In the practice of international law, which regulated the relations of ancient states, the concept of reprisals was present. This is the use of various kinds of coercive measures, bypassing the use of force as a way to exercise responsibility. Basically, it was the economic pressure exerted by the affected state. It represented either the termination of trade relations or a ban on trade. The fact that these are reprisals earlier and now will be discussed in the article.
Forced measures in antiquity
In international law, reprisals are lawful coercive measures applied by a state that are aimed at restoring its rights that have suffered from another state. At the same time, measures are applied that do not involve the threat of the use of force.
The first recorded and surviving examples of reprisals are found in ancient Greece. In 423 BC e. Athens occupied a dominant position in Hellas. Merchants from Megara were forbidden to visit their markets and ports. This was one of the reasons that led to the Peloponnesian war.
At Polybius, a 2nd-century historian BC e., there is evidence that the conflict between the Achaeans and the Boeotians led to the fact that the head of the Achaean Union Filopemen granted the right to recover the property of the Boeotians. The result was an armed conflict between citizens and between nations.
In the Middle Ages
Reprisals - this is the name forced non-military measures received in the 7-12 centuries. They clearly reflected the essence of international relations in those days, as a result of which they were of a private-law nature. The person who suffered damage from the actions of a foreigner had the right to seize the property or its equivalent from an indicated foreigner or his compatriots independently. This was allowed by the authorities of the state to which the victim belonged when satisfaction could not be obtained from the state whose subject was the offender.
The practice of using reprisals in medieval Europe, where there were a large number of city states and developed trade, was eventually enshrined in the charters of cities and bilateral treaties. They stipulated that if a foreigner refused to pay off debts arising from a liability relationship, his creditor had the right to apply to the court of the corresponding foreign state. If the claim is not satisfied, the plaintiff may contact his authorities to obtain special permission to seize the property of the debtor located within the country that granted the permit.
Gradually, international practice shifted to other types of reprisals. This is their application directly by the supreme authorities in the interests of those who were victims. For example, compulsory fees could be imposed on merchants and goods of the state whose subject is the guilty person.
In the 18th century
At the end of the 18th century. reprisals are already legal means that have acquired a purely public character. From this period only one state could apply them to another, but not private individuals. Researchers believe that the transfer of rights to reprisals to the state from private individuals was the result of such a view of the war that it is an armed clash of countries and not private individuals.
New forms of coercive measures of a peaceful nature have appeared. They began to be considered as types of reprisals. These include, for example, embargo and androlepsy.
An embargo may consist of:
- a ban on the import or export of gold, foreign currency, certain items of goods, weapons, technologies to other countries;
- prohibition of entry and exit from ports;
- complete or partial cessation of trade with any countries by decision of an interstate association.
Androlepsy refers to the abduction and detention of hostage citizens of foreign countries on a legal basis.
In the 19th century
By the middle of the 19th century. reprisals refers to all coercive measures taken by the government against another country, its citizens, their property in order to encourage them to recognize the disputed law or receive due satisfaction from them. And in the extreme case - this is the implementation of one’s own claims.
Examples of reprisals are seizure of property, its confiscation, detention for illegal fishing of a fishing vessel. Appeal to them is lawful only when the violating state refused to compensate for the damage or to implement another decision made as a result of the application of a peaceful procedure.
Reprisals must be proportionate to the offenses. They are terminated from the moment when the original position is restored. At the end of the review of the meaning of “reprisals” we will talk about similar measures used today.
Nowadays
Today, the term “reprisals” is obsolete; similar actions are called countermeasures. And if they are applied by an international organization, then these are sanctions.
Countermeasures refers to forced unilateral actions undertaken by the injured state in relation to another that violated his right. Their goal is to ensure the proper fulfillment of obligations arising from the legal relationship of responsibility.
Countermeasures and sanctions do not belong to the institution of international responsibility, since they are secondary to it. In other words, they do not have the nature of punishment and cease immediately after fulfilling the requirements.
Countermeasures
They should not concern obligations:
- to abstain from the threat of force, its use;
- to protect fundamental human rights;
- humanitarian, prohibiting reprisals;
- others specified in peremptory norms of international law.
For countermeasures to be taken lawfully, three conditions must be met:
- The actual commission of an international wrongful act.
- Nomination by the injured state of a preliminary requirement to terminate this act and (or) redress
- The proportionality of the means with the international legal act, as well as their consequences.
The adoption of these measures, before all possible procedures for the peaceful settlement of disputes have been exhausted or the refusal of the violating state from these procedures is illegal.