Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNITED A NATIONS General Assembly Distr. LIMITED A/CN.4/L.682 13 April 2006 Original: ENGLISH INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION Fifty-eighth session Geneva, 1 May-9 June and 3 July-11 August 2006 FRAGMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW: DIFFICULTIES ARISING FROM THE DIVERSIFICATION AND EXPANSION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission Finalized by Martti Koskenniemi* * The Chairman gratefully acknowledges the help of a number of colleagues who have commented on the topic and provided advice and assistance on particular questions. Special mention should, among them, be made of Professor Campbell McLachlan, Dr. Anders Fischer-Lescano, Professor Gunther Teubner, Professor Emmanuelle Jouannet, Professor Pierre Marie Dupuy and Ms. Isabelle Van Damme. Several NYU interns provided assistance during the Study Group meetings and collecting background materials on particular items. They include Gita Kothari, Cade Mosley, Peter Prows, and Olivia Maloney. Anna Huilaja, Ilona Nieminen and Varro Vooglaid at the Erik Castrén Institute of International Law and Human Rights in Helsinki provided much appreciated help in research. Last but not least, the assistance throughout the years of Ms. Anja Lindroos from the University of Helsinki needs to be recognized. Without her careful notes of the Study Group meetings and her background research this Report would never have materialized. Nevertheless, the contents of this report - including any opinions therein - remain the sole responsibility of its author. GE.06-61077 (E) 090506 A/CN.4/L.682 page 2 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page A. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 1 - 4 7 B. FRAGMENTATION AS A PHENOMENON ............................... 5 - 45 10 1. The background ........................................................................ 5 - 20 10 2. What is a conflict? .................................................................... 21 - 26 17 3. The approach of this Study: seeking relationships .................. 27 - 36 20 4. Harmonization - systemic integration ....................................... 37 - 43 25 5. Jurisdiction vs. applicable law .................................................. 44 - 45 28 C. CONFLICTS BETWEEN SPECIAL LAW AND GENERAL LAW (lex specialis derogare lege generali) ................................... 46 - 222 30 1. Introduction .............................................................................. 47 - 55 30 (a) Fragmentation through conflicting interpretations of general law ....................................................................... 49 - 52 31 (b) Fragmentation through the emergence of special law as exception to the general law ........................................ 53 - 54 33 (c) Fragmentation as differentiation between types of special law ........................................................................ 55 34 2. The function and scope of the lex specialis maxim .................. 56 - 122 34 (a) Lex specialis in international law ..................................... 56 - 87 34 (i) Legal doctrine ........................................................ 56 - 67 34 (ii) Case law ................................................................. 68 - 84 40 (iii) An informal hierarchy: the point of lex specialis ............................................................ 85 - 87 47 (b) The two types of lex specialis reference .......................... 88 - 107 49 (i) Lex specialis as an application of lege generali .... 98 - 102 54 (ii) Lex specialis as an exception to the general rule ... 103 - 107 56 A/CN.4/L.682 page 3 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs Page (c) Prohibited lex specialis ..................................................... 108 - 110 59 (d) The relational character of the general/special distinction .......................................................................... 111 - 118 60 (i) Speciality in regard to parties ................................. 113 - 115 61 (ii) Speciality in regard to “subject-matter” ................. 116 - 118 62 (e) Conclusion for lex specialis: the omnipresence of “general law” .................................................................... 119 - 122 64 3. Self-contained (special) regimes ............................................... 123 - 190 65 (a) What are self-contained regimes? ..................................... 123 - 137 65 (b) Self-contained regimes and the ILC work on State responsibility ..................................................................... 138 - 152 74 (c) The relationship between self-contained regimes outside State responsibility and general international law ................................................................ 153 - 190 83 (i) Establishment of self-contained (special) regimes ................................................................... 154 - 158 83 (ii) The relationship of the self-contained (special) regime vis-à-vis general international law under normal circumstances ............................................. 159 - 185 85 (1) Example: human rights regimes ..................... 161 - 164 85 (2) Example: WTO law ....................................... 165 - 171 87 (3) Conclusions on the relationship of self-contained (special) regimes vis-à-vis general international law under normal circumstances .................................................. 172 - 185 91 (iii) Fall-back onto general rules due to the failure of self-contained regimes ........................................ 186 - 190 97 4. Conclusions on self-contained regimes ..................................... 191 - 194 99 A/CN.4/L.682 page 4 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs Page 5. Regionalism .............................................................................. 195 - 219 102 (a) What is “regionalism”? .................................................... 195 - 198 102 (b) “Regionalism” as a set of approaches and methods for examining international law ....................................... 199 - 204 103 (c) “Regionalism” as a technique for international law-making ....................................................................... 205 - 210 106 (d) “Regionalism” as the pursuit of geographical exceptions to universal international law rules ................ 211 - 217 108 (e) European integration ........................................................ 218 - 219 112 6. Conclusion on conflicts between special law and general law ................................................................................ 220 - 222 114 D. CONFLICTS BETWEEN SUCCESSIVE NORMS ....................... 223 - 323 115 1. General law on conflicts between earlier and later treaties ...... 228 - 250 118 (a) Conflict between treaties with identical parties ............... 229 - 233 118 (b) Conflict between treaties with non-identical parties ........ 234 - 250 121 (i) Lex prior ................................................................ 236 - 242 122 (ii) Lex posterior .......................................................... 243 - 250 125 2. Article 30 VCLT: from invalidity to responsibility ................. 251 - 266 128 (a) The question of “same subject-matter” ............................ 253 - 256 129 (b) The ILC debates ............................................................... 257 - 266 131 3. Special clauses .......................................................................... 267 - 294 135 (a) A typology of conflict clauses ......................................... 268 - 271 135 (b) Relations within and across regimes: environmental treaties .............................................................................. 272 - 282 138 (c) Conflict clause in the EC Treaty ...................................... 283 - 288 143 (d) Disconnection clauses ...................................................... 289 - 294 147 A/CN.4/L.682 page 5 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs Page 4. Inter se agreements ................................................................... 295 - 323 151 (a) The conditions applicable to the conclusion of inter se agreements ........................................................... 304 - 315 156 (i) Preservation of the rights and interests of the parties to the original treaty .................................... 305 - 308 157 (ii) Preservation of the object and purpose of the multilateral treaty .................................................... 309 - 313 159 (iii) Other situations ....................................................... 314 - 315 161 (b) Notification to the other parties and their reaction ........... 316 - 318 162 (c) Consequences for breach of the multilateral treaty by parties to an inter se agreement ........................................ 319 164 (d) Conclusion on successive agreements .............................. 320 - 323 165 E. RELATIONS OF IMPORTANCE: ARTICLE 103 OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS, JUS COGENS AND OBLIGATIONS ERGA OMNES AS CONFLICT RULES .................................................................. 324 - 409 166 1. Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations ...................... 328 - 360 168 (a) What are the prevailing obligations? ................................ 331 - 332 168 (b) What does it mean for an obligation to prevail over another? ............................................................................. 333 - 340 170 (c) Special cases ..................................................................... 341 - 350 173 (i) Conflicts with treaties between United Nations Member