scholarly journals Methodological Flaws in the ILC's Study on Exceptions to Immunity Ratione Materiae of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 9-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qinmin Shen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Draft Article ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The Core ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
International Law Commission

In July 2017, the UN International Law Commission (ILC) provisionally adopted Draft Article 7 on exceptions to immunity ratione materiae of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, by a recorded vote of twenty-one votes in favor, eight votes against, and one abstention. In the view of the majority of ILC members, immunity ratione materiae does not apply to the six international crimes listed in the draft article—genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, apartheid, torture, and enforced disappearance—either because of a limitation or because of an exception. The unusual practice of adopting a draft article by recorded vote demonstrated the deep controversy among the ILC members themselves. After all, exceptions to official immunity lie at the core of the project of “Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction” that was started a decade ago by the ILC. This divisive Draft Article 7 naturally garnered criticism and equally deep controversy among states in discussions on the ILC's work report at UN General Assembly Sixth Committee in late October 2017.

The international law commission’s recent work on exceptions to immunity: Charting the course for a brave new world in international law?

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (01) ◽  
pp. 169-187
Author(s):  
Dire Tladi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Draft Article ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Brave New World ◽  
Main Criticism ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Mixed Reaction

AbstractIn the summer of 2017, the International Law Commission adopted a draft article on exceptions to immunity. The Draft Article adopted provides that immunityratione materiaedoes not apply with respect to certain international crimes, namely crimes against humanity, the crime of genocide, war crimes, the crime of apartheid, torture, and enforced disappearances. These exceptions do not apply to immunityratione personae. The Draft Article was adopted after a vote and was severely criticized by some members of the Commission. It has also received mixed reaction from states, with some supporting its content while others have opposed it. In the aftermath of the adoption of the Draft Article, there has also been academic commentary, some of which has been critical. The (main) criticism levelled against the Draft Article is that it does not represent existing law and has no basis in the practice of states. This article seeks to evaluate the criticism by considering whether there is any state practice in support of the Draft Article proposed by the Commission.

scholarly journals Immunity Ratione Materiae of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction: Where is the State Practice in Support of Exceptions?

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 4-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean D. Murphy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
The State ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Draft Article ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
State Practice ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

In the summer of 2017, the UN International Law Commission adopted Draft Article 7 and an associated draft annex for its project on immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. The draft article identifies six “crimes under international law in respect of which immunity ratione materiae shall not apply”: genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; crime of apartheid; torture; and enforced disappearance. Given the divergences within the Commission when considering and adopting Draft Article 7 (as evidenced by the plenary debate in 2016 and 2017, the unusual recorded vote on whether to refer the matter to the Commission's drafting committee, and the Commentary), it is difficult to conclude that the Commission is expressing a view that Draft Article 7 reflects lex lata.

scholarly journals The “International Crime” Exception in the ILC Draft Articles on the Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction: Two Steps Back?

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 27-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosanne van Alebeek
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Draft Article ◽  
The Real ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Functional Immunity ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

In addressing the topic of the immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, the International Law Commission (ILC) took on one of the most contentious issues in contemporary international law. The question whether functional immunity applies when officials are accused of having committed international crimes has divided courts and scholars alike, and the ILC was deeply split. The “international crimes” exception set forth in Draft Article 7 was, exceptionally, put up for a vote, with twenty-one votes cast in favor of provisional adoption, one abstention, and eight negative votes. Because the ILC has a mandate to both codify and progressively develop international law, these figures do not help resolve what was arguably the real bone of contention: whether or not the exception is already part of customary international law—that is, whether it is lex lata.

The Work of the International Law Commission, 2007–2011: Progress and Prospects

2012 ◽  
Vol 106 (2) ◽  
pp. 322-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald McRae
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Transboundary Aquifers ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
The Way

On November 17, 2011, the UN General Assembly elected the members of the International Law Commission for the next five years. In the course of the quinquennium that was completed in August 2011 with the end of the sixty-third session, the Commission concluded four major topics on its agenda: the law of transboundary aquifers, the responsibility of international organizations, the effect of armed conflicts on treaties, and reservations to treaties. It was by any standard a substantial output. The beginning of a new quinquennium now provides an opportunity to assess what the Commission has achieved, to consider the way it operates, and to reflect on what lies ahead for it.

Visits to the ICRC

1990 ◽  
Vol 30 (277) ◽  
pp. 345-346
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
United Nations General Assembly ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

• ICRC President Comelio Sommaruga received the members of the International Law Commission (ILC) at ICRC headquarters on 7 June 1990.The Commission is a subsidiary body of the United Nations General Assembly. Its 34 members are elected from among the most eminent representatives of the world's different legal systems. The Commission is entrusted with the task of promoting the codification and development of international law. It is currently working on the codification of offences against the peace and security of mankind (which include war crimes) and the setting up of an international criminal court.

scholarly journals Foreign Official Immunity in the International Law Commission: The Meanings of “Official Capacity”

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 156-160
Author(s):  
William S. Dodge
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

Of all the issues facing the International Law Commission (ILC) in its work on the topic of “Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction,” how to define “act performed in an official capacity” is certainly one of the most difficult and important. If serious international crimes, like torture, are considered acts performed in an official capacity, then foreign officials responsible for such crimes may (unless an exception applies) be immune from criminal jurisdiction in other states for such acts even after they leave office.

The Work of The International Law Commission on “Relations between States and International Organizations” Discontinued: an Assessment

1993 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter H.F. Bekker
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The UN General Assembly has recently decided to delete from the agenda of the International Law Commission the topic ‘Relations between States and International Organizations’.Over a period of 31 years, fourteen Reports by two successive Special Rapporteurs studied the topic in two parts. The First part of the topic (1963–1975) dealt with the privileges and immunities of representatives of states to international organizations, and resulted in a Convention, that has, however, not yet entered into force; the Second part of the topic (1976–1992) concentrated on the legal status and immunities of organizations themselves.The author analyzes the Draft Articles that have been submitted in the course of the ILC's study of the Second part. This is done by way of a three-step application of the functional necessity concept of organizational immunities:(1) Status, dealing with an organization's functions, legal personality and capacity-(2) Selection, defining a scale of organizational immunities for which an organization may be eligible - and (3) Scope, determining the extent of selected immunities. Finally, the author employs the two statutory functions of the ILC -the codification of international law and the progressive development of international law- to assess the contribution by the ILC to this field of international institutional law.

The International Law Commission's Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts Adopted on Second Reading

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 891-919 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Wittich
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Sensitive Areas ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

In 2001 the International Law Commission finally adopted on second reading the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts and the commentaries thereto, thereby successfully concluding almost half a century of work on the topic by the ILC. Subsequent to the adoption, the General Assembly welcomed the conclusion of the work of the ILC. This article highlights the main changes made during the second reading 1998–2001, among them the issue of international crimes, the concept of injured state and countermeasures. While the 59 articles are the result of compromise, they undoubtedly are a major achievement in one of the most important and most sensitive areas of international law. Ultimately they may be a useful tool to promote the enforcement of community interests in the international legal system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document