The allocation of responsibility for internationally wrongful acts committed in the course of multinational operations

2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (891-892) ◽  
pp. 727-742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Palchetti
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Specific Focus ◽  
The Status ◽  
Special Rules ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Ultimate Control ◽  
Law Commission

AbstractThe article aims to examine, in light of the codification work of the International Law Commission and of the most recent practice, some issues concerning the allocation of responsibility between an organisation and its troop-contributing states for the conduct taken in the course of a multinational operation (with a specific focus on UN operations). After explaining the general rule of attribution of conduct based on the status of the multinational force as an organ or an agent of the organisation, this article will examine the validity of special rules of attribution of conduct based on the notions of ‘effective control’ or ‘ultimate control’ over the acts of the multinational force. Finally, I will discuss the possibility of dual responsibility of both the organisation and the troop-contributing state concerned.

The Fortieth Session of the International Law Commission

1989 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Mccaffrey
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Draft Code ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Liability ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its 40th session from May 9 to July 29, 1988, under the Chairmanship of Ambassador Leonardo Díaz-González. The Commission adopted 6 articles of the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind and 14 articles on the law of non-navigational uses of international watercourses. Substantial time was devoted to both international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law and the status of the diplomatic courier and the diplomatic bag not accompanied by diplomatic courier. Reports on jurisdictional immunities of states and their property and state responsibility were introduced by the special rapporteurs for those topics but were not discussed by the Commission owing to lack of time. The remaining substantive item on the Commission’s agenda, relations between states and international organizations (second part of the topic), was not considered at this session. Finally, the Commission once again devoted substantial time to reviewing its procedures and methods of work.

On the Evidence of U.S. Treaty Law

1972 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-367
Author(s):  
Salo Engel
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
National Level ◽  
General Interest ◽  
International Level ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Treaty Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Creation ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

According to Article 24 of its Statute, the International Law Commission “shall consider ways and means for making the evidence of customary international law more readily available”. The existence of such law is indeed difficult to prove even at the national level; how much more so in the international sphere. This, however, should not mislead one to think that there are no problems with regard to treaty law. On the international level it may not be too difficult to determine whether a treaty exists on a particular question, but information about the exact status of the treaty (its entry into force, the parties thereto, the amendments thereof, etc.) in most cases is not easily available. Wherefore, I proposed many years ago the creation of an International Legislation Register which would contain up-to-date information at least about the status of multi-partite treaties of general interest.

Disentangling ‘Effective Control’ Test for the Purpose of Attribution of the Conduct of un Peacekeepers to the States and the United Nations

2017 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Perova
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Unlawful Conduct ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Superior Responsibility ◽  
Law Commission

Despite the efforts of the United Nations (un), the world continues to hear news about un peacekeepers committing crimes in the state where they are deployed. One of the reasons is that the responsibility of the troop-contributing states for the conduct of their peacekeepers is not sufficiently recognised. In order to address the issue, this article advocates for ‘effective control’ to be interpreted as a material ability of a national contingent commander (for troop-contributing states) or un Force Commander (for the un) to prevent particular conduct (criminal act). Although representing a minority of academic views, this approach derives from superior responsibility, the International Court of Justice’s jurisprudence, is supported by the International Law Commission and in line with the un’s position and practice. Following this interpretation, the article concludes that in many instances unlawful conduct of peacekeepers will be attributed to the troop-contributing states and not only to the un.

Past, Present and Future of the International Law of Transboundary Aquifers

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Mechlem
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Water Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Transboundary Aquifers ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
The Way

AbstractThe article discusses the development of international groundwater law from the first codification efforts of modern water law until present and raises relevant issues for the way forward. It first traces international groundwater law from the 1960s until the end of the last century. It then reviews the growing attention groundwater has received during the last decade and third discusses the status quo. It places particular emphasis on the 2008 Draft Articles on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers adopted by the International Law Commission and the legal arrangements made for five of the 273 transboundary aquifers. It concludes with thoughts on the way forward in this important and understudied area of international law.

The Forty-First Session of the International Law Commission

1989 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 937-945 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen C. McCaffrey
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Liability ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its 41st session from May 2 to July 21, 1989, under the Chairmanship of Professor Bernhard Graefrath. The most noteworthy achievement of the session was the completion of work on the status of the diplomatic courier and the diplomatic bag not accompanied by diplomatic courier. The Commission referred this draft to the General Assembly with the recommendation that the Assembly convoke a diplomatic conference for the purpose of concluding a convention on the basis of the articles. Also at the 41st session, the Commission adopted three articles of the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind and discussed reports on state responsibility, international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law, jurisdictional immunities of states and their property, and the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses. A report on relations between states and international organizations was presented to the Commission but was not discussed for lack of time. Finally, the Commission once again devoted a number of meetings to reviewing its procedures and methods of work.

Establishment of Diplomatic Relations

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denza Eileen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Holy See ◽  
Foreign State ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

This chapter analyses the Article 2 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which states that diplomatic relations, and of permanent diplomatic missions, takes place by mutual consent. It outlines the changes and development that led to the formation of the article. The International Law Commission traces the roots of the second article from a state’s right to legation, the right of sending a diplomatic mission to a foreign state. However, in order to determine whether an entity has the ‘right of legation’, it is necessary to determine whether or not it is a State. For most of the Parties of the Convention, the right to conduct diplomatic relations is generally regarded as flowing from recognition as a sovereign State. The chapter describes some instances where recognition plays an important factor in diplomacy, such as the status of Palestine and the Holy See.

The Legal Status of Submarine Areas Beneath the High Seas.

1951 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Young
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Legal Concepts ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
General Assent ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
High Seas

The increasing number of claims by various states to submarine areas beneath the high seas has recently raised anew the question of the status of such claims in international law. The importance of the problem, with its possible impact on traditional legal concepts, has attracted the attention of writers and of several bodies interested in the development of international law, including the International Law Commission of the United Nations. It is to be hoped that out of the present ferment will emerge some sound legal principles which will reconcile new needs with established patterns in such a manner as to win general assent. To this end it may be useful, now that there are some years of state practice and learned discussion to draw upon, to comment on various views that have been advanced.

Part II Interpretation of Treaties, 9 Supplementary Means of Interpretation

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sbolci Luigi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 established a distinct hierarchy between the general rule of interpretation and supplementary means. Article 32 of the Convention subordinates the use of supplementary means to various assumptions connected with the outcome of the interpretation made on the basis of the general rule contained in Article 31. The list of the supplementary means laid down in Article 32 is not exhaustive and the Vienna Convention says nothing about the concept of preparatory works, of circumstances surrounding the conclusion of the treaty, and about the concept of other supplementary means of interpretation. These and other critical observations can be resolved by reference to indications from the comments of the International Law Commission and from international case law. The rule established in Article 32 can be considered to correspond to the international custom. The use of supplementary means of interpretation is important when the application of the general rule leaves the meaning ambiguous, obscure, or absurd. Recent international case law appears to illustrate the reasons that can lead the interpreter to find, in the supplementary means, a confirmation of the meaning emerging from the application of the general rule expressed in Article 31.

Part 3 General Principles of Criminal Law: Principes Généraux Du Droit Pénal, Art.32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law/Erreur de fait ou erreur de droit

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

This chapter comments on Article 32 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 32 addresses defences of mistake of fact or mistake of law. The drafters of the Statute did not want to leave the determination of defences to the discretion of judges, an approach used in all of the earlier models including the final draft Code of Crimes adopted by the International Law Commission in 1996. In general, the purpose of codifying defences in the Rome Statute is not to authorize them but rather to confine them. Thus, article 32 admits defences of mistake of fact and law but under certain conditions. If article 32 were not in the Statute, the general rule on mens rea set out in article 30 would apply without restriction, possibly subject to limitation by the Elements of Crimes.

The Persistent Objector Rule in the Work of the International Law Commission on the Identification of Customary International Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 175-188
Author(s):  
James A. Green
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Specific Focus ◽  
State Practice ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The persistent objector rule is a well-known but controversial mechanism for a state to exempt itself from norms of customary international law. This article examines the rule with a specific focus on the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) on the Identification of Customary International Law, through a consideration of Conclusion 15 and the commentary to it that have been adopted, as well as the ILC plenary debates on the topic. The state usage and, indeed, very existence of the rule will be considered, given that this has been so controversial in the ILC and wider literature. The article further examines whether the rule rightly formed an aspect of the Commission’s work, and looks at the terminology employed in Conclusion 15. Finally, it assesses the requirements for the operation of the persistent objector rule as expressed by the ILC, through comparison to the manner in which the criteria have been employed in state practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document