Let us not allow international law to die
In these troubling times, FIBGAR wishes to express its strong condemnation of recent events that represent a deliberate challenge to the international legal order.
We also wish to take a moment to call for reflection and collective action.
The large-scale military action carried out by the United States against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela — including the bombing of Caracas and other cities, as well as the forced abduction of its president — constitutes a flagrant violation of international law and Article 2 (4) of the Charter of the United Nations, which unequivocally prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State. Furthermore, it could constitute the international crime of aggression, according to Article 8bis of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
These actions have been accompanied by a series of unilateral coercive measures, including a naval blockade and the armed seizure of oil tankers, as well as the killing of civilians, which represent a serious, flagrant and deliberate violation of the fundamental principles of international law, set a dangerous precedent and jeopardise the stability of the entire region and the world.
Unfortunately, these actions are part of a broader pattern of systematic disregard for peace, international law and multilateral institutions. This includes the humanitarian and genocidal devastation in Gaza, the blockade of aid agencies in Israel, the prolongation of the armed conflict in Ukraine, and attacks against the International Criminal Court and its judges and prosecutors, as well as against a United Nations rapporteur.
All of this reminds us that international law is not an abstract or eternal framework.
It is a system carefully constructed after the Second World War to protect peace, justice and human rights, and to prevent arbitrariness and force from replacing the law. This system requires care, vigilance and constant commitment. Its strength depends not only on States, but also on civil society and on every citizen who understands that global justice and the protection of the most vulnerable are not a luxury, but a shared responsibility.
International law under siege
The attack on international law does not occur in isolation or circumstantially, but manifests itself through clear and sustained political and legal patterns designed to weaken accountability and consolidate impunity.
In recent months, it has become clear how the discourse of state sovereignty operates as a shield of impunity, used selectively by political leaders to block investigations, evade responsibility and delegitimise international justice mechanisms. This instrumentalisation of sovereignty—originally conceived as a guarantee of self-determination and not as a licence to commit international crimes—has eroded widely accepted legal norms and weakened the consensus built after the Second World War on the prohibition of serious human rights violations.
At the same time, the systematic questioning of the impartiality, competence, and effectiveness of the International Criminal Court has become a strategy for its political and institutional delegitimisation. Key actors in the accountability ecosystem—legal professionals, human rights defenders, journalists, and activists—face harassment, threats, sanctions, and criminalisation processes aimed at inhibiting independent international justice.
Taken together, these initiatives seek to redefine international law and challenge its institutional meaning through nationalist and regressive strategies aimed at undermining the international bodies, instruments and agreements established since the second half of the 20th century.
When security takes precedence over the law
In the name of ‘national security’, ‘regional security’ or even ‘global security’, the most powerful states have normalised unilateral actions — including military interventions — without a United Nations mandate, relegating international law to a secondary level.
This logic is reminiscent of the national security doctrine applied in Latin America during the years of military dictatorships, when serious human rights violations were justified under the pretext of protecting internal order or strategic interests. Historical experience shows that placing the strategic and security interests of a few above international law leads to impunity, violence and the erosion of the international system.
Furthermore, claiming that these actions are carried out in the name of democracy violates international norms and undermines the fundamental principles of justice and human rights. A country’s democratic transition must be carried out in accordance with standards of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-repetition, built on the basis of tragic historical experiences, especially in Latin America, under the slogan ‘Never again’.
When “security” is defined unilaterally and without institutional oversight, it ceases to be a collective good and becomes an excuse for the arbitrary use of force. Each violation of international law becomes a precedent, and each precedent becomes a licence for the next transgression.
International law was created to limit the logic of the strongest and ensure that states respect the law. Its erosion jeopardises not only international security but also global stability.
Impunity is not an anomaly: it is cross-cutting
Today, impunity does not distinguish between political systems. It operates in both authoritarian regimes and consolidated democracies, albeit in different forms. It has become a structural and cross-cutting phenomenon.
There is a double standard in the application of legal standards: while some leaders are punished, others evade justice thanks to their political, economic or media power. This inequality undermines the legitimacy of international courts and bodies and threatens the principle of equality before the law.
When unmandated interventions, selective jurisdictions or inaction in the face of international crimes are tolerated, the exception becomes the rule, weakening the preventive function of international law.
An invitation to reflection and citizen engagement
Faced with these challenges, it is natural to feel overwhelmed. But hope must not be lost.
Every person has a role to play, and every contribution, no matter how small, helps to sustain a system that protects lives and rights.
Taking action means expressing our dissent, demanding accountability, and calling for concrete action from the institutions that represent us.
Mistrust of international law is understandable, but it cannot lead to inaction. Reversing its erosion before it becomes irreversible is an urgent priority.
International law, built after the Second World War, remains our strongest tool for protecting people, limiting the abuse of power, and ensuring justice. Its existence and effectiveness depend on our vigilance and daily commitment.
