This article analyses the growing resistance to judgments of the International Court of Justice arising out of domestic law in Latin America, through a study of challenges to the authority of the Court’s judgments regarding territorial and maritime delimitation in the region. These challenges are based upon the ‘territory clauses’ found in many Latin American constitutions, which were used to set national boundaries following colonial independence. Territory clauses that once developed international law doctrines such as uti possidetis iuris are now being used against prevailing international law rules, in a process described in this article as ‘constitutional resistance’.This article explains the nature of ‘territory clauses’ in Latin America, i.e., clauses that constitutionally define the national territory in reference to international law. It then describes the process of ‘constitutional resistance’, by which local authorities have used these clauses to oppose ICJ judgments, leading to various results, such as non-appearance in further proceedings, constitutionalizing exclusively favourable judgments, deferring the implementation of a judgment to the Constitutional Court or implementing only certain ICJ judgments, while creating legal barriers to the implementation of judgments that, in the State’s view, negatively affect their territory.These challenges based on territory clauses are studied through prominent ICJ cases involving Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, and Colombia. The article also explores how the lack of a strong territory clause eased the implementation of the Peru v. Chile judgment, and how the recent non-appearance of Venezuela in its current ICJ proceedings with Guyana, is partly based on constitutional justifications.

中文翻译：

---

抵制国际法院的领土和海洋划界判决并与拉丁美洲国家宪法中的“领土条款”发生冲突

本文通过研究国际法院对该地区领土和海洋划界判决的权威性的挑战，分析了拉丁美洲国内法对国际法院判决的日益抵制。这些挑战是基于许多拉丁美洲宪法中的“领土条款”，这些宪法被用来在殖民独立后设定国界。曾经发展出国际法学说的领土条款，例如uti possidetis iuris现在被用来反对现行的国际法规则，在本文中描述为“宪法阻力”的过程中。本文解释了拉丁美洲“领土条款”的性质，即在宪法上参照国际定义国家领土的条款法律。然后，它描述了“宪法抵抗”的过程，地方当局利用这些条款反对国际法院的判决，导致了各种结果，例如在进一步的诉讼中没有出庭，将完全有利的判决宪法化，将判决的执行推迟到宪法法院或仅执行某些国际法院判决，同时为执行该国认为对其领土产生负面影响的判决设置法律障碍。这些基于领土条款的挑战通过涉及尼加拉瓜、洪都拉斯、萨尔瓦多和哥伦比亚的著名国际法院案件进行了研究。文章还探讨了缺乏强有力的领土条款如何简化了秘鲁诉智利判决，以及委内瑞拉最近在国际法院目前与圭亚那的诉讼中未出庭，部分是基于宪法正当性。