Possibility of State Succession to International Responsibility in the Jurisprudence of US-Britain Arbitral Commission and ICJ

پژوهش نامه ایرانی سیاست بین الملل

Article 9, Volume 9, Issue 1 - Serial Number 17, June 2021, Pages 219-244   

Document Type: مقالات

DOI: 10.22067/irlip.2021.21223.0

Authors

Mohamad Setayeshpur¹; Mostafa Fazaeli^{* 2}

¹Ph.D. of International Law, University of Qom

²Department of International Law, Law Faculty, University of Qom

Abstract

Succession of states to international responsibility has been considered as one of the most controversial issues in international law, must be scrutinized regardless of the way the related succession has been occurred. Being controversial, united nations international law commission (ILC), as the scientific institution of codification and progressive development of international law, has also repeatedly refused to deal with the issue in question. While United States of America and Great Britain Arbitral Commission (US-Britain Arbitral Commission) and International Court of Justice (ICJ), as two legal bodies for the peaceful settlement of international disputes, via their decisions and the arguments advanced, clarified the above mentioned conception, which re-affirms the role of international tribunals in the progressive development of international law, beside their main function, i.e. the peaceful settlement of international disputes. Scutinizing the decisions of these two international legal tribunals, clearly, indicates the conceptual evolution of the succession of states in respect of international responsibility. None-succession of state to international responsibility, which explicity was considered as a principle in two arbitral awards of US-Britain arbitral commission, has gone down in the ICJ, gradually. The present paper, through the comparative study of the decisions of these two international legal tribunals, addresses the conceptual evolution of the state succession to international responsibility and its scope as the international legal conception.

Keywords

Succession of States; International Responsibility of State; US-Britain Arbitral Commission; International Court of Justice

References

 

Anderson, J. (2015). Inside the marble corridors of the peace palace: Croatia v. Serbia, 4 February. At https://justicehub.org/article/inside-marble-corridors-peace-palace-croatia-v-serbia

Azizi, S., & Moosavi, M. (2016). Gabcikovo-nagymaros project case: the role of the international court of justice in highlighting the concept of sustainable development, International Law Review, 55(5), 109-134 (in Persian).

Bazzar, V. (2017). Content analysis of judgment of the international court of justice in gabcikovo-nagymaros case, Evolutionary Law, 18(7), 183-208 (in Persian).

Crawford, J. (2012). Brownlie’s principles of public international law, 8^th edn., Oxford University Press.

Czaplinski, W. (1990). State succession and state responsibility, Canadian Yearbook of International Law, 28, 339-359.

Dumberry, P. (2007). State succession to international responsibility, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Falsafi, H. (2012). International law of treaties, Nashr e no (in Persian).

French-Greek Arbitral Tribunal (1956). Lighthouse arbitration, sentence arbitrale en date des 24/27 juillet 1956 rendue par le tribunal d’arbitrage constitué en vertu du compromise signé à paris le 15 juillet 1932 entre la france et la grèce, RIAA, vol. 12, Award.

Habibi, H., & Shamloo, S. (2013). The role of the icj in the development of international law, Quarterly Journal of Public Law, 41(3), 71-114 (in Persian).

Hernandez, G. (2014). The international court of justice and the judicial function, Oxford University Press. 

Hurst, C. J. B. (1924). State succession in matters of tort, British Yearbook of International Law, 163-178.

ICJ (1945). Statute of the Internattional Court of Justice.

ICJ (1994). Counter-memorial, submitted by the slovak republic, Case concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), vol. 1.

ICJ (1996). Legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, Advisory opinion.

ICJ (1997). Case concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project, Judjment.

ICJ (2003). Application of revision of the judgment of 11 july 1996 in the case concerning application of the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, (bosnia and herzegovina v. yugoslavia), Judgment.

ICJ (2007). Application of the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide (bosnia and herzegovina v. serbia and montenegro), Judgment.

ICJ (2015). Application of the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), Judgment.

ICJ (2017). Legal consequences of the seperation of the chagos archipelago from mauritius in 1965 (request for advisory opinion), press release 2017/32, pending case.

ICJ (2018). Legal consequences of the seperation of the chagos archipelago from mauritius in 1965 (request for advisory opinion), press release 2018/39, pending case.

ICJ (2018). Legal consequences of the seperation of the chagos archipelago from mauritius in 1965 (request for advisory opinion), press release 2018/44, pending case.

ILC (1998). Report on State Responsibility.

ILC (2001). Yearbook, vol. II, part. 2, (ARSIWA).

ILC (2011). A/66/10, Report (ARIO).

ILC (2017). Report on Succession of States in Respect of State Responsibility.

ILC (2018). Report on Succession of States in respect of State Responsibility.

ILC (2016). A/71/10, Report.

ILC (2017). A/RES/71/292, Report.

Jacobs, D. (2015). A commentary on the icj, croatia v. serbia genocide case (part i): some thoughts on an anti-climatic result, 16 february. at https://dovjacobs.com/2015/02/16/a-commentary-on-the-icj-croatia-v-serbia-genocide-case-part-i-some-thoughts-on-an-anti-climatic-result/

Leroy, H. (1926). American and british claims arbitration tribunal, American Bar Association Journal, 12, 156-196.

Mataji, M. (2015). The elements of genocide crime in light of the icj judgment in case of croatia v. Serbia, International Police Studies, 23(5), 109-125 (in Persian).

Milanovic, M. (2017). ICJ advisory opinion request on the chagos islands, ejiltalk, 24 june. At https://www.ejiltalk.org/icj-advisory-opinion-request-on-the-chagos-islands/

Mohebi, M., & Rezadoost, V. (2016). Evolutive interpretation of treaties in international law in the light of dispute regarding navigational and related reights case (costa rica v. Nicaragua), International Law Review, 53(1), 9-30 (in Persian).

Novic, E. (2016). The concept of cultural genocide: an international law perspective, Oxford University Press.

Saeedkolahi, H., & Zakerian M. (2017). International law: an introduction, Khorsandi (in Persian).

 Salehahmadi, K. (2012). Scrutinizing state succession in respect of minority rights with emphasize on SFRY, Master degree, thesis, under supervision of M. Ghadir, faculty of law, university of Qom (in Persian).

Schachter, O. (1993). State succession: the once and future law, Virginia Journal of International Law, 33, 253-260.

Setayeshpur, M. (2018). Derivative responsibility in international law, Khorsandi (in Persian).

Shearer, I. (1994). Starke’s international law, 11^th edn., Butterworth.

Special Agreement between the Republic of Hungary and the Slovakia Republic for submission to the international court of justice of the differences between them concerning the gabčíkovo-nagymaros project (1993).

Special Agreement for the Submission to Arbitration of Pecuniary Claims Outstanding Between the United States and Great Britain (1910).

Šturma, P. (2016). State succession in respect of international responsibility, George Washington International Law Review, 48, 653-678.

Taylor, P. (1999). The case concerning the gabcikovo-nagymaros project: a message from the hague on sustainable developmennt, New Zealand Journal of Environmental Law, 3, 109-126.

UNGA (2017). A/71/L.73.

United States-Great Britain Arbitral Commission (1923). R. E. Brown (United States) v. Great Britain, RIAA, vol. 6, Award.

United States-Great Britain Arbitral Commission (1925). F.H. Redward and Others (Great Britain) v. United States (Hawaiian Claims), RIAA, vol. 6, Award.

UNSC (1996). S/RES/1088.

US-Britain (American British) Claims Aarbitration Report, Washington, GPO by F.K. Nielsen (1926).

Verzijl, J. H. W. (1960). Droit de la mer et succession d’Etats, Hommage d’une génération de juristes au président Basdevant, Pedone, 500-524.

Verzijl, J. H. W. (1974). International law in historical perspective, part vii, a.w. Sijthoff International Publishing Company B.V. Leiden.

Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of State Property, Archives and Debts, (1983).

Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties, (1978).

Volkovitsch, M. J. (1992). Righting wrongs: toward a new theory of state succession to responsibility for international delicts, Columbia Law Review, 92, 2162-2214.

Zakerhossein M. H. (2015). Revisiting icj judgment regarding Croatia v. Serbia (in Persian); at: http://www.icicl.org/details.asp?id=215

Ziae, Y. (2013). An introduction of secession in international law, Shahr e danesh (in Persian).

Ziemele, I. (2003). State continuity, succession and responsibility: reparations to the baltic states and their peoples, Baltic Yearbook of International Law, 3, 165-189.