The State did not have the opportunity to bring Torre to a court of justice as Colombia
granted him asylum

The court addresses this issue by stating that diplomatic asylum should not justify the
operation of legal proceedings

When seeking asylum, the political prisoners must be under the threat of a violence and
disorderly action of irresponsible sections of the population

Not the situation with Torre when he went to Colombian Embassy in Lima

The reasons for asylum did not conform to Article 2(2) of the Havana Convention

FINAL VERDICT

The International Court of Justice rejected

the argument presented by Colombia
Colombia was unqualified to prosecute Peru based on a

unilateral and definitive decision binding on Peru

Due to the inviolability of Torre, Peru was not bound to

provide safe passage

Torre was not committing a common crime which Peru

claimed
Asylum that was granted by Colombian government was

in violation with Paragraph of the Havana Convention.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN ASYLUM

RIGHTS

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948

1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees

The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees

The United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General

Assembly

A refugee must be a person who is persecuted on the basis of

either of the following: caste, race, nationality, political opinion,
membership or participation in any social group or activities and
religion

The basic purpose for these conventions is to make sure the rights
of a refugee are not abused and to maintain a non-refoulement

CONCLUSION

Asylum seekers:

experiencing persecution in their native country

Subjected to torture or witness the death of a loved one due to torture and
murder

The most vulnerable groups in their native countries

Physically, mentally and emotionally victimized

Decision to flee to seek protection.

Not protected in all the cases

Issues of the mistreatment and neglect of the asylum seekers

Are sent to detention centers with children and pregnant women

No legal status in the country-seeking asylum

No right to employment leaving them completely independent from help and

assistance

Not all countries ratify to the Asylum and Refugee related conventions: do not
consider them properly before rejecting their request for a refugee status

Right to asylum important is essential under international law

Avoid further human rights violations and to maintain justice and security for the

BIBLIOGRAPHY

International Court of Justice. (1950). Asylum Case (Colombia v. Peru). Available at:
http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b6f8c.htm

International Court of Justice. (1949). Asylum (Colombia/ Peru) Available at:

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/7/8895.pdf

International Court of Justice. (1949). Agreement of Lima between Colombia and Peru (31 August
1949) and correspondence(French version only) Available at: http://www.icjcij.org/docket/files/7/10848.pdf

International Justice Resource Center. Asylum and Rights of Refugees. Available at:
http://www.ijrcenter.org/refugee-law/

Liberty (Protecting Civil Liberties and Promoting Human Rights). The Right to Seek Asylum.
Available at:
https://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/asylum-and-borders/right-seek-asylum

Ruwanthika Gunaratne and Public International Law. (2008). Asylum Case (Summary). Available
at: https://ruwanthikagunaratne.wordpress.com/2014/03/02/asylum-case-summary/

Thomas Jefferson School of Law. Asylum Case: Colombia v. Peru. Available at:
http://www.tjsl.edu/slomansonb/ 2.7_ColvPeru.pdf