Brief Fact Summary. Alvarez-Machain (P) argued he was detained against his will by bounty hunter and brought to the United States.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. The abduction of a foreign national does not amount to an “arbitrary arrest†within the meaning of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
A commentator noted in 1962 that, for the purposes of these borrowing statutes, the courts unanimously hold that a cause of action sounding in tort arises in the jurisdiction where the last act necessary to establish liability occurred; i.e., the jurisdiction in which injury was received.
View Full Point of LawIssue. Does the abduction of a foreign national amount to an “arbitrary arrest†within the meaning of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights?
Held. No. The abduction of a foreign national does not amount to an “arbitrary arrest†within the meaning of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Obligations as a matter of international law is not imposed by the Declaration and while the Covenant binds the United States as a matter of international law, the U.S. ratified it on the express understanding that it was not self-executing, and therefore did not itself create obligations that were enforceable in the federal courts.
Discussion. This case shows the concept of self-determination under international law. No document can give rise to obligations as a matter of international law that does not expressly purport to do so, and there no state which can be bound to any international pact without its consent.