Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-tmfhh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T09:10:21.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On Re-Reading the Draft Articles on State Responsibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

James Crawford*
Affiliation:
Lauterpacht Research Centre for International Law, Cambridge UniversityState Immunity

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
State Responsibility in a Multiactor World
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 228 (para. 5) (1963) (Doc A/CN.4/152).

3 Judgment of 27 Sept. 1997, para 47.

4 See, e.g., International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, art. 14, 999 UNTS 171, and its equivalents in other instruments.

5 Article 19(2) only “defines” a category of international crimes of state, in the time-honored circular fashion adopted for the notion of jus cogens by Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Article 19(3) appears to give this highly generalized definition some further precision, but the appearance is deceptive: Article 19(3) is inclusive; it is itself couched in illustrative and very general language, and it is stated to be subject both to paragraph 2 and to “the rules of international law in force.” It is thus lacking in the precision necessary for criminal responsibility.

6 Judgment of 27 Sept. 1997, paras. 85-87.

7 See Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, opened for signature May 3, 1969, art. 66(a), 1155 UNTS 331.

8 See Gerald Fitzmaurice, 2 Y.B. Int’l L. Comm’n 105-06 (1956).