Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T03:18:13.003Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The International Law Commission Reinvents Itself?

Part of: The Sixty-Fifth Session of the International Law Commission

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kristina Daugirdas
Kristina Daugirdas*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan Law School
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

For most of its history, the International Law Commission has been in the business of producing draft articles. Yet, Sean Murphy’s coverage of the Commission’s sixty-fifth session reveals that the Commission has decisively turned away from this format. As Jacob Katz Cogan’s earlier post observes, the Commission is demonstrating a new-found preference for outputs that are explicitly non-binding and betray no aspiration to form the basis for multilateral treaties. The Commission’s embrace of alternative formats is a promising response to some of the risks and criticisms associated with producing draft articles. But it is also an incomplete response. To ensure that its work continues to be relevant, ambitious, and influential, the Commission must revise its working methods as well as its outputs. In particular, the Commission should develop procedures for engaging with and soliciting input from the non-state actors who are becoming an increasingly important audience for the Commission’s work.

Type
Symposium: The Sixty-Fifth Session of the International Law Commission
Information
AJIL Unbound , Volume 108 , 2014 , pp. 79 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2014

References

1 Murphy, Sean D., Immunity Ratione Personae of Foreign Government Officials and Other Topics: The Sixty-Fifth Session of the International Law Commission , 108 AJIL 41 (2014)Google Scholar.

2 Cogan, Jacob Katz, The Changing Form of the International Law Commission’s Work, 108 AJIL Unbound 4 (2014)Google Scholar.

3 Jose E. Alvarez, International Organizations as Law-Makers (2005).

4 Franck, Thomas M. & ElBaradei, Mohamed, The Codification and Progressive Development of International Law: A UNITAR Study of the Role and Use of the International Law Commission, 76 AJIL 630 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 See Cogan, supra note 2.

6 See Murphy, supra note 1.

7 Rep. of the Int’l Law Comm’n, 63d Sess., Apr. 26-June 3, July 4-Aug. 12, 2011, UN Doc. A/66/10; GAOR, 66th Sess., Supp. No. 10 (2011).

8 Milanovic, Marko & Sicilianos, Linos-Alexander, Reservations to Treaties: An Introduction, 24 Eur. J. Int’l L. 1055, 1058 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 James Crawford, Special Rapporteur, Fourth Rep. on State Responsibility, Int’l L. Comm’n, UN Doc. A/CN.4/517 (Apr. 2, 2001).

10 Charnovitz, Steve, New Opportunities for Nongovernmental Actors in the International Law Commission (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Rep. of the Int’l Law Comm’n, 65th Sess., May 6-June 7, July 8-Aug. 9, 2013, UN Doc. A/68/10; GAOR, 68th Sess., Supp. No. 10 (2013).