Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T05:54:16.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Twenty-Fourth Session of the International Law Commission

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

Richard D. Kearney
Richard D. Kearney*
Affiliation:
24th Session of the International Law Commission
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The agenda that faced the International Law Commission at the first meeting of the 24th session on May 2, 1972, was a formidable one. The 23rd session in 1971, despite an extension to fourteen weeks in place of the usual ten, had been able to complete work on the draft articles on the Representation of States in their Relations with International Organizations only by concentrating on that subject to the substantial exclusion of other topics. As a consequence the Commission had not made any real progress on the other active subjects before it, which included State Succession in respect of treaties and in respect of matters other than treaties, as divide between two Special Rapporteurs, State Responsibility, the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause, and Treaty Law of International Organizations. In addition, the Commission had before it another piece of unfinished business, the review of its longterm program of work in light of the wide-ranging and thoughtful “Survey of International Law” which had been prepared in 1971 by the U.N. Secretariat at the Commission request.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 67 , Issue 1 , January 1973 , pp. 84 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 ILC Report, 23rd Sess., 1971 at 2, in 26 UN GAOR, Supp. 10, UN Doc. A/8410/ Rev. 1 (1971).

2 UN Doc. A/CN.4/245.

3 ILC Report, 23rd Sess., supra note 1 at 76. The offer has been subjected to some criticism in view of the crowded character of the Commission’s agenda. 13 Habvabd Int. L. J. 437 (1972).

4 Section I, para. 5.

5 ILC, 24th Sess., 1972, UN Doc. A/CN.4/L 182. (Produced with advice and assistance from the ASIL Study Group on Protection of Diplomats.)

6 Sir Humphrey Waldock had been nominated for election to the International Court of Justice.

7 The history of the codification of the law of treaties had established the likelihood that one Special Rapporteur succeeding another is less likely to follow a rule of continuity than is the case in succession of states to treaties. Cf. Kearney, and Dalton, , The Treaty on Treaties , 64 AJIL 497 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 See, in general, Bhiggs, , The International Law Commission 217 et seq. (1965)Google Scholar.

9 [1971] 2 Y.B. ILC 3, 4, 396.

10 Brach, Richard, The Inter-American Convention on the Kidnapping of Diplomats , 10 Colum. J. Thansnat’l L., 393, (1971)Google Scholar.

11 ILC Report, 24th Sess., 1972, at 227–28 and Annex; 27 UN GAOR, Supp. 10, UN Doc A/8710 and Add. 1. (1972).

12 Off. Recs., O.A.S., Ser. P, General Assembly Doc. 88/Rev. 1 and Corr. 1.

13 66 AJIL 455 (1972); 10 ILM 1151 (1971).

14 65 AJIL 440 (1971); 10 ILM 133 (1971).

15 UN Doc. A/C.6/L 822.

16 Report, 1972.

17 Report, 1972.

18 UN Doc. A/CN.4/L 188 and Add. 1, June 28, 1972; UN Doc. A/CN.4/L 189, June 30,1972.

19 The draft articles are annexed to this article. See infra pp. 98–101.

20 Report, 1972, at 231.

21 Id.

22 Id. 253.

23 Id. 233.

24 Id.

25 Id. 229, 230.

26 Id. 232.

27 Supra, note 12.

28 Brach, supra, note 10 at 397–98.

29 See, among other examples, the discussions of draft Art. 2 at the 1041st meeting of the General Assembly Sixth Committee; Art. 21 at the 1055th through 1061st meetings; Arts. 29 and 31 at the 1069th through 1072nd meetings. 23 UN GAOR, 6th Comm., (1968).

30 While because of its Statute the Commission always refers to “draft articles,” it generally uses treaty terminology in drafting.

31 Threats or attempts to commit such attacks and participation as an accomplice are also included.

32 ILC, 24th Sess., 1972, UN Doc. A/CN.4/L 186.

33 See letter from the Secretary of State to the President transmitting the OAS Convention. 92d Cong., 1st Sess., Senate Executive D, at 5.

34 Report, 1972, at 241.

35 Id. 240.

36 Id. 238–39.

37 “[A] person as to whom there are reasonable grounds to believe that he has committed one or more of the crimes set forth in Article 2.” Art. 1 ( 2 ) . Id., 232.

38 Id. 246.

39 Id. 247.

40 Id. 244.

41 Id. 244, 245,254.

42 Id. 232.

43 Id. 245.

44 Id. 251.

45 Id. 242, 253.

46 Id. 230,252.

47 63 AJIL 875 (1969); 8 ILM 704, 712–13 (1969).

48 26 UN GAOR, Supp. 10, at 57 UN Doc. A/8410/Rev. 1 (1971); 11 ELM 548 (1972).

49 Report, 1972, at 257.

50 Id. 256.

51 [1968] 2 Y.B. ILC 87–93, 221.

52 Id. 216.

53 Id. 222.

54 Report, 1972, at 19.

55 8 ILM 680 (1969).

56 Report, 1972, at 19.

57 Id. 21.

58 Id. 24.

59 Id. 20, 21.

60 Id. 20.

61 Id. 11.

62 Id. 20.

63 Art. 1 on Scope, Art. 2 on Use of Terms and Art. 3 on Cases Not within the Scope of the Present Articles.

64 Arts. 4 and 5, Report, 1972, at 26, 34.

65 Art. 6, id. 35.

66 Described as an agreement between a successor and a predecessor state providing that obligations or rights under treaties in force at the date of a succession of states devolve upon the successor state.

67 Report, 1972, at 35–36.

68 8 ILM 693 (1969).

69 Report, 1972, at 36–46.

70 Id. 66.

71 id. 71.

72 Id. 13.

73 Id. 81,82.

74 Id. 83–84.

75 Id. 88,93,97.

75 Id. 128.

77 Id. 135.

78 Id. See discussion under Art. 8, at 48 et seq.

79 Id. 149–51.

80 Id. 155.

81 Id. 165–80.

82 Id. 181.

83 Id. 188.

84 Id. 189.

85 Id. 203–10.

86 8 ILM 62 (1969).

87 Report, 1972, at 217–22.

88 Id.

89 Id. 223.

90 Id. 261.