|
The Cidip process
CIDIPs, then,
have been the mechanism used for the past quarter of a
century to address matters of private international law,
with proven success. One of the CIDIPs’ main features is
that the issues suggested for consideration by a particular
CIDIP consist of those recommendations that were presented
by the previous CIDIP. These proposed topics then become the
subject of meetings of experts, who discuss these highly
specialized areas of private international law.
To date, five
CIDIPs have been held in various cities throughout the
Americas: Panama City in 1975; Montevideo in 1979; La Paz in
1984; Montevideo in 1989, and Mexico City in 1994. In all,
23 inter-American conventions and protocols have been
adopted on various matters related to effective legal and
judicial cooperation among the states and security in civil,
family, commercial and procedural relations.
In 1975, CIDIP-I
adopted six conventions covering international trade and
procedural law. These are the Inter-American Conventions on
Conflict of Laws concerning Bills of Exchange, Promissory
Notes, and Invoices[1]/; on Conflict of Laws concerning
Checks[2]/; on International Commercial Arbitration[3]/; on
Letters Rogatory[4]/; on the Taking of Evidence Abroad[5]/;
and on the Legal Regime of Powers of Attorney to be used
Abroad[6]/.
CIDIP-II in 1979
approved 8 international instruments concerning aspects of
international trade law and international procedural law, as
well as conventions on legal institutions related to the
general aspects covered by this branch of the law. The
conventions on international trade law include the
Inter-American Conventions on Conflicts of Laws Concerning
Checks[7]/ and Conflicts of Laws Concerning Commercial
Companies[8]/.
Inter-American
Conventions regarding procedural law were adopted on
Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgments and Arbitral
Awards[9]/; on Execution of Preventive Measures[10]/; on
Proof and Information on Foreign Law[11]/; and the
Additional Protocol to the Inter-American Convention on
Letters Rogatory[12]/. General aspects of private
international law were treated in the Inter-American
Conventions on the Domicile of Natural Persons in Private
International Law[13]/ and on General Rules of Private
International Law[14]/.
In 1984,
CIDIP-III adopted international instruments on international
civil law and international procedural law. The first group
includes the Inter-American Conventions on Conflict of Laws
Concerning the Adoption of Minors[15]/ and on Personality
and Capacity of Juridical Persons in Private International
Law[16]/. The second group includes the Inter-American
Convention on Jurisdiction in the International Sphere for
the Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgments[17]/ and
the Additional Protocol to the Inter-American Convention on
the Taking of Evidence Abroad[18]/.
CIDIP-IV in 1989
approved the Inter-American Conventions on International
Return of Children[19]/; on Support Obligations[20]/; on
Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods by
Road[21]/.
Lastly, in 1994,
CIDIP-V approved the Inter-American Convention on Law
Applicable to International Contracts[22]/ and the
Inter-American Convention on International Traffic in
Minors[23]/.
The importance of
the solutions agreed upon in these international instruments
has had a clear impact on the national legislation of the
countries in the region, and on the jurisprudence of their
courts. Ultimately, they have had an immediate effect on the
daily lives of individuals throughout this Hemisphere.
The successful
development of private international law requires the
combination of a number of components. The more important
aspects include the codification of general principles and a
search for specific solutions to diverse problems, as well
as the drafting of international standards and an evaluation
of their effectiveness. In addition, the application of the
technical criteria must be considered in relation to the
political context.
The preparation
of each of the CIDIP conferences has involved a great deal
of prior work to enable the political and legal bodies of
the OAS, and experts from Member States to prepare the
studies and drafts to be considered for adoption. However,
this lengthy but necessary process does not end with the
adoption of the international instruments. In fact, the
process begun with each successive CIDIP should lead to
ratification by the Member States and awareness and
implementation by all concerned parties, particularly by
judges and attorneys.
In keeping with
the CIDIP tradition, CIDIP-V requested that CIDIP-VI be
convened, and recommended and that a number of topics be
considered for its agenda:
a) Power of
attorney and commercial representation;
b) Conflict of
laws on extracontractual liability (limited to a
specifically defined scope);
c) Standard
commercial documentation for free trade;
d) International
bankruptcy;
e) Problems in
private international law regarding private international
loan contracts;
f) Civil
international liability for cross-border contamination;
Aspects of private international law;
g) International
protection of children in private international law:
authority over children, custody, visitation rights, status;
h) Uniformity and
harmonization of secured transactions law.[24]/
[1].B-33; in
force 01/16/76, 14 ratifications, 4 signatures [Note:
All conventions and information on their status can be
found at www.oas.org.]
[2].B-34; in
force 01/16/76, 9 ratifications, 7 signatures.
[3].B-35; in
force 06/16/76, 17 ratifications, 2 signatures.
[4].B-36; in
force 01/16/76, 17 ratifications, 2 signatures.
[5].B-37; in
force 01/16/76, 15 ratifications, 3 signatures.
[6].B-38; in
force 01/16/76, 16 ratifications, 2 signatures.
[7].B-39; in
force 06/14/80, 8 ratifications, 8 signatures.
[8].B-40; in
force 06/14/80, 8 ratifications, 10 signatures.
[9].B-41; in
force 06/14/80, 10 ratifications, 8 signatures.
[10].B-42; in
force 06/14/80, 7 ratifications, 9 signatures.
[11].B-43; in
force 06/14/80, 12 ratifications, 7 signatures.
[12].B-46; in
force 06/14/80, 14 ratifications, 5 signatures.
[13].B-44; in
force 06/14/80, 6 ratifications, 11 signatures.
[14].B-45; in
force 06/14/80, 10 ratifications, 8 signatures.
[15].B-48; in
force 05/26/88, 6 ratifications, 7 signatures.
[16].B-49; in
force 08/09/92, 4 ratifications, 7 signatures.
[17].B-50; not
yet in force, 1 ratification, 11 signatures.
[18].B-51; in
force 11/28/92, 4 ratifications, 9 signatures.
[19].B-53; in
force 11/04/94, 9 ratifications, 5 signatures.
[20].B-54; in
force 03/06/96, 10 ratifications, 4 signatures.
[21].B-55; not
yet in force, no ratifications, 9 signatures.
[22].B-56; in
force 12/15/96, 2 ratifications, 3 signatures.
[23].B-57; in
force 08/15/97, 8 ratifications, 3 signatures.
[24].CIDIP-V.RES.8 (94), OEA/Ser.C/VI.21.5. |
