We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 July 2009
1. Hand. II 1982/83 p. 3146.
2. Cf., 10 NYIL (1979) p. 360; 11 NYIL (1980) p. 221; 12 NYIL (1981) p. 222–13 NYIL (1982) p. 222; 14 NYIL (1983) p. 30.
3. UN Doc. A/37/10, especially p. 202 et seq.
4. Article 7 reads:
“1. A State shall give effect to State immunity [under article 6] by refraining from exercising jurisdiction in a proceeding before its courts against another State.
2. A proceeding before a court of a State shall be considered to have been instituted against another State, whether or not that other State is named as a party to that proceeding, so long as the proceeding in effect seeks to compel that other State either to submit to the jurisdiction of the court or to bear the consequences of a determination by the court which may affect the rights, interests, properties or activities of that other State.
3. In particular, a proceeding before a court of a State shall be considered to have been instituted against another State when the proceeding is instituted against one of the organs of that State, or against one of its agencies or instrumentalities in respect of an act performed in the exercise of governmental authority, or against one of the representatives of that State in respect of an act performed in his capacity as a representative, or when the proceeding is designed to deprive that other State of its property or of the use of property in its possession or control.”
5. Statement of 9 November 1982, Zevenendertigste Zitting van de Algemene Vergadering der Verenigde Naties [Thirty-seventh Session of the UN General Assembly], Publication of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vol. 130 (1983) pp. 521–523Google Scholar; summary in UN Doc. A/C.6/37/SR.40.
6. Reply of 8 June 1983, Hand. II 1982/83 p. 4417.
7. Cf., 13 NYIL (1982) p. 178.
8. Reply of 8 February 1983, Aanh. Hand. II 1982/83 p. 1003.
9. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17816 No. 1 pp. 2–3.
10. Reply of 7 March 1983, Aanh.Hand. II 1982/83 p. 115.
11. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
12. Statement of 1 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17798 (R1227) No. 3 pp. 8–9.
13. Courtesy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
14. Statement of 14 October 1982, Hand. II 1982/83 p. 273.
15. Statement of 8 June 1983, Hand. II 1982/83 p. 4417.
16. Reply of 23 February 1983, Aanh.Hand. II 1982/83 pp. 1083–1084.
17. Statement of 28 February 1983, Hand. II (UCV 19) pp. 42, 43.
18. Zevenendertigste Zitting p. 515; summary in UN Doc. A/C.6/37/SR.25.
19. Cf., 10 NYIL (1979) p. 332; 12 NYIL (1981) p. 188; 13 NYIL (1982) p. 183; 14 NYIL (1983) p. 267.
20. Reply by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of 6 May 1983, including lists of the UNGA resolutions concerned, Aanh.Hand. II 1982/83 pp. 1483–1486.
21. Hand. II 1982/83 p. 3147.
22. Hand. II 1982/83 p. 3747.
23. Hand. II 1982/83 p. 4403.
24. Hand. II 1982/83 p. 295.
25. Bijl.Hand. II 1979/80 - 15800 V No. 24.
26. Hand. II 1982/83 pp. 1168, 1669, 1670.
27. Statement of 26 April 1983, Bijl.Hand. I 1982/83 - 17600 VI No. 135a p. 14.
28. Trb. 1975 No. 132.
29. Stb. 1976 No. 465; cf., 8 NYIL (1977) p. 325.
30. Statement of 23 June 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17822 [, etc.] No. 6 pp. 2–3.
31. See earlier, 14 NYIL (1983) p. 268.
32. Statement of 9 August 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16947 (R 1181) No. 7 p. 4.
33. Statement of 9 August 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16947 (R 1181) No. 7 pp. 4–5.
34. As appears from Article 2(a), Dutch nationals include persons whose father or mother lived in the Netherlands or Netherlands Antilles at the time of their birth and was in turn born of a mother living in either country.
35. See n. 33 supra at p. 8.
36. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17984 No. 2 pp. 14–16.
37. Statement of 9 August 1983, Bijl. Hand. II 1982/83 - 16947 (R 1181) No. 7 p. 23.
38. Trb. 1952 No. 105.
39. Trb. 1982 No. 156.
40. See, 14 NYIL (1983) p. 337.
41. Bijl.Hand. II 1980/81 - 16759 No. 5.
42. Trb. 1960 No. 40.
43. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17600 V No. 25 pp. 14–15.
44. Hand. II 1982/83 p. 4740.
45. Statement of 9 August 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16947 (R 1181) No. 7 pp. 6–7.
46. Stct. No. 112 of 14 June 1983 pp. 1, 2.
47. European agreement on transfer of responsibility for refugees, Trb. 1981 No. 239.
48. Article 5 reads in full:
“1. From the date of transfer of responsibility:
a. the responsibility of the first State to extend or renew the travel document of the refugee shall cease;
b. the second State shall be responsible for issuing a new travel document to the refugee.
2. The second State shall inform the first State that transfer of responsibility has taken place.”
49. Article 15 para. 1 reads: “Aliens originating from a country where they have wellfounded grounds to fear persecution for reasons of religion, political opinion or nationality, race or membership of a particular group, may be admitted as refugees by Our Minister.”
50. Statement of 2 June 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17946 No. 3 pp. 4–5.
51. Trb. 1980 No. 111.
52. Supreme Court, 16 January 1973, NJ 281.
53. Supreme Court, 1 July 1977, NJ 601; 9 NYIL (1978) p. 292.
54. Statement of 21 February 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17122 (R 1193) No. 9 p. 1.
55. See earlier, 14 NYIL (1983) p. 274.
56. Memorandum of 23 February 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17397 No. 5 pp. 2–3.
57. Memorandum of 7 July 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17937 No. 8 pp. 1–2.
58. Trb. 1981 No. 188.
59. Benelux Treaty concerning Extradition and Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, Trb. 1962 No. 97.
60. European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, Trb. 1965 No. 10.
61. Statement of 28 September 1982, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17123 (R 1194) No. 7 p. 11.
62. Reply of 15 March 1982, Aanh.Hand. II 1981/82 p. 1547.
63. Reply of 23 February 1983, Aanh.Hand. II 1982/83 p. 1079.
64. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
65. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 p. 10.
66. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
67. Article 9 refers to the declaration of persona non grata; Article 11 refers to the size of the mission.
68. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 p. 9.
69. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
70. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 p. 12.
71. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
72. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
73. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 pp. 15–16.
74. Article 11 paragraph 2 reads: “The receiving State may equally, within similar bounds and on a non-discriminatory basis, refuse to accept officials of a particular category.”
75. Article 47 paragraph 1 reads: “In the application of the provisions of the present Convention, the receiving State shall not discriminate as between States.”
76. See n. 73 supra at p. 17.
77. See n. 74 supra.
78. See n. 73 at pp. 16–17.
79. Article 7 reads, inter alia: “… the sending State may freely appoint the members of the staff of the mission. In the case of military, naval or air attachés, the receiving State may require their names to be submitted beforehand, for its approval.”
80. Article 9 refers to the declaration of persona non grata.
81. See n. 73 supra at pp. 13–14.
82. See n. 73 supra at p. 15
83. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
84. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 p. 15.
85. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
86. Article 3 paragraph 1(d) reads in full: “The functions of a diplomatic mission consist inter alia in: ascertaining by all lawful means, conditions and developments in the receiving State, and reporting thereon to the Government of the sending State”.
87. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 p. 11.
88. Article 3 para. 2 reads: “Nothing in the present Convention shall be construed as preventing the performance of consular functions by a diplomatic mission.”
89. See n. 87 supra at p. 11.
90. See 13 NYIL (1982) p. 213.
91. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
92. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 pp. 38–39.
93. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
94. Article 9 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations refers to the declaration of persona non grata.
95. In this context reference is made to the replies to written questions in Aanh.Hand. II 1964/65 No. 376, 1969/70 No. 896, see also: 2 NYIL (1971) p. 167, and 1981/82 No. 1333.
96. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R1158) No. 7 pp. 36–37.
97. Idem, at p. 37.
98. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
99. Article 27 para. 3 reads: “The diplomatic bag shall not be opened or detained.”
The declaration by Bahrain reads in full: “With respect to paragraph 3 of article 27, relating to the ‘Diplomatic Bag’, the Government of the State of Bahrain reserves its right to open the diplomatic bag if there are serious grounds for presuming that it contains articles the import or export of which is prohibited by law.”
100. The Libyan reservation reads in full: “In the event that the authorities of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya entertain strong doubts that the contents of a diplomatic pouch include items which may not be sent by diplomatic pouch in accordance with paragraph 4 of article 27 of said Convention, the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya reserves its right to request the opening of such pouch in the presence of an official representative of the diplomatic mission concerned. If such request is denied by the authorities of the sending state, the diplomatic pouch shall be returned to its place of origin”.
101. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 p. 17.
102. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
103. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 pp. 4–5.
104. Article 37 para. 2 concerns members of the administrative and technical staff of the mission, together with members of their families forming part of their respective households.
105. See n. 103 supra at pp. 34–35.
106. Cf. earlier, 12 NYIL (1981) p. 210.
107. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
108. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) p. 13.
109. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
110. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 p. 12.
111. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
112. Statement of 1 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17798 (R 1227) No. 3 pp. 8, 12.
113. UN Doc. A/CONF.117/SR.10 p. 21.
114. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
115. Statement of 1 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17798 (R 1227) No. 3 pp. 11–12.
116. Amendment subsequently circulated in UN Doc. A/CONF.117/L. 4.
117. UN Doc. A/CONF.117/SR.7 p. 11.
118. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
119. Statement of 1 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17798 (R 1227) No. 3 pp. 18–19.
120. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
121. Article 62(1)(d) states that approval shall not be required if in exceptional cases of a compelling nature it would be clearly detrimental to the interests of the Kingdom if the agreement were not to enter into force before it had been approved.
Article 62(2) states that an agreement as referred to under (d) shall, however, be submitted for approval to the States General without delay. If the States General withholds its approval, the agreement shall be terminated as soon as is compatible with the provisions of the agreement An agreement shall only be concluded subject to the reservation that it will be terminated if the States General should withhold its approval, unless this is clearly detrimental to the interests of the Kingdom.
122. Statement of 1 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17798 (R 1227) No. 3 pp. 16–18.
123. Stct. No. 245 of 20 December 1982, p. 1.
124. Aanh. Hand. II 1982/83 p. 2181.
125. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
126. Statement of 1 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17798 (R 1227) No. 3 pp. 13–14.
127. Idem, p. 28.
128. Cf., 14 NYIL (1983) p. 249.
129. UN Doc. A/37/10, especially p. 6 et seq.
130. Article 36 bis reads:
“Obligations and rights arise for States members of an international organization from the provisions of a treaty to which that organization is a party when the parties to the treaty intend those provisions to be the means of establishing such obligations and according such rights and have defined their conditions and effects in the treaty or have otherwise agreed thereon, and if:
(a) the States members of the organization, by virtue of the constituent instrument of that organization or otherwise, have unanimously agreed to be bound by the said provisions of the treaty; and
(b) the assent of the States members of the organization to be bound by the relevant provisions of the treaty has been duly brought to the knowledge of the negotiating States and negotiating organizations.”
131. Article 2(1)(j) reads: “For the purposes of the present article ‘rules of the organization’ means, in particular, the constituent instrument, relevant decisions and resolutions, and established practice of the organizations.”
132. Article 2(1)(g) reads: “For the purposes of the present articles ‘party’ means a State or an international organization which has consented to be bound by the treaty and for which the treaty is in force”.
133. Article 46 reads:
“1. A State may not invoke the fact that its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental importance.
2. In the case of paragraph 1, a violation is manifest if it would be objectively evident to any State or any international organization referring in good faith to normal practice of States in the matter.
3. An international organization may not invoke the fact that its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of the rules of the organization regarding competence to conclude treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a rule of fundamental importance.
4. In the case of paragraph 3, a violation is manifest if it is or ought to be within the knowledge of any contracting State or any contracting organization.”
134. Article 73 reads:
“1. The provisions of the present articles shall not prejudge any question that may arise in regard to a treaty between one or more States and one or more international organizations from a succession of States or from the international responsibility of a State or from the outbreak of hostilities between States parties to that treaty.
2. The provisions of the present articles shall not prejudge any question that may arise in regard to a treaty from the international responsibility of an international organization, from the termination of the existence of the organization or from the termination of participation by a State in the membership of the organization.”
135. Statement of 9 November 1982, Zevenendertigste Zitting, pp. 517–521; summary in UN Doc. A/C.6/37/SR.40.
136. Articles 3–7 concern the applicability of Dutch criminal law.
137. Reference is made here to the following judicial decisions: Supreme Court, 1 November 1897, W 7040 (for complicity), Supreme Court, 15 June 1917, NJ 821, and Supreme Court, 26 June 1933, NJ 1933, 1582 (for procurement) and Court of Appeal of Den Bosch, 20 September 1942, NJ 1943, 895 (for causing to commit). The fact that this also applies to attempted offences may be deduced from the conclusion of the Advocate-General to the Supreme Court of 9 March 1976, 356.
There are no grounds for inferring from the Supreme Court judgment of 6 April 1954, NJ 1954, 368, that these observations would not apply to acts of participation in the form of complicity [medeplegen]. In this judgment, the Court established that in a case of fraud not only the place (abroad) from which the fraudulent devices were dispatched, but also the place where they arrived and where the victim was induced to hand over money must be regarded as the place of the crime. This conclusion follows from the definition in Art. 326 of the Criminal Code, according to which the offence of fraus is completed only when a person has been induced to hand over property and the like. It cannot, however, be deduced from the judgment that complicity in an offence committed (partly) in the Netherlands could never take place wholly on foreign territory.
138. Stb. 1978 No. 430.
139. Statement of 24 June 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17975 No. 3 pp. 8–10.
140. Act of 20 July 1814, Stb. 1814 No. 85.
141. Statement of 4 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17804 (R 1228) No. 5 pp. 24–25.
142. Exchange of letters of 28 September / 1 October 1982, Trb. 1982 No. 164 and 1983 No. 18.
143. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17197 No. 13 p. 3.
144. Trb. 1982 No. 61 sub J.
145. Exchange of letters of 2/4 March 1982, Trb. 1982 Nos. 61 and 69.
146. Agreement between the parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the status of their forces, London, 19 June 1951, Trb. 1951 No. 114.
147. Memorandum of 29 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17849 No. 1 pp. 2–3.
148. Cf. earlier, 10 NYIL (1979) p. 373.
149. Trb. 1960 No. 69.
150. Seep. 335.
151. Trb. 1962 No. 54.
152. Memorandum of 29 October 1982, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17654 No. 3 pp. 9–10.
153. Cf. earlier, 12 NYIL (1981) p. 227.
154. Stb. 1884 No. 40.
155. Trb. 1959 No. 123.
156. Memorandum of 29 October 1982, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17654 No. 3 pp. 5–6.
157. Cf. earlier, 14 NYIL (1983) p. 311.
158. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17824 No. 1 pp. 3–4.
159. De Veiligheidsraad in 1983 [The Security Council in 1983], Publication of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vol. 131, p. 144.
160. Reply of 28 April 1983, Bijl.Hand, II 1982/83 - 17294 No. 6 p. 15.
161. Cf., 8 NYIL (1977) p. 201; 9 NYIL (1978) p. 229; 10 NYIL (1979) p. 379; 11 NYIL (1980) p. 227; 12 NYIL (1981) p. 230; 13 NYIL (1982) p. 229 and 232; 14 NYIL (1983) p. 314.
162. UN Doc. A/37/10, especially p. 167 et seq.
163. Statement of 16 November 1982, Zevenendertigste Zitting, pp. 523–526; summary in UN Doc. A/C.6/36/SR.46.
164. Trb. 1962 Nos. 101 and 159.
165. Stb. 1871 No. 91 and 1981 No. 776 respectively.
166. Statement of 8 March 1983, Bijl. Hand. II 1982/83 - 16644 (R 1158) No. 7 pp. 10–11.
167. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
168. Part V concerns the invalidity, termination and suspension of the operation of treaties.
169. Articles 53 and 64 concern the emergence of a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens).
170. Statement of 1 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17798 (R 1227) No. 4 pp. 31–32.
171. Article 98 reads, inter alia: “The Secretary-General shall act in that capacity in all meetings of the General Assembly, of the Security Council, of the Economic and Social Council, and of the Trusteeship Council, and shall perform such other functions as are entrusted to him by these organs.”
Article 99 reads: “The Secretary-General may bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.”
172. Zevenendertigste Zitting, pp. 512–514; summary in UN Doc. A/C.6/37/SR.25.
173. The new article reads in full (UN Doc. A/CONF. 117/C.1/L.25/Rev.1/Corr.1):
“1. If a dispute arises regarding the interpretation or application of this Convention, the parties to the dispute shall seek to resolve it by a process of consultation and negotiation upon the request of any of them.
2. If the dispute is not resolved as a result of the process of consultation and negotiation referred to in paragraph 1 within [three months] of its inception, any State participating in the process may, by a written application, submit it to the International Court of Justice for a decision unless the parties by common consent agree upon other means of settlement.
3. Each State may, at the time of signature or ratification of this Convention or accession thereto, declare that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 2. The other State shall not be bound by paragraph 2 with respect to any State which has made such a declaration.
4. When a dispute regarding the interpretation or application of this Convention includes a State which has made a declaration under paragraph 3, if the dispute is not settled by negotiation or by other agreed means, any one of the parties to the dispute may, by a request addressed to the other party, submit it to arbitration in conformity with the Annex to this Convention.
5. Any State which has made a declaration in accordance with paragraph 3 may at any time withdraw that declaration by notification to the depositary.”
174. The Annex reads in full (UN Doc. A/CONF.117/C.1/L.57):
“1. Arbitration procedure, unless the parties to the dispute decide otherwise, shall be in accordance with the rules set out in this Annex.
2. The arbitration tribunal shall consist of three members: one arbitrator nominated by each of the parties to the dispute, and a third arbitrator who shall be nominated by agreement between the two first-named, and shall act as its chairman.
3. If, at the end of a period of 60 days from the nomination of the second arbitrator, the chairman of the tribunal has not been nominated, the Secretary-General of the United Nations upon request of either party to the dispute shall proceed to such nomination.
4. If, at the end of a period of 60 days from the date of the receipt of the request for arbitration, one of the parties to the dispute has not nominated the member of the tribunal for whose designation it is responsible, the other party may directly inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations who shall nominate the chairman of the tribunal.
5. The chairman of the tribunal shall, upon nomination in accordance with paragraph 4, request the party which has not provided an arbitrator, to do so within a period of 60 days. If the party does not make the required nomination, the chairman of the tribunal shall so inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations who shall make the nomination.
6. The chairman of the tribunal, if nominated under the provisions of paragraph 3 or 4, shall not be or have been a national or one of the parties to the dispute, except with the consent of the other party.
7. In the case of the decease or default of an arbitrator for whose nomination one of the parties is responsible, the said party shall nominate a replacement within a period of 60 days from the date of decease or default. Should the said party not make the nomination, the arbitration shall continue under the remaining arbitrators. In the case of decease or default of the chairman of the tribunal, a replacement shall be nominated in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2 above or, in the absence of agreement between the members of the tribunal within a period of 60 days of the decease or default, according to the provisions of paragraph 3. The arbitration is continued as soon as the new chairman has been nominated.
8. If a procedure has been initiated between two parties to a dispute, any other Contracting State the interests of which are affected may join in the arbitration procedure by giving written notice to the parties which have originally initiated the procedure unless either of the latter parties object to such joinder.
9. An arbitration tribunal established under the provisions of the present Annex shall decide its own rules of procedure.
10. Decisions of the tribunal both as to its procedure and its place of meeting as to any controversy laid before it, shall be taken by majority vote of its members; the absence or abstention of one of the members for whose nomination the parties to the dispute were responsible shall not constitute an impediment to the tribunal reaching a decision. In cases of equal voting, the chairman shall cast the deciding vote.
11. Absence or default of one party to the dispute shall not constitute an impediment to the procedure.
12. The award of the tribunal shall be final and binding on the parties to the dispute.
13. Any controversy which may arise between the parties to the dispute as regards interpretation and execution of the award may be submitted by either party for judgement to the tribunal which made the award, or, if it is not available, to another tribunal constituted for this purpose in the same manner as the original tribunal.”
175. UN Doc. A/CONF.117/C.1/SR.43 pp. 5–6.
176. Trb. 1972 No. 51.
177. Trb. 1956 No. 119.
178. Statement of 1 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17798 (R 1227) No. 4 p. 32.
179. Trb. 1981 No. 155 p. 11 et seq.
180. Trb. 1981 No. 155 p. 5 et seq.
181. The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules are incorporated in the Yearbook of Commercial Arbitration, Vol. II (1978) pp. 161–171. The rules adapted for use by the Tribunal, the “Tribunal Rules (March 1983)” are incorporated in Yearbook Vol. VIII (1983) pp. 234–256.
182. Cf., p. 276 supra.
183. Trb. 1958 No. 145; lately Trb. 1980 No. 27.
184. Article 642: “1. The arbitral decision shall be executed by virtue of an order of the President of the District Court [in question].
2. This writ shall be written on the original and be copied when issued”.
Article 644: “The arbitral decision, bearing the order of the President of the competent District Court, shall be executed by the usual method of execution”.
Article 645: “The Court whose President has issued this order, shall take cognizance of the dispute concerning the execution of the arbitral decision”.
185. Stb. 1981 Nos. 451 and 669 respectively.
186. Memorandum of 14 July 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 18000 No. 3 pp. 5–8.
187. Trb. 1981 No. 155 p. 11 et seq.
188. Reply of 28 October 1982, Aanh.Hand. II 1982/83 pp. 283–284.
189. Stb. 1935 No. 332.
190. European Court of Justice, 15 December 1976, case 41/76, Donckerwolcke, Jur. '76 p. 1938.
191. European Court of Justice, 19 December 1968, case 13/68, Salgoil, Jur. 1968 p. 645.
192. See n. 190 supra.
193. Stb. 1962 No. 295 and 1980 No. 93 respectively.
194. See 12 NYIL (1981) p. 242.
195. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17895 No. 2 pp. 14–18; also Stc. No. 87 of 6 May 1983 pp. 1, 4–5.
196. Commentary of 2 June 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17895 No. 3 pp. 32–39.
197. Advisory report on the compatibility of a Benelux or national oil embargo with Benelux law, of 1 September 1980, Bijl.Hand. II 1980/81 - 16400 V No. 86 pp. 8–11.
198. Hand. II 1982/83 pp. 4730–4733.
199. Cf. earlier, 13 NYIL (1982) p. 237.
200. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16432 No. 13 pp. 1–2.
201. Bijl.Hand. II 1981/82 - 17100 XIII No. 150.
202. See n. 200 supra at p. 3.
203. ILM (1983) p. 723.
204. Article 4 of the Annex of the Israeli/Lebanese agreement reads in full:
“It is understood that the government of Lebanon may request appropriate action in the United Nations Security Council for one unit of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) to be stationed in the Sidon area. The presence of this unit will lend support to the government of Lebanon and the Lebanese armed forces in asserting governmental authority and protection in the Palestinian refugee camp areas. For a period of 12 months, the unit in the Sidon area may send teams to the Palestinian refugee camp areas in the vicinity of Sidon and Tyre to surveil and observe, if requested by the government of Lebanon following notification to the security arrangements committee. Police and security functions shall remain the sole responsibility of the government of Lebanon, which shall ensure that the provisions of the agreement shall be fully implemented in these areas”.
205. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17600 V/X No. 115 pp. 8–10.
206. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17600 V/X No. 24 p. 6.
207. Protocol of 3 August 1981, 20 ILM (1981) p. 1190.
208. Hand. II 1982/83 pp. 2966–2967.
209. Cf., 11 NYIL (1980) p. 247.
210. Twaalfde Bijzondere Zitting van de Algemene Vergadering der Verenigde Naties inzake Ontwapening [Twelfth Special Session of the UN General Assembly on Disarmament], Publication of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vol. 129, p. 133.
211. See, 10 NYIL (1979) p. 391.
212. UN Doc. A/AC.206/14.
213. UN General Assembly Resolution 2373 (XXII), annex.
214. UN General Assembly Resolution 31/72, annex.
215. Twaalfde Bijzondere Zitting van de Algemene Vergadering der Verenigde Naties inzake Ontwapening [Twelfth Special Session of the UN General Assembly on Disarmament], Publication of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vol. 129, pp. 99–102; see also UN Doc. A/S - 12/22 Annex.
216. Zevenendertigste Zitting, pp. 414–1415; see also in Stc. No. 242 of 15 December 1982 p. 3.
217. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17600 No. 21 pp. 2–3.
218. Lastly, Trb. 1980 No. 86.
219. Bijl.Hand. 1951/52 - 2511 No. 9.
220. Bijl.Hand. 16813 (R 1165).
221. Lastly, Trb. 1979 No. 65.
222. Memorandum of 19 November 1982, Bijl.Hand. II 17690 (R 1221) No. 1 pp. 2–3.
223. Article 2 paragraph 2, opening sentence and sub 4° states that, in time of war, the District Courts of first instance take cognizance of punishable acts committed by anyone in territory occupied by the Dutch armed forces, insofar as such cognizance is in conformity with the rules recognized by international law.
224. Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war, Trb. 1951 No. 75.
225. Stb. 1921 No. 841.
226. Stb. 1954 No. 249.
227. Reference is made here to Jean Pictet, Les Conventions de Genève du 12 Août 1949, vol. IV, p. 360 et seq.
228. Statement of 4 March 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17804 (R 1228) No. 5 p. 13.
229. De Veiligheidsraad in 1983 [The Security Council in 1983], Publication of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vol. 131, p. 103.
230. Article 14 paragraph 4 reads:
“Agreements between the predecessor State and the newly independent State to determine succession to State property otherwise than by the application of paragraphs 1 to 3 shall not infringe the principle of the permanent sovereignty of every people over its wealth and natural resources.”
Paragraph 32 of the ILC's commentary reads: “In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Commission, while being aware that the principle of permanent sovereignty over wealth and natural resources applies in the case of every people and not only of peoples of newly independent States, nevertheless thought it particular relevant and necessary to stress that principle in the context of succession of States relating to newly independent States.”
231. UN Doc. A/CONF.117/C.1/L. 18.
232. UN Doc. A/CONF.117/C.1/SR.13 p. 3.
233. Stb. 1973 No. 246.
234. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17600 XIII No. 127 pp. 5–7.
235. Cf. 12 NYIL (1981) p. 255; 13 NYIL (1982) p. 265; 14 NYIL (1983) p. 333.
236. UN Doc. E/CN.4/1983/SR.18 p. 4.
237. Cf., 14 NYIL (1983) p. 334.
238. Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 18012 nr. 2 p. 5.
239. Agreement of 23 February 1983, Trb. 1983 No. 94.
240. New York, 13 February 1946, Stb. No. I, 224.
241. Memorandum of 10 August 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 18018 No. 1 pp. 2–3.
242. Agreement of 5 June 1982, Trb. 1982 No. 151.
243. Memorandum of 5 November 1982, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17663 No. 1 pp. 2–3.
244. Agreement of 14 October 1982, Treb. 1982 No. 166.
245. Memorandum of 2 December 1982, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17694 No. 1 p. 2.
246. Aanh. Hand. II 1982/83 pp. 939–940.
247. Trb. 1962 No. 30.
248. Stb. 1976 No. 424.
249. Reply of 31 May 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 17867 No. 2 pp. 18–20.
250. Statement of 17 February 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16204 No. 6 p. 4.
251. Memorandum of 19 June 1975, Bijl.Hand. II 1974/75 - 13461 No. 1 p. 64; cf. earlier, NYIL (1982) p. 270.
252. Letter of 3 February 1983, Bijl.Hand. II 1982/83 - 16204 No. 6 p. 8.
