Blay, Sam; Piotrowicz, Ryszard --- "The Awfulness of Lawfulness: Some Reflections on the Tension Between International and Domestic Law" [2000] AUYrBkIntLaw 1; (2000) 21 Australian Year Book of International Law 1

^[∗] Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney.

^[∗∗] Department of Law, University of Wales, Aberystwyth.

^[1] (19 December 1966), 999 UNTS 171; 6 ILM 368.

^[2] A v Australia, Comm no 560/1993, UN Doc CCPR/C/59/D/560/1993; (1998) 5 IHRR 78.

^[3] Ibid [10].

^[4] (16 December 1966), 999 UNTS 302.

^[5] Chu Kheng Lim and Others v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs and Another (1992) 176 CLR 14-15.

^[6] Ibid 1.

^[7] Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (28 July 1951), 189 UNTS 150.

^[8] Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (31 January 1967), 606 UNTS 267.

^[9] Above n 5, 38.

^[10] Ibid.

^[11] Ibid [3.1].

^[12] Ibid [3.5].

^[13] Ibid [3.1], referring to Van Alphen v The Netherlands, Comm no 305/1988, adopted on 23 July 1990 [5.8].

^[14] Ibid [9.4].

^[15] Ibid [9.2].

^[16] Ibid [9.4] emphasis added.

^[17] Ibid [7.5]-[7.6].

^[18] Ibid [4.2].

^[19] Ibid [7.6].

^[20] Response of the Australian government to the views of the United Nations Human Rights Committee in A v Australia, 16 December 1997 (response) [5]. Australia had made a similar point in its submission to the Committee [7.1].

^[21] Ibid [9].

^[22] Ibid [6].

^[23] Ibid [5].

^[24] Ibid [8].

^[25] This interpretation is supported by case law under the European Convention on Human Rights. See below n 35.

^[26] Above n 2 [9.5].

^[27] I Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law (5^th ed, 1998) 35. See also the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969, art 27 of which provides, in part: ‘A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law for its failure to perform a treaty.’, (23 May 1969), 1155 UNTS 331; 8 ILM 679. This reflects the primacy given in the international sphere to international obligations.

^[28] Response of the Australian government above n 20 [12].

^[29] Ibid.

^[30] Ibid. These included, according to Australia, arts 9(1), 17(2), 18(3) and 22(2).

^[31] (21 December 1965), 660 UNTS 195.

^[32] GA Res 3068 (1973).

^[33] Above n 27.

^[34] (4 November 1950), 213 UNTS 222.

^[35] Emphasis added. The lawfulness of the procedure must not only be in compliance with domestic law; there must also be no abuse of authority: Winterwerp v The Netherlands [1979] ECHR 4; (1979) 2 EHRR 387; Bozano v France (1987) 9 EHRR 927; J Murdoch, ‘Safeguarding the Liberty of the Person: Recent Strasbourg Jurisprudence’ (1993) 42 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 494, 500; D Harris, M O’Boyle and C Warbrick, Law of the European Convention on Human Rights (1995) 105-107.

^[36] Van Droogenbroeck v Belgium (1982) 4 EHRR 433; see also Thynne, Wilson and Gunnell v United Kingdom [1990] ECHR 29; (1990) 13 EHRR 666.

^[37] Judgment of 27 October 1997, Reports, 1997-VII 2391.

^[38] Ibid [59].

^[39] Ibid [60]. See also Wassink v the Netherlands, judgment of 27 September 1990, ECHR Ser A 185-A.

^[40] Judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, 3264 [139].

^[41] See, for instance, art 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA Res 217A (1948); art 6 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, reprinted in (1982) 21 ILM 58; art XXV of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, OAS Res XXX, adopted by the Ninth International Conference of American States (1948), reprinted in Basic Documents Pertaining to Human Rights in the Inter-American System, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.82 doc 6 rev 1 at 17 (1992); arts 7(2) and 7(3) of the American Convention on Human Rights, OAS Treaty Series No 36, (22 November 1969), 1144 UNTS 123, reprinted in Basic Documents Pertaining to Human Rights in the Inter-American System, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.82 doc 6 rev 1, 25 (1992); art 5(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed at Rome on 4 November 1950, above n 34; art 55(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, Rome, 1998, reprinted in (1998) 37 ILM 999.

^[42] This included detention ordered by the executive or detention by paramilitary groups with the consent or acquiescence of the security forces. Inter-American Commission, Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Argentina, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.49, doc 19, 140 (1980).

^[43] Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission, 1980-1981, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.49, doc 9 rev 1, 117 (1981) and Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission, 1981-1982, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.57 (1982).

^[44] An army general was subjected to 16 preliminary inquiries and eight criminal actions over seven years. All the actions were closed or dismissed, in what the Commission described as ‘an unreasonable succession of cases, which taken together constitute an “abuse of power”’. Inter-American Commission, Report No 13/96, Case 11.430, Mexico, 15 October 1996.

^[45] Krischna Achutan (on behalf of Aleke Banda), Amnesty International on behalf of Orton and Vera Chirwa, Amnesty International on behalf of Orton and Vera Chirwa v Malawi, (64/92, 68/92, 78/92 respectively), 8^th Annual Report of the African Commission, 1994-1995, ACHPR/RPT/8^th/Rev I.

^[46] Anette Pagnoule (on behalf of Abdoulaye Mazou) v Cameroon, (39/90), 10^th Annual Report of the African Commission, 1996-1997, ACHPR/RPT/10^th.

^[47] Van Alphen v The Netherlands, above n 13.

^[48] Report: Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, UN Doc E/CN 4/1993/24, 12 January 1993.