In a speech before the Sixth (Legal) Committee of the United Nations General Assembly a few years ago, the representative of Israel, Dr. Jacob Robinson, pointed out that the area to which international law was applicable had expanded enormously in recent years owing to the emergence of many independent States. “Although these States had only recently gained their independence, they were the heirs to ancient civilizations and some way had to be found to combine their ancient traditions with the body of international law as developed in modern times”, he said. In drawing attention in this way to the problem of fusing ancient legal traditions to the main stream pf modern public international law, Dr. Robinson was giving expression to what has been a feature of the philosophical development of international law ever since it emerged during the seventeenth century. Without questioning the postulate of the universality of international law (although the term itself is subject to many, and at times irreconcilable, or at least conflicting, interpretations), it is generally recognized that international law, both in its substantive rules and in its procedures, is on the one hand influenced by, and on the other may, indeed must, draw upon, the general legal experience of mankind. Positive acknowledgment of these tendencies is found in Article 9 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice which enjoins that the body of judges as a whole shall assure the representation of the ‘main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world’, a formula which, whatever other purposes it was designed to serve, also draws attention to certain features of what might be termed the intellectual elements of public international law, and as such, as is being increasingly recognized, it has wider implications.

Publicists who, in our century, recognize sovereignty to be a quality of States as subjects of international law, may be divided into three categories:

A. Publicists who consider sovereignty to be a basic criterion of the State as subject of international law, and a foundation of the whole system of this law. According to their view, sovereignty is the rule, and limitation of sovereignty is an exception to the rule under international law. They base their conclusions on international treaties, awards and judgements of international tribunals and Courts, as well as on diplomatic practice. They stress respect of the principle Pacta stint servanda, and the subjection of the State to international law which the State co-created, or to which it acceded

1. A person who enters the territory of a foreign country, thereby becomes subject to the operation of the law of that country. This rule of international law has been incorporated in the national legislations of the contemporary States. In so far as concerns penal legislation it is, for example, in the Netherlands laid down in article 8 of the “Act containing general principles of the legislation of the Kingdom” of 15 May 1829 (S. 28) and in article 2 of the Penal Code. Article 13a of the said Act and article 8 of the Code explicitly provide that the limitations of this “territorial principle” are to be found in international law. Among them are the rules on exterritoriality which can originate from either custom or treaty. The question to be examined here is whether there is a rule of customary law according to which members of visiting forces in the territory of a friendly foreign State are entitled to exterritoriality in criminal matters wholly or partly.

Bij de legenwoordige zware belastingdruk oefent de vrijstelling van belasting over genoten inkomen, aan bepaalde functies op internationaal terrein verbunden, een magische werking uit op hen, die niet op dit voorrecht kunnen aanspraak maken. Met ontstemming nemen zij, die een groot deel van hun zuur verdiende penningen in de grijpgrage handen van de fiscus zien verdwijnen, kennis van het feit, dat de naar hun oordeel toch reeds buitensporig hoge salarissen, op dit gebied betaald, bovendien nog vrij van belasting zijn. Het kornt ons wel nuttig voor in deze tijd, nu het scheppen van nieuwe internationale organen aan de orde van de dag is, aan deze vrijstellingen enkele beschouwingen te wijden.