The above quoted wishes, written in 1973 by the British official who was chief-delegate of the United Kingdom at the revision-conferences of CIM/CIV//CAV held in the years 1966 – 1972, have finally all been fullfilled by the CONVENTION OF INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY TRANSPORT (C O T I F), signed at Berne on the 9th of May 1980. But the preceding struggle has been long and protracted, as this paper will indicate.

One reason at least, as the writer of this study tries to show, is that the Baltic Sea has to a great extent formed a “microcosms” reflecting the changing priniciples of the law of the sea. Thus the classic terms of the law of the sea such as “mare liberum”, “freedom of fishing”, “conservation”, “growing interests of the coastal states”, “exclusive fisheries zones” are all relevant to the Baltic Sea. The legal aspects of the Baltic Sea fisheries pose questions, also, which concern the general theory of international law, such as the law of treaties (both bilateral and multilateral agreements), the relationship between international law and muncipal law (the resolutions of international organization and muncipal law) and the law relating to international organizations (in particular the role of resolutions of international organizations in the law making process).

The speaker expresses his indebtedness to the T.M.C. Asser Institute for the opportunity afforded for his return to The Hague, which he considers to be the natural habitat of many an international lawyer. The Hague has long been and still remains the centre for international adjudication, arbitration and other activities in the field of pacific settlement of disputes. The speaker is particularly gratified to be back at the birth place of the illustrious Hugo de Groot, whose four hundredth birthday anniversary is soon to be celebrated, not only in The Netherlands, but also the world over. Many great names have indeed followed that of Grotius. To name but one further, Cornelius van Bijnkershoek ranks among the celebrated classics of international law.

The law of State immunity has changed very significantly over the last twenty years. Legal development often occurs because a new international law topic has burst upon the scene, or because pressures-have mounted from numerically important States who find the old law unsatisfactory. But developments in the law of State immunity seem to have been precipitated by other factors. The topic has a very long legal history. And much of the third world, from whom so much of the impetus for change today comes, has very conservative views about State immunity. The developments in State immunity have been a self-generated response to the requirements of the contemporary commercial world and to notions of stability, fairness and equity in the market place.