Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Published:
Criminal Law Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  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).

  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?”

  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].

  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).

  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).

  6. G.A. Res. 174 (II), U.N. Doc. A/519, at 105 (1947).

  7. G.A. Res. 177 (II), U.N. Doc. A/519, at 111 (1947).

  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].

  9. 22Trial of the German War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 14 October 1945–1 October 1946, at 411 (1949).

  10. [1950] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 374.

  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.

  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.”).

  13. [1951] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 134.

  14. [1954] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 150.

  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.

  16. G.A. Res. 3314 (XXIX), U.N. GAOR, 29th Sess., Supp. No. 31, at 142, U.N. Doc. A/9631 (1974).

  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).

  18. G.A. Res. 36/106, U.N. GAOR, 36th Sess., Supp. No. 51, at 239, £ 1, U.N. Doc. A/36/51 (1981).

  19. [1982] 2(2) Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 121.

  20. [1983] 2(2) Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 15–16.

  21. Id. at 16.

  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].

  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).

  24. Thiam,supra note 23, ¶¶ 2–3.

  25. Id. ¶ 4 (footnote omitted).

  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).

  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].

  28. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 19.

  29. Id. at 20.

  30. Id. at 20–21.

  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].

  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].

  33. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 21 n.29.

  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).

  35. Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 24; Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 23.

  36. Draft Statute,supra note 3, art. 47.

  37. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 17–18, 29–30.

  38. Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 7(4); Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 6(4).

  39. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 49–50.

  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].

  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]).

  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).

  43. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 54.

  44. Trial in absentia is prohibited in Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 21; Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 20.

  45. Cf. Yugoslavia Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 10; Rwanda Tribunal Statute,supra note 31, art. 9.

  46. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 82.

  47. Prosecutor v. Erdemovic, Case No. IT-96-22-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for Former Yugo., Nov. 29, 1996) (sentencing decision).

  48. G.A. Res. 3314 (XXIX),supra note 16.

  49. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 83.

  50. Id.

  51. Genocide Convention,supra note 32, art. 2.

  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).

  53. International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 14 June 1996, at 4, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2442 (1996).

  54. 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.

  55. 1991 Draft Code,supra note 22, art. 23.

  56. Id. art. 24 covered terrorism;id. art. 25, illicit drug trafficking.

  57. 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).

  58. 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.

  59. Thiam,supra note 23, ¶¶ 17–18.

  60. 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).

  61. 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.

  62. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 89–91.

  63. Thiam,supra note 23, ¶¶ 64–97.

  64. 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 ....”).

  65. 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.”

  66. 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.].

  67. International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 14 June 1996, at 14, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2442 (1996).

  68. 1991 Draft Code,supra note 22, at 266.

  69. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 95.

  70. 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.

  71. U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/L.532/Corr.3 (1996).

  72. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 101.

  73. 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).

  74. 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).

  75. 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).

  76. International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 14 June 1996, at 16, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2442 (1996).

  77. Seesupra note 11.

  78. 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).

  79. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 103–04.

  80. 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).

  81. 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.

  82. Id. at 114 (emphasis added) states: “Most of the acts are recognised by international humanitarian law and are listed in different instruments.”

  83. Seesupra note 82.

  84. 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.

  85. International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 25 June 1996, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2447 (1996).

  86. 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.

  87. ILC Commentary,supra note 27, at 116–17.

  88. 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.

  89. International Law Comm’n, Summary Records, 25 June 1996, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/SR.2447 (1996).

  90. Tadic App. Op.,supra note 67, ££ 128–137.

  91. See generally The Case against the Bomb (Roger S. Clark & Madeleine Sann eds., 1996).

  92. [1976] 2(2) Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 75.

  93. 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).

  94. Seesupra notes 23–25 and accompanying text.

  95. 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.

  96. Statute of the International Law Commission, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/4, U.N. Sales No. 1949.V.5 (1949) [hereinafter ILC Statute].

  97. 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).

  98. Such as Cecil Hurst,quoted in Schachter,supra note 100, at 67.

  99. 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).

  100. Dhokalia,supra note 100, at 213; Briggs,supra note 100, at 139;see also [1951] 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 132.

  101. 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).

  102. 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).

  103. Seesupra section II, “Drafting History.”

  104. G.A. Res. 36/106,supra note 18.

  105. Seesupra note 22 and accompanying text.

  106. Seesupra notes 23–25 and accompanying text.

  107. Seesupra text accompanying note 96.

  108. 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.

  109. G.A. Res. 489 (V), U.N. GAOR, 5th Sess., Supp. No. 20, at 77, U.N. Doc. A/1775 (1950).

  110. G.A. Res. 898 (IX), U.N. GAOR, 9th Sess., Supp. No. 21, at 50, U.N. Doc. A/2890 (1954).

  111. G.A. Res. 45/41, U.N. GAOR, 45th Sess., Supp. No. 49A, at 363, ¶ 3, U.N. Doc. A/45/49 (1990).

  112. The ILC adopted the Draft Statute in 1994. Seesupra note 3.

  113. G.A. Res. 49/53, U.N. GAOR, 49th Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 293, U.N. Doc. A/49/49/vol.I (1994).

  114. G.A. Res. 50/46, U.N. GAOR, 50th Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 307, U.N. Doc. A/50/49/vol.I (1995).

  115. G.A. Res. 51/207, U.N. GAOR, 51st Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 342, U.N. Doc. A/51/49/vol.I (1996).

  116. G.A. Res. 51/160,supra note 2.

  117. 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.

  118. Report of the International Law Commission on Its Forty-Eighth Session, supra note 1, at 4.

  119. E.g., Baxter,supra note 104, at 146–66.But see Wolfke,supra note 104, at 318–21.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

    Rosemary Rayfuse (Lecturer in International Law)

Authors
  1. Rosemary Rayfuse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

1997 Rosemary Rayfuse. This motif was suggested by a member of the International Law Commission during the 1996 plenary discussion on the second reading of the Draft Code. He referred to the Code as having been put on a diet to reduce the number of crimes contained in it.

LL.B., Queen’s University (Ontario) 1987; LL.M., Cambridge University 1991.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rayfuse, R. The draft code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind: Eating disorders at the international law commission. Crim Law Forum 8, 43–86 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02699800

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02699800

Keywords

Search

Navigation