| Summary: | In commonparlance,what is called diplomatic protection means, in most cases, a consular protection action. The generic notion of diplomatic protection is used to define a variety of possible forms of protection of the national abroad. This paper seeks to reflect on what lies behind the recurrent inaccuracy or error in the application of correct semantics to the type of protection of nationals abroad. Using the hypothetical deductive method, we find that in theory diplomatic and consular protection are clearly differentiated by two main axes. In practice, however, these two institutes overlap and confuse each other frequently. The solution to the problem referred to would not be based on doubt about the theory, but on the practical performance of the international actors themselves. The lack of a precise distinction between the two concepts of protection would occur more by the combination of factors resulting from the exercise of protection, than of a hesitation about theory.
|
|---|