Antecedente nacional e internacional sobre la percepción y los derechos de las niñas, los niños, los y las adolescentes

Until the middle of the XVIII Century, children were considered as miniature adults, but with Jean Jacob Rousseau the study of the development of the human being was started and the foundation was set up for the new science of Paidology (the study of children), wich focuses on the different intellectual and physical conflicts which children face, and also for other sciencies such as Paidofilaxis, Pueroculture and Pediatrics. The Society of Nations, created, in 1919, the Consultancy for the Trafficking of Women and the Protection of Children, and in Geneva, the International Union for Aid was founded in 1920. In Argentina, the First American Congress for Children was organized in 1916, and others followed. The first Declaration of Childrens Right was proclaimed in 1924 and then followed the first Ten Commandments of Childrens Rights. In Costa Rica in 1929, a project was presented for the Constitutional Congress to establish an institution for the protection of children, wich was duly enacted into law in 1930 with the name of National Institution for the Protection of Children (Patronato Nacional de la Infancia, PANI) whose duty was to oversee the welfare of minors and their physical, intellectual, moral and emotional development. In 1930, the first Declaration of the Rights for Costarrican Children was proclaimed. The creation of the PANI, the declaration of Childrens Rights, and the enactment of a Code for Infants (1932), constitute the three events that signal Costa Rica as one of the pioneers countries in Latin American and the World, in the protectionof children and mothers. At the end of the article, some of the crucial events that have happened during the decades that PANI has been working in the country are analized.

Existencia del derecho penal del enemigo en el derecho penal internacional

Sin duda alguna, el debate sobre el derecho penal del enemigo es una cuestión que está revolucio­nando el mundo del derecho, en general, y el derecho internacional en particular. Es un debate de actualidad que está llamando la atención de la comunidad académica, en tanto se plantea y se avizora un problema de fondo, en cuanto a la efectiva protección de los derechos humanos, por encima de un discurso de seguridad, que se viene planteando como eje central en la comunidad internacional, en la lucha contra el terrorismo y como estrategia jurídico-política al interior de Estados que dicen llamarse democráticos. Esta situación está revolucionando desde cualquier punto de vista la concepción tradicional del derecho, violentando flagrantemente la dignidad humana como eje central del Estado Social de Derecho, al poner en práctica lo que Jakobs denomina “dere­cho penal del enemigo”, práctica que también se viene fortaleciendo y traspasándose del ejercicio del ius puniendi de los Estados, como manifestación de soberanía, al derecho penal internacional.Abstract Without any doubt, the debate about the penal right of the enemy is a question that is revolutionizing the world of law in a general level, and international right in particular. It is a current debate that is drawing the attention of the academic community, as it poses as a basic problem: the effective protection of the human rights, over a security discourse which is presented as central in the international community in the fight against terrorism, and as a legal-political strategy to the interior of the so called democratic States. This situation is revolutionizing, from different points of view, the traditional conception of law, flagrantly violenting the human dignity as the central axis of the Social State of Right, putting in practice what Jakobs denominates “Criminal law for the enemy”. This practice is being fortified and transferring from the exercise of ius puniendi of the States, as manifestation of sovereignty, to the international penal right.

La persona como sujeto de derecho internacional

 ResumenEl presente artículo es un intento de señalar un aspecto del Derecho Internacional que parece mostrar una paulatina evolución. Es por ello que estudiar a la persona como sujeto de Derecho Internacional (DI) es innovador o al menos diferente de como siempre se lo ha mostrado, esto es, ajeno al sistema internacional desde el estudio de los Sujetos del Derecho Internacional. Por otro lado, los internacionalistas en su inmensa mayoría han insistido en no elevar al rango de sujeto de DI a la persona. No obstante, los argumentos utilizados son diversos, cuestión que aquí se remarcará.En el desarrollo del presente trabajo, se describirán los argumentos a favor de la persona como sujeto y en contra de tal carácter. Y en la medida de lo posible, se replanteará el tema con base o referencia en una teoría del derecho, en este caso la de H. Kelsen, ya que desde sus inicios esta ha hecho recepción del asunto. Se debe dejar en claro que también se analizará la realidad positiva y situaciones que han dado el pie de partida para el replanteamiento que coadyuve a exponer o clarificar la temática aquí encarada.Se finalizará con una serie de conclusiones que no pretenden emitir un juicio de valor, sino solamen­te reflexionar con mejores y profundos argumentos que los hasta ahora analizados por la doctrina internacionalista.AbstractThe present article will try to show an issue of the International Law system which displays a progressive evolution, that is why studying individuals as International Law (IL) subjects is innovative, or at least different than it always has been exhibited; devoid of the international system from the studies of the Subjects of International Law. On the other hand, internationalists in general have insisted on not elevating the status of subject of IL to the person. Nonetheless, the arguments used to do so are diverse, an issue that is emphasized here.In the development of the present article the arguments in favor and against the person as subject will be described. And, if possible, to re-establish the issue based on or with reference to a law theory, in this case Kelsen´s, because it has made reception of the issue since its beginning. It must be clear that the positive reality and the situations which have promoted the re proposal of the issue in order to clarify and contribute to the description of it will be analyzed.It ends with a description of facts and conclusions, without any value content, only remarking the topic from different deep arguments.