Jus Dispositivum and Jus Cogens in International Law

1966 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred Veedross

Nearly three decades ago I published in this JOURNAL an article in which I tried to prove that even in international law there exist rules having the character of jus cogens; i.e., norms with which treaties must not conflict. Since my eminent colleague in the International Law Commission, Ambassador Tabibi, mentioned in a meeting of this Commission that the view expressed in my article “foreshadowed the solution” embodied in Article 37 of the Commission’s draft Convention on the Law of Treaties concerning the problem of jus cogens in international law, I feel obliged to defend this draft against the criticism directed against it by the eminent English lawyer, Professor Georg Schwarzenberger.

Author(s):  
Shelton Dinah

This chapter discusses how peremptory norms/jus cogens entered positive law with the Vienna treaties on treaties. Jus cogens was first included in the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) with the Third Report of G.G. Fitzmaurice, Special Rapporteur on the Law of Treaties, under the heading ‘legality of the object’. The first two special rapporteurs on the law of treaties supported the notion of peremptory norms in international law. During ILC work on the law of treaties, however, most of the members joined the ILC’s fourth special rapporteur on treaty law, Sir Humphrey Waldock, who sought to reconcile jus cogens with the doctrine of positivism. They spent little time speculating on the origin of jus cogens. The final ILC draft on the law of treaties was produced by Waldock. The work of the ILC on the law of treaties was based essentially on the notion of barring illegal agreements as a general principle of law. The chapter then provides a definition of jus cogens norms.


1967 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 946-975 ◽  
Author(s):  
Egon Schwelb

Article 50 of the Draft Articles on the Law of Treaties, which were presented by the International Law Commission to the General Assembly in 1966 and which the General Assembly has referred, as the basic proposal for consideration, to the international conference of plenipotentiaries, provides under the heading “Treaties conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens)” that: A treaty is void if it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character.


1967 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 976-989 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert W. Briggs

The 1966 Draft Articles on the Law of Treaties, drafted over a period of five years of intensive work by an official organ of the international community—the International Law Commission of the United Nations—is more comprehensive and more reflective of community consensus than any previous draft prepared by international lawyers on the law of treaties. In contrast with the excellent Draft Convention on the Law of Treaties completed by the Harvard Eesearch in International Law in 1935, preparation of the Commission’s draft had the advantage of participation by members representative of all continents and of the views of states which were not in existence in 1935.


1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malgosia Fitzmaurice

The subject-matter of this article are the issues of treaty law as expounded in the Judgment in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros case. The following problems are discussed: unilateral suspension and abandonment of obligations deriving from the binding treaty; the principle of fundamental change of circumstances; unilateral termination of a treaty; applicability of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in this case; legal status of so-called ‘provisional solution’; impossibility of performance and material breach of treaty; the application of the principle of ‘approximate application’; and the principle pacta sunt servanda. The issues arc discussed at the background of the Drafts of the International Law Commission.


1991 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 595-612 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Graefrath

The history, operation and tasks of the International Law Commission (ILC) have often been described and its success in codifying general international law is well-known and widely acknowledged. The conduct of international relations today is unthinkable without such basic instruments, first drafted by the Commission, as the conventions on diplomatic and consular relations, the law of treaties and the law of the sea. Moreover, other ILC drafts that have not been adopted as treaties have had a long-term effect on the development of international law; for example, the Draft Declaration on the Rights and Duties of States, the Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, and the Model Rules on Arbitral Procedure.


2012 ◽  
Vol 106 (2) ◽  
pp. 322-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald McRae

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.


1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 395-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen C. McCaffrey

At its 1994 session, the International Law Commission (ILC) completed the final adoption (“second reading”) of a complete set of thirty-three draft articles on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses, together with a resolution on transboundary confined ground water. The Commission submitted the draft articles and the resolution to the General Assembly and recommended that a convention on international watercourses be elaborated by the Assembly or by an international conference of plenipotentiaries on the basis of the Commission’s draft.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Dire Tladi

In 2019 the International Law Commission adopted two texts providing for the peremptory character of the prohibition of crimes against humanity, namely the draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity and the draft conclusions on peremptory norms of general international law. While both of these instruments recognise the peremptory character of the prohibition of crimes against humanity, neither of them address the consequences of the peremptory character of the prohibition of crimes against humanity. This article, on the basis, inter alia, of the internal processes leading to the adoption of these instruments, addresses the consequences of the peremptory character of the prohibition of crimes against humanity.


2007 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panos Merkouris

AbstractThe Diversification and expansion of International Law has sparked a series of debates on the present status and future of International Law; even more so, since the ILC decided to tackle the issue of fragmentation. One of the areas of research and controversy has been Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which, arguably, enshrines the principle of systemic integration. The aim of this article is to explore the evolution of Article 31(3)(c) from its first inception by the forefathers of international law up to the finalization of the text of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. By mapping the critical arguments in the three main fora of debate (i.e the Institut de Droit International, the International Law Commission and the Vienna Conference on the Law of treaties) what arises is a series of conclusions with respect to certain aspects of Article 31(3)(c) as well as certain recurring themes in the nature and progress of the discussions. All of the above will show that the drafting history of Article 31(3)(c) seems to suggest that the relevant provision was meant to serve a purpose expressed more concisely by the symbol of Ouroboros rather than of a mere "master-key" to the house of International Law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document