HE HAGUE, March 31 — The International Court of Justice on Wednesday ordered American courts to review death sentences imposed on 51 Mexicans in the United States, saying their rights under international law had been violated.

The decision, by the United Nations' highest court, was seen as a moral victory in Mexico and as a stinging rebuke to the United States.

	Advertisement

In a firm ruling read out before the judges in the stately hall of the Peace Palace in The Hague, the court said the prisoners' rights to speak with Mexican consular officials after their arrests had been repeatedly violated.

It ordered the United States to undertake "an effective review" of the convictions and the sentences. The next Mexican to be executed in the United States is scheduled to die May 18 in Oklahoma.

President Vicente Fox of Mexico called the decision "a victory for international rights, for human rights."

Arturo Dager, a senior legal adviser to the Mexican Foreign Ministry, said Mexico "totally trusts that the United States will do the right thing and the necessary thing to fulfill this decision."

It is unclear whether American courts will heed the ruling, and federal officials reacted cautiously, saying they needed time to study the list of decisions. "It's a very complex ruling," said Adam Ereli, a State Department spokesman. "We'll decide, based on studying it, how we can go about implementing it."

The United States acknowledges the jurisdiction of the court to resolve disputes between nations arising under the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, which allows people arrested abroad to meet with representatives of their governments and says detainees must be advised of this right. The United States regularly invokes the convention to visit Americans in foreign jails.

Although the laws of an international treaty should prevail over national law, the Bush administration has often criticized the application of international law. Even if it bows to the ruling, federal officials may not be able to compel states to heed the court.

Gov. Rick Perry, who succeeded President Bush in Texas, has said that "the International Court of Justice does not have jurisdiction in Texas."

If the decision is ignored, Mexican officials noted on Wednesday, they can return to the court, bringing further pressure. While the court's rulings are binding, it has no power to enforce them.

Mexico was the third country in five years to sue the United States for similar violations of the Vienna Convention, after Germany and Paraguay. It filed its complaint in January 2003 to halt the imminent execution of three of its citizens.

The United States did not deny that it had breached the convention. In the past, it apologized and promised better compliance. It also argued that the American practice of allowing defendants to ask for clemency provided an adequate remedy because it often resulted in pardons or in the commutation of death sentences.

But the court said an apology or a clemency hearing was not enough. Instead, it said, each case should be examined to see if a defendant suffered legal prejudice from not having early access to a diplomat.

"This is great news; it means my client's case will now be looked at again," said David Sergi, a lawyer from San Marcos, Tex., who was present in The Hague and represents Roberto Moreno Ramos, a Mexican awaiting execution in Texas.

Mr. Ramos was sentenced to death in 1992 for killing his wife. Mr. Sergi said he had evidence that Mr. Ramos was mentally retarded, which was not raised by his previous lawyers. "If the U.S. ignores this right to call your consul, why should the rest of the world honor it?" Mr. Sergi said.

Mexico's filing with the court specifically covered Mr. Ramos, another Texas prisoner, César Fierro, and Osbaldo Torres, who is scheduled to be executed in Oklahoma on May 18. There are Mexicans on death row in seven other states: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Nevada, Ohio and Oregon.

Human rights lawyers said the court's ruling had respected American sovereignty. It ruled that it was up to the United States to decide how it would review the cases and stressed that it was not debating whether any conviction or sentence was correct. "It is for the courts of the United States to examine the facts," the ruling said.

The court also rejected the demand by Mexico that all 51 convictions and death sentences be annulled. The decision, Mexican diplomats said, may affect the cases of almost 100 other Mexicans facing death sentences before American courts.

But the ruling aims to have even broader applications. The court said that because it was deciding on a principle, namely the obligation to abide by the Vienna Convention, its ruling applied to "other foreign nationals finding themselves in similar situations in the United States."

Reed Brody of Human Rights Watch, based in New York, said the ruling applied to more than 120 foreigners from 29 countries on death rows in the United States.

"The right to see your consul is not just a technicality, it is a way to avoid all kinds of errors or miscarriage of justice," Mr. Brody said. "Of course this right is just as important to Americans abroad." The convention covers 165 nations.

Mexico does not have a death penalty, except in its military code. Executions of Mexicans in American prisons are widely publicized and almost universally resented in Mexico. Mr. Fox canceled a scheduled visit in August 2002 to Mr. Bush's ranch in Texas to protest the state's execution of a Mexican.

The ruling was applauded across the political spectrum in Mexico, where even opposition politicians praised Mr. Fox for taking a stand against the United States in the international court.

Silvia Hernández, a member of the opposition and president of the Mexican Senate's foreign relations committee, warned of an outcry should the states begin again to execute Mexican prisoners.

"That would be a deception," she said. "It would generate enormous distrust towards the American authorities, and it would send a very dangerous message that the United States only obeys favorable rulings under international law."

Gabriel Guerra Castellanos, a foreign policy analyst in Mexico City, said: "The United States usually does not pay much attention to the international court unless the court rules in its favor. It would be wrong for the United States to disregard this ruling. At a time when it is looking for allies everywhere around the world, it would be a huge mistake."

Marlise Simons reported from The Hague for this article and Tim Weiner from Mexico City.

Home Delivery of The Times from $2.90/week - Act Now!