Central University of South Bihar

THE INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION

The International Law Commission was established by the General Assembly in 1947 with the
declared object of promoting the progressive development of international law and its
codification.1 It consists of thirty-four members from Africa, Asia, America and Europe, who
remain in office for five years each and who are appointed from lists submitted by national
governments. The Commission is aided in its deliberations by consultations with various outside
bodies including the Asian–African Legal Consultative Committee, the European Commission
on Legal Cooperation and the Inter-American Council of Jurists. 2 Many of the most important
international conventions have grown out of the Commission’s work. Having decided upon a
topic, the International Law Commission will prepare a draft. This is submitted to the various
states for their comments and is usually followed by an international conference convened by the
United Nations. Eventually a treaty will emerge. This procedure was followed in such
international conventions as those on the Law of the Sea in 1958, Diplomatic Relations in 1961,
Consular Relations in 1963, Special Missions in 1969 and the Law of Treaties in 1969. Of
course, this smooth operation does not invariably occur, witness the many conferences at
Caracas in 1974, and Geneva and New York from 1975 to 1982, necessary to produce a new
Convention on the Law of the Sea. Apart from preparing such drafts, the International Law
Commission also issues reports and studies, and has formulated such documents as the Draft
Declaration on Rights and Duties of States of 1949 and the Principles of International Law
recognised in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal of
1950. The Commission produced a set of draft articles on the problems of jurisdictional
immunities in 1991, a draft statute for an international criminal court in 1994 and a set of draft
1
0 See, as to the relationship between codification and progressive development, Judge ad hoc Sørensen’s
Dissenting Opinion in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, ICJ Reports, 1969, pp. 3, 242–3; 41 ILR, pp. 29, 217–
19.
2
See articles 2, 3 and 8 of the Statute of the ILC. See also e.g. B. Ramcharan, The International Law Commission,
Leiden, 1977; The Work of the International Law Commission, 4th edn, New York, 1988; I. Sinclair, The
International Law Commission, Cambridge, 1987; The International Law Commission and the Future of
International Law (eds. M. R. Anderson, A. E. Boyle, A. V. Lowe and C. Wickremasinghe), London, 1998;
International Law on the Eve of the Twenty-first Century: Views from the International Law Commission, New
York, 1997; S. Rosenne, ‘The International Law Commission 1949–59’, 36 BYIL, 1960, p. 104, and Rosenne,
‘Relations Between Governments and the International Law Commission’, 19 YBWA, 1965, p. 183; B. Graefrath,
‘The International Law Commission Tomorrow: Improving its Organisation and Methods of Work’, 85 AJIL, 1991,
p. 597, and R. P. Dhokalia, The Codification of Public International Law, Manchester, 1970.
articles on state responsibility in 2001. The drafts of the ILC are often referred to in the
judgments of the International Court of Justice. Indeed, in his speech to the UN General
Assembly in 1997, President Schwebel noted in referring to the decision in the Gabˇc´ıkovo–
Nagymaros Project case3 that the judgment:

is notable, moreover, because of the breadth and depth of the importance given in it to the work
product of the International Law Commission. The Court’s Judgment not only draws on treaties
concluded pursuant to the Commission’s proceedings: those on the law of treaties, of State
succession in respect of treaties, and the law of international watercourses. It gives great weight
to some of the Commission’s Draft Articles on State Responsibility, as did both Hungary and
Slovakia. This is not wholly exceptional; it rather illustrates the fact that just as the judgments
and opinions of the Court have influenced the work of the International Law Commission, so the
work of the Commission may influence that of the Court.4

Thus, one can see that the International Law Commission is involved in at least two of the major
sources of law. Its drafts may form the bases of international treaties which bind those states
which have signed and ratified them and which may continue to form part of general
international law, and its work is part of the whole range of state practice which can lead to new
rules of customary law. Its drafts, indeed, may constitute evidence of custom, contribute to the
corpus of usages which may create new law and evidence the opinio juris. In addition, it is not to
be overlooked that the International Law Commission is a body composed of eminently qualified
publicists, including many governmental legal advisers, whose reports and studies may be used
as a method of determining what the law actually is, in much the same way as books.

OTHER BODIES

Although the International Law Commission is by far the most important of the organs for the
study and development of the law, there do exist certain other bodies which are involved in the
same mission. The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and
the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), for example, are
actively increasing the range of international law in the fields of economic, financial and
development activities, while temporary organs such as the Committee on the Principles of
3
ICJ Reports, 1997, p. 7; 116 ILR, p. 1.
4
See www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/ipresscom/SPEECHES/Ga1997e.htm.

2|Page
International Law have been engaged in producing various declarations and statements. Nor can
one overlook the tremendous work of the many specialised agencies like the International
Labour Organisation and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
(UNESCO), which are constantly developing international law in their respective spheres. There
are also some independent bodies which are actively involved in the field. The International Law
Association and the Institut de Droit International are the best known of such organisations
which study and stimulate the law of the world community, while the various Harvard Research
drafts produced before the Second World War are still of value today.5

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF CODIFICATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

The codification process can be briefly summarised as under6 :

(i) The history of codification of international law dates back to the end of 18th century when
the idea of codification of international law was conceived by Bentham.Before him an
unsuccessful attempt was made by the French Convention to draw up a declaration of the Rights
of Nations in 1792.

(ii) The actual beginning of the codification process can be traced back to 1873 when the
Institute of International Law was founded at Ghent in Belgium with one of the aims to codify
the existing principles of international law.

(iii) The First Hague Conference convened by Russian Emperor Nicholas II in 1899, which
resulted into two conventions in the form of code, namely:

(a) Convention on the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes

(b) Convention on the Laws of Customs of War on Land

5
See Virally, ‘Sources’, pp. 154–6; Brownlie, Principles, pp. 612–15; W. Fiedler, ‘Unilateral Acts in International
Law’ in Encyclopedia of Public International Law (ed. R. Bernhardt), Amsterdam, 2000, vol. IV, p. 1018; G.
Venturini, ‘La Portee et les Effets Juridiques des ´ Attitudes et des Actes Unilateraux des ´ Etats’, 112 HR, 1964, p.
363; J. Charpentier, ‘En- ´ gagements Unilateraux et Engagements Conventionnels’ in ´ Theory of International Law
at the Threshold of the 21st Century, p. 367; A. P. Rubin, ‘The International Legal Effects of Unilateral
Declarations’, 71 AJIL, 1977, p. 1; K. Zemanek, ‘Unilateral Legal Acts Revisited’ in Wellens, International Law, p.
209; E. Suy, Les Actes Unilateraux en Droit International Public, Paris, 1962, and J. Garner, ‘The International
Binding Force of Unilateral Oral Declarations’, 27 AJIL, 1933, p. 493. The International Law Commission has been
studying the question of the Unilateral Acts of States since 1996, see A/51/10, pp. 230 and 328–9. See also the Fifth
Report, A/CN.4/525, 2002.
6
Jain, Tarun,CODIFICATION AND PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL
LAW,http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1120849 accessed on 17 November 2015

3|Page
(iv) The Second Hague Convention of 1907, which resulted into thirteen conventions were one
of the major codification exercises undertaken at that time.

(v) Thereon a lot of codification work was undertaken under the aegis of the League of Nations.
In fact Oppenhiem has noted that “it was left to the League of Nations to approach in a
systematic manner the problem of codification properly called.” The League Council appointed a
Committee of sixteen jurists in 1924 to report to the Council, subjects which were ripe for
codification. Thereon the Committee reported seven subjects for codification and further in 1928
reported two more subjects for codification.

CONCLUSION

Codification is the process through which rules of law are committed to written form. It is
usually mentioned in one breath with progressive development. Within the broader topic of the
sources of international law, codification holds a peculiar place. The process of codification
tends to change the law, because transforming unwritten rules into written rules requires
precision, systematization, and definition of the relevant terms and rules. These changes can be
minor or substantial. As all authors agree, “pure” codification does not exist; it always involves
some measure of change. When this change is substantial, it is often is called “progressive
development” or “legislation.”

Codification is often seen as beneficial, increasing certainty through the rule of law and the
development, coherence, and sophistication of international law. Yet, it is also criticized for
decreasing flexibility, creating discord, and creating uncertainty through the vagueness and
generality of provisions in codification treaties due to the requirement of consensus.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS :-

 International Law, Malcolm N. Shaw(6th Edition)

4|Page
 WEBSITES :-
 https://legal.un.org/cod/
 https://www.foreignaffairs.com/
 https://legal.un.org/ilc/
 https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/
 https://Cambridge.org/

JOURNALS :-

 AJIL (American Journal of International Law), 1939

5|Page