Representación Permanente ante las Naciones Unidas

Statements

Permanent Mission to the Un

Contact Us

Issues in which the Permanent Mission works

General Assembly

Report of the International Law Commission

October 25, 2011: General Assembly. Sixth Committee : Agenda item 81. Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its 63rd Session. (Cluster I). Statement by the Deputy-Legal Adviser of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Argentina, Minister Holger Martinsen

Mr. Chairman,

Being this the first time I take the floor at this Session, allow me to reiterate to you how pleased the Argentine delegation is for your election as President of the Sixth Commitee. We would also like to thank the President of the International Law Commission, Mr. Maurice Kamto, for the introduction of the Report of the ILC.

Our delegation joins others who have previously expressed their condolences for the passing of Professor Antonio Cassese. His valuable contribution to the study and analysis of international law deserves a true recognition by my delegation. His contribution to the development of international criminal law will also be always treasured.

Regarding the work of the Commission, my delegation associates itself which the statement deliverd by Chile on behalf of the Rio Group.

Argentina has followed the work of the ILC with great attention. In the last year, the ILC has considered some issues of high interest for the codification and progressive development of international law.

Regarding the report on Reservations to Treaties, we would like at the outset to congratulate very specially the Special Rapporteur - Professor Alain Pellet - for his devoted work and for the quality and the erudition of his successive reports, which represent a significant progress in the consideration by the ILC of substantive aspects of this important issue. The work done deserves to be especially acknowledged as it formulates a comprehensive draft of guidelines or recommendations for practice –which is examined in detail- and contributes to clarifying the main aspects of the legal regime on reservations to treaties, all with remarkable detail and within the general framework of the provisons of the 1969, 1978 and 1986 Vienna Conventions.

We are of the view that one of the major achievements of this outstanding work is having examined in a systematic manner the practice of States regarding the acceptance –being it express or tacit- of reservations made by other States and the formulation of objections to reservations. But it also addresses some questions aiming at the progressive development of international law, which will possibly require a deep examination, such as the case of the object of reservations and the succession of States in relation to reservations. We also recognize the work of the Commission regarding the clarification provided on the regime applicable to interpretative declarations and their effects.

Nevertheless, some aspects of the mechanisms proposed by the Commission –such as the case of the “observatory” for reservations- require a deeper analysis in light of the need to preserve the integrity of international law. Besides the fact that Reservations to Treaties will be addressed in detail at the 67th Session, my delegation wishes to take this opportunity to share its opinion regarding the need to consider fully and with caution the creation of mechanisms such as the “observatory” for reservations.

Our delegation reiterates it deep and warm gratefulness to Professor Pellet.

Mr. Chairman,

My delegation whishes also to refer to the draft articles on the Responsibility of international organizations, and thank the Special Rapporteur Mr. Giorgio Gaja for his hard work.

We share the view expressed yesterday, Monday 24, by two of the organizations that took the opportunity to participate in this debate regarding the need to take duly into account the heterogeneity of international organizations. Nevertheless, we value the efforts of the Commission to identify the elemements that these entities have in common regarding the international responsibility in which they can incurr vis à vis States and other international organizations. Several international organizations seem to be aware of such common factors, which are also part of their own perception of themselves, as is shown by the many times in they act jointly before Governments claiming for analogous treatment regarding issues of their interest.

At this time, my delegation wishes to call the attention to the content of draft article 22 on countermeasures and the concepts expressed in the second paragraph of the commentaries. The application by analogy of the specific principles that govern the responsibility between States to the relations between international organizations and non-Member States requires a prudent examination. The parta tertiis principle has obvious implications in this question that need to be considered in its whole dimension. Also, the limits to the competences of international organizations –in all the scope of those competences, in particular the personal and material ones- also deserve specific consideration, which is still pending. In this regard, all the differences between a State and an international organization must be duly kept in mind.

Thank you.

 Misión Permanente Argentina ante las Naciones Unidas


 

Fondo argentino de cooperación sur-sur y triangular