Message from the General Commissioner of the IHRCJPI - Dr. Humphrey H. Pachecker 

We invite you to the sixth (6th) Symposium of the Legal Analysis 2018 for the future of Cuba and, this time including the Venezuela’s issue. Starting on 24 – 26 of August, 2018 (Summer holidays).This will be held in the city of Sebring, Florida with the participation of illustrious personalities of the Cuban American politics and Venezuela.

In this year's Symposium 2018 we will bring to this conference a discussion to the possible reality that the governments of Washington and Cuba- both governments allow us to offer the solution of conflicts for these compensations using the International Commercial Arbitration Court of the AICAC, including the Chamber of Experts (CEP) which is a Structural subdivision of the AICAC.

Washington’s government believes that resolving this issue is a priority, but it has not yet been included in the agenda, since both governments should reach an agreement first.

The transition from Marxism to democracy in Cuba and Venezuela raises a series of legal and constitutional issues. As is almost always the case, particularly when it comes to matters of rules of conduct and compensation, the answers are loaded with political and economic considerations and what is good for one is bad for another.

Each of the issues that will be examined in this Symposium can be isolated for future research and analysis purposes. What will be examined here will be eminent domain, privatization, and compensation for government nationalizations.

First - Compensation for nationalizations. Although many observers argue that the only fair rate of compensation is in kind, this is a misconception from a legal point of view. Nowhere is it written that compensation must be in kind. In fact, eminent domain or expropriation right, by definition, implies payment in money, not in kind.

In Cuba two questions will be confronted: if there will be compensation for the nationalizations, and if so, in what form it will be done. From a strictly legal point of view, under the Cuban Constitution of 1940 and in some laws after 1958, the State must pay compensation for the property that it expropriates.

International law requires that States pay compensation for the nationalization of property of foreign citizens, which was not the case in Cuba.

The revolutionary government of Fidel Castro even issued bonds to pay compensation. The question of whether the “postrevolutionary” new government of Miguel Díaz-Canel officially appointed as the new leader of Cuba must compensate, will become a political and economic issue to be decided by the judicial and popular powers. However, there is a possibility that if an independent judiciary is established and the government refuses to pay compensation, the Supreme Court will dismiss the government's decision and hold that the Constitution and international law require payment of compensation.

The way to compensate, including appraisal plans and sources of funds will present a series of legal problems. As for the appraisal: will the market value or the current value of the future flows of commercial profits or profits multiplied by a reasonable figure? Will the net amount recovered from income deductions in the United States or another country be subtracted from the compensation? Will the payment be made in money or in bonds? If it is in bonds, at what interest? Will the interest be calculated from the time it was nationalized? If so, what will be the interest rate? The three percent real plus the rate of inflation in the United States? Will the bonds issued by the revolutionary government of Fidel Castro be recognized? Another problem will be: if compensation has to be paid, where will the funds be taken from: taxes, loans, privatizations? 

Full article: