Citation. Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692, 124 S. Ct. 2739, 159 L. Ed. 2d 718, 72 U.S.L.W. 4660, 158 Oil & Gas Rep. 601, 2004 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 515 (U.S. June 29, 2004)
Law Students: Don’t know your Studybuddy Pro login? Register here
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.
Facts.
Alvarez-Machain (P) argued he was detained against his will by bounty hunter and brought to the United States.
Issue.
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.
