After sixteen years of negotiation and numerous Commission's proposals, on December 21, 1989 the Council of Ministers of the EC finally adopted a Regulation on the Control of Concentrations Between Undertakings. The Regulation enters into force on September 21, 1990.

Although the first draft regulation had been issued by the Commission as long ago as 19732, the Council has been unable to reach consensus on the subject for some time. Several amended proposals followed the 1973 draft, but it was only recently that things became really serious, as the Council has been put under considerable pressure by the Commission and industry to finally decide. The increasing pressure has been considered due largely to the EC Court's decision in the BAT-Reynolds Case and the rather active behaviour the EC Commission has displayed in intervening in concentrations since that judgment.

There are, of course, a variety of arenas available for the implementation and expansion of international law. The UN Decade on International Law provides a natural occasion for assessing their relative utility at this stage of international relations. Often the emphasis is placed on procedural steps that encourage states to use judicial arenas for third-party application of international law. In this regard great attention is given to the encouragement of steps towards the formal acceptance by governments of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, and to the insertion in treaties of compromissory clauses and dispute settlement procedures that entail a legal duty to resolve conflict through the impartial application of international law, and the related obligation to respect the outcome of such an agreed process. For major disputes between states such an app roach to the application of international law remains highly desirable, and needs to be encouraged in every possible way. Extending the domain of compulsory jurisdiction to address both disputes of regionaland inter-regional scope also tends to extend the protection of international law to weaker and more vulnerable states, especially if a stronger tradition of compliance can be established.

Before the recent adoption, by the Council of Ministers of the EEC, of a directive concerning EEC ‘television law’, technical developments in the European television industry were definitely outpacing legal ones. The emergence of cable and satellite television encouraged both broadcasting companies and advertisers to start operating on a European, instead of merely on a national level. This happened at first in a legal void which was eventually partly filled by the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. Amongst others the relevant cases are the Sacchi Case and Debauve Case. The former established inter alia that the articles of the Treaty of Rome governing the free provision of services, also apply to television transmissions. The latter states that the same applies to cable television services.

A current legal development that has certainly attracted public attention (at least in the Netherlands) is the Decision of the European Commission “concerning the provision in the Netherlands of express delivery services”.

By now it is commonplace that developments in Europe take place faster than any observer, who intends to write an analysis, would prefer. The degree of difficulty to predict the directions in which Europe will develop itself, is only matched by the importance to study the landmarks that have already been reached.

In his article on the implementation of international law by the domestic courts in the United States, Richard Falk focuses on the possible role of domestic courts with respect to the acts of foreign policy which may be contrary to international law. In general that role is limited. This is the same in Europe. Falk mentions efforts of individuals, to change national foreign policy by means such as the Russell Tribunal, boycotts of products, blocking of tracks and the occupation of buildings. Such activities also happen in Europe but rather with the intention to attract public attention than with the purpose to litigate in court. In Europe it is generally accepted that courts should not take policy decisions of that kind.

The astonishing sequence of events during the past twelve months which have completely turned Eastern Europe upside down and mark the beginning of a new era of which nobody yet knows the outlines, has turned out to be of crucial importance for the future of the European Communities as well. One of the international fora where this is obvious, is the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. With Soviet President Gorbachov calling for a follow-up Conference this November, American President Bush willing to give Western Europe -read the E.C.- primary responsibility for the economic resurrection and political integration within the West of Eastern Europe; West German Chancellor Kohl totally preoccupied by German unification, British Prime Minister, Thatcher, and French President, Mitterand, unable to give Western Europe the lead, necessary and desired, the European Communites have a unique political opportunity to take some decisive steps towards the proclaimed ultimate goal of a European Union by further tightening the Communities and enforcing their autonomous role, inter alia within the CSCE. At the same time, those steps not only seem legally desirable, but e.g. with respect to that same CSCE, perhaps also necessary for purposes of international law!

Inter-state disputes on human rights issues have been a far from exceptional phenomenon. During the Cold War the human rights question deeply divided the countries belonging to the Western and the communist blocs. Relations between developed and developing countries quite often have been heavily strained by controversies on human rights. But even within a group of countries belonging to an alliance or a homogeneous regional organization, human rights issues from time to time have been the cause of serious difficulties; e.g., the human rights record of Greece and Portugal within NATO and that of Greece and Turkey within the Council of Europe. Hardly ever have such disputes been subjected to third party dispute settlement machinery, even if such machinery was available. Most human rights treaties have a so-called procedure for state complaints, although in most cases acceptance of such a procedure is optional for the state parties. Only under two treaties, the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, it is mandatory for any state party against which a complaint by another state party is made, to submit itself to such a procedure. In most cases the procedures are of a fact-finding and mediatory character.Again, only under two (regional) treaties, the European and the American Convention on Human Rights, the initiating of such a procedure may lead to a binding decision.

“[…]for in the international community the rule of law generally ranks second after politics.”

“Basis van goede verstandhouding kan slechts het recht zijn. Recht alleen kan goede houdingen bestendigen, geschillen voorkomen of bevredigend oplossen. Onrecht, geweld en anarchie voeren tot ondergang, omdat er kiem van destructie zit in al wat niet rechtens is.”

A system for the settlement of disputes has developed within the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), originally through the practice of this organization, later on embodied in several decisions of Contracting Parties. This system presents a unique set of rules and practices for the settlement of interstate economic conflicts. It is the only comprehensive system, established within multicultural context, that is comparable with the bilateral procedure incorporated in the Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Canada.

International Space Law forms one of the most recently established branches of international law. Its progressive development requires effective means to settle disputes at an international level. A generally accepted system to settle disputes on space law matters peacefully would not only benefit the world community by reducing tension in international relations, but would also appear to be indispensible for an increase in the reliability and credibility of this new field of international law.Moreover, enhanced trust in the existing system of international regulation of space activities could facilitate the willingness of nations to extend and elaborate this specific field of international law. Establishment of an effective mechanism for dispute settlement in international space law could positively influence the general subject matter of peaceful settlement of international disputes by setting an example for international relations in the increasingly dependant world of modern times.