| |
(Considerations by Diego P. Fernández Arroyo, OAS special
guest)*
CIDIP has had its silver wedding anniversary and is now
celebrating its sixth edition. Of the 23 instruments adopted
by it, 21 are in effect. In spite of the fact that the
number of ratifications of the conventions adopted in the
more recent CIDIP is less than those corresponding to the
first two Conferences, countries continue to ratify and many
of the solutions adopted by CIDIP are now, in addition,
positive standards in the national or subregional
international private law systems. Nobody would have
predicted that in 1975. This is an enormously significant
development, and one therefore worth insisting on. Compare
that, without looking too far afield, with the fate of many
an international convention adopted by famed international
organizations. For example, the UNIDROIT conventions on
leasing and factoring adopted with considerable fanfare in
Ottawa in 1988 show rather meager lists of accessions
thirteen years after they were adopted, compared to the
hopes once deposited in them and the universal aspirations
of that organization.[5]/ It did not even help that on the
last day of CIDIP-IV (Montevideo, 1989), a highly
collaborative resolution was adopted, urging member states
of the OAS to ratify or accede to those conventions (only
Panama took that recommendation to heart). Not to mention
other conventions, like the famous 1985 convention of the
Hague Conference on international contracts that never
entered into force and has just one ratification … by
Argentina!
Despite all that, the easily verifiable fact that CIDIP is
sailing on a sea of paradoxes should not be underestimated.
Perhaps the most shocking of those is the fact that,
although it is the most prolific organization drafting
international private law instruments, at the present time
it lacks decisive institutional, political support from
either the OAS or the majority of member states, over and
above the occasional rhetorical outburst. For CIDIP to be
able to function, at long last, with fewer paradoxes, it is
essential to re-examine every aspect of it, in as broad a
debate as possible. On the will to conduct that debate, the
commitment to ensure the quality of it, and the readiness to
implement its conclusions depend on the chance that America
can not only take pride in its pioneering achievements in
the field of international codification of private
international law but also delight in performing a task that
is both useful and in tune with the demands of the times in
which we have been called upon to live.
Washington, D.C., February 5, 2002
*
These ideas have been further developed in my contribution
to the recently published Liber Amicorum Jürgen Samtleben.
[5]. The Convention on factoring is in effect for France,
Italy, Nigeria, Hungary, Germany and Lithuania. The
Convention on leasing is in effect for the same countries,
except Germany, and for Panama, Russia, Byelorussia, and
Uzbekistan |
