The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment was opened to all States for signature and ratification by General Assembly resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984. Part I of the Convention defines and prohibits torture, establishes a system of universal jurisdiction against it, and specifies the responsibilities of States under the Convention for preventing and prosecuting torture in their territories. Part II establishes an international implementation system based on a Committee against Torture with the authority to review mandatory periodic reports by States parties on their implementation of the Convention. Optional provisions also permit parties to authorize the Committee to receive and investigate communications (complaints) from States or from individuals alleging violations of the Convention, as well as any reliable information it should receive indicating the systematic practice of torture in the territory of any State party.

The new 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter referred to as the LOS Convention) that lays down a comprehensive framework for contemporary uses of the sea, all of them playing an increasingly important role in international relations and the world's economy, may certainly be considered a major achievement in the history of international law. The Convention accomodates a great variety of political, economic and strategic interests of States in their various uses of the sea and provides a firm basis for avoiding conflicts between these uses. Quoting Arvid Pardo, it is ‘truly a “package deal” containing innumerable bilateral and multilateral political compromises’.

The attainment of independence by many colonial peoples and territories all over the world through the process of decolonisation is perhaps one of the significant events in contemporary international law and relations. In the process of decolonisation, many distinct groups and territories under different autonomous administrations were subjected to forced unity under a single colonial administration. The grievances and expectations of these identified groups were not taken into consideration during the decolonisation process. As a result, decolonisation has created in its wake numerous multiracial States. These States are now confronted with the problem of national unity. Some of them have been able to preserve their national solidarity by defusing the separatist sentiment of dissident groups: some, however, have attempted this in vain.

The Protocol concerning the Interpretation by the EC Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968, on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in civil and commercial matters (hereinafter referred to as the Protocol on Interpretation) came into force on 1 September 1975 between the six original Member States of the EEC (i.e., Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Germany). On the basis of this Protocol the European Court of Justice can give preliminary rulings on the interpretation of the above-mentioned Convention, of the Protocol Annex to this Convention and also of the Protocol on Interpretation itself.

It is sometimes argued that States who do not want to see the legal regime concerning nuclear weapons altered, will have, for precisely that reason, serious difficulties in ratifying the 1977 Protocol additional to the Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949, especially Protocol I relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts.

Two reports were before those present at the meeting, one by Professor Bos entitled Ongeschreven Volkenrecht in de Nederlandse Rechtspraak (Unwritten International Law in Dutch Judicial Decisions), the other by Professor Meijers entitled Rond het Internationaal Gewoonterecht in Nederland (About Customary International Law in the Netherlands). Both reports were produced as part of the Branch's series of Mededelingen (Information), No. 91 (April 1985), pp. 1–53 and pp. 55–158, respectively.