Suchergebnisse

State responsibility has been on the agenda of the International Law Commission since its earliest days. Nearly fifty years ago, in 1949, the Commission identified state responsibility as one of fourteen topics in international law ready for codification. Only in 1956, however, did the Commission, with F.V. Garcia Amador as special rapporteur, begin in earnest its state responsibility codification project. Garcia Amador, whose work focused on the responsibility of states toward aliens on their territory, submitted a number of reports through 1961, but limited discussion was devoted to the topic. A review of the early history of the Commission's state responsibility project, as well as other efforts at codification of this area of law, may be found in the ILC's 1969 Yearbook

The International Law Commission's articles on reparations restate the existing law on remedies, but they also innovate in significant ways to reinforce broader community interests in international legality. Given the dearth of precedents on reparations, both aspects can be helpful to tribunals and parties engaged in traditional interstate litigation, but the progressive elements, if they are accepted by states, could have wider application in supporting mechanisms to enhance implementation and observance of international obligations. The combination of codification and progressive development, however, is sometimes an uneasy fit and leaves unanswered several important questions about the theoretical foundation and practical application of the law of reparations. Even the seeming clarity of the articles is deceptive because some of the concepts included in the broadly drafted provisions can be difficult to apply in practice.

The United States agrees with the Commission that a statement of the law of state
responsibility must provide guidance to states with respect to the following questions:When does an act of a state entail international responsibility? What actions are attributable to the state? What consequences flow from a state'sviolation of its international responsibility? Customary international law provides answers to these questions, but the Commission has in many instances not codified such norms but rather proposed new substantive rules. In particular, the sections on countermeasures, crimes, dispute settlement, and state injury contain provisions that are not supported by customary international law.

Abstract
The International Law Commission adopted the Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts in 2001, when there had been fewer than 100 recorded investment claims. Since then, there has been a significant rise in the number of investment treaty arbitration cases. This article considers how the ILC Articles have been used by investment treaty tribunals to analyse issues of State responsibility in investment treaty claims. The article summarises key trends concerning the use of the ILC Articles in investment treaty arbitration. It addresses the application of the ILC Articles in investment disputes, the role given to the ILC Articles in determining questions of attribution, the influence of the ILC Articles for the analysis of temporal issues, and the role of the ILC Articles in determining matters of reparation and contributory fault. The article is accompanied by a lengthy case appendix which summarises references by investment treaty tribunals to the ILC Articles from 2010–2020.

Abstract
In this Special Issue, commemorating the twentieth anniversary of the International Law Commission's Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, as adopted in August 2001 ('ILC Articles' or 'ARSIWA'), we curate a bibliography annotating important contributions to scholarship and literature concerning the ILC Articles. It is organized topically, including focus on attribution, elements of international breach (including acts, omissions, defences and justifications), the State–individual relationship, State responsibility for judicial acts, various redress doctrines and contributory fault. Each entry is accompanied by a few comments. This annotated bibliography aims to be useful to practitioners and scholars alike, as it presents a centralized corpus of relevant literature, reflecting the topics that have captured popular interest, while also illuminating possible gaps where further scholarly attention is needed.