Advertisement

Criminal Law Forum

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 43–86 | Cite as

The draft code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind: Eating disorders at the international law commission

  • Rosemary Rayfuse
Article
  • 211 Downloads

Keywords

Supra Note International Criminal Court International Criminal Geneva Convention International Criminal Tribunal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind,Report of the International Law Commission on Its Forty-eighth Session, U.N. GAOR, 51st Sess., Supp. No. 10, at 9, U.N. Doc. A/51/10 (1996).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    The ILC reports to the General Assembly through the Sixth (Legal) Committee of the Assembly. After considering the ILC’s annual report, the Sixth Committee recommends to the General Assembly what, if any, further action should be taken. The General Assembly has ultimate responsibility for deciding what action it wishes to take with regard to the Draft Code. The Sixth Committee considered the Draft Code at its meeting in October-November 1996. In its resolution, adopted without a vote, on theReport of the Sixth Committee the General Assembly simply requested the Secretary-General to invite governments to present their comments on the Draft Code by 1998. G.A. Res. 51/160, U.N. GAOR, 51st Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 333, U.N. Doc. A/51/49/vol.I (1996). Seeinfra section V, "Whither the Draft Code?"Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court,Report of the International Law Commission on Its Forty-sixth Session, U.N. GAOR, 49th Sess., Supp. No. 10, at 43, U.N. Doc. A/49/10 (1994) [hereinafter Draft Statute].Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    There is a vast literature on both the process and the proposed content of a code.E.g., Benjamin Ferencz,An International Criminal Court (1980); M. Cherif Bassiouni,A Draft International Criminal Code and Draft Statute for an International Criminal Tribunal (1987);Commentaries on the International Law Commission’s 1991 Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind (M. Cherif Bassiouni ed., 1993).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    See Richard H. Minear,Victors’ Justice: The Tokyo War Crimes Trial (1971); William B. Simons,The Jurisdictional Bases of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, inThe Nuremberg Trial and International Law 39 (George Ginsburgs & V.N. Kudriavtsev eds., 1990).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G.A. Res. 174 (II), U.N. Doc. A/519, at 105 (1947).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    G.A. Res. 177 (II), U.N. Doc. A/519, at 111 (1947).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Agreement for the Prosecution and Punishment of the Major War Criminals of the European Axis, Aug. 8, 1945, 82 U.N.T.S. 279. The Charter of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg is set out inid. at 284 [hereinafter Nuremberg Charter].Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    22Trial of the German War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 14 October 1945–1 October 1946, at 411 (1949).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    [1950] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 374.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    G.A. Res. 177 (II),supra note 7. G.A. Res. 42/151, U.N. GAOR, 42d Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 292, U.N. Doc. A/42/49 (1987), amended the title from “Draft Code of Offences” to “Draft Code of Crimes” in order to make the English text consistent with non-English texts of the Code.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Report of Special Rapporteur J. Spiropoulos, [1950] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 253, 261 (citing Nuremberg Tribunal’s statement that "[c]rimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit such crimes can the provisions of international law be enforced.”).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    [1951] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 134.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    [1954] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 150.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    G.A. Res. 897 (IX), U.N. GAOR, 9th Sess., Supp. No. 21, at 50, U.N. Doc. A/2890 (1954), postponed consideration of the Draft Code.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G.A. Res. 3314 (XXIX), U.N. GAOR, 29th Sess., Supp. No. 31, at 142, U.N. Doc. A/9631 (1974).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    The reasons for the delay are discussed in Benjamin Ferencz,An International Criminal Code and Court: Where They Stand and Where They’re Going, 30 Colum. J. Transnat’l L. 378 (1992).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    G.A. Res. 36/106, U.N. GAOR, 36th Sess., Supp. No. 51, at 239, £ 1, U.N. Doc. A/36/51 (1981).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    [1982] 2(2) Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 121.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    [1983] 2(2) Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 15–16.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Id. at 16.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind,Report of the International Law Commission on Its Forty-third Session, U.N. GAOR, 46th Sess., Supp. No. 10, at 238, U.N. Doc. A/46/10 (1991) [hereinafter 1991 Draft Code].Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Doudou Thiam,Thirteenth Report on the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind ¶¶ 7–18, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/466 (1995);Comments and Observations of Member States, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/448 & Add. 1 (1995).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thiam,supra note 23, ¶¶ 2–3.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Id. ¶ 4 (footnote omitted).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Report of the International Law Commission on Its Forty-seventh Session, U.N. GAOR, 50th Sess., Supp. No. 10, at 66, U.N. Doc. A/50/10 (1995).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Report of the International Law Commission on Its Forty-eighth Session, supra note 1, at 9–120, sets out both the Draft Code and the commentary thereto [hereinafter ILC Commentary].Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 19.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Id. at 20.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Id. at 20–21.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nuremberg Charter,supra note 8, art. 6; Statute of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, art. 7, Annex toReport of the Secretary-General pursuant to Paragraph 2 of Security Council Resolution 808 (1993), U.N. Doc. S/25704 & Add. 1 (1993),reprinted in Appendix B, 5 Crim. L.F. 597, 636 (1994) [hereinafter Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute]; Statute of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighboring States, art. 6, Annex to S.C. Res. 955, U.N. SCOR, 49th Year, 1994 S.C. Res. & Dec. at 15, U.N. Doc. S/INF/50 (1994),reprinted in Appendix D, 5 Crim. L.F. 695, 701 (1994) [hereinafter Rwanda Tribunal Statute].Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,adopted Dec. 9, 1948, 78 U.N.T.S. 277 (entered into force Jan. 12, 1951) [hereinafter Genocide Convention].Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 21 n.29.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    See generally William A. Schabas,The Abolition of the Death Penalty in International Law (2d ed. 1997); Roger Hood,The Death Penalty, a World-wide Perspective: A Report to the United Nations Committee on Crime Prevention and Control (2d ed. 1996).Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 24; Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 23.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Draft Statute,supra note 3, art. 47.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 17–18, 29–30.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 7(4); Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 6(4).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 49–50.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    For a summary of the debate on this issue, seeReport of the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, U.N. GAOR, 51st Sess., Supp. No. 22, at 18–20, U.N. Doc. A/51/22/vol.I (1996) [hereinafterICC Preparatory Committee Report].Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 52–53 (citing Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field,adopted Aug. 12, 1949, art. 49, 75 U.N.T.S. 31 (entered into force Oct. 21, 1950) [hereinafter Geneva Convention I]; Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick, and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea,adopted Aug. 12, 1949, art. 50, 75 U.N.T.S. 85 (entered into force Oct. 21, 1950) [hereinafter Geneva Convention II]; Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,adopted Aug. 12, 1949, art. 129, 75 U.N.T.S. 135 (entered into force Oct. 21, 1950) [hereinafter Geneva Convention III]; Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War,adopted Aug. 12, 1949, art. 146, 75 U.N.T.S. 287 (entered into force Oct. 21, 1950) [hereinafter Geneva Convention IV]).Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cf. Kenneth J. Harris & Robert Kushen,Surrender of Fugitives to the War Crimes Tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda: Squaring International Legal Obligations with the U.S. Constitution, 7 Crim. L.F. 561, 571–72 (1996).Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 54.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Trial in absentia is prohibited in Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 21; Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 20.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cf. Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 10; Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 9.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 82.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Prosecutor v. Erdemovic, Case No. IT-96-22-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for Former Yugo., Nov. 29, 1996) (sentencing decision).Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    G.A. Res. 3314 (XXIX),supra note 16.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 83.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
  51. 51.
    Genocide Convention,supra note 32, art. 2.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    ICC Preparatory Committee Report, supra note 40, at 18;see also Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, U.N. GAOR, 50th Sess., Supp. No. 22, at 13, U.N. Doc. A/50/22 (1995).Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 14 June 1996, at 4, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2442 (1996).Google Scholar
  54. 55.
    In September 1995 the infamous French mercenary Robert Denard carried out his fourth "coup" in the islands. On October 6 he and his accomplices were removed by French forces to the island of Reunion. His whereabouts now are unknown. Christian Jennings,Collapse of a Coup, Sunday Telegraph (London), Oct. 8, 1995, at 34,available in LEXIS, World Library, Allnws File.Google Scholar
  55. 56.
    1991 Draft Code,supra note 22, art. 23.Google Scholar
  56. 57.
    Id. art. 24 covered terrorism;id. art. 25, illicit drug trafficking.Google Scholar
  57. 58.
    The Security Council has repeatedly reaffirmed that "suppression of acts of international terrorism including those in which States are involved is essential for the maintenance of international peace and security" and has taken action pursuant to chapter VII of the UN Charter against states that the Council thinks have been involved in some way in supporting or facilitating terrorist activities. Perhaps the best-known case is the action taken against Libya with respect to the Lockerbie bombing. S.C. Res. 731, U.N. SCOR, 47th Year, 1992 S.C. Res. & Dec. at 51, U.N. Doc. S/INF/48 (1992); S.C. Res. 748, U.N. SCOR, 47th Year, S.C. Res. & Dec. at 52, U.N. Doc. S/INF/48 (1992);see also Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104–172, §§ 1–14, 110 Stat. 1541 (1996) (prohibiting U.S. nationals from conducting business with these regimes). A more recent example from the Security Council is the action taken against Sudan in response to the attempted assassination of President Mubarak of Egypt. S.C. Res. 1044, U.N. SCOR, 51st Year, 3627th mtg. (1996); S.C. Res. 1054, U.N. SCOR, 51st Year, 3660th mtg. (1996); S.C. Res. 1070, U.N. SCOR, 51st Year, 3690th mtg. (1996).Google Scholar
  58. 59.
    In 1996 press reports revealed that the United States had discovered that a Saudi millionaire, Osama bin Laden, has been bankrolling terrorist attacks against U.S. targets. Jeff Green & Judith Miller,Terror Money, N.Y. Times, Aug. 14, 1996, at A1,available in LEXIS, World Library, Allnws File;see also Financier Wanted by U.S., Saudi Arabia, Still in Afghanistan, Agence France Presse, Apr. 9, 1997,available in LEXIS, World Library, Allnws File.Google Scholar
  59. 60.
    Thiam,supra note 23, ¶¶ 17–18.Google Scholar
  60. 61.
    The example of Robert Denard is citedsupra note 55. Other examples include the sojourn of Pol Pot in Thailand,Pol Pot Flees to Thailand in Refuge from Justice, Glasgow Herald, Apr. 6, 1994, at 4,available in LEXIS, World Library, Allnws File, and the release, by Italy, of Abu Abbas, the leader of theAchille Lauro hijacking, Barry James,U.S. Wants Italy to Explain Furlough, Int’l Herald Trib., Mar. 6, 1996,available in LEXIS, World Library, Allnws File (discussing releases and jail escapes of severalAchille Lauro hijackers).Google Scholar
  61. 62.
    Genocide Convention,supra note 32, art. 2. Affirmation of the Principles of International Law Recognized by the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal, G.A. Res. 95 (I), U.N. Doc. A/64/Add.1, at 188 (1946), "affirms that genocide is a crime under international law which the civilized world condemns." This assertion was confirmed by the International Court of Justice in Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1951 I.C.J. 15, 23 (May 28), and recently restated in Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia & Herz. v. Yugo.), 1993 I.C.J. 3 (Interim Order of Apr. 8),reprinted in 32 I.L.M. 888; 1993 I.C.J. 325 (Interim Order of Sept. 13),reprinted in 32 I.L.M. 1599.Google Scholar
  62. 63.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 89–91.Google Scholar
  63. 64.
    Thiam,supra note 23, ¶¶ 64–97.Google Scholar
  64. 65.
    Nuremberg Charter,supra note 8, art. 6(c)("Crimes against humanity: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal ….").Google Scholar
  65. 66.
    Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 5, gives the tribunal "the power to prosecute persons responsible for the following crimes when committed in armed conflict, whether international or internal in character."Google Scholar
  66. 67.
    Prosecutor v. Tadic, Cae No. IT-94-1-AR72, ¶¶ 140–142 (Int’l Crim. Trib. for Former Yugo., App. Chamber, Oct. 2, 1995),reprinted in 7 Crim. L.F. 51 (1996) [hereinafterTadic App. Op.]; Prosecutor v. Tadic, Case No. IT-96-1-T, ¶¶ 206–208 (Int’l Crim. Trib. for Former Yugo., Trial Chamber, May 7, 1997) (decision on the merits) [hereinafterTadic Trial Op.].Google Scholar
  67. 68.
    International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 14 June 1996, at 14, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2442 (1996).Google Scholar
  68. 69.
    1991 Draft Code,supra note 22, at 266.Google Scholar
  69. 70.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 95.Google Scholar
  70. 71.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 101–02; Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, G.A. Res. 47/133, U.N. GAOR, 47th Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 207, U.N. Doc. A/47/49/vol.I (1992); Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearances of Persons,done June 9, 1994, 33 I.L.M. 1530.Google Scholar
  71. 72.
    U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/L.532/Corr.3 (1996).Google Scholar
  72. 73.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 101.Google Scholar
  73. 74.
    Topical Summary of the Discussion Held in the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly during Its Fiftieth Session: Prepared by the Secretariat ££ 122–124, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/472 (1996).Google Scholar
  74. 75.
    E.g., S.C. Res. 392, U.N. SCOR, 31st Year, 1976 S.C. Res. & Dec. at 11, U.N. Doc. S/INF/32 (1976).Google Scholar
  75. 76.
    International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid,adopted Nov. 30, 1973, art. 2, 1015 U.N.T.S. 243, refers to "similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in South Africa." There is a significant difference of opinion among international lawyers as to whether the convention was so limited.See, e.g., Roger S. Clark,The Crime of Apartheid, in 1International Criminal Law 299, 302–03 (M. Cherif Bassiouni ed., 1986).Google Scholar
  76. 77.
    International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 14 June 1996, at 16, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2442 (1996).Google Scholar
  77. 78.
    Seesupra note 11.Google Scholar
  78. 80.
    Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 5; Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 3; C.P.M. Cleiren & M.E.M. Tijssen,Rape and Other Forms of Sexual Assault in the Armed Conflict in the Former Yugoslavia: Legal, Procedural, and Evidentiary Issues, 5 Crim. L.F. 471 (1994).Google Scholar
  79. 81.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 103–04.Google Scholar
  80. 82.
    Geneva Convention I,supra note 41, arts. 49, 50; Geneva Convention II,supra note 41, arts. 50, 51; Geneva Convention III,supra note 41, arts. 129, 130; Geneva Convention IV,supra note 41, arts. 146, 147; Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I),adopted June 8, 1977, arts. 80, 85, 86, 88 (entered into force Dec. 7, 1978).Google Scholar
  81. 83.
    The French verbbanaliser, "to render banal," was the term used by one of the members of the ILC during debate in the plenary.ILC Commentary, supra note 27, at 113–16.Google Scholar
  82. 84.
    Id. at 114 (emphasis added) states: "Most of the acts are recognised by international humanitarian law and are listed in different instruments."Google Scholar
  83. 85.
    Seesupra note 82.Google Scholar
  84. 86.
    Report of the Secretary-General pursuant to Paragraph 2 of Security Council Resolution 808 (1993), £ 35, U.N. Doc. S/25704 & Add.1 (1993),reprinted in Appendix B, 5 Crim. L.F. 597, 606 (1994);see also Tadic Trial Op.,supra note 67, £ 186.Google Scholar
  85. 87.
    International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 25 June 1996, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2447 (1996).Google Scholar
  86. 88.
    Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-international Armed Conflicts (Protocol II),adopted June 8, 1977, 1125 U.N.T.S. 609 (entered into force Dec. 7, 1978); Geneva Conventions I–IV,supra note 41.Google Scholar
  87. 89.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 116–17.Google Scholar
  88. 90.
    In particular, Hague Convention (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, and Annex to the Convention (Regulations Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land), Oct. 18, 1907, 205 Consol. T.S. 227,reprinted in Documents on the Laws of War 44 (Adam Roberts & Richard Guelff eds., 2d ed. 1989). See ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 117.Google Scholar
  89. 91.
    International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 25 June 1996, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2447 (1996).Google Scholar
  90. 92.
    Tadic App. Op.,supra note 67, ££ 128–137.Google Scholar
  91. 93.
    See generally The Case against the Bomb (Roger S. Clark & Madeleine Sann eds., 1996).Google Scholar
  92. 94.
    [1976] 2(2) Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 75.Google Scholar
  93. 95.
    ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 108; Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, G.A. Res. 49/59,opened for signature Dec. 15, 1994, U.N. GAOR, 49th Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 299, U.N. Doc. A/49/49/vol.I (1994).Google Scholar
  94. 96.
    Seesupra notes 23–25 and accompanying text.Google Scholar
  95. 97.
    The Chairman’s statement, set out in U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/L.527/Add.1 (1996), is reprinted in ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 13.Google Scholar
  96. 99.
    Statute of the International Law Commission, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/4, U.N. Sales No. 1949.V.5 (1949) [hereinafter ILC Statute].Google Scholar
  97. 100.
    Report of the Committee on the Progressive Development of International Law and Its Codification, U.N. GAOR 6th Comm., 2d Sess., Annex 1, U.N. Doc. A/AC.10/51 (1947). For a discussion of the debates, see R.P. Dhokalia,The Codification of Public International Law 203–17 (1970); Oscar Schachter,International Law in Theory and Practice ch. 5 (1991); Herbert W. Briggs,The International Law Commission 129–41 (1965);see also R.Y. Jennings,The Progressive Development of International Law and Its Codification, 24 Brit. Y.B. Int’l L. 301 (1947).Google Scholar
  98. 101.
    Such as Cecil Hurst,quoted in Schachter,supra note 100, at 67.Google Scholar
  99. 102.
    Such as Charles De Visscher,quoted in Schachter,supra note 100, at 68. Another proponent of the political school was Hersch Lauterpacht.E.g., Hersch Lauterpacht,Codification and Development of International Law, 49 Am. J. Int’l L. 16 (1955).Google Scholar
  100. 103.
    Dhokalia,supra note 100, at 213; Briggs,supra note 100, at 139;see also [1951] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 132.Google Scholar
  101. 104.
    U.N. Secretary-General,Survey of International Law in Relation to the Work of Codification of the International Law Commission, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/Rev.1 (1949); Jennings,supra note 100; Lauterpacht,supra note 102; R.R. Baxter,The Effects of Ill-Conceived Codification on the Development of International Law, inRecueil d’études de droit international en hommage à Paul Guggenheim 93 (1968); Herbert W. Briggs,Reflections on the Codification of International Law by the International Law Commission and Other Agencies, 126 [1969-I] Recueil des Cours de l’Académie de Droit International 233; Hugh W.A. Thrilway,International Customary Law and Codification (1972); Charles de Visscher,Stages in the Codification of International Law, inTransnational Law in a Changing Society 17 (Wolfgang Friedmann et al. eds., 1972); Karol Wolfke,Can Codification of International Law Be Harmful?, inEssays in International Law in Honour of Judge Manfred Lachs 313 (Jerzy Makarczyk ed., 1984).Google Scholar
  102. 105.
    E.g., [1956] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 255 (reporting to General Assembly that in "preparing its rules on the law of the sea, the Commission has become convinced that, in this domain at any rate, the distinction established in the Statute between these two activities [codification and progressive development] can hardly be maintained").See generally The Work of the International Law Commission 13–21 (5th ed. 1996).Google Scholar
  103. 106.
    Seesupra section II, "Drafting History."Google Scholar
  104. 107.
    G.A. Res. 36/106,supra note 18.Google Scholar
  105. 108.
    Seesupra note 22 and accompanying text.Google Scholar
  106. 109.
    Seesupra notes 23–25 and accompanying text.Google Scholar
  107. 110.
    Seesupra text accompanying note 96.Google Scholar
  108. 111.
    G.A. Res. 260B (III), U.N. Doc. A/810, at 177 (1948) (inviting the ILC "to study the desirability of establishing an international judicial organ for the trial of persons charged with genocide or other crimes"). In carrying out that task the ILC was "to pay attention to the possibility of establishing a Criminal Chamber of the International Court of Justice."Id. Google Scholar
  109. 112.
    G.A. Res. 489 (V), U.N. GAOR, 5th Sess., Supp. No. 20, at 77, U.N. Doc. A/1775 (1950).Google Scholar
  110. 113.
    G.A. Res. 898 (IX), U.N. GAOR, 9th Sess., Supp. No. 21, at 50, U.N. Doc. A/2890 (1954).Google Scholar
  111. 114.
    G.A. Res. 45/41, U.N. GAOR, 45th Sess., Supp. No. 49A, at 363, ¶ 3, U.N. Doc. A/45/49 (1990).Google Scholar
  112. 115.
    The ILC adopted the Draft Statute in 1994. Seesupra note 3.Google Scholar
  113. 116.
    G.A. Res. 49/53, U.N. GAOR, 49th Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 293, U.N. Doc. A/49/49/vol.I (1994).Google Scholar
  114. 117.
    G.A. Res. 50/46, U.N. GAOR, 50th Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 307, U.N. Doc. A/50/49/vol.I (1995).Google Scholar
  115. 118.
    G.A. Res. 51/207, U.N. GAOR, 51st Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 342, U.N. Doc. A/51/49/vol.I (1996).Google Scholar
  116. 119.
    G.A. Res. 51/160,supra note 2.Google Scholar
  117. 120.
    ILC Statute,supra note 99, art. 23(1), gives the ILC authority to "recommend" to the General Assembly: (a) To take no action, the report having already been published; (b) To take note of or adopt the report by resolution; (c) To recommend the draft to Members with a view to the conclusion of a convention; (d) To convoke a conference to conclude a convention.Google Scholar
  118. 121.
    Report of the International Law Commission on Its Forty-Eighth Session, supra note 1, at 4.Google Scholar
  119. 122.
    E.g., Baxter,supra note 104, at 146–66.But see Wolfke,supra note 104, at 318–21.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Rutgers University School of Law at Camden 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rosemary Rayfuse
    • 1
  1. 1.University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations