Report of the International Law Commission

国际法委员会报告

Sixty-fifth session (6 May–7 June and 8 July–9 August 2013)

第六十五届会议 (2013年5月6日至6月7日和7月8日至8月9日)

General Assembly Official Records Sixty-eighth session Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10)

大会正式记录 第六十八届会议 补编第10号 (A/68/10)

United Nations

联合国

Note

说明

Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures.

联合国文件都用大写英文字母附加数字编号。

Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document.

凡是提到这种编号，就是指联合国的某一个文件。

The word Yearbook followed by suspension points and the year (e.g. Yearbook … 1971) indicates a reference to the Yearbook of the International Law Commission.

前有年份和省略号的“年鉴”(如《1971年…年鉴》)是指《国际法委员会年鉴》。

A typeset version of the report of the Commission will be included in Part Two of volume II of the Yearbook of the International Law Commission 2013.

委员会报告的排版本将载入《2013年国际法委员会年鉴》第二卷第二部分。

Chapter I Introduction

第一章 导言

1. The International Law Commission held the first part of its sixty-fifth session from 6 May to 7 June 2013 and the second part from 8 July to 9 August 2013 at its seat at the United Nations Office at Geneva.

1. 国际法委员会分别于2013年5月6日至6月7日和2013年7月8日至8月9日在联合国日内瓦办事处委员会所在地举行了第六十五届会议第一期会议和第二期会议。

The session was opened by Mr. Lucius Caflisch, Chairman of the sixty-fourth session of the Commission.

本届会议由委员会第六十四届会议主席卢修斯·卡弗利施先生主持开幕。

A. Membership

A. 委员

2. The Commission consists of the following members:

2. 委员会包括下列成员：

Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke (Nigeria)

穆罕默德·贝洛·阿多克先生(尼日利亚)

Mr. Ali Mohsen Fetais Al-Marri (Qatar)

阿里·穆赫辛·费塔伊斯·马里先生(卡塔尔)

Mr. Lucius Caflisch (Switzerland)

卢修斯·卡弗利施先生(瑞士)

Mr. Enrique J.A. Candioti (Argentina)

恩里克·坎迪奥蒂先生(阿根廷)

Mr. Pedro Comissário Afonso (Mozambique)

佩德罗·科米萨里奥·阿丰索先生(莫桑比克)

Mr. Abdelrazeg El-Murtadi Suleiman Gouider (Libya)

阿卜杜勒拉齐克·穆尔塔迪·苏莱曼·古伊德尔先生(利比亚)

Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández (Spain)

康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士(西班牙)

Mr. Mathias Forteau (France)

马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生(法国)

Mr. Kirill Gevorgian (Russian Federation)

基里尔·格沃尔吉安先生(俄罗斯联邦)

Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez-Robledo (Mexico)

胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生(墨西哥)

Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna (Egypt)

侯赛因·哈苏纳先生(埃及)  

Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud (Jordan)

马哈茂德·哈穆德先生(约旦)  

Mr. Huikang Huang (China)

黄惠康先生(中国)

Ms. Marie G. Jacobsson (Sweden)

玛丽·雅各布松女士(瑞典)

Mr. Maurice Kamto (Cameroon)

莫里斯·卡姆托先生(喀麦隆)

Mr. Kriangsak Kittichaisaree (Thailand)

江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生(泰国)

Mr. Ahmed Laraba (Algeria)

艾哈迈德·拉腊巴先生(阿尔及利亚)

Mr. Donald M. McRae (Canada)

唐纳德·麦克雷先生(加拿大)

Mr. Shinya Murase (Japan)

村濑信也先生(日本)

Mr. Sean D. Murphy (United States of America)

肖恩·墨菲先生(美利坚合众国)

Mr. Bernd H. Niehaus (Costa Rica)

贝恩德·尼豪斯先生(哥斯达黎加)

Mr. Georg Nolte (Germany)

格奥尔格·诺尔特先生(德国)

Mr. Ki Gab Park (Republic of Korea)

朴基甲先生(大韩民国)

Mr. Chris Maina Peter (United Republic of Tanzania)

克里斯·马伊纳·彼得先生(坦桑尼亚联合共和国)

Mr. Ernest Petrič (Slovenia)

埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生(斯洛文尼亚)

Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia (Brazil)

吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生(巴西)   

Mr. Narinder Singh (India)

纳林德·辛格先生(印度)

Mr. Pavel Šturma (Czech Republic)

帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(捷克共和国)

Mr. Dire D. Tladi (South Africa)

迪雷·特拉迪先生(南非)

Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina (Colombia)

爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生(哥伦比亚)

Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez (Ecuador)

马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生(厄瓜多尔)

Mr. Amos S. Wako (Kenya)

阿莫斯·瓦科先生(肯尼亚)

Mr. Nugroho Wisnumurti (Indonesia)

努格罗霍·维斯努穆尔蒂先生(印度尼西亚)

Mr. Michael Wood (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)

迈克尔·伍德先生(大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国)

B. Casual vacancy

B. 临时空缺

3. On 6 May 2013, the Commission elected Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez to fill the casual vacancy occasioned by the resignation of Mr. Stephen C. Vasciannie.

3. 2013年5月6日，委员会选举马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生填补斯蒂芬·瓦钱尼先生辞职造成的临时空缺。

C. Officers and the Enlarged Bureau

C. 主席团成员和扩大的主席团

4. At its 3159th meeting, on 6 May 2013, the Commission elected the following officers:

4. 委员会在2013年5月6日举行的第3159次会议上，选出了下列主席团成员：

Chairman:

主席：

Mr. Bernd H. Niehaus (Costa Rica)

贝恩德·尼豪斯先生(哥斯达黎加)

First Vice-Chairman:

第一副主席：

Mr. Pavel Šturma (Czech Republic)

帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(捷克共和国)

Second Vice-Chairman:

第二副主席：

Mr. Narinder Singh (India)

纳林德·辛格先生(印度)

Chairman of the Drafting Committee:

起草委员会主席：

Mr. Dire D. Tladi (South Africa)

迪雷·特拉迪先生(南非)

Rapporteur:

报告员：

Mr. Mathias Forteau (France)

马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生(法国)

5. The Enlarged Bureau of the Commission was composed of the officers of the present session, the previous Chairmen of the Commission  and the Special Rapporteurs.

5. 委员会扩大的主席团由本届会议主席团成员、委员会前任主席  和特别报告员  组成。

6. The Commission set up a Planning Group composed of the following members: Mr. P. Šturma (Chairman), Mr. L. Caflisch, Mr. P. Comissário Afonso, Mr. A. El-Murtadi Suleiman Gouider, Ms. C. Escobar Hernández, Mr. H.A. Hassouna, Mr. M.D. Hmoud, Ms. M.G. Jacobsson, Mr. M. Kamto, Mr. K. Kittichaisaree, Mr. A. Laraba, Mr. D.M. McRae, Mr. S. Murase, Mr. S.D. Murphy, Mr. G. Nolte, Mr. K.G. Park, Mr. E. Petrič, Mr. G.V. Saboia, Mr. N. Singh, Mr. D.D. Tladi, Mr. E. Valencia-Ospina, Mr. M. Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. N. Wisnumurti, Mr. M. Wood, and Mr. M. Forteau (ex officio).

6. 委员会设立了由下列委员组成的规划组：斯图尔马先生(主席)、卡弗利施先生、科米萨里奥·阿丰索先生、穆尔塔迪·苏莱曼·古伊德尔先生、埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、哈苏纳先生、哈穆德先生、雅各布松女士、卡姆托先生、吉滴猜萨里先生、拉腊巴先生、麦克雷先生、村濑先生、墨菲先生、诺尔特先生、朴先生、彼得里奇先生、萨博亚先生、辛格先生、特拉迪先生、巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生、巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、维斯努穆尔蒂先生、伍德先生和福尔托先生(当然成员)。

D. Drafting Committee

D. 起草委员会

7. At its 3163rd, 3170th and 3180th meetings, on 14 and 24 May and 16 July 2013, the Commission established a Drafting Committee, composed of the following members for the topics indicated:

7. 委员会在分别于2013年5月14日、5月24日和7月16日举行的第3163、3170和3180次会议上，为下列专题设立了由下列委员组成的起草委员会：

(a) Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties: Mr. D.D. Tladi (Chairman), Mr. G. Nolte (Special Rapporteur), Ms. C. Escobar Hernández, Mr. M.D. Hmoud, Ms. M.G. Jacobsson, Mr. M. Kamto, Mr. K. Kittichaisaree, Mr. S. Murase, Mr. S.D. Murphy, Mr. K.G. Park, Mr. E. Petrič, Mr. G.V. Saboia, Mr. P. Šturma, Mr. E. Valencia-Ospina, Mr. M. Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. N. Wisnumurti, Mr. M. Wood, and Mr. M. Forteau (ex officio);

(a) 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例：特拉迪先生(主席)、诺尔特先生(特别报告员)、埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、哈穆德先生、雅各布松女士、卡姆托先生、吉滴猜萨里先生、村濑先生、墨菲先生、朴先生、彼得里奇先生、萨博亚先生、斯图尔马先生、巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生、巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、维斯努穆尔蒂先生、伍德先生和福尔托先生(当然成员)。

(b) Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction: Mr. D.D. Tladi (Chairman), Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández (Special Rapporteur), Mr. M.D. Hmoud, Ms. M.G. Jacobsson, Mr. K. Kittichaisaree, Mr. S. Murase, Mr. S.D. Murphy, Mr. G. Nolte, Mr. K.G. Park, Mr. E. Petrič, Mr. G.V. Saboia, Mr. N. Singh, Mr. P. Šturma, Mr. E. Valencia-Ospina, Mr. M. Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. A.K. Wako, Mr. N. Wisnumurti, Mr. M. Wood, and Mr. M. Forteau (ex officio);

(b) 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免：特拉迪先生(主席)、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士(特别报告员)、哈穆德先生、雅各布松女士、吉滴猜萨里先生、村濑先生、墨菲先生、诺尔特先生、朴先生、彼得里奇先生、萨博亚先生、辛格先生、斯图尔马先生、巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生、巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、瓦科先生、维斯努穆尔蒂先生、伍德先生和福尔托先生(当然成员)。

(c) Protection of persons in the event of disasters: Mr. D.D. Tladi (Chairman), Mr. E. Valencia-Ospina (Special Rapporteur), Mr. J.M. Gómez-Robledo, Mr. M.D. Hmoud, Ms. M.G. Jacobsson, Mr. K. Kittichaisaree, Mr. S. Murase, Mr. S.D. Murphy, Mr. K.G. Park, Mr. E. Petrič, Mr. G.V. Saboia, Mr. N. Singh, Mr. M. Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. M. Wood, and Mr. M. Forteau (ex officio).

(c) 发生灾害时的人员保护：特拉迪先生(主席)、巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生(特别报告员)、戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生、哈穆德先生、雅各布松女士、吉滴猜萨里先生、村濑先生、墨菲先生、朴先生、彼得里奇先生、萨博亚先生、辛格先生、巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、伍德先生和福尔托先生(当然成员)。

8. The Drafting Committee held a total of 20 meetings on the three topics indicated above.

8. 起草委员会就以上三个专题共举行了20次会议。

E. Working Groups and Study Group

E. 工作组和研究组

9. At its 3161st and 3169th meetings, on 8 and 23 May 2013, the Commission reconstituted the following Working Group and Study Group:

9. 委员会在2013年5月8日和23日举行的第3161和3169次会议上，重新设立了以下工作组和研究组：

(a) Open-ended Working Group on The Obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare): Mr. K. Kittichaisaree (Chairman).

(a) 引渡或起诉的义务(aut dedere aut judicare)问题不限成员名额工作组：吉滴猜萨里先生(主席)。

(b) Study Group on The Most-Favoured-Nation clause: Mr. D.M. McRae (Chairman), Mr. L. Caflisch, Ms. C. Escobar Hernández, Mr. M.D. Hmoud, Mr. S. Murase, Mr. S.D. Murphy, Mr. K.G. Park, Mr. N. Singh, Mr. P. Šturma, Mr. M. Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. M. Wood, and Mr. M. Forteau (ex officio).

(b) 最惠国条款研究组：麦克雷先生(主席)、卡弗利施先生、埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、哈穆德先生、村濑先生、墨菲先生、朴先生、辛格先生、斯图尔马先生、巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、伍德先生和福尔托先生(当然成员)。

10. The Planning Group reconstituted the following Working Group:

10. 规划组重新设立了以下工作组：

Working Group on the Long-term Programme of work for the quinquennium: Mr. D. McRae (Chairman), Mr. L. Caflisch, Ms. C. Escobar Hernández, Mr. K. Gevorgian, Mr. J.M. Gómez-Robledo, Mr. M.D. Hmoud, Ms. M.G. Jacobsson, Mr. M. Kamto, Mr. K. Kittichaisaree, Mr. A. Laraba, Mr. S. Murase, Mr. S.D. Murphy, Mr. G. Nolte, Mr. K.G. Park, Mr. E. Petrič, Mr. N. Singh, Mr. P. Šturma, Mr. D.D. Tladi, Mr. M. Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. A.S. Wako, Mr. N. Wisnumurti, Mr. M. Wood, and Mr. M. Forteau (ex officio).

五年期长期工作方案工作组：麦克雷先生(主席)、卡弗利施先生、埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、格沃尔吉安先生、戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生、哈穆德先生、雅各布松女士、卡姆托先生、吉滴猜萨里先生、拉腊巴先生、村濑先生、墨菲先生、诺尔特先生、朴先生、彼得里奇先生、辛格先生、斯图尔马先生、特拉迪先生、巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、瓦科先生、维斯努穆尔蒂先生、伍德先生和福尔托先生(当然成员)。

F. Secretariat

F. 秘书处

11. Ms. Patricia O’Brien, Under-Secretary-General, the Legal Counsel, represented the Secretary-General.

11. 副秘书长兼法律顾问帕特里夏·奥布赖恩女士担任秘书长的代表。

Mr. George Korontzis, Director of the Codification Division of the Office of Legal Affairs, acted as Secretary to the Commission and, in the absence of the Legal Counsel, represented the Secretary-General.

法律事务厅编纂司司长乔治·科伦济斯先生担任委员会秘书，并在法律顾问缺席时代表秘书长。

Mr. Trevor Chimimba and Mr. Arnold Pronto, Senior Legal Officers, served as Senior Assistant Secretaries.

高级法律干事特雷沃尔·齐敏巴先生和阿诺德·普龙托先生担任高级助理秘书。

Mr. Gionata Buzzini, Ms. Hanna Dreifeldt-Lainé, Legal Officers, and Mr. Noah Bialostozky, Associate Legal Officer, served as Assistant Secretaries to the Commission.

法律干事焦纳塔·布津尼先生和哈娜·德雷菲尔特－莱恩女士以及协理法律干事诺亚·比亚沃斯托茨基担任委员会助理秘书。

G. Agenda

G. 议程

12. At its 3159th meeting, on 6 May 2013, the Commission adopted an agenda for its sixty-fifth session.

12. 委员会在2013年5月6日第3159次会议上 ，通过了第六十五届会议议程。

The agenda, as modified in light of the decision taken by the Commission at its 3171st meeting,  on 28 May, consisted of the following items:

议程经依照委员会在2013年5月28日第3171次会议上作出的决定修订之后，包括下列项目：

1. Organization of the work of the session.

1. 会议工作安排。

2. Filling of a casual vacancy.

2. 填补临时空缺。

3. The obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare).

3. 引渡或起诉的义务(aut dedere aut judicare)。

4. Protection of persons in the event of disasters.

4. 发生灾害时的人员保护。

5. Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction.

5. 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。

6. Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties.

6. 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例。

7. Provisional application of treaties.

7. 条约的暂时适用。

8. Formation and evidence of customary international law.

8. 习惯国际法的形成与证据。  

9. Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts.

9. 与武装冲突有关的环境保护。

10. The Most-Favoured-Nation clause.

10. 最惠国条款。

11. Programme, procedures and working methods of the Commission and its documentation.

11. 委员会方案、程序和工作方法以及文件。

12. Date and place of the sixty-sixth session.

12. 第六十六届会议日期和地点。

13. Cooperation with other bodies.

13. 与其他机构的合作。

14. Other business.

14. 其他事项。

Chapter II Summary of the work of the Commission at its sixty-fifth session

第二章 委员会第六十五届会议工作概况

13. With regard to the topic “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties”, the Commission had before it the first report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/660), which, inter alia, contained four draft conclusions relating to the general rule and means of treaty interpretation; subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as means of interpretation; the definition of subsequent agreement and subsequent practice as means of treaty interpretation; and attribution of a treaty related practice to a State.

13. 关于“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/660)。 除其他外，该报告载有与下列问题有关的四项结论草案：条约解释通则和资料；以嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释资料；嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为条约解释资料的定义；将与条约有关的惯例归于一个国家。

Following the debate in plenary, the Commission decided to refer the four draft conclusions to the Drafting Committee.

经全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将这四项结论草案转交起草委员会。

Upon consideration of the report of the Drafting Committee, Commission provisionally adopted five draft conclusions, together with commentaries thereto (chap. IV).

在审议了起草委员会的报告之后，委员会暂时通过了五项结论草案及其评注(第四章)。

14. Concerning the topic “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction”, the Commission had before it the second report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/661), in which, inter alia, six draft articles were presented, following an analysis of: (a) the scope of the topic and of the draft articles; (b) the concepts of immunity and jurisdiction; (c) the difference between immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae; and (d) identified the basic norms comprising the regime of immunity ratione personae.

14. 关于“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/661)。 除其他外，该报告分析了(a) 本专题和本条款草案的范围；(b) 豁免和管辖的概念；(c) 属人豁免和属事豁免的区别；并(d) 确定了组成属人豁免制度的基本规范，此后提出了六条条文草案。

Following the debate in plenary, the Commission decided to refer the six draft articles to the Drafting Committee.

经全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将这六条条文草案转交起草委员会。

Upon consideration of the report of the Drafting Committee, the Commission provisionally adopted three draft articles, together with commentaries thereto (chap. V).

在审议了起草委员会的报告之后，委员会暂时通过了三条条文草案及其评注(第五章)。

15. As regards the topic “Protection of persons in the event of disasters”, the Commission had before it the sixth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/662), dealing with aspects of prevention in the context of the protection of persons in the event of disasters, including disaster risk reduction, prevention as a principle of international law, and international cooperation on prevention.

15. 关于“发生灾害时的人员保护”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第六次报告(A/CN.4/662)。 该报告讨论了发生灾害时的人员保护中的预防问题，包括减少灾害风险、将预防作为国际法原则以及预防方面的国际合作。

Following the debate in plenary, the Commission decided to refer the two draft articles, proposed by the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee.

经全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将特别报告员建议的两条条款草案转交起草委员会。

16. The Commission provisionally adopted seven draft articles, together with commentaries, namely draft articles 5 bis and 12 to 15, of which it had taken note of at its sixty-fourth session (2012), dealing with forms of cooperation, offers of assistance, conditions on the provision of external assistance, facilitation of external assistance, and termination of external assistance, respectively, as well as draft article 5 ter and 16, concerning cooperation for disaster risk reduction and the duty to reduce the risk of disasters, respectively (chap. VI).

16. 委员会暂时通过了七条条文草案及其评注，亦即委员会在第六十四届会议(2012年)曾注意到的第5条之二和第12至第15条―― 分别涉及合作形式、提议援助、对提供外部援助规定条件、便利外部援助和终止外部援助，以及第5条之三和第16条―― 分别涉及减少灾害风险的合作以及减少灾害风险的义务(第六章)。

17. In relation to the topic “Formation and evidence of customary international law”, the Commission had before it the first report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/663), which, inter alia, presented an overview of the previous work of the Commission relevant to the topic, views expressed by delegates in the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly, the scope of the topic, the range of materials to be consulted, and issues relating to customary international law as a source of international law.

17. 关于“习惯国际法的形成与证据”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/663)。 除其他外，该报告介绍了委员会先前开展的与本专题相关的工作概况、代表们在大会第六委员会上发表的意见、本专题的范围、应参考的材料的范围以及与习惯国际法作为国际法渊源有关的问题。

The Commission also had before it a memorandum by the Secretariat addressing elements in the previous work of the Commission that could be particularly relevant to the topic (A/CN.4/659).

委员会还收到秘书处编写的一份关于委员会此前的工作中可能与本专题尤为相关的要素的备忘录(A/CN.4/659)。

The debate in plenary addressed, among other issues, the scope and methodology of the topic, the range of materials to be consulted and the future plan of work.

全体会议上的辩论讨论了本专题的范围和方法学、应参考的材料的范围以及今后工作计划等问题。

The Special Rapporteur also held informal consultations on the title of the topic, the consideration of jus cogens within the scope of the topic and the need for additional information on State practice.

特别报告员还就专题的标题、在本专题范围内审议强制法问题以及提供国家惯例补充资料的必要性举行了非正式磋商。

The Commission decided to change the title of the topic to “Identification of customary international law” (chap. VII).

委员会决定将该专题的标题改为“习惯国际法的识别”(第七章)。

18. As regards the topic “Provisional application of treaties”, the Commission had before it the first report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/664) which sought to establish, in general terms, the principal legal issues that arose in the context of the provisional application of treaties by considering doctrinal approaches to the topic and briefly reviewing the existing State practice.

18. 关于“条约的暂时适用”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/664)。 该报告考虑了处理本专题的理论方法并简要回顾了现有的国家惯例，试图从总体上确定在条约的暂时适用方面出现的主要法律问题。

The Commission also had before it a memorandum by the Secretariat which traced the negotiating history of article 25 both in the Commission and at the Vienna Conference on the Law of Treaties (A/CN.4/658).

委员会还收到秘书处编写的一份追溯第二十五条在委员会和维也纳条约法会议上的谈判历史的备忘录(A/CN.4/658)。

The debate revolved around the purpose of the provisional application of treaties, and the elaboration of specific issues to be considered in the future reports of the Special Rapporteur (chap. VIII).

辩论围绕条约的暂时适用的目的以及阐明特别报告员今后报告中应审议的具体问题进行(第八章)。

19. The Commission decided to include the topic “Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict” in its programme of work, and appointed Ms. Marie G. Jacobsson as Special Rapporteur (chap. XII, sect. A.1).

19. 关于“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”专题，委员会决定将其列入工作方案，并任命玛丽·雅各布松女士为特别报告员(第十二章A.1节)。

The Special Rapporteur presented the Commission with a series of informal working papers with a view to initiating an informal dialogue with members of the Commission on a number of issues that could be relevant for the development and consideration of the work on the topic.

特别报告员向委员会提交了一系列非正式工作文件，以便与委员会委员启动非正式对话，讨论可能与发展和审议本专题工作有关的各种问题。

Issues addressed in the informal consultations included, inter alia, scope and methodology, the possible outcome of the Commission’s work, as well as a number of substantive issues relating to the topic (chap. IX).

在非正式磋商中讨论的问题包括范围和方法学、委员会工作的可能成果以及与本专题有关的各种实质性问题(第九章)。

20. In connection with the topic “The obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare)”, the Commission re-constituted the Working Group on the topic, which continued the evaluation of work on the topic, particularly in the light of the judgment of the International Court of Justice in Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal) case, of 20 July 2012.

20. 关于“引渡或起诉的义务(aut dedere aut judicare)”专题，委员会重新组建了本专题工作组。 该工作组继续评估本专题的有关工作，特别是根据国际法院2012年7月20日在“与引渡或起诉的义务有关的问题(比利时诉塞内加尔)”一案中作出的判决评估有关工作。

The Commission took note of the report of the Working Group, which is annexed to the present report (chap. X and annex A).

委员会注意到工作组报告，该报告作为附件附于委员会报告之后(第十章和附件A)。

21. Concerning the topic “The Most-Favoured-Nation clause”, the Commission re-constituted the Study Group on the topic, which, inter alia, continued to examine the various factors that seemed to influence investment tribunals in interpreting MFN clauses, on the basis, inter alia, of contemporary practice and jurisprudence, in particular Daimler Financial Services AG v. Argentine Republic  and Kılıç Ĭnşaat Ĭthalat Ĭhracat Sanayi ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Turkmenistan  (chap. XI).

21. 关于“最惠国条款”专题，委员会重新组建了本专题研究组。 除其他外，该研究组根据当代惯例和判例等，特别是戴姆勒金融服务公司(Daimler Financial Services AG)诉阿根廷共和国  以及宝剑建筑进出口工业和贸易公司(Kılıç İnşaat İthalat İhracat Sanayi ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi)诉土库曼斯坦  两案的判例，继续审查似乎会影响投资法庭解释最惠国条款的各种因素(第十一章)。

22. The Commission established a Planning Group to consider its programme, procedures and working methods (chap. XII, sect.

22. 委员会设立了规划组，负责审议其方案、程序和工作方法(第十二章A节)。

A). The Commission decided to include the topic “Protection of the atmosphere” in its programme of work, and to appoint Mr. Shinya Murase as Special Rapporteur for the topic (chap. XII, sect. A.1).

委员会决定在其工作方案中列入“大气层的保护”专题，并任命村濑信也先生为该专题特别报告员(第十二章A.1节)。

The Commission also decided to include in its long-term programme of work the topic “Crimes against humanity” (chap. XII, sect. A.2 and annex B).

委员会还决定将“危害人类罪”专题列入其长期工作方案(第十二章A.2节和附件B)。

23. The Commission continued traditional exchanges of information with the International Court of Justice, the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization, the European Committee on Legal Cooperation and the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law of the Council of Europe, and the Inter-American Juridical Committee.

23. 委员会继续与以下组织进行传统的信息交流：国际法院、亚非法律协商组织、欧洲委员会欧洲法律合作委员会和国际公法法律顾问委员会、美洲法律委员会。

The Commission also had an exchange of information with the African Union Commission on International Law.

委员会还与非洲联盟国际法委员会交流了信息。

Members of the Commission also held informal meetings with other bodies and associations on matters of mutual interest (chap. XII, sect.

委员会成员还与其他机构和协会就共同感兴趣的问题举行了非正式会议(第十二章C节)。

C). 24. The Commission decided that its sixty-sixth session be held in Geneva from 5 May to 6 June and 7 July to 8 August 2014 (chap. XII, sect. B).

24. 委员会决定第六十六届会议于2014年5月5日至6月6日和7月7日至8月8日在日内瓦举行(第十二章B节)。

Chapter III Specific issues on which comments would be of particular interest to the Commission

第三章 委员会特别想听取意见的具体问题

A. Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction

A. 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免

25. The Commission requests States to provide information, by 31 January 2014, on the practice of their institutions, and in particular, on judicial decisions, with reference to the meaning given to the phrases “official acts” and “acts performed in an official capacity” in the context of the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction.

25. 关于“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”专题，委员会请缔约国在2014年1月31日之前提供资料，说明国内机构如何定义国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免情况下的“公务行为”或“以公务身份实施的行为”，特别是提供司法判决。 委员会请各国在2014年1月31日之前提供这些资料。

B. Formation and evidence of customary international law

B. 习惯国际法的形成与证据

26. The Commission requests States to provide information, by 31 January 2014, on their practice relating to the formation of customary international law and the types of evidence suitable for establishing such law in a given situation, as set out in:

26. 委员会请各国在2014年1月31日之前提供资料，说明以下文件体现的关于国际习惯法的形成与证据的国家实践，以及在特定情况下有助于确立此种法律的证据类型：

(a) official statements before legislatures, courts and international organizations; and

(a) 在立法机构、法院和国际组织的正式发言；以及

(b) decisions of national, regional and subregional courts.

(b) 国家、区域和次区域法院的判决。

C. Provisional application of treaties

C. 条约的暂时适用

27. The Commission requests States to provide information, by 31 January 2014, on their practice concerning the provisional application of treaties, with examples, in particular in relation to:

27. 委员会请各国在2014年1月31日之前提供资料，说明其关于暂时适用条约的实践，并特别举例说明以下方面的实践：

(a) the decision to provisionally apply a treaty;

(a) 关于暂时适用条约的决定；

(b) the termination of such provisional application; and

(b) 此种暂时适用的终止；以及

(c) the legal effects of provisional application.

(c) 暂时适用的法律效力。

D. Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts

D. 与武装冲突有关的环境保护

28. The Commission would like to have information from States on whether, in their practice, international or domestic environmental law has been interpreted as applicable in relation to international or non-international armed conflict.

28. 关于这一专题，委员会希望各国提供资料，说明在它们的实践中，在涉及国际或非国际武装冲突时，国际或国内环境法是否被解释为适用。

The Commission would particularly appreciate receiving examples of:

委员会特别希望收到以下材料：

(a) treaties, particularly relevant regional or bilateral treaties;

(a) 条约，特别是有关的区域或双边条约；

(b) national legislation relevant to the topic, including legislation implementing regional or bilateral treaties;

(b) 与本专题有关的国内法律，包括执行区域或双边条约的国内法律；

(c) case law in which international or domestic environmental law was applied to disputes arising from situations of armed conflict.

(c) 对武装冲突局势引起的争端适用国际或国内环境法的判例法。

Chapter IV Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties

第四章 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例

A. Introduction

A. 导言

29. The Commission, at its sixtieth session (2008), decided to include the topic “Treaties over time” in its programme of work and to establish a Study Group on the topic at its sixty-first session.

29. 委员会第六十届会议(2008年)决定将“条约随时间演变”专题列入其工作方案，并决定在第六十一届会议上设立一个专题研究组。

 At its sixty-first session (2009), the Commission established the Study Group on Treaties over time, chaired by Mr. Georg Nolte.

 委员会第六十一届会议(2009年)设立了条约随时间演变专题研究组，由格奥尔格·诺尔特先生担任主席。

At that session, the Study Group focused its discussions on the identification of the issues to be covered, the working methods of the Study Group and the possible outcome of the Commission’s work on the topic.

在该届会议上，研究组的讨论侧重于确定要涵盖的问题、工作组的工作方法和委员会关于该专题的工作可能产生的成果。  

30. From the sixty-second to the sixty-fourth session (2010–2012), the Study Group was reconstituted under the chairmanship of Mr. Georg Nolte.

30. 从第六十二届至第六十四届会议(2010-2012年)，都重新设立了研究组，由格奥尔格·诺尔特先生任主席。

The Study Group examined three reports presented informally by the Chairman, which addressed, respectively, the relevant jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and arbitral tribunals of ad hoc jurisdiction;  the jurisprudence under special regimes relating to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice;  and subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of States outside judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings.

研究组审查了研究组主席非正式提交的三份报告，这些报告分别讨论了国际法院和具有特别管辖权的仲裁法庭的相关判例；  在特殊制度下与嗣后协定和嗣后惯例有关的判例；  以及在司法和准司法程序外的国家嗣后协定和嗣后惯例。  

31. At the sixty-third session (2011), the Chairman of the Study Group presented nine preliminary conclusions, reformulated in the light of the discussions in the Study Group.

31. 在第六十三届会议上(2011年)，研究组主席提交了参照研究组讨论情况重新拟订的九项初步结论。

 At the sixty-fourth session (2012), the Chairman presented the text of six additional preliminary conclusions, also reformulated in the light of the discussions in the Study Group.

 在第六十四届会议上(2012年)，研究组主席介绍了也是参照研究组讨论情况重新拟订的另外六项初步结论。

 The Study Group also discussed the format in which the further work on the topic should proceed and the possible outcome of the work.

 研究组还讨论了此专题进一步工作应采取的形式以及工作的可能成果。

A number of suggestions were formulated by the Chairman and agreed upon by the Study Group.

研究组主席提出了若干建议并得到研究组的赞同。  

32. At the sixty-fourth session (2012), the Commission, on the basis of a recommendation of the Study Group,  also decided (a) to change, with effect from its sixty-fifth session (2013), the format of the work on this topic as suggested by the Study Group; and (b) to appoint Mr. Georg Nolte as Special Rapporteur for the topic “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties”.

32. 在第六十四届会议上(2012年)，委员会根据研究组的建议  还决定：(a) 按照研究组的建议自第六十五届会议(2013年)起改变本专题的工作方式；(b) 任命格奥尔格·诺尔特先生为“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”专题特别报告员。  

B. Consideration of the topic at the present session

B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况

33. At the present session, the Commission had before it the first report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/660), which it considered at its 3159th to 3163rd meetings, from 6 to 8 and on 10 and 14 May 2013.

33. 委员会在本届会议上收到了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/660)，并在2013年5月6日至8日及10日和14日举行的第3159至3163次会议上进行了审议。

34. In his first report, the Special Rapporteur, after addressing the scope, aim and possible outcome of the work on this topic (section II), considered the general rule and means of treaty interpretation (section III); subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as means of interpretation (section IV); the definition of subsequent agreement and subsequent practice as means of treaty interpretation (section V); and attribution of a treaty related practice to a State (section VI).

34. 在其第一次报告中，特别报告员先是处理了此专题的范围、目标和可能成果(第二节)，然后考虑了条约解释通则和资料(第三节)；以嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释资料(第四节)；嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为条约解释资料的定义(第五节)；将与条约有关的惯例归于一个国家(第六节)。

The report also contained some indications as to the future programme of work (section VII).

报告还含有关于未来工作方案的一些提示(第七节)。

The Special Rapporteur proposed a draft conclusion corresponding with each of the four issues addressed in sections III to VI.

特别报告员还提出了对应着第三至第六节所处理的四个问题的结论草案。  

35. At its 3163rd meeting, on 14 May 2013, the Commission referred draft conclusions 1 to 4, as contained in the Special Rapporteur’s first report, to the Drafting Committee.

35. 在2013年5月14日第3163次会议上，委员会将载于特别报告员第一次报告的结论草案1至4移交起草委员会。

36. At its 3172nd meetings, on 31 May 2013, the Commission considered the report of the Drafting Committee and provisionally adopted five draft conclusions (see section C.1 below).

36. 在2013年5月31日第3172次会议上，委员会审议了起草委员会的报告并暂时通过了五项结论草案(见下文C.1)。

37. At its 3191st to 3193rd meetings, on 5 and 6 August 2013, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft conclusions provisionally adopted at the current session (see section C.2 below).

37. 在2013年8月5日和6日第3191至第3193次会议上，委员会通过了本届会议暂时通过的结论草案的评注(见下文C.2)。

C. Text of the draft conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties, as provisionally adopted by the Commission at its sixty-fifth session

C. 委员会第六十五届会议暂时通过的关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的结论草案案文

1. Text of the draft conclusions

1. 结论草案案文

38. The text of the draft conclusions provisionally adopted so far by the Commission is reproduced below.

38. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的结论草案案文载录如下。

Conclusion 1 General rule and means of treaty interpretation

结论1 条约解释通则和资料

1. Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties set forth, respectively, the general rule of interpretation and the rule on supplementary means of interpretation.

1. 《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一和第三十二条分别规定了解释条约的通则和关于解释条约的补充资料的规则。

These rules also apply as customary international law.

这些规则也作为习惯国际法适用。

2. A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to its terms in their context and in the light of its object and purpose.

2. 条约应按照其用语按上下文所具有的通常含义并参照该条约的目的和宗旨善意地予以解释。

3. Article 31, paragraph 3, provides, inter alia, that there shall be taken into account, together with the context, (a) any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions; and (b) any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation.

3. 第三十一条第三款除其他外规定，应与上下文一并考虑到的还有：(a) 缔约方之间嗣后所订关于条约的解释或其规定的适用的任何协定；和(b) 在条约适用方面确定各缔约方对条约的解释意思一致的任何嗣后惯例。

4. Recourse may be had to other subsequent practice in the application of the treaty as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32.

4. 可将条约适用方面的其他嗣后惯例作为第三十二条所称的补充的解释资料加以使用。

5. The interpretation of a treaty consists of a single combined operation, which places appropriate emphasis on the various means of interpretation indicated, respectively, in articles 31 and 32.

5. 条约的解释是单一的综合行动，这一行动对第三十一和第三十二条分别载明的各种解释资料各给予适当的强调。

Conclusion 2 Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as authentic means of interpretation

结论2 以嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为作准的解释资料

Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), being objective evidence of the understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the treaty, are authentic means of interpretation, in the application of the general rule of treaty interpretation reflected in article 31.

第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例是缔约方对条约含义理解的客观证据，因而是适用第三十一条所反映的条约解释通则时的作准的解释资料。

Conclusion 3 Interpretation of treaty terms as capable of evolving over time

结论3 能够随时间演变的条约用语的解释

Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32 may assist in determining whether or not the presumed intention of the parties upon the conclusion of the treaty was to give a term used a meaning which is capable of evolving over time.

第三十一和第三十二条所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可协助确定缔约方在缔结条约之时的推定意图是不是赋予用语以能够随时间演变的含义。

Conclusion 4 Definition of subsequent agreement and subsequent practice

结论4 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的定义

1. A “subsequent agreement” as an authentic means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) is an agreement between the parties, reached after the conclusion of a treaty, regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions.

1. “嗣后协定”作为第三十一条第三款(a)项之下作准的解释资料是指缔约方在条约缔结后达成的关于解释条约或适用条约规定的协定。

2. A “subsequent practice” as an authentic means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (b) consists of conduct in the application of a treaty, after its conclusion, which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty.

2. “嗣后惯例”作为第三十一条第三款(b)项之下作准的解释资料是指条约缔结后确定各缔约方对条约的解释意思一致的适用条约的行为。

3. Other “subsequent practice” as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 consists of conduct by one or more parties in the application of the treaty, after its conclusion.

3. 其他“嗣后惯例”作为第三十二条之下的补充的解释资料是指条约缔结后一个或多个缔约方适用条约的行为。

Conclusion 5 Attribution of subsequent practice

结论5 嗣后惯例的归属

1. Subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32 may consist of any conduct in the application of a treaty which is attributable to a party to the treaty under international law.

1. 第三十一和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例可包括依国际法可归属于条约某一缔约方的任何适用条约的行为。

2. Other conduct, including by non-State actors, does not constitute subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32.

2. 其他行为，包括非国家行为者的行为，不构成第三十一和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例。

Such conduct may, however, be relevant when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty.

然而此种行为在评估条约缔约方的嗣后惯例时可能具有意义。

2. Text of the draft conclusions and commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its sixty-fifth session

2. 委员会第六十五届会议暂时通过的结论草案案文及其评注

39. The text of the draft conclusions, together with commentaries, provisionally adopted by the Commission at the sixty-fifth session, is reproduced below.

39. 委员会第六十五届会议暂时通过的结论草案案文及其评注载录如下。

Introduction

导言

(1) The following draft conclusions are based on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (“Vienna Convention”),  which constitutes the framework for the work on the topic “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to treaty interpretation”.

(1) 以下结论草案以《维也纳条约法公约》(《维也纳公约》)  为基础，该公约构成“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”的框架。

The Commission considers that the relevant rules of the Vienna Convention today enjoy general acceptance.

委员会认为，《维也纳公约》的相关规则今天得到普遍接受。

(2) The first five draft conclusions are general in nature.

(2) 头五个结论草案为一般性质。

Other aspects of the topic, in particular more specific points, will be addressed at a later stage of the work.

本专题的其他方面，尤其是更为具体的各点，将在工作的稍后阶段处理。

Conclusion 1 General rule and means of treaty interpretation

结论1 条约解释通则和资料

1. Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties set forth, respectively, the general rule of interpretation and the rule on supplementary means of interpretation.

1. 《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一和第三十二条分别规定了解释条约的通则和关于解释条约的补充资料的规则。

These rules also apply as customary international law.

这些规则也作为习惯国际法适用。

2. A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to its terms in their context and in the light of its object and purpose.

2. 条约应按照其用语按上下文所具有的通常含义并参照该条约的目的和宗旨善意地予以解释。

3. Article 31, paragraph 3, provides, inter alia, that there shall be taken into account, together with the context, (a) any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions; and (b) any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation.

3. 第三十一条第三款除其他外规定，应与上下文一并考虑到的还有：(a) 缔约方之间嗣后所订关于条约的解释或其规定的适用的任何协定；和(b) 在条约适用方面确定各缔约方对条约的解释意思一致的任何嗣后惯例。

4. Recourse may be had to other subsequent practice in the application of the treaty as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32.

4. 可将条约适用方面的其他嗣后惯例作为第三十二条所称的补充的解释资料加以使用。

5. The interpretation of a treaty consists of a single combined operation, which places appropriate emphasis on the various means of interpretation indicated, respectively, in articles 31 and 32.

5. 条约的解释是单一的综合行动，这一行动对第三十一和第三十二条分别载明的各种解释资料各给予适当的强调。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft conclusion 1 situates subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as a means of treaty interpretation within the framework of the rules on the interpretation of treaties set forth in articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention.

(1) 结论草案1规定，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例为在《维也纳条约法公约》(《维也纳公约》)第三十一和第三十二条所述解释条约规则框架范围内条约解释的资料。

The title “General Rule and Means of Treaty Interpretation” signals two points.

标题“条约解释通则和资料”表明两点。

First, article 31 of the Vienna Convention, as a whole, is the “general rule” of treaty interpretation.

第一，《维也纳公约》第三十一条整体为解释条约的“通则”。

 Second, articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention together list a number of “means of interpretation” which must (article 31) or may (article 32) be taken into account in the interpretation of treaties.

 第二，《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条共同列出了若干“解释的资料”，在解释条约中必须(第三十一条)或可以(第三十二条)考虑。

(2) Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 1 emphasizes the interrelationship between articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention, as well as the fact that these provisions, together, reflect customary international law.

(2) 结论草案1第1段强调《维也纳公约》第三十一和第三十二条之间的相互关系，谈到这些规定共同反映了习惯国际法。

The reference to both articles 31 and 32 clarifies from the start the general context in which subsequent agreements and subsequent practice are addressed in the draft conclusions.

将第三十一和第三十二条一并提及，这等于从一开始就明确了结论草案处理嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的总体背景。

(3) Whereas article 31 sets forth the general rule and article 32 deals with supplementary means of interpretation, both rules  must be read together as they constitute an integrated framework for the interpretation of treaties.

(3) 第三十一条载有通则，而第三十二条则涉及解释的补充资料，这两项规则  必须一并阅读，因为它们构成解释条约的整体框架。

Article 32 includes a threshold between the primary means of interpretation according to article 31,22  all of which are to be taken into account in the process of interpretation, and “supplementary means of interpretation” to which recourse may be had when the interpretation according to article 31 leaves the meaning of the treaty or its terms ambiguous or obscure or leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable.

第三十二条含有一个分界点，区分出以下两者：在解释过程中依照第三十一条均必须考虑的主要解释资料  与依照第三十一条解释而条约意义或其术语仍属不明或难解时或所获结果显属荒谬或不合理时可使用的“解释之补充资料”。

(4) The second sentence of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 1 confirms that the rules enshrined in articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention reflect customary international law.2322  International courts and tribunals have acknowledged the customary character of these rules.

(4) 结论草案1第1段第二句确认《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条所载规则反映了习惯国际法。

This is true, in particular, for the International Court of Justice,  the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (“ITLOS”),  inter-State arbitrations  the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (“WTO”),  the European Court of Human Rights,  the Inter-American Court of Human Rights,  the Court of Justice of the European Union,  and tribunals established by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”) under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States.

各种国际法院和法庭均承认这些规则的习惯性质，尤其是国际法院、  国际海洋法法庭、  国家间仲裁、  世界贸易组织(世贸组织)上诉机构、  欧洲人权法院、  美洲人权法院、  欧洲联盟法院、  和《关于解决国家与他国国民之间投资争端公约》之下的国际投资争端解决中心所设各法庭。

 Hence, the rules contained in articles 31 and 32 apply as treaty law in relation to those States which are parties to the Vienna Convention for treaties which fall within the scope of the Convention, and as customary international law between all States.

 因此，第三十一和第三十二条所载规则在《维也纳公约》缔约国之间就该《公约》范围内各条约而言作为条约法适用，在所有国家之间作为习惯国际法适用。

(5) The Commission also considered referring to article 33 of the Vienna Convention in draft conclusion 1 and whether this provision also reflected customary international law.

(5) 委员会还审议了在结论草案1中提到《维也纳公约》第三十三条以及该条是否也反映习惯国际法的问题。

Article 33 may be relevant for draft conclusions on the topic of “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to treaty interpretation”.

第三十三条可能与“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”专题的结论草案相关。

A “subsequent agreement” under article 31 (3) (a), for example, could be formulated in two or more languages, and there could be questions regarding the relationship of any subsequent agreement to different language versions of the treaty itself.

例如，第三十一条第三款(a)项之下的“嗣后协定”，可能以两种或多种语文拟订，可能出现任何嗣后协定与条约本身不同语文文本之间关系的问题。

The Commission nevertheless decided not to address such questions for the time being, but left open the possibility to do so should this issue come up in the future work on the topic.

尽管如此，委员会决定目前暂不处理这一问题，而是保留将来在有关这一专题的工作出现这一问题时再加以处理的可能性。

(6) The Commission, in particular, considered whether the rules set forth in article 33 reflected customary international law.

(6) 委员会尤其审议了第三十三条所列规则是否反映了习惯国际法的问题。

Some members thought that all the rules in article 33 reflected customary international law, while others wanted to leave open the possibility that only some, but not all, rules set forth in this provision qualified as such.

一些委员认为，第三十三条的所有规则均反映了习惯国际法，而另一些委员则希望保留该条中所列部分规则而非全部规则可如此定性的可能性。

The jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals has not yet fully addressed the question.

各国际法院和法庭的判例尚未充分处理这一问题。

The International Court of Justice and the WTO Appellate Body have considered parts of article 33 to reflect rules of customary international law: In LaGrand, the Court recognized that paragraph 4 of article 33 reflects customary international law.

国际法院和世贸组织上诉机构承认，第三十三条的某些部分反映了习惯国际法规则：在拉葛兰案中，国际法院承认第三十三条第4款反映了习惯法。

 It is less clear whether the International Court of Justice in the Kasikili/Sedudu Island case considered that paragraph 3 of article 33 reflected a customary rule.

 而国际法院在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中是否认为第三十三条第3款反映了习惯法规则，则不甚明确。

 The WTO Appellate Body has held that the rules in paragraphs 3 and 4 reflect customary law.

 世贸组织上诉机构认为，第3和第4款反映了习惯法。

 The Arbitral Tribunal in the Young Loan Arbitration found that paragraph 1 “incorporated” a “principle”.

 仲裁法庭在Young Loan 仲裁案中认定，第1款“纳入”了一项“原则”。

 The ITLOS and the European Court of Human Rights have gone one step further and stated that article 33 as a whole reflects customary law.

 海洋法法庭和欧洲人权法院更进一步，主张第三十三条整条反映了习惯法。

 Thus, there are significant indications in the case law that article 33, in its entirety, indeed reflects customary international law.

 因此，在判例法中，有大量案例表明，第三十三条整条确实反映了习惯国际法。

(7) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 1 reproduces the text of article 31 (1) given its importance for the topic.

(7) 鉴于第三十一条第1款对于本专题的重要性，结论草案1第2段转载了该款的案文。

Article 31 (1) is the point of departure for any treaty interpretation according to the general rule contained in article 31 as a whole.

按照第三十一条整条所载的通则，第三十一条第1款是任何条约解释的出发点。

This is intended to contribute to ensuring the balance in the process of interpretation between an assessment of the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose, on the one hand, and the considerations regarding subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in the following draft conclusions.

这确实有助于确保根据上下文以及结合其目标和宗旨评估条约术语工作与后续结论草案中关于嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的考虑之间的平衡。

The reiteration of article 31 (1) as a separate paragraph is not, however, meant to suggest that this paragraph, and the means of interpretation mentioned therein, possess a primacy in substance within the context of article 31 itself.

但是，将第三十一条第1款作为单独一款予以重申，并不意味着表明该款及其中所述解释材料在第三十一条本身的范围内实质上处于首位。

All means of interpretation in article 31 are part of a single integrated rule.

第三十一条中的所有解释材料均为单一的综合规则的一部分。

(8) Paragraph 3 reproduces the language of articles 31 (3) (a) and (b) of the Vienna Convention, in order to situate subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, as the main focus of the topic, within the general legal framework of treaty interpretation.

 (8) 第3段沿用了《维也纳公约》第三十一条第3款(a)和(b)项的措辞，以便将作为本专题主要核心的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例置于条约解释的一般法律框架之内。

Accordingly, the chapeau of article 31 (3) “there shall be taken into account, together with the context” is maintained in order to emphasise that the assessment of the means of interpretation mentioned in paragraph 3 (a) and (b) of article 31 are an integral part of the general rule of interpretation set forth in article 31.29

因此，保留了第三十一条第3款起首部分“应与上下文一并考虑者尚有”的措辞，以突出表明，评估第三十一条第3款(a)和(b)项所述解释材料须是第三十一条所述解释通则的组成部分。  

(9) Paragraph 4 clarifies that subsequent practice in the application of the treaty, which does not meet all criteria of article 31 (3) (b), nevertheless falls within the scope of article 32.

(9) 第4段澄清了嗣后在条约适用方面的惯例，其并不符合第三十一条第3款(b)项的所有标准，但是却在第三十二条的范围之内。

Article 32 includes a non-exhaustive list of supplementary means of interpretation.24  Paragraph 4 borrows the language “recourse may be had” from article 32 to maintain the distinction between the mandatory character of the taking into account of the means of interpretation, which are referred to in article 31, and the discretionary nature of the use of the supplementary means of interpretation under article 32.

第三十二条列入了一个非详尽的补充解释资料清单。  第4段借用了第三十二条的“得使用”的措辞，以维持第三十一条提到的考虑解释资料的强制性和根据第三十二条使用补充解释资料的更多的任意性之间的区分。

(10) In particular, subsequent practice in the application of the treaty, which does not establish the agreement of all parties to the treaty, but only of one or more parties, may be used as a supplementary means of interpretation.

(10) 特别是，嗣后在条约适用方面的惯例，其并非该条约所有缔约方、而仅仅是一个或数个缔约方的协定，可被用作解释的补充资料。

This was stated by the Commission,  and has since been recognized by international courts and tribunals,  and in the literature2424  (see in more detail paras. (22) to (36) of the commentary to draft conclusion 4).

委员会曾这样阐述，  并得到各国际法院和法庭的承认，  在文献中也得到承认  (更多详情，见结论草案4的评注第(22)至第(36)段)。

(11) The Commission did not, however, consider that subsequent practice, which is not “in the application of the treaty”, should be dealt with, in the present draft conclusions, as a supplementary means of interpretation.

(11) 但是，委员会并不认为，应当在本结论草案中处理不在“条约适用方面”的嗣后惯例作为补充解释材料的问题。

Such practice may, however, under certain circumstances be a relevant supplementary means of interpretation as well.29  But such practice is beyond what the Commission now addresses under the present topic, except insofar as it may contribute to “assessing” relevant subsequent practice in the application of a treaty (see draft conclusion 5 and accompanying commentary).

然而，在特定情况下，这种惯例也可作为相关补充解释资料。  但除了其可能有助于“评估”条约适用方面相关嗣后惯例之外，此类惯例超过了委员会目前在本专题之下处理的范围(见结论草案5及其评注)。

Thus, paragraph 4 of draft conclusion 1 requires that any subsequent practice be “in the application of the treaty”, as does paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 4, which defines “other ‘subsequent practice’”.

因此，结论草案1第4段要求任何嗣后惯例须是“条约适用方面”的，正如界定“其他‘嗣后惯例’”的结论草案4第3段所要求的那样。

(12) The Commission considered it important to complete draft conclusion 1 by emphasising in paragraph 529  that, notwithstanding the structure of draft conclusion 1, moving from the general to the more specific, the process of interpretation is a “single combined operation”, which requires that “appropriate emphasis” is placed on various means of interpretation.29  The expression “single combined operation” is drawn from the Commission’s commentary to the 1966 draft articles on the Law of Treaties.

(12) 委员会认为，结论草案1若要完整，重要的是要在第5段  中强调，尽管结论草案1的结构是从一般到具体，但解释过程是一个“单一的综合行动”，要求“适当强调”各种解释资料 。 “单一的综合行动”这一表述取自委员会1966年对《条约法》条款的评注。

 There the Commission also stated that it intended “to emphasize that the process of interpretation is a unity”.

 委员会在其中还表明，打算“强调解释过程是一个整体”。  

(13) Paragraph 5 of draft conclusion 1 also explains that appropriate emphasis must be placed, in the course of the process of interpretation as a “single combined operation”, on the various means of interpretation, which are referred to in articles 31 and 32.

(13) 结论草案1第5段还说明，在第三十一条和第三十二条提到的作为“单一的综合行动”的解释过程中，必须对各种解释资料给予适当的强调。

The Commission did not, however, consider it necessary to include a reference, by way of example, to one or more specific means of interpretation in the text of Paragraph 5 of draft conclusion 1.

但是，委员会认为，在结论草案1第5段的案文中，没有必要作为例子提到一种或多种具体的解释资料。

 This avoids a possible misunderstanding that any one of the different means of interpretation has priority over others, regardless of the specific treaty provision or the case concerned.

 这避免了一种可能的误解，认为不同的解释资料中有任何一种优先于其他，而无论相关具体规定或案件情况如何。

(14) Paragraph 5 uses the term “means of interpretation”.

(14) 第5段使用了“解释资料”一语。

This term captures not only the “supplementary means of interpretation”, which are referred to in article 32, but also the elements mentioned in article 31.2225  Whereas the Commission, in its commentary on the draft articles on the Law of Treaties, sometimes used the terms “means of interpretation” and “elements of interpretation” interchangeably, for the purpose of the present topic the Commission retained the term “means of interpretation” because it also describes their function in the process of interpretation as a tool or an instrument.

这一术语不仅涵盖第三十二条所提及的“补充解释资料”，而且涵盖第三十一条所提到的各个要素。  在对《条约法》条款草案的评注中，委员会有时交替使用“解释资料”和“解释要素”，而为了本专题的目的，委员会保留了“解释资料”这一术语，因为它还描述了其作为工具或手段在解释过程中的作用。

 The term “means” does not set apart from each other the different elements, which are mentioned in articles 31 and 32. It rather indicates that these means each have a function in the process of interpretation, which is a “single”, and at the same time a “combined” operation.

 “资料”一词并没有将第三十一条和第三十二条中提到的不同要素分开，而是说明，这些资料在解释过程中各有其作用，解释过程既是“单一”的同时又是“综合”的行动。

 Just as courts typically begin their reasoning by looking at the terms of the treaty, and then continue, in an interactive process,  to analyse those terms in their context and in the light of the object and purpose of the treaty,242444  the precise relevance of different means of interpretation must first be identified in any case of treaty interpretation before they can be “thrown into the crucible”  in order to arrive at a proper interpretation, by giving them appropriate weight in relation to each other.

 正如法院推理通常首先是看条约的术语，继而在一个互动进程中，  结合上下文并根据条约的目的和宗旨，分析这些术语一样，  在进行条约解释的任何情况下，必须首先确定不同解释资料确切的相关性，然后才能将其 “扔进熔炉”，  对其给予相应的适当权衡，以得出一个适当的解释。

(15) The obligation to place “appropriate emphasis on the various means of interpretation” may, in the course of the interpretation of a treaty in specific cases, result in a different emphasis on the various means of interpretation depending on the treaty or on the treaty provisions concerned.

(15) 在具体案件的条约解释过程中，对“各种解释资料给予适当的强调”的义务，可能产生对各种解释资料的不同的强调，取决于有关条约或条约条款的具体情况。

 This is not to suggest that a court or any other interpreter is more or less free to choose how to use and apply the different means of interpretation.

 这并不是说，一个法院或任何其他解释者多少能够自由选择如何使用和应用不同的解释资料。

What guides the interpretation is the evaluation by the interpreter, which consists in identifying the relevance of different means of interpretation in a specific case and in determining their interaction with the other means of interpretation in this case by placing a proper emphasis on them in good faith, as required by the rule to be applied.

指导有关解释的是解释者作出的评价，评价的内容是确定不同解释资料在具体案件中的相关性，并通过善意地适当强调，确定这些解释资料在该案中与其他解释资料的互动关系，正如拟适用的规则所要求的那样。

This evaluation should include, if possible and practicable, consideration of relevant prior assessments and decisions in the same and possibly also in other relevant areas.

如果可能并实际可行，这一评价应当包括考虑在相同及可能在其他相关方面先前的相关评估和决定。

(16) The Commission debated whether it would be appropriate to refer, in draft conclusion 1, to the “nature” of the treaty as a factor which would typically be relevant to determining whether more or less weight should be given to certain means of interpretation.

 (16) 在结论草案1中是否宜提到条约的“性质”并视之为在确定给予某些解释资料或多或少的权重时通常相关的因素，委员会进行了辩论。

 Some members considered that the subject-matter of a treaty (e.g. whether provisions concern purely economic matters or rather address the human rights of individuals; and whether the rules of a treaty are more technical or more value-oriented) as well as its basic structure and function (e.g. whether provisions are more reciprocal in nature or more intended to protect a common good) may affect its interpretation.

 有些委员认为，一项条约的主题(例如，有关规定是涉及纯经济事项还是涉及个人的人权问题；条约的规则是更多偏于技术还是偏于价值取向)及其基本结构和职能(例如，有关规定更多为互惠性质还是为了保护公益)可能影响到条约的解释。

They indicated that the jurisprudence of different international courts and tribunals suggested that this is the case.29  It was also mentioned that the concept of the “nature” of a treaty is not alien to the Vienna Convention (see e.g. article 56 (1) (a))  and that the concept of the “nature” of the treaty and/or of treaty provisions had been included in other work of the Commission, in particular on the topic of the Effects of Armed Conflicts on Treaties.

他们说，各国际法院和法庭的判例表明，情况就是如此。  有人还提到，条约的“性质”的概念对《维也纳公约》而言并不陌生(参见第五十六条第(1) 款(a)项)，  条约和/或条约条款的“性质”的概念被纳入了委员会的其他工作，特别是关于武装冲突对条约的影响专题。

 Other members, however, considered that the draft conclusion should not refer to the “nature” of the treaty in order to preserve the unity of the interpretation process and to avoid any categorization of treaties.

 但是，另一些委员认为，结论草案不应当提到条约的“性质”以维护解释过程的统一性，避免对条约进行任何分类。

The point was also made that the notion of the “nature of the treaty” was unclear and that it would be difficult to distinguish it from the object and purpose of the treaty.

还有人提到，“条约的性质”的提法不明确，难以将其与条约的目的和宗旨区分。

 The Commission ultimately decided to leave the question open and to make no reference in draft conclusion 1 to the nature of the treaty for the time being.

 委员会最终决定这一问题保持开放，目前不在结论草案1中提到条约的性质。

Conclusion 2 Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as authentic means of interpretation

结论2 以嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为作准的解释资料

Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), being objective evidence of the understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the treaty, are authentic means of interpretation, in the application of the general rule of treaty interpretation reflected in article 31.

第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例是缔约方对条约含义理解的客观证据，因而是适用第三十一条所反映的条约解释通则时的作准的解释资料。

Commentary

评注

(1) By characterizing subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (a) and (b) of the Vienna Convention as “authentic means of interpretation” the Commission indicates the reason why those means are significant for the interpretation of treaties.

(1) 通过将《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例定性为“作准的解释资料”，委员会指出了为什么这些资料是条约解释的重要因素。

 The Commission thereby follows its 1966 commentary on the draft articles on the law of treaties which described subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under articles 31 (3) (a) and (b) as “authentic means of interpretation” and which underlined that:

 委员会因此遵循其1966年对条约法条款草案的评注，该评注将第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例描述为“作准的解释资料”，其中强调：

“The importance of such subsequent practice in the application of a treaty, as an element of interpretation, is obvious; for it constitutes objective evidence of the understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the treaty.”

“作为解释的一个要素，此种嗣后惯例在适用条约方面的重要性十分明显；因为其构成有关缔约国对条约意义的理解的客观证据”。

(2) Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (a) and (b) are, however, not the only “authentic means of interpretation”.

(2) 但是，第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例并非唯一的“作准的解释资料”。

Analyzing the ordinary meaning of the text of a treaty, in particular, is also such a means.

特别是，对条约案文的通常含义作出分析也是此种资料。

As the Commission has explained

正如委员会所解释的：

“(…) the Commission’s approach to treaty interpretation was on the basis that the text of the treaty must be presumed to be the authentic expression of the intentions of the parties, (…) making the ordinary meaning of the terms, the context of the treaty, its object and purpose, and the general rules of international law, together with authentic interpretations by the parties, the primary criteria for interpreting a treaty.”

“(…)委员会对条约解释的办法的基础是，条约案文必须假定为缔约国意图的权威表述，(…)将其用语的通常意义、条约的背景、其目的和宗旨、及国际法一般规则，连同缔约国的作准解释，作为解释条约的主要标准”。

The term “authentic” thus refers to different forms of “objective evidence”, or “proof” of conduct of the parties which reflects the “common understanding of the parties” as to the meaning of the treaty.

因此，“作准”一词是不同形式缔约国行为的“客观证据”或“证明”，反映了“缔约国”对条约意义的“共同理解”。

(3) By describing subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (a) and (b) as “authentic” means of interpretation the Commission recognizes that the common will of the parties, from which any treaty results, possesses a specific authority regarding the identification of the meaning of the treaty, even after the conclusion of the treaty.

(3) 通过将第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项描述为解释的“作准”资料，委员会承认缔约国的共同意愿，从这一意愿出发，任何条约结果在确定条约的意义方面都具有特定的权威性，甚至在条约缔结之后也是如此。

The Vienna Convention thereby accords the parties to a treaty a role which may be uncommon for the interpretation of legal instruments in some domestic legal systems.

因此，《维也纳公约》让条约缔约国发挥一种可能在某些国内法律制度中不常见的解释法律文书的作用。

(4) The character of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of the parties under article 31 (3) (a) and (b) as “authentic means of interpretation” does not, however, imply that these means necessarily possess a conclusive, or legally binding, effect.

(4) 但是，第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项之下嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为“作准的解释资料”并不意味着这些资料必然是决定性的或具有法律约束力。

According to the chapeau of article 31 (3), subsequent agreements and subsequent practice shall, after all, only “be taken into account” in the interpretation of a treaty, which consists of a “single combined operation” with no hierarchy among the means of interpretation which are referred to in article 31.

按照第三十一条第三款起首部分，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例不过应在解释条约方面纳入“考虑”，而条约的解释是一个“单一的综合行动”，在第三十一条所指的所有解释资料中，没有等级之分。

 For this reason, and contrary to a view of some commentators,23  subsequent agreements and subsequent practice which establish the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty are not necessarily conclusive, or legally binding.29  Thus, when the Commission characterized a “subsequent agreement” as representing “an authentic interpretation by the parties which must be read into the treaty for purposes of its interpretation”,  it did not go quite as far as saying that such an interpretation is necessarily conclusive in the sense that it overrides all other means of interpretation.

 因此，与某些评论者的意见相反，  确定缔约国同意条约解释的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例并非必然是决定性的或具有法律约束力。  因此，委员会将“嗣后协定”定性为代表“缔约国的权威解释，其必须结合条约本身加以解释”，  这并非是说，在其高于所有其他解释资料这一意义上，此种解释必然是决定性的。

(5) This does not exclude that the parties to a treaty, if they wish, may reach a binding agreement regarding the interpretation of a treaty.

(5) 这不排除条约缔约国在愿意的情况下，就条约的解释达成一项具有约束力的协定。

The Special Rapporteur on the law of treaties, Sir Humphrey Waldock, stated in his Third Report on the Law of Treaties that it may be difficult to distinguish subsequent practice of the parties under what became article 31 (3) (a) and (b) — which is only to be taken into account, among other means, in the process of interpretation — and a later agreement which the parties consider to be binding:

条约法问题特别报告员汉弗雷·沃尔多克爵士在关于条约法的第三次报告中说，在解释过程中，可能难以区分构成第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项的缔约国嗣后协定―― 其仅应当在解释过程中与其他资料一并考虑―― 和缔约国认为具有约束力的稍后的协定：

“Subsequent practice when it is consistent and embraces all the parties would appear to be decisive of the meaning to be attached to the treaty, at any rate when it indicates that the parties consider the interpretation to be binding upon them.

“如果前后一致并包括所有缔约国，嗣后惯例看来在确定条约应有的意义方面具有决定性，无论如何[强调是后加的]，在其表明缔约国认为解释对其有约束力之时是如此。

In these cases, subsequent practice as an element of treaty interpretation and as an element in the formation of a tacit agreement overlap and the meaning derived from the practice becomes an authentic interpretation established by agreement.”

在这些情况下，作为条约解释的一个要素，以及作为构成默示协定重叠和源自该惯例意义的一个要素，嗣后惯例成为一项由协定确立的权威解释”。

 (emphasis added)

 (强调是后加的)

Whereas Waldock’s original view that (simple) agreed subsequent practice “would appear to be decisive of the meaning” was ultimately not adopted in the Vienna Convention, subsequent agreements and subsequent practice establishing the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty must be conclusive regarding such interpretation when “the parties consider the interpretation to be binding upon them”.

沃尔多克最初的意见―― 即(单一的)商定的嗣后惯例“看来在确定意义方面具有决定性”―― 这一意见，《维也纳公约》最终没有采纳，但是，在“缔约国认为解释对其有约束力”之时，确立缔约国同意有关条约解释的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例在有关此种解释方面必定是决定性的。

It is, however, always possible that provisions of domestic law prohibit the government of a State from arriving at a binding agreement in such cases without satisfying certain — mostly procedural — requirements under its constitution.

然而总有可能的是，国内法的规定禁止一国政府在此种情况中，在没有满足宪法所规定的某些要求(多数为程序性要求)的情况下，达成有约束力的协定。

(6) The possibility of arriving at a binding subsequent interpretative agreement by the parties is particularly clear in cases in which the treaty itself so provides.

(6) 在条约本身有此规定的情况下，缔约国达成有约束力的嗣后解释性协定的可能性十分明显。

Article 1131 (2) NAFTA, for example, provides that “[a]n interpretation by the [inter-governmental] Commission of a provision of this Agreement shall be binding on a Tribunal established under this Section.”

例如，《北美自由贸易协定》第1131(2)条规定，“[政府间]委员会对本协定条款的解释对依本条所设法庭具有约束力”。

The existence of such a special procedure or an agreement regarding the authoritative interpretation of a treaty which the parties consider binding may or may not preclude additional recourse to subsequent agreements or subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (a) and (b).

此种缔约国认为对其有约束力的有关条约权威解释的特别程序或协定的存在，可能排除或不排除额外使用第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例。

(7) The Commission has continued to use the term “authentic means of interpretation” in order to describe the not necessarily conclusive, but to a more or less authoritative, character of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (a) and (b).

(7) 委员会继续使用“作准的解释资料”，以描述第三十一条第3款(a)和(b)项之下嗣后协定和嗣后惯例不一定具有的决定性但或多或少具有的权威性。

The Commission has not employed the terms “authentic interpretation” or “authoritative interpretation” in draft conclusion 2 since these concepts are often understood to mean a necessarily conclusive, or binding, agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty.64236829

委员会在结论草案2中没有采用“权威解释”或“权威性解释”，因为这些概念常常被理解为意味着必定是缔约国之间有关条约解释的结论性或有约束力的协定。

(8) The term “authentic means of interpretation” encompasses a factual and a legal element.

(8) “作准的解释资料”包含了事实和法律要素。

The factual element is indicated by the expression “objective evidence”, whereas the legal element is contained in the concept of “understanding of the parties”.

事实要素载于“客观证据”这一表述中，而法律要素则载于“缔约国的理解”的概念。

Accordingly, the Commission characterized a “subsequent agreement” as representing “an authentic interpretation by the parties which must be read into the treaty for purposes of its interpretation”,  and subsequently stated that subsequent practice “similarly (…) constitutes objective evidence of the understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the treaty”.

因此，委员会将“嗣后协定”定性为表示“缔约国的权威解释，其解释必须结合条约本身阅读”，  并随后说明，嗣后惯例“同样(…)构成缔约国对条约意义的理解的客观证据”。

 Given the character of treaties as embodiments of the common will of their parties, “objective evidence” of the “understanding of the parties” possesses considerable authority as a means of interpretation.2374

 鉴于条约的特性是体现其缔约国的共同意愿，“缔约国的理解”的“客观证据”作为解释资料具有相当的权威性。  

(9) The distinction between any “subsequent agreement” (article 31 (3) (a)) and “subsequent practice (…) which establishes the agreement of the parties” (article 31 (3) (b)) does not denote a difference concerning their authentic character.

(9) “嗣后协定”(第三十一条第3款(a)项)与“确定各当事国对协定…之嗣后惯例”(第三十一条第3款(b)项)之间的区分并不意味着其在权威性方面有所不同。

 The Commission rather considers that a “subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions” ipso facto has the effect of constituting an authentic interpretation of the treaty, whereas a “subsequent practice” only has this effect if it “shows the common understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the terms”.

 相反，委员会认为，“当事国嗣后所定关于条约之解释或其规定之适用之任何协定”当然具有构成条约权威解释的效力，而“嗣后惯例”仅在其“表明当事国对术语意义的共同理解”时才具有这一效力。

 Thus, the difference between a “subsequent agreement between the parties” and a “subsequent practice (…) which establishes the agreement of the parties” lies in the manner of establishing the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty, with the difference being in the greater ease with which an agreement is established.

 因此，“当事国之嗣后协定”与“确定各当事国对协定…之嗣后惯例”之间的区别在于确立当事国对条约解释之协定的方式，因此区别在于更容易确立协定。  

(10) Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as authentic means of treaty interpretation are not to be confused with interpretations of treaties by international courts, tribunals, or treaty bodies in specific cases.

(10) 不应当将作为作准的条约解释资料的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例与各国际法院、法庭或条约机构在具体案件中对条约的解释相混淆。

Subsequent agreements or subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (a) and (b) are “authentic” means of interpretation because they are expressions of the understanding of the treaty by the States parties themselves.

第三十一条第3款(a)和(b)项之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例为“作准的”解释资料，因为它们表示当事国本身对条约的理解。

The authority of international courts, tribunals and treaty bodies rather derives from other sources, most often from the treaty which is to be interpreted.

而各国际法院、法庭和条约机构的权威来自其他渊源，最通常是来自所要解释的条约。

Judgments and other pronouncements of international courts, tribunals and treaty bodies, however, may be indirectly relevant for the identification of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as authentic means of interpretation if they reflect or trigger such subsequent agreements and practice of the parties themselves.29

但是，各国际法院、法庭和条约机构的判决和其他宣判如果反映或引起当事国本身的此种嗣后协定和惯例，则可能与确定作为作准的解释资料的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例间接相关。  

(11) Draft conclusions 1 and 4 distinguish between “subsequent practice” establishing the agreement of the parties under article 31 (3) (b) of the Vienna Convention, on the one hand, and other subsequent practice (in a broad sense) by one or more, but not all parties to the treaty which may be relevant as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32.

(11) 结论草案1和4区分了《维也纳公约》第三十一条第3款(b)项之下确定当事国之协定的“嗣后惯例”，和第三十二条之下作为补充解释资料可能相关的条约一个或多个、但并非所有当事国(广义的)其他嗣后惯例。

 Such “other” subsequent interpretative practice which does not establish the agreement of all the parties cannot constitute an “authentic” interpretation of a treaty by all its parties and thus will not possess the same weight for the purpose of interpretation.

 此种并不确立所有当事国同意的“其他”嗣后解释性惯例不能构成条约所有当事国对条约的“权威”解释，因此，就解释目的而言，不具有相同的权重。

(12) The last part of draft conclusion 2 makes it clear that any reliance on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as authentic means of interpretation should occur as part of the application of the general rule of treaty interpretation reflected in article 31 of the Vienna Convention.

(12) 结论草案2的最后一部分清楚地表明，以嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为作准的解释资料应作为适用《维也纳公约》第三十一条所反映的条约解释通则的一部分。

Conclusion 3 Interpretation of treaty terms as capable of evolving over time

结论3 能够随时间演变的条约用语的解释

Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32 may assist in determining whether or not the presumed intention of the parties upon the conclusion of the treaty was to give a term used a meaning which is capable of evolving over time.

第三十一和第三十二条所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可协助确定缔约方在缔结条约之时的推定意图是不是赋予用语以能够随时间演变的含义。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft conclusion 3 addresses the role which subsequent agreements and subsequent practice may play in the context of the more general question of whether the meaning of a term of a treaty is capable of evolving over time.

(1) 结论草案3涉及在条约术语的含义是否能够随时间演变的更一般性问题的背景下，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可以发挥的作用。

(2) In the case of treaties, the question of the so-called intertemporal law  has traditionally been put in terms of whether a treaty should be interpreted in the light of the circumstances and the law at the time of its conclusion (“contemporaneous” or “static” interpretation), or in the light of the circumstances and the law at the time of its application (“evolutive”, “evolutionary”, or “dynamic” interpretation).

(2) 在涉及条约时，所谓时际法  的一般问题历来是这样提出的：条约是应当根据其缔结时的情况和法律来解释(“当时意义”或“静态”解释)，还是应当根据使用之时的情况和法律来解释(“演进”、“演化”或“动态”解释)。

 Arbitrator Max Huber’s dictum in the Island of Palmas case according to which “a judicial fact must be appreciated in the light of the law contemporary with it”  led many international courts and tribunals, as well as many writers, to generally favour contemporaneous interpretation.

 当初，仲裁官Max Hubert在帕尔马斯岛案中判词是“必须根据当时的法律来审视案件事实”，  导致许多国际法院和法庭以及许多法学家普遍赞成“注重当时意义的解释”方法。

 At the same time, the Tribunal in the Iron Rhine case asserted that there was,846984  “general support among the leading writers today for evolutive interpretation of treaties”.

 与此同时，法庭在“莱茵铁路公司”案中认为，  “今天，主流法学家普遍支持对条约的演进式解释”。

(3) The Commission, in its commentary on the draft articles on the law of treaties, considered in 1966 that “to attempt to formulate a rule covering comprehensively the temporal element would present difficulties” and it, therefore, “concluded that it should omit the temporal element”.

(3) 1966年，委员会在条约法草案的评注中认为，“试图制定一项全面涵盖时间因素的通则会产生难题”，因此，委员会“得出结论认为，应忽略时间因素。”  

 Similarly, the debates within the Commission’s Study Group on Fragmentation led to the conclusion in 2006 that it is difficult to formulate and to agree on a general rule which would give preference either to a “principle of contemporaneous interpretation” or to one which generally recognizes the need to take account of an “evolving meaning” of treaties.

 同样，通过委员会不成体系问题研究组内的辩论，委员会在2006年得出结论认为，难以制定并商定一条通则，从而要么偏向于“当时意义解释原则”，要么偏向于一般承认需考虑到条约的“演进意义”的那种解释。  

(4) Draft conclusion 3 should not be read as taking any position regarding the appropriateness of a more contemporaneous or a more evolutive approach to treaty interpretation in general.

(4) 结论草案3不应当被视为一般条约解释采取当时意义办法适当还是采取演进办法适当这一问题采取了任何立场。

Draft conclusion 3 rather emphasizes that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, as any other means of treaty interpretation, can support both a contemporaneous and an evolutive interpretation (or, as it is often called, evolutionary interpretation), where appropriate.

结论草案3强调的是，与任何其他条约解释资料一样，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例在适当情况下均可支持当时意义解释和演进解释(或通常所称的演化解释)。

The Commission, therefore, concluded that these means of treaty interpretation “may assist in determining whether or not” an evolutive interpretation is appropriate with regard to a particular treaty term.

因此，委员会的结论是，这些条约解释资料“可协助确定演进解释办法对于特定条约术语是否适合”。

(5) This approach is confirmed by the jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals.

(5) 各国际法院和法庭的判例确认了这一办法。

The various international courts and tribunals which have engaged in evolutive interpretation — albeit in varying degrees — appear to have followed a case-by-case approach in determining, through recourse to the various means of treaty interpretation which are referred to in articles 31 and 32, whether or not a treaty term should be given a meaning capable of evolving over time.

采用演进解释办法―― 尽管程度不同―― 的各国际法院和法庭，看来都采用逐案处理的办法，通过第三十一条和第三十二条提到的各种条约解释资料，确定是否应当赋予条约术语以能够随时间演变的含义。

(6) The International Court of Justice, in particular, is seen as having developed two strands of jurisprudence, one tending towards a more “contemporaneous” and the other towards a more “evolutionary” interpretation, as Judge ad hoc Guillaume has pointed out in his Declaration in Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights.

(6) 特别是，国际法院被视为做出了两种判例，一种更偏向于“当时意义”解释，一种更偏向于“演变性”解释，正如纪尧姆专案法官在其关于航行权和相关权利的争端案的声明中所指出的。

 The decisions which favour a more contemporaneous approach mostly concern specific treaty terms (“water-parting”;  “main channel/Thalweg”;  names of places;  “mouth” of a river ).

 他认为，更倾向于当时意义办法的法院裁决大多涉及相当具体的条约术语(“分水岭”；  “主航道/河流最深线”；  地名；  “河口”  )。

On the other hand, the cases which support an evolutive interpretation seem to relate to more general terms.

另一方面，赞成演变性解释的案件看来涉及更一般的术语。

This is true, in particular, for terms which are “by definition evolutionary”, such as “the strenuous conditions of the modern world” or “the well-being and development of such peoples” in article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

《国际联盟盟约》第二十二条“现代世界的艰难条件”或“这些人民的福祉和发展”等“根据定义为演变性”的用语尤为如此。

The International Court of Justice, in its Namibia Opinion, has given those terms an evolving meaning by referring to the evolution of the right of peoples to self-determination after the Second World War.

国际法院在其“纳米比亚咨询意见”中，援引第二次世界大战之后人民自决权的演变，给出了注重演变的解释。

 The “generic” nature of a particular term in a treaty  and the fact that the treaty is designed to be “of continuing duration”  may also give rise to an evolving meaning.

 某个条约的特定用语具有“通用”性质，  以及条约旨在“长期有效”，  可能也引起演变的含义。

(7) Other international judicial bodies sometimes also employ an evolutive approach to interpretation, though displaying different degrees of openness towards such interpretation.

(7) 其他国际司法机构有时也采用演进解释办法，尽管对此种解释表现出不同的开放程度。

The Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization has only occasionally resorted to evolutive interpretation.

世界贸易组织上诉机构偶尔采用演进解释。

In a well-known case it has, however, held that “the generic term “natural resources” in article XX (g) is not “static” in its content or reference but is rather “by definition, evolutionary”.

但是，在一桩众所周知的案件中，上诉机构认为，“第20条(g)项中‘自然资源’这一通用术语不是‘静止’的，而‘根据定义是发展的’”。

 The Seabed Disputes Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea has held that the meaning of certain “obligations to ensure”  “may change over time”,  and has emphasized that the rules of State liability in UNCLOS are apt to follow developments in the law and are “not considered to be static”.

 国际海洋法法庭海底争端分庭认为，某些 “确保…的义务”的含义  “会随着时间而变化”，  并强调，《联合国海洋法公约》中关于国家责任的条款会随着法律的发展而发展，而“不会被认为是静止的”。

 The European Court of Human Rights has held more generally “that the Convention is a living instrument which (…) must be interpreted in the light of present-day conditions”.

 欧洲人权法院更一般地认为，“《公约》是一项活的文书，(…)必须依照当今的情况来解释”。

 The Inter-American Court of Human Rights also more generally follows an evolutive approach to interpretation, in particular in connection with its so­called pro homine approach.

 美洲人权法院也更一般地采用演进解释办法，特别是其所谓人道的办法。

 In the Iron Rhine case the continued viability and effectiveness of a multi-dimensional cross-border railway arrangement was an important reason for the Tribunal to accept that even rather technical rules may have to be given an evolutive interpretation.

 在莱茵铁路公司一案中，多方面跨界铁路安排的持续存在和效力是一个重要理由，促使法庭同意，即使对非常技术性的规则，也可以进行注重演变的解释。

(8) In the final analysis, most international courts and tribunals have not recognized evolutive interpretation as a separate form of interpretation, but instead have arrived at such an evolutive interpretation in application of the various means of interpretation which are mentioned in articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention, by considering certain criteria (in particular those mentioned in paragraph (6) above) on a case-by-case basis.

(8) 归根到底，大多数国际法院和法庭并未将演进解释承认为解释的一种单独形式，而是通过在个案的基础上考虑某些标准(特别是以上第(6)段提到的标准)，在使用各种解释资料中得出此种演进解释。

Any evolutive interpretation of the meaning of a term over time must therefore result from the ordinary process of treaty interpretation.

因此，对术语随时间变化的意义的任何演进解释，必须产生于正常的条约解释过程。

(9) The Commission considers that this state of affairs confirms its original approach to treaty interpretation:

(9) 委员会认为，这种情况确认了其最初对条约解释的办法：

“(…) the Commission’s approach to treaty interpretation was on the basis that the text of the treaty must be presumed to be the authentic expression of the intentions of the parties, and that the elucidation of the meaning of the text rather than an investigation ab initio of the supposed intentions of the parties constitutes the object of interpretation (…) making the ordinary meaning of the terms, the context of the treaty, its object and purpose, and the general rules of international law, together with authentic interpretations by the parties, the primary criteria for interpreting a treaty.”

“(…)委员会对条约解释的办法的基础是，条约案文必须假定为当事国意图的权威表述，案文意义的阐释―― 而非从头开始调查所谓当事国的意图―― 构成解释的目的(…)，将用语的通常含义、上下文、欺侮地和宗旨、国际法一般规则，以及当事国的权威解释作为条约解释的首要标准。 ”

Accordingly, draft conclusion 3, by using the phrase “presumed intention”, refers to the intention of the parties as determined through the application of the various means of interpretation which are recognized in articles 31 and 32.

因此，通过使用“推定意图”一语，结论草案3提到通过应用第三十一条和第三十二条承认的各种解释资料所确定的当事国的意图。

The “presumed intention” is thus not a separately identifiable original will, and the travaux préparatoires are not the primary basis for determining the presumed intention of the parties, but they are only, as article 32 indicates, a supplementary means of interpretation.

因此，“推定意图”并非一个单独可确定的最初意愿，准备工作并非确定当事国推定意图的主要基础，而是如第三十二条所示，仅仅是补充解释资料。

And although interpretation must seek to identify the intention of the parties, this must be done by the interpreter on the basis of the means of interpretation which are available at the time of the act of interpretation, and which include subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of parties to the treaty.

虽然解释必须设法确定当事国的意图，但解释者必须根据进行解释之时现有的解释资料予以确定，其中包括条约当事国的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例。

The interpreter thus has to answer the question whether parties can be presumed to have intended, upon the conclusion of the treaty, to give a term used a meaning which is capable of evolving over time.

因而解释者须回答这样的问题：是否可推定当事国在签订条约时有意使所用的术语具有可随时间演变的含义。

(10) Draft conclusion 3 does not take a position regarding the question of the appropriateness of a more contemporaneous or a more evolutive approach to treaty interpretation in general (see above commentary, at paragraph (4)).

(10) 结论草案3没有普遍就条约解释应更多采取当时意义办法适当还是采取演进办法适当这一问题采取任何立场。 (见以上评注，第(4)段)。

The conclusion should, however, be understood as indicating the need for some caution with regard to arriving at a conclusion in a specific case whether to adopt an evolutive approach.

但是，该结论应当被理解为表明，在是否对具体案件采取演进办法得出结论时，需要慎重一些。

For this purpose, draft conclusion 3 points to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as means of interpretation which may provide useful indications to the interpreter for assessing, as part of the ordinary process of treaty interpretation, whether the meaning of a term is capable of evolving over time.23

为此目的，结论草案3将嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释资料，从而可能提供有益的借鉴，有利于解释者评估―― 作为条约解释正常程序的一部分评估――术语的含义是否能够随时间演变。

(11) This approach is based on and confirmed by the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and other international courts and tribunals.

(11) 这一办法以国际法院和各其他国际法院和法庭的判例为基础并为其所确认。

In the Namibia Opinion the International Court of Justice referred to the practice of United Nations Organs and of States in order to specify the conclusions which it derived from the inherently evolutive nature of the right to self-determination.

在纳米比亚一案中，国际法院援引了联合国机构和一些国家的惯例，以具体说明其从自决权固有的演变性质中得出的结论。

 In the Aegean Sea case, the Court found it “significant” that what it had identified as the “ordinary, generic sense” of the term “territorial status” was confirmed by the administrative practice of the United Nations and by the behaviour of the party which had invoked the restrictive interpretation in a different context.

 在爱琴海一案中，国际法院认为“十分重要”的是，联合国的行政惯例和当事国的行为确认了它认定的“领土地位”这一用语的“一般和通用意义”，尽管当事国在另一处上下文中援用了限制性的解释。

10 In any case, the decisions in which International Court of Justice has undertaken an evolutive interpretation have not strayed from the possible meaning of the text and from the presumed intention of the parties to the treaty, as they had also been expressed in their subsequent agreements and subsequent practice. 11

10 无论如何，国际法院采取演进办法的裁定并未偏离案文可能具有的含义，并未偏离―― 如其在嗣后协定和嗣后惯例中也表示的―― 条约当事国的推定意图。 11

(12) The judgment of the International Court of Justice in Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights also illustrates how subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of the parties can assist in determining whether a term has to be given a meaning which is capable of evolving over time.

(12) 国际法院关于“关于航行权和相关权利的争端案”的判决也表明，缔约国的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例如何能够帮助确定某一术语是否具有能够随时间演变的含义。

Interpreting the term “comercio” in a treaty of 1858, the Court held:

在解释1858年一项条约中的“comercio”这一术语时，法院认为：

“On the one hand, the subsequent practice of the parties, within the meaning of article 31 (3) (b) of the Vienna Convention, can result in a departure from the original intent on the basis of a tacit agreement between the parties.

“一方面，在《维也纳公约》第三十一条第3款(b)项的意义上，当事国的嗣后惯例可能导致偏离缔约方默认的原有意图。

On the other hand, there are situations in which the parties’ intent upon conclusion of the treaty was (…) to give the terms used (…) a meaning or content capable of evolving, not one fixed once and for all, so as to make allowance for, among other things, developments in international law.”

另一方面，在有些情况中，当事国缔结条约的意图是(…)赋予所用术语(…)一种能够演变的含义或内容，而不是一种一旦确定即永不改变的含义或内容，以便除其他外为国际法的发展留出余地。”

The Court then found that the term “comercio” was a “generic term” of which “the parties necessarily” had “been aware that the meaning (…) was likely to evolve over time” and that “the treaty has been entered into for a very long period”, and concluded that “the parties must be presumed (…) to have intended” this term to “have an evolving meaning”.

法院随后认定，“comercio”这一术语是一个“通用术语”，其“当事国必然意识到其含义(…)很可能随时间演变”，意识到“缔结的条约要持续很长时间”，并得出结论认为“必须推定当事国(…)意图使”这一术语“具有演变的含义”。

13 Judge Skotnikov, in a Separate Opinion, while disagreeing with this reasoning, ultimately arrived at the same result by accepting that a more recent subsequent practice of Costa Rica related to tourism on the San Juan river “for at least a decade” against which Nicaragua “never protested” but rather “engaged in consistent practice of allowing tourist navigation” and concluded that this “suggests that the parties have established an agreement regarding its interpretation”. 14

13 在个人意见中，斯科特尼科夫法官尽管不同意这一推理，但他最后也得出了同样的结果，他接受，对于哥斯达黎加最近“至少十年”有关圣胡安河旅游的嗣后惯例，尼加拉瓜“从未抗议”，而是“采取允许旅游航行的一贯做法”，并得出结论认为，这“表明当事国就其解释达成了一致”。 14

(13) The International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has sometimes taken more general forms of State practice into account, including trends in the legislation of States which, in turn, can give rise to a changed interpretation of the scope of crimes or their elements.

(13) 前南国际刑事法庭有时考虑到更普遍的国家惯例形式，包括会员国立法趋势，这反过来又可能改变对犯罪范围或犯罪要件的解释。

In Furundžija, for example, the Chamber of the ICTY, in search of a definition for the crime of rape as prohibited by article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, article 76 (1) of the first Additional Protocol, and article 4 (2) (e) of the second Additional Protocol, 15 examined the principles of criminal law common to the major legal systems of the world and held

例如，在Furundzija一案中，前南问题国际法庭的分庭为界定《日内瓦第四公约》第27条、第一附加议定书第76条(1)款和第二附加议定书第4条(2)款(E)项所禁止的强奸罪， 15 检查了世界各主要法律制度通用的刑法原则，并认为：

“that a trend can be discerned in the national legislation of a number of States of broadening the definition of rape so that it now embraces acts that were previously classified as comparatively less serious offences, that is sexual or indecent assault.

“…可以看出，一些缔约国本国立法中的一个趋势是，扩大强奸罪定义的范围，把先前定为较轻犯罪的行为也纳入进来，包括性侵犯或非礼行为。

This trend shows that at the national level States tend to take a stricter attitude towards serious forms of sexual assault.”

这种趋势表明，在国家一级，各国倾向于更严格地对待严重的性侵犯形式。”

(14) The “living instrument” approach of the European Court of Human Rights is also based, inter alia, on different forms of subsequent practice.29 17 While the Court does not generally require “the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation” in the sense of article 31 (3) (b), the decisions in which it adopts an evolutive approach are regularly supported by an elaborate account of subsequent (state, social, and international legal) practice. 18

(14) 欧洲人权法院的“活的文书”的办法除其他外也是基于嗣后惯例的不同形式。 17 尽管该法院并不一般要求第三十一条第三款(b)项意义上的“当事国同意对条约解释之…”，但其采取演进办法的裁定往往辅之以详细叙述嗣后(国家、社会和国际法律)惯例。 18

(15) The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, despite its relatively rare mentioning of subsequent practice, frequently refers to broader international developments, an approach which falls somewhere between subsequent practice and other “relevant rules” under article 31 (3) (c).

(15) 美洲人权法院尽管相对而言很少提到嗣后惯例，但该法院常常提到更广泛的国际发展，这一办法介于嗣后惯例和第三十一条第3款(c)项之下其他“相关规则”之间。

19 In the case of Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua, for example, the Court pointed out that

19 例如，在“Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni社区诉尼加拉瓜”案中，美洲人权法院指出：

“human rights treaties are live instruments [“instrumentos vivos”] whose interpretation must adapt to the evolution of the times and, specifically, to current living conditions.”

“人权条约是活动文书[“instrumentos vivo”]，其解释必须适应于时代的演变，具体而言，适应于目前的生活条件。 ”

(16) The Human Rights Committee also on occasion adopts an evolutive approach which is based on developments of State practice.

(16) 人权事务委员会有时也采用基于国家实践的发展的演进办法。

Thus, in Judge v. Canada, the Committee abandoned its Kindler  jurisprudence, elaborating that:

因此，在法官诉加拿大案中，人权事务委员会放弃了其在Kindler案  中的判例，阐述说：

“The Committee is mindful of the fact that the above-mentioned jurisprudence was established some 10 years ago, and that since that time there has been a broadening international consensus in favour of abolition of the death penalty, and in States which have retained the death penalty, a broadening consensus not to carry it out.”

“委员会意识到，上述判例是大约10年以前做出的，自那时以来，国际协商一致意见更加广泛地主张废除死刑，而在保留死刑的国家中，更加广泛的协商一致意见是不执行死刑。 ”

In Yoon and Choi, the Committee stressed that the meaning of any right contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) evolved over time and concluded that article 18 (3) now provided at least some protection against being forced to act against genuinely-held religious beliefs.

在Yoon和Choi案中，委员会强调，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》所载任何权利的含义随时间演变，并得出结论认为，《公约》第十八条第3款现在至少提供了某种保护，使人不致违背自己真心持有的宗教信仰而被迫行动。

The Committee reached this conclusion since “an increasing number of those States parties to the Covenant which have retained compulsory military service have introduced alternatives to compulsory military service”.

委员会得出这一结论是因为，“越来越多的保持义务兵役制度的缔约国实行了义务兵役的替代办法”。  

(17) Finally, ICSID tribunals have emphasized that subsequent practice can be a particularly important means of interpretation for such provisions which the parties to the treaty intended to evolve in the light of their subsequent treaty practice.

(17) 最后，投资争端解决中心法庭着重指出，对于条约当事国意图根据其嗣后条约惯例而演变的这种条款，嗣后惯例可能是特别重要的解释资料。

In the case of Mihaly International Corporation v. Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, for example, the Tribunal held that:

例如，在米海利国际公司诉斯里兰卡民主社会主义共和国案中，法庭认为：

“Neither party asserted that the ICSID Convention contains any precise a priori definition of “investment”.

“当事双方均没有主张，《投资争端解决中心公约》载有任何先验的‘投资’的确切定义。

Rather, the definition was left to be worked out in the subsequent practice of States, thereby preserving its integrity and flexibility and allowing for future progressive development of international law on the topic of investment.”

而是将此种定义留待嗣后国家实践确定，从而保留了其完整性和灵活性，并为投资专题方面国际法未来的逐渐发展留出了余地。 ”

(18) The jurisprudence of international courts, tribunals, and other treaty bodies thus confirms that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32 “may assist in determining” whether or not a “term” shall be given a meaning which is capable of evolving over time.

(18) 因此，各国际法院、法庭和其他条约机构的判例确认，第三十一和第三十二条所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例“可协助确定”缔约方在缔结条约之时的推定意图是不是赋予“用语”以能够随时间演变的含义。

The expression “term” is not limited to specific words (like “commerce”, “territorial status”, “rape”, or “investment”), but may also encompass more inter-related or cross-cutting concepts (such as “by law” (article 9 of the ICCPR) or “necessary” (article 18 of the ICCPR), as they exist, for example, in human rights treaties).

“用语”一语并不限于具体措辞(如“商业”、“领土地位”、“强奸”、或“投资”)，而是还可能包含更为相互关联和相互交叉的概念(如“依法”(《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第九条)或“必须”(《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十八条)，这些概念在各项人权条约中存在)。

Since the “terms” of a treaty are elements of the rules which are contained therein, the rules concerned are covered accordingly.

由于条约的“用语”是其所载规则的要素，因此涵盖相关规则。

Conclusion 4 Definition of subsequent agreement and subsequent practice

结论4 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的定义

1. A “subsequent agreement” as an authentic means of interpretation under article 31 (3) (a) is an agreement between the parties, reached after the conclusion of a treaty, regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions.

1. “嗣后协定”作为第三十一条第三款(a)项之下作准的解释资料，是指缔约方在条约缔结后达成的关于解释条约或适用条约规定的协定。

2. A “subsequent practice” as an authentic means of interpretation under article 31 (3) (b) consists of conduct in the application of a treaty, after its conclusion, which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty.

2. “嗣后惯例”作为第三十一条第三款(b)项之下作准的解释资料，是指条约缔结后确定各缔约方对条约的解释意思一致的适用条约的行为。

3. Other “subsequent practice” as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 consists of conduct by one or more parties in the application of the treaty, after its conclusion.

3. 其他“嗣后惯例”作为第三十二条之下的补充的解释资料，是指条约缔结后一个或多个缔约方适用条约的行为。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft conclusion 4 defines the three different “subsequent” means of treaty interpretation which are mentioned in draft conclusion 1, paragraphs 3 and 4, i.e. “subsequent agreement” under article 31 (3) (a), “subsequent practice” under article 31 (3) (b), and other “subsequent practice” under article 32.

(1) 结论草案4对结论草案1第3和第4段中讲到的“嗣后”对条约进行解释的三种不同的方法做了定义，即第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“嗣后协定”、第三十一条第三款(b)项下的“嗣后惯例”，和第三十二条下的其他的“嗣后惯例”。

(2) In all three cases the term “subsequent” refers to acts occurring “after the conclusion of a treaty”.

(2) 在所有三种情况下，“嗣后”一词均指在“一项条约缔结后”发生的行为。

 This point in time is often earlier than the moment when the treaty enters into force (art. 24).

 这个时间点常常早于条约生效的一刻(第二十四条)。

Various provisions of the Vienna Convention (e.g. article 18) show that a treaty may be “concluded” before its actual entry into force.44  For the purposes of the present topic, “conclusion” is whenever the text of the treaty has been established as definite.

《维也纳公约》各种条款(例如第十八条)表明，一项条约可在它实际生效之前“缔结”。  为了本专题的目的，只要条约案文最后确定即为“缔结”。

It is after conclusion, not just after entry into force, of a treaty when subsequent agreements and subsequent practice can occur.

嗣后协定和嗣后惯例发生在条约缔结之后，而不仅仅发生在生效之后。

Indeed, it is difficult to identify a reason why an agreement or practice which take place between the moment when the text of a treaty has been established as definite and the entry into force of that treaty should not be relevant for the purpose of interpretation.

实际上，很难找出理由，为什么在一项条约的案文最后确定与条约生效之间达成的协议或惯例不能用于对条约的解释。

(3) Article 31 (2) of the Vienna Convention provides that the “context” of the treaty includes certain “agreements” and “instruments”23  that “are made in connection with the conclusion of the treaty”.

(3) 《维也纳公约》第三十一条第二款规定，条约的“内容”包括若干“协定”和“文书”，  这些“协定”和“文书”的订立是与缔结条约联系在一起的。

The phrase “in connection with the conclusion of the treaty” should be understood as including agreements and instruments which are made in a close temporal and contextual relation with the conclusion of the treaty.2464  If they are made after this period, then such “agreements” and agreed upon “instruments” constitute “subsequent agreements” or subsequent practice under article 31 (3).44

“因缔结条约”这一短语应理解为包括在与缔结条约相关的那段封闭的时间里或背景下订立的协定和文书。  如果是在这段时间之后订立的，则这种“协定”和议定的“文书”即为第三十一条第三款下的“嗣后协定”或嗣后惯例。  

(4) Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 4 provides the definition of “subsequent agreement” under article 31 (3) (a).

(4) 结论草案4的第1段规定了第三十一条第三款(a)项下“嗣后协定”的定义。

(5) Article 31 (3) (a) uses the term “subsequent agreement” and not the term “subsequent treaty”.

(5) 第三十一条第三款(a)项使用了“嗣后协定”一词，而非“嗣后条约”。

A “subsequent agreement” is, however, not necessarily less formal than a “treaty”.

但“嗣后协定”不一定不如“条约”更正式。

Whereas a treaty within the meaning of the Vienna Convention must be in written form (article 2 (1) (a)), the customary international law on treaties knows no such requirement.44  The term “agreement” in the Vienna Convention  and in customary international law does not imply any particular degree of formality.

虽然《维也纳公约》意义下的条约必须是书面形式的(第二条第一款(a))，但关于条约的习惯国际法则没有这种要求。 《维也纳公约》之下的“协定”一词  和习惯国际法下的“协定”一词，并不意味着任何特定的正式程度。

Article 39 of the Vienna Convention, which lays down the general rule according to which “(a) treaty may be amended by agreement between the parties”, has been explained by the Commission to mean that “(a)n amending agreement may take whatever form the parties to the original treaty may choose”.44  In the same way, the Vienna Convention does not envisage any particular formal requirements for agreements and practice under article 31 (3) (a) and (b).69

《维也纳公约》第三十九条规定了一般规则，根据该项规则，“(a)条约可根据缔约方之间的协定作出修正”，委员会对此的解释是，“修正协定可采取原条约缔约方所选择的任何形式”。  同样，《维也纳公约》并未对第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项下的协定和惯例设定任何具体形式的要求。  

(6) While every treaty is an agreement, not every agreement is a treaty.

(6) 虽然所有条约都是协定，但并非每项协定都是条约。

Indeed, a “subsequent agreement” under article 31 (3) (a) “shall” only “be taken into account” in the interpretation of a treaty.

实际上，第三十一条第三款(a)下的“嗣后协定”只能在条约的解释上予以考虑。

Therefore, it is not necessarily binding.

因此，它不一定具有约束力。

The question under which circumstances a subsequent agreement between the parties is binding, and under which circumstances it is merely a means of interpretation among several others, will be addressed at a later stage of the work on the topic.

有关在什么情况下缔约方之间的嗣后协定具有约束力，又在什么情况下仅仅是若干种解释方法的一种，将在有关这个主题以后阶段的工作中处理。

(7) The Vienna Convention distinguishes a “subsequent agreement” under article 31 (3) (a) from “any subsequent practice (…) which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation” under article 31 (3) (b).

(7) 《维也纳公约》对第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“嗣后协定”与第三十一条第三款(b)项下缔约方对条约解释达成一致的任何嗣后惯例作了区分。

This distinction is not always clear and the jurisprudence of international courts and other adjudicative bodies shows a certain reluctance to assert it.

这个区分并不总是十分清楚，一些国际法院和其他仲裁机构的判例法也显示出某种不愿明言的态度。

In Libya v. Chad, the International Court of Justice used the expression “subsequent attitudes”, to denote both what it later described as “subsequent agreements” and as subsequent unilateral “attitudes”.

在利比亚诉乍得一案中，国际法院使用了“嗣后态度”的表述，表示它后来所说的“嗣后协定”和嗣后单方面“态度”的两重意义。

 In the case of Indonesia v. Malaysia, the International Court of Justice left the question open whether the use of a particular map could constitute a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice.

 在印度尼西亚诉马来西亚一案中，国际法院对使用某一份地图是否可以作为嗣后协定或嗣后惯例的问题没有下定论。

 WTO Panels and the Appellate Body have also not always distinguished between a subsequent agreement and subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (a) and (b).

 世贸组织的专家组和上诉机构也并非总是对第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作出区分。  

(8) The NAFTA Tribunal in CCFT v. US,  however, has squarely addressed this distinction.

(8) 但《北美自由贸易协定》法庭在CCFT诉美国案中，  直截了当地作出了这一区分。

In that case the United States asserted that a number of unilateral actions by the three NAFTA parties could, if considered together, constitute a subsequent agreement.

在该案中，美国声称，三个《北美自由贸易协定》的缔约国采取的一些单方面行动，如果联系起来看，可以构成嗣后协定。

 In a first step, the Panel did not find that the evidence was sufficient to establish such a subsequent agreement under article 31 (3) (a).

 最初，小组认为证据不足以确定第三十一条第三款(a)项之下的嗣后协定。

40 In a second step, however, the Tribunal concluded that the very same evidence constituted a relevant subsequent practice which established an agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation:

40 但进入第二阶段，法庭认为，同样这些证据构成的相关的嗣后惯例，进而确定了缔约方对于解释达成的一致：

“The question remains: is there ‘subsequent practice’ that establishes the agreement of the NAFTA Parties on this issue within the meaning of Article 31 (3) (b)? The Tribunal concludes that there is.

“问题是：是否有一个“嗣后惯例”，确定了《北美自由贸易协定》的缔约国在这个问题上符合第三十一条第三款(b)项的协定？法庭认为这是肯定的。

Although there is, to the Tribunal, insufficient evidence on the record to demonstrate a ‘subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions,’ the available evidence cited by the Respondent demonstrates to us that there is nevertheless a ‘subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its applications.”

尽管法庭认为没有充分的记录在案的证据，表明“缔约方之间关于条约解释或条款规定适用方面的嗣后协定”，但回答这个问题的国家所举出的现有证据向我们表明，确有一项“适用条约的嗣后惯例，构成了缔约国对条约适用的协定”。

(9) This reasoning suggests that one difference between a “subsequent agreement” and “subsequent practice” under article 31 (3) lies in different forms which embody the “authentic” expression of the will of the parties.

(9) 这一论证表明，第三十一条第三款之下的“嗣后协定”和“嗣后惯例”之间的一个区别，在于体现缔约方意愿的作准表述的不同形式。

Indeed, by distinguishing between “any subsequent agreement” under article 31 (3) (a) and “subsequent practice (…) which establishes the agreement of the parties” under article 31 (3) (b) of the Vienna Convention, the Commission did not intend to denote a difference concerning their possible legal effect.

实际上，委员会在《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“任何嗣后协定”，与第三十一条第三款(b)项下确定缔约方(…)一致的“嗣后惯例”之间作出区分，并不是想指出两者之间可能存在的法律效果上的区别。

42 The difference between the two concepts, rather, lies in the fact that a “subsequent agreement between the parties” ipso facto has the effect of constituting an authentic means of interpretation of the treaty, whereas a “subsequent practice” only has this effect if its different elements, taken together, show “the common understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the terms”.7943

42 这两个概念之间的区别在于“缔约方之间的嗣后协定”当然具有作准的解释资料的作用，而“嗣后惯例”只是在其不同内容联系在一起能够表明“缔约方对术语的意义持有共同理解”时，方才具有这种效果。 43

(10) Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under article 31 (3) are hence distinguished based on whether an agreement of the parties can be identified as such, in a common act, or whether it is necessary to identify an agreement through individual acts which in their combination demonstrate a common position.

(10) 因此，第三十一条第三款之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例，其区分的根据是，是否可以找到缔约方之间在一个共同的行动中达成的一项名副其实的协定，还是必须通过若干单独的行动，综合这些行动可以表明一个共同的立场，由此确定缔约方的一致。

A “subsequent agreement” under article 31 (3) (a) must therefore be “reached” and presupposes a single common act by the parties by which they manifest their common understanding regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions.

因此，第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“嗣后协定”，必须是由缔约方在一次共同的行动“达成”的，表明他们对条约的解释或适用条款规定的共同理解。

(11) “Subsequent practice” under article 31 (3) (b), on the other hand, encompasses all (other) relevant forms of subsequent conduct by the parties to a treaty which contribute to the identification of an agreement, or “understanding”,134 44 of the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty.

(11) 而第三十一条第三款(b)项下的“嗣后惯例”，则囊括了条约缔约方所有(其他)形式的相关的嗣后行为，这些行为可帮助确定缔约国在条约解释方面的协定或“谅解”。 44

It is, however, possible that “practice” and “agreement” coincide in specific cases and cannot be distinguished.

然而，在具体情况下“惯例”和“协定”可能是一回事，无法区分。

This explains why the term “subsequent practice” is sometimes used in a more general sense which encompasses both means of interpretation that are referred to in article 31 (3) (a) and (b). 45

这就解释了为什么“嗣后惯例”一词有时在一般意义上使用，同时包含第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所指的解释资料。 45

(12) A group of separate subsequent agreements, each between a limited number of parties, but which, taken together, establish an agreement between all the parties to a treaty regarding its interpretation, is not normally “a” subsequent agreement under article 31 (3) (a).

(12) 一组单独的嗣后协定，每项协定仅限于少数缔约方，但把这些协定放在一起，便可形成条约所有缔约方对于条约解释的协定，这些嗣后协定通常不属于第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“一项”嗣后协定。

The term “subsequent agreement” under article 31 (3) (a) should, for the sake of clarity, be limited to a single agreement between all the parties.

第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“嗣后协定”意思，为清楚起见，应限于所有缔约方之间单一的一项协定。

Different later agreements between a limited number of parties which, taken together, establish an agreement between all the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty constitute subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (b).

少数缔约方之间事后签订的不同的协定，综合起来可形成所有缔约方对于条约解释的一致，应作为第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后惯例。

Different such agreements between a limited number of parties which, even taken together, do not establish an agreement between all the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty, may have interpretative value as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 (see below at paragraphs (22) and (23)).

少数缔约方之间事后签订的不同的协定，即使放在一起也不能形成所有缔约方对条约解释的协定，可以具有解释上的价值，作为第三十二条之下的补充解释资料(见下文第(22)段和(23)段)。

Thus, the use of the term “subsequent agreement” is limited to agreements between all the parties to a treaty which are manifested in one single agreement – or in a common act in whatever form that reflects the agreement of all parties. 46

因此，“嗣后协定”一词的使用，限于条约所有缔约方之间的协定，表现为一项单一的协定，或一个共同的行动，无论形式如何，但反映所有缔约方的一致。46

(13) A subsequent agreement under article 31 (3) (a) must be an agreement “regarding” the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions.

(13) 第三十一条第三款(a)项下的嗣后协定，必须是“关于”条约解释或适用条款规定的协定。

The parties must therefore purport, possibly among other aims, to clarify the meaning of a treaty or how it is to be applied.7447

因此，缔约方必须除其他可能的目的外，力求澄清一项条约的含义，或应如何适用。 47

(14) Whether an agreement is one “regarding” the interpretation or application of a treaty can sometimes be determined by some reference which links the “subsequent agreement” to the treaty concerned.

(14) 一项协定是不是“关于”条约解释或适用的协定，有时可以通过其中使用的一些词语来确定，这些词语将“嗣后协定”与相关的条约联系来。

Such reference may also be comprised in a later treaty.

这类语句也可见于一项之后的条约。

In the Jan Mayen case between Denmark and Norway, for example, the International Court of Justice appears to have accepted that a “subsequent treaty” between the parties “in the same field” could be used for the purpose of the interpretation of the previous treaty.

例如，在丹麦与挪威之间的Jan Mayen案中，国际法院显然已经接受当事国之间“在同一领域”的一项“嗣后条约”可用于解释前一项条约的目的。

In that case, however, the Court ultimately declined to use the subsequent treaty for that purpose because it did not in any way “refer” to the previous treaty.

但在该案中，法院最终还是没有使用嗣后条约用于该目的，因为嗣后条约丝毫没有“提到”之前的那项条约。

48 In Dispute Regarding Navigation and Related Rights between Costa Rica and Nicaragua, Judge Guillaume referred to the actual practice of tourism on the San Juan River in conformity with a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the two States.

48 在哥斯达黎加和尼加拉瓜“关于航行和相关权利的争端”中，Guillaume法官提到了San Juan河的旅游业，根据两国间的一项《谅解备忘录》，实际采用的做法。

49 It was not clear, however, whether this particular MoU was meant by the parties to serve as an interpretation of the boundary treaty under examination.

49 然而并不清楚两国是否准备将这份《谅解备忘录》用于解释所审议的边界条约。

(15) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 4 does not intend to provide a general definition for any form of subsequent practice that may be relevant for the purpose of the interpretation of treaties.

(15) 结论草案4的第2段并不是要为任何形式的嗣后惯例作出一般性定义，可能用于条约解释的目的。

Paragraph 2 is limited to subsequent practice as a means of authentic interpretation which establishes the agreement of all the parties to the treaty, as formulated in article 31 (3) (b).

第2段仅限于作准解释资料的嗣后惯例，根据第三十一条第三款(b)项的规定，确定各缔约方对条约解释的一致。

Such subsequent practice (in a narrow sense) is distinguishable from other “subsequent practice” (in a broad sense) by one or more parties which does not establish the agreement of the parties, but which may nevertheless be relevant as a subsidiary means of interpretation according to article 32 of the Vienna Convention.

(狭义上)这种嗣后惯例有别于(广义上的)一个或多个缔约方的其他“嗣后惯例”，后者并未形成缔约方的一致，但根据《维也纳公约》第三十二条，可以作为解释的辅助资料(见下文第22和23段)。  

(16) Subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (b) may consist of any “conduct”.

(16) 第三十一条第三款(b)下的嗣后惯例可以包括任何“行为”。

The word “conduct” is used in the sense of article 2 of the Commission’s articles on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts.

使用的“行为”一词，与委员会关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第二条同义。

 It may thus include not only acts, but also omissions, including relevant silence, which contribute to establishing agreement.

 因此，它不仅仅包括促成一致意见的各种行为，也包括不行为，包括相关的沉默。

 The question under which circumstances omissions, or silence, can contribute to an agreement of all the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty will be addressed at a later stage of the work.

 有关在什么情况下不行为或沉默可能促成所有缔约方就条约的解释达成一致的问题，将在以后阶段的工作中处理。

(17) Subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (b) must be conduct “in the application of the treaty”.

(17) 第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后惯例，必须是“适用条约过程中”的行为。

This includes not only official acts at the international or at the internal level which serve to apply the treaty, including to respect or to ensure the fulfilment of treaty obligations, but also, inter alia, official statements regarding its interpretation, such as statements at a diplomatic conference, statements in the course of a legal dispute, or judgments of domestic courts; official communications to which the treaty gives rise; or the enactment of domestic legislation or the conclusion of international agreements for the purpose of implementing a treaty even before any specific act of application takes place at the internal or at the international level.

这不仅仅包括在国际上或在国内为适用公约采取的官方行为，如遵守或确保履行条约的义务，而且除其他外也包括：有关条约解释的官方声明，如在外交会议上的发言、在法律争端过程中的声明，或国内法院的判决；有关条约的官方函件；或颁布国内法，或为执行条约缔结的国际协定，即使是在国内或在国际上实际采取任何具体适用行动之前。

(18) It may be recalled that, in one case, a NAFTA Panel denied that internal legislation can be used as an interpretative aid:

(18) 不妨一提的是，在一起案件中，《北美自由贸易协定》的一个专家组否定了国内法可用来帮助作出解释：

“Finally, in light of the fact that both Parties have made references to their national legislation on land transportation, the Panel deems it appropriate to refer to Article 27 of the Vienna Convention, which states that ‘A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.

“最后，鉴于双方都提到他们本国有关陆路运输的法律，专家组认为，应当提及《维也纳公约》第二十七条，该条规定：“一当事国不得援引其国内法规定为理由而不履行条约。 ”

’ This provision directs the Panel not to examine national laws but the applicable international law.

这项规定指示本专家组无须审议国家法律，而只需研究适用的国际法。

Thus, neither the internal law of the United States nor the Mexican law should be utilized for the interpretation of NAFTA.

因此，不论是美国的国内法还是墨西哥的国内法，都不能用来解释《北美自由贸易协定》。

To do so would be to apply an inappropriate legal framework.”

这样做无异于适用一套不相干的法律框架。”

Whereas article 27 of the Vienna Convention is certainly valid and important, this rule does not signify that national legislation may not be taken into account as an element of subsequent State practice in the application of the treaty.

虽然《维也纳公约》第二十七条肯定是有效而且重要的，但这项规则并不意味着国家法律在适用条约上不能作为嗣后国家惯例的一个要素加以考虑。

There is a difference between invoking internal law as a justification for a failure to perform a treaty and referring to internal law for the purpose of interpreting a provision of a treaty law.

援引国内法为不履行条约辩解，和为解释一项条约法律规定提及国内法，这两者之间是有区别的。

Accordingly, international adjudicatory bodies, in particular the WTO Appellate Body and the European Court of Human Rights, have recognized and regularly distinguish between internal legislation (and other implementing measures at the internal level) which violates treaty obligations, and national legislation and other measures which can serve as a means to interpret the treaty.

因此，国际裁判机构，特别是世贸组织的上诉机构和欧洲人权法院，都承认违反条约义务的国内法(和其他国内执行措施)的存在，和可用来解释条约的国内法和其他措施的存在，并经常性地对两者作出区分。

 It should be noted, however, that an element of bona fides is implied in any “subsequent practice in the application of the treaty”.

 然而，应当指出，任何“适用条约的嗣后惯例”，都离不开有一个要素―― 善意。

A manifest misapplication of a treaty, as opposed to a bona fide application (even if erroneous), is therefore not an “application of the treaty” in the sense of articles 31 and 32.

因此，明显蓄意或显而易见地篡改条约而不是善意地履行条约(即便有失误)，不能视为第三十一条和第三十二条意义上的“适用条约”。

(19) The requirement that subsequent practice in the application of a treaty under article 31 (3) (b) must be “regarding its interpretation” has the same meaning as the parallel requirement under article 31 (3 (a) (see above paragraphs (13) and (14)).

(19) 第三十一条第三款(b)项下适用条约的嗣后惯例，要求必须是“有关条约解释的”，与第三十一条第三款(a)项下的平行要求同等意义(见上文第(13)和第(14)段)。

It may often be difficult to distinguish between subsequent practice which specifically and purposefully relates to a treaty, i.e. is “regarding its interpretation”, and other practice “in the application of the treaty”.

专门针对一项条约的嗣后惯例，即“有关条约解释的”惯例，与“适用条约”方面的其他惯例之间，常常很难作出区分。

The distinction, however, is important because only conduct that the parties undertake “regarding the interpretation of the treaty” is able to contribute to an “authentic” interpretation, whereas this requirement does not exist for other subsequent practice under article 32.

然而，又必须作出区分，因为只有缔约方采取的“有关条约解释的”行为，才有助于“作准”的解释，而对于第三十二条下的其他嗣后惯例则没有这项要求。

(20) The question under which circumstances an “agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty” is actually “established”, will be addressed at a later stage of the work on the topic.

(20) 在什么情况下“缔约方对条约解释的一致”实际得到“确定”，这个问题将在本专题工作以后的阶段处理。

(21) Article 31 (3) (b) does not explicitly require that the practice must be conduct of the parties to the treaty themselves.

(21) 第三十一条第三款(b)项并没有明确要求“惯例”必须是条约缔约方自己的行为。

It is, however, the parties themselves, acting through their organs,79  or by way of conduct which is attributable to them, who engage in practice in the application of the treaty which may establish their agreement.

然而，首先是缔约方自己，通过他们的机构行事，  或通过可归于这些机构的行为，具体践行条约，才可能形成协定。

The question whether other actors can generate relevant subsequent practice is addressed in draft conclusion 5.

其他行为人是否能够产生相关的嗣后惯例问题在结论草案5中得到处理。  

(22) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 4 addresses “other” subsequent practice, i.e. practice other than that referred to in article 31 (3) (b).

(22) 结论草案4的第3段论及“其他”的嗣后惯例，即第三十一条第三款(b)项中没有讲到的其他惯例。

This paragraph concerns “subsequent practice in the application of the treaty as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32”, as mentioned in paragraph 4 of draft conclusion 1.

这一段论及结论草案1第4段中讲到的“条约适用方面的其他嗣后惯例，作为第三十二条所称的补充的解释资料”。

This form of subsequent practice, which does not require the agreement of all the parties, was originally referred to in the commentary of the Commission as follows:

这种形式的嗣后惯例不要求所有缔约方一致同意，委员会在评注中最初是这样讲的：

“But, in general, the practice of an individual party or of only some parties as an element of interpretation is on a quite different plane from a concordant practice embracing all the parties and showing their common understanding of the meaning of the treaty.

“但是一般而言，一个缔约方的做法，或仅仅是部分缔约方的做法，作为解释的一个要素，与所有缔约方都认可的共同做法，显示他们对条约意义的共同理解，两者完全不在同一个平面上。

Subsequent practice of the latter kind evidences the agreement of the parties as to the interpretation of the treaty and is analogous to an interpretative agreement.

后一种嗣后惯例表明各缔约方对条约解释的认同，等同于一项解释性协定。

For this reason the Commission considered that subsequent practice establishing the common understanding of all the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty should be included in paragraph 3 [of what became Article 31 (3) of the Vienna Convention] as an authentic means of interpretation alongside interpretative agreements.

因此，委员会认为，确定所有缔约方对条约解释共同理解的嗣后惯例，应列入第3段[也即《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款的内容]，与解释性协定一并作为作准的解释资料。

The practice of individual States in the application of a treaty, on the other hand, may be taken into account only as one of the ‘further’ means of interpretation mentioned in article 70.”

而单个国家在适用条约方面的做法，只能作为第七十条中讲到的“进一步的”解释资料之一加以考虑。 ”

(23) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 4 does not enunciate a requirement, as it is contained in article 31 (3) (b), that the relevant practice be “regarding the interpretation” of the treaty.

(23) 结论草案4的第3段并没有像第三十一条第三款(b)项那样，阐明一项要求，即相关惯例必须是“有关条约解释的”。

Thus, for the purposes of the third paragraph, any practice in the application of the treaty that may provide indications as to how the treaty should be interpreted may be a relevant supplementary means of interpretation under article 32.

因此，对第3段而言，在适用条约方面的任何做法，只要能够表明条约应作如何解释，便可作为第三十二条下的相关补充解释资料。

(24) This “other” subsequent practice, since the adoption of the Vienna Convention, has been recognized and applied by international courts and other adjudicatory bodies as a means of interpretation (see below paragraphs (25)–(33)).

(24) 此处的“其他”嗣后惯例，是在通过《维也纳公约》之后，已被各种国际法院和其他裁判机构作为一种解释手段予以承认并且适用的嗣后惯例(见下文第(25)段至(33)段)。

It should be noted, however, that the WTO Appellate Body, in Japan – Alcoholic Beverages II,  has formulated a definition of subsequent practice for the purpose of treaty interpretation which seems to suggest that only such “subsequent practice in the application of the treaty” “which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation” can at all be relevant for the purpose of treaty interpretation, and not any other form of subsequent practice by one or more parties:

然而，应当指出，世贸组织的上诉机构，在日本―― 酒精饮料案(二)中，  为条约解释之目的提出了一个嗣后惯例的定义，该定义似乎认为，在条约适用上的这种嗣后惯例，确定了缔约方对条约解释的一致，只有这种惯例才能用于条约解释的目的，而不是任何其他形式的、一个或多个缔约方的嗣后惯例：

“Subsequent practice in interpreting a treaty has been recognized as a ‘concordant, common and consistent’ sequence of acts or pronouncements which is sufficient to establish a discernable pattern implying the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation.”

“用于解释条约的嗣后惯例，公认应当是‘协调的、共同的和一致的’系列行为或声明，足以确定一个明确的模型，表明缔约方对条约解释的一致。 ”

However, the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and other international courts and tribunals, and ultimately even that of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body itself (see below (32) and (33)), demonstrate that subsequent practice which fulfils all the conditions of article 31 (3) (b) of the Vienna Convention is not the only form of subsequent practice by parties in the application of a treaty which may be relevant for the purpose of treaty interpretation.

然而，国际法院和其他国际法院和法庭的判例法，乃至世贸组织争端解决机构自己的判例法(见下文第32和33段)都表明，符合《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所有条件的嗣后惯例，对条约解释目的而言，并不是缔约方在适用条约方面唯一的嗣后惯例的形式。

(25) In the Case of Kasikili/Sedudu Island, for example, the International Court of Justice held that a report by a technical expert which had been commissioned by one of the parties and which had “remained at all times an internal document”,  while not representing subsequent practice which establishes the agreement of the parties under article 31 (3) (b), could “nevertheless support the conclusions” which the Court had reached by other means of interpretation.

(25) 例如，在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛一案中，国际法院认为，一位技术专家编写的报告，该报告是由一个缔约方委托编写的，“始终是一份国内文件”，  虽然报告不能代表第三十一条第三款(b)项下确定各缔约方一致意见的嗣后惯例，但仍可支持国际法院根据其他解释资料得出的结论。

(26) ICSID Tribunals have also used subsequent State practice as a means of interpretation in a broad sense.

(26) 国际投资争端解决中心的法庭也使用了国家的嗣后惯例作为广义上的解释资料。

 For example, when addressing the question whether minority shareholders can acquire rights from investment protection treaties and have standing in ICSID procedures, the tribunal in CMS Gas v. Argentina held that:

 例如，在处理少数股权所有人是否享有投资保护条约中的权利和是否有资格进入投资争端解决中心的程序问题时，法庭在CMS Gas诉阿根廷一案中认为：

“State practice further supports the meaning of this changing scenario. (…) Minority and non-controlling participations have thus been included in the protection granted or have been admitted to claim in their own right.

“国家惯例进一步支持了这种物换星移的意义所在。 (…)少数和非控股参与也因此被纳入受保护的范围，或被允许要求他们自身的权利。

Contemporary practice relating to lump-sum agreements (…) among other examples, evidence increasing flexibility in the handling of international claims.”

当今流行的各种一次性付清协议的做法(…)，还有其他例子，都证明在处理国际索赔中采取灵活的做法日益普遍。 ”

(27) The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held in Loizidou v. Turkey  that its interpretation was “confirmed by the subsequent practice of the Contracting Parties”,  i.e. “the evidence of a practice denoting practically universal agreement amongst Contracting Parties that Articles 25 and 46 (…) of the Convention do not permit territorial or substantive restrictions”.

(27) 欧洲人权法院在Loizidou诉土耳其一案中裁定 ，该法院的解释“得到各缔约方嗣后惯例的确认”，  即有一种做法，表明缔约方几乎普遍同意《公约》第二十五条和第四十六条(…)不允许作出领土或实质上的限制。

 More often the ECHR has relied on — not necessarily uniform — subsequent State practice by referring to national legislation and domestic administrative practice, as a means of interpretation.

 欧洲人权法院经常借助缔约国的嗣后惯例―― 虽然并非一成不变―― 援引一国的法律或国内的行政惯例作为解释的资料。

In the case of Demir and Baykara v. Turkey,  for example, the Court held that “as to the practice of European States, it can be observed that, in the vast majority of them, the right for public servants to bargain collectively with the authorities has been recognised”  and that “the remaining exceptions can be justified only by particular circumstances”.

例如，在Demir和Baykara诉土耳其一案中，  法院裁定，“关于欧洲国家的惯例，可以发现在，他们中的绝大多数国家，公务员与主管机关进行集体谈判的权利是得到承认的，”  “其余的少数例外，只能根据具体情况作出解释”。

(28) The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), when taking subsequent practice of the parties into account, has also not limited its use to cases in which the practice established the agreement of the parties.

(28) 美洲人权法院在考虑到缔约方的嗣后惯例时，也没有将惯例的使用限于缔约方已就惯例取得一致的案件。

Thus, in the case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin and others v. Trinidad and Tobago,  the IACtHR held that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty for every form of conduct which resulted in the death of another person was incompatible with article 4 (2) of the American Convention on Human Rights (imposition of the death penalty only for the most serious crimes).

例如，在Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等人诉特里尼达和多巴哥一案中，  美洲人权法院裁定，所有造成另一人死亡的行为必须判处死刑的做法，不符合《美洲人权公约》第四条第2款(只能对最严重的犯罪判处死刑)。

In order to support this interpretation, the Court held that it was “useful to consider some examples in this respect, taken from the legislation of those American countries that maintain the death penalty”.

为了支持这一解释，法院认为，“在这方面，有些例子值得考虑―― 那些仍然保留死刑的美洲国家法律中的例子”。  

(29) The Human Rights Committee under the ICCPR is open to arguments based on subsequent practice in a broad sense when it comes to the justification of interferences with the rights set forth in the Covenant.

(29) 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》下设的人权事务委员会，在审议为侵犯公约规定的权利提出的辩解时，对根据广义上的嗣后惯例提出的论点持开放态度。

 Interpreting the rather general terms contained in article 19 (3) of the ICCPR (permissible restrictions of the freedom of expression), the Committee observed that “similar restrictions can be found in many jurisdictions”,  and concluded that the aim pursued by the contested law did not, as such, fall outside the legitimate aims of article 19 (3) of the ICCPR.

 委员会对《公约》第十九条第3款中较为笼统的规定(可允许的对言论自由的限制)做了解释，认为“在很多司法制度中都可以找到类似的限制，”  委员会的结论是，存在争议的法律所追求的目标，本身并没有超出《公约》第十九条第3款的目标。

(30) ITLOS has on some occasions referred to the subsequent practice of the parties without verifying whether such practice actually established an agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty.

(30) 国际海洋法法庭几次提到缔约方的嗣后惯例，但却没有核实惯例是否实际上在缔约方之间就条约的解释取得一致。

In The M/V “SAIGA” (No 2),  for example, the Tribunal reviewed State practice with regard to the use of force to stop a ship according to UNCLOS.

例如，在M/V‘SAIGA’(第2号)一案中，  法庭根据《联合国海洋法公约》审议了使用武力迫使船只停止航行的做法。

 Relying on the “normal practice used to stop a ship”, the Tribunal did not specify the respective State practice but rather assumed a certain general standard to exist.

 法庭采用了“停止船只航行的通常做法”，没有具体指明相关的国家惯例，而是假定存在某种一般性标准。  

(31) The ICTY, referring to the Genocide Convention, noted in the Jelisić Judgment that:

(31) 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭在Jelisić判决中提到《灭绝种族罪公约》，指出：

“the Trial Chamber (…) interprets the Convention’s terms in accordance with the general rules of interpretation of treaties set out in Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

“审判庭(…)根据《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一和第三十二条规定的解释条约的一般性规则，解释《灭绝种族罪公约》的条款。

(…) The Trial Chamber also took account of subsequent practice grounded upon the Convention.

(…)审判庭还考虑到有关公约的嗣后惯例。

Special significance was attached to the Judgments rendered by the Tribunal for Rwanda.

特别考虑到卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭做出的裁决。

(…) The practice of States, notably through their national courts, and the work of international authorities in this field have also been taken into account.”

(…)各国的做法，特别是通过各国国内法院，以及国际权威部门在这个领域里的工作也得到考虑。”

(32) The WTO dispute settlement bodies also occasionally distinguish between “subsequent practice” which satisfies the conditions of article 31 (3) (b) and other forms of subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which they also recognize as being relevant for the purpose of treaty interpretation.

(32) 世贸组织的解决争端机构有时也对满足所有第三十一条第三款(b)项条件的“嗣后惯例”，与在适用条约方面其他形式的嗣后惯例之间作出区分，他们认为后者对条约解释目的而言也是相关的。

In US – Section 110(5) Copyright Act  (not appealed), for example, the Panel had to determine whether a “minor exceptions doctrine” concerning royalty payments applied.

例如，在美国版权法第110(5)节条款案中  (未上诉)，专家组必须确定，有关支付版权的“轻微例外原则”是否适用。

 The Panel found evidence in support of the existence of such a doctrine in several Member States’ national legislation and noted:

 专家组发现证据，证明在几个成员国的国内法中确有这种原则存在：

“We recall that Article 31 (3) of the Vienna Convention provides that together with the context (a) any subsequent agreement, (b) subsequent practice, or (c) any relevant rules of international law applicable between the parties, shall be taken into account for the purposes of interpretation.

“我们忆及《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款规定，(a) 任何嗣后协定，(b) 嗣后惯例，或(c) 任何对缔约方适用的相关的国际法规则，对解释目的而言均应予以考虑。

We note that the parties and third parties have brought to our attention several examples from various countries of limitations in national laws based on the minor exceptions doctrine.

我们注意到，当事方和一些第三方向我们提出了一些国家的事例，表明一些国家的法律在轻微例外原则上局限。

In our view, State practice as reflected in the national copyright laws of Berne Union members before and after 1948, 1967 and 1971, as well as of WTO Members before and after the date that the TRIPS Agreement became applicable to them, confirms our conclusion about the minor exceptions doctrine.”

我们认为，伯尔尼联盟成员国本国的版权法在1948、1997和1971年之前和之后，以及世贸组织成员国的版权法在《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》对他们生效之前和之后，其中所反映的各国的做法，证实了我们对轻微例外原则所做的结论。 ”

And the Panel added the following cautionary footnote:

专家组为谨慎起见又补充了以下脚注：

“By enunciating these examples of State practice we do not wish to express a view on whether these are sufficient to constitute ‘subsequent practice’ within the meaning of Article 31 (3) (b) of the Vienna Convention.”

“我们阐述这些国家做法的例子，并非想对这些例子是否足以构成《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项含义内的“嗣后惯例”表达意见。

(33) In EC – Computer Equipment, the Appellate Body criticized the Panel for not having considered decisions by the Harmonized System Committee of the World Customs Organization (WCO) as a relevant subsequent practice:

(33) 在“欧共体－电脑设备”一案中，上诉机构批评专家组没有作为相关的嗣后惯例，考虑世界海关组织协调制度委员会的决定：

“A proper interpretation also would have included an examination of the existence and relevance of subsequent practice.

“正确解释还应包括研究现有的和相关的嗣后惯例。

We note that the United States referred, before the Panel, to the decisions taken by the Harmonized System Committee of the WCO in April 1997 on the classification of certain LAN equipment as ADP machines.

我们注意到，美国曾向专家组提出世界海关组织协调制度委员会在1997年4月关于某些LAN设备按ADP机器分类的决定。

Singapore, a third party in the panel proceedings, also referred to these decisions.

新加坡作为专家组审理中的第三方，也提到这些决定。

The European Communities observed that it had introduced reservations with regard to these decisions (…) However, we consider that in interpreting the tariff concessions in Schedule LXXX, decisions of the WCO may be relevant.”

欧洲共同体认为，共同体对那些决定提出保留。 (…)然而，我们认为，在解释关税减让税率表LXXX方面，海关组织的决定可能是相关的。”

Thus, on closer inspection, the WTO dispute settlement bodies also recognize the distinction between “subsequent practice” under article 31 (3) (b), and a broader concept of subsequent practice which does not presuppose an agreement between all the parties of the treaty.

因此，在经过认真研究之后，世贸组织的争端解决机构也承认第三十一条第三款(b)项下的“嗣后惯例”，与更宽泛的嗣后惯例概念之间的区别，后者并不要求所有条约缔约方之间的一致。

(34) In using subsequent practice by one or more, but not all, parties to a treaty as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 one must, however, always remain conscious of the fact that “the view of one State does not make international law”.

 (34) 在采用一个或几个缔约方，但不是所有条约缔约方的嗣后惯例作为第三十二条下解释的补充资料时，必须始终牢记，“一个国家的意见不构成国际法”。

 In any case, the distinction between agreed subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (b), as an authentic means of interpretation, and other subsequent practice (in a broad sense) under article 32, implies that a greater interpretative value should be attributed to the former.

 无论如何，第三十一条第三款(b)项下达成一致的嗣后惯例，作为作准的解释资料，与第三十二条之下(广义)的其他嗣后惯例，两者之间的区别意味着应主要给予前者更大的解释权重。

(35) The distinction between subsequent practice under article 31 (3) (b) and subsequent practice under article 32 also contributes to answering the question whether subsequent practice requires repeated action with some frequency  or whether a one-time application of the treaty may be enough.

(35) 第三十一条第三款(b)项下(达成一致的)嗣后惯例，与(第三十二条之下)适用条约的任何特例意义上的嗣后惯例，两者之间的区分也有助于回答嗣后惯例是否需要某种频率的重复行动的问题，  或是否一次适用条约便已足够。

 In the WTO framework, the Appellate Body has found:

 在世贸组织的框架下，上诉机构认为：

“An isolated act is generally not sufficient to establish subsequent practice; it is a sequence of acts establishing the agreement of the parties that is relevant.”

“一个孤立的行为一般而言不足以确定嗣后惯例，必须是缔约方的一系列行动，确定了彼此之间的一致，方为有效。 ”

If, however, the concept of subsequent practice as a means of treaty interpretation is distinguished from a possible agreement between the parties, frequency is not a necessary element of the definition of the concept of “subsequent practice” in the broad sense (under article 32).

然而，如果要在作为条约解释资料的嗣后惯例概念与缔约方之间可能的协定二者之间做出区分，频度并不是定义(第三十二条下)广义上“嗣后惯例”概念的必需要素。  

(36) Thus, “subsequent practice” in the broad sense (under article 32) covers any application of the treaty by one or more parties.

(36) 因此，(第三十二条下)广义的“嗣后惯例”，涵盖了一个或多个缔约方的任何适用条约的行为。

It can take various forms.

它可采取各种形式。

 Such “conduct by one or more parties in the application of the treaty” may, in particular, consist of a direct application of the treaty in question, conduct which is attributable to a State party as an application of the treaty, a statement or a judicial pronouncement regarding its interpretation or application.

 具体而言，这种“一个或多个缔约方适用条约的行为”可包括直接适用有关条约―― 一个可归属于一缔约国适用条约的行为，或有关条约解释或适用的声明或司法宣示。

Such conduct may include official statements concerning the treaty’s meaning, protests against non-performance, or tacit acceptance of statements or acts by other parties.

这种行为可包括有关条约含义的官方声明，对不履行条约提出的抗议，或其他缔约方声明或行为的默许接受。

Conclusion 5 Attribution of subsequent practice

结论5 嗣后惯例的归属

1. Subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32 may consist of any conduct in the application of a treaty which is attributable to a party to the treaty under international law.

1. 第三十一和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例可包括依国际法可归属于条约某一缔约方的任何适用条约的行为。

2. Other conduct, including by non-State actors, does not constitute subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32.

2. 其他行为，包括非国家行为者的行为，不构成第三十一和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例。

Such conduct may, however, be relevant when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty.

然而此种行为在评估条约缔约方的嗣后惯例时可能具有意义。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft conclusion 5 addresses the question of possible authors of subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32.

(1) 结论草案5涉及第三十一条和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例的可能主体问题。

The phrase “under articles 31 and 32” makes it clear that this draft conclusion applies both to subsequent practice as an authentic means of interpretation under article 31 (3) (b) and to subsequent practice as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 of the Vienna Convention.

“第三十一条和第三十二条所称”说明该结论草案既适用于作为《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所称权威解释资料的嗣后惯例，也适用于作为第三十二条所称的补充解释资料的嗣后惯例。

Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 5 defines positively whose conduct in the application of the treaty may constitute subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32, whereas paragraph 2 states negatively which conduct does not, but which may nevertheless be relevant when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty.

结论草案5的第一段以肯定的方式界定了条约适用中谁的行为可能构成第三十一条和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例，而第2段以否定方式说明了哪些行为不构成第三十一条和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例，但在评估条约缔约方的嗣后惯例时可能具有意义。

(2) Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 5, by using the phrase “any conduct which is attributable to a party to a treaty under international law”, borrows language from article 2 (a) of the articles on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts.

(2) 结论草案5第1段采用的说法“依国际法可归属于条约某一缔约方的任何适用条约的行为”借用了国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第2条(a)项的措词。

 Accordingly, the term “any conduct” encompasses actions and omissions and is not limited to the conduct of State organs of a State, but also covers conduct which is otherwise attributable, under international law, to a party to a treaty.

 相应的，‘任何行为’包括行动和疏忽，不限于一国国家机关的行为，还涵盖依国际法可归属于条约某一缔约方的任何行为。

The reference to the articles on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts does not, however, extend to the requirement that the conduct in question be “internationally wrongful” (see below para. (8)).

但对国家对国际不法行为的责任条款的援引并不涉及相关行为应为‘国际不法’行为的要求(见以下第(8)段)。

(3) An example of relevant conduct which does not directly arise from the conduct of the parties, but nevertheless constitutes an example of State practice, has been identified by the International Court of Justice in the Kasikili/Sedudu case.

(3) 国际法院在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中确认了这样一个实例：一种行为虽不是直接源于缔约方的行为，但仍构成国家惯例。

There the Court considered that the regular use of an island on the border between Namibia (former South-West Africa) and Botswana (former Bechuanaland) by members of a local tribe, the Masubia, could be regarded as subsequent practice in the sense of article 31 (3) (b) of the Vienna Convention if it

法院在该案中认为，在下述条件下，当地马苏比亚部落的成员对纳米比亚(前西南非洲)和博茨瓦纳(前贝专纳兰)边界上一个岛屿的经常可视为《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后惯例：

“was linked to a belief on the part of the Caprivi authorities that the boundary laid down by the 1890 Treaty followed the Southern Channel of the Chobe; and, second, that the Bechuanaland authorities were fully aware and accepted this as a confirmation of the treaty boundary.”

“此种经常使用与卡普里维当局的这一观点相关：1890 年条约规定的边界是沿乔贝河的南河道划定的；而且贝专纳兰当局完全了解这种使用并予以认可，以此作为对条约边界的确认。 ”

(4) By referring to any conduct in the application of the treaty which is attributable to a party to the treaty, however, paragraph 1 does not imply that any such conduct necessarily constitutes, in a given case, subsequent practice for the purpose of treaty interpretation.

(4) 第一段述及可归属于条约某一缔约方的任何适用条约的行为，但这并不意味着这种行为必定在给定案件中构成条约解释意义上的嗣后惯例。

The use of the phrase “may consist” is intended to reflect this point.

使用“可包括”的措辞意在反映这一点。

This clarification is particularly important in relation to conduct of State organs which might contradict an officially expressed position of the State with respect to a particular matter, and thus contribute to an equivocal conduct by the State.

这一说明的重要性特别体现于国家机关的行为可能违反该国在某一事项上的官方表述立场，从而导致国家行为的模棱两可。

(5) The Commission debated whether draft conclusion 5 should specifically address the question under which conditions the conduct of lower State organs would be relevant subsequent practice for purposes of treaty interpretation.

(5) 委员会讨论过结论草案5是否应专门述及在哪些情况下下级国家机关的行为构成出于条约解释目的的相关嗣后惯例。

In this regard, several members of the Commission pointed to the difficulty of distinguishing between lower and higher State organs, particularly given the significant differences in the internal organization of State governance.

在这方面，委员会一些委员指出很难区分下级和上级国家机关，特别是考虑到国家治理内部机构方面的巨大差异。

The point was also made that the relevant criterion was less the position of the organ in the hierarchy of the State than its actual role in interpreting and applying any particular treaty.

还有人指出，与机关在国家等级制度中的位置相比，相关标准更重视其在解释和适用特定条约中的实际作用。

Given the complexity and variety of scenarios that could be envisaged, the Commission concluded that this matter should not be addressed in the text of draft conclusion 5 itself, but rather in the commentary.

鉴于可料想到的情况的复杂性和多样性，委员会认为不应在结论草案5的案文中论述这一问题，而应在评注中予以论述。

(6) Subsequent practice of States in the application of a treaty may certainly be performed by the high-ranking government officials mentioned in article 7 of the Vienna Convention.

(6) 国家在适用条约方面的嗣后惯例当然可以由《维也纳公约》第七条所指高级政府官员实施。

Yet, since most treaties typically are not applied by such high officials, international courts and tribunals have recognized that the conduct of lower authorities may also, under certain conditions, constitute relevant subsequent practice in the application of a treaty.

但是，由于大部分条约通常不是由高级政府官员适用，各国际法院和法庭认识到，低级主管机关的行为也可以构成与适用条约相关的嗣后行动。

Accordingly, the International Court of Justice recognized in the case of Rights of U.S. Nationals in Morocco that article 95 of the Act of Algeciras had to be interpreted flexibly in light of the inconsistent practice of local customs authorities.

因此，国际法院在有关摩洛哥境内的美国国民权利一案中承认，应根据当地海关当局的不一致的惯例灵活解释《阿尔赫西拉斯议定书》第95条。

 The jurisprudence of arbitral tribunals confirms that relevant subsequent practice may emanate from lower officials.

 各仲裁法庭的判例确认，相关嗣后惯例可来自下级官员。

In the German External Debts Award, the Arbitral Tribunal considered a letter of the Bank of England to the German Federal Debt Administration as relevant subsequent practice.

在德国外债案的裁决中，仲裁法庭将英格兰银行给德国联邦债务管理局的一封信作为相关嗣后惯例。

 And in the case of Tax regime governing pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France the Arbitral Tribunal accepted, in principle, the practice of the French tax administration of not collecting taxes on the pensions of retired UNESCO employees as being relevant subsequent practice. Ultimately, however, the Arbitral Tribunal considered some contrary official pronouncements by a higher authority, the French Government, to be decisive.

 在向居住法国的教科文组织退休职员所付养恤金税收制度一案中，仲裁法庭在原则上认可，法国税收征管机构不对教科文组织退休雇员的养恤金征税的惯例是相关嗣后惯例，但最终认为上级机关，即法国政府的一些不同的官方声明起了决定作用。

(7) It thus appears that the practice of lower and local officials may be subsequent practice “in the application of a treaty” if this practice is sufficiently unequivocal and if the government can be expected to be aware of this practice and has not contradicted it within a reasonable time.

(7) 因此，下级和地方官员的做法可以成为“适用条约”的嗣后惯例，前提是该做法足够明确，且政府应知道该做法且没有在合理时间内否定这种做法。  

(8) The Commission did not consider it necessary to limit the scope of the relevant conduct by adding the phrase “for the purpose of treaty interpretation”.

(8) 委员会认为没有必要通过增加“出于条约解释的目的”短语来限制相关行为的范围。

 This had been proposed by the Special Rapporteur in order to exclude from the scope of the term “subsequent practice” such conduct which may be attributable to a State but which does not serve the purpose of expressing a relevant position of a State regarding the interpretation of a treaty.

 特别报告员曾提出这样的建议，以从“嗣后惯例”一词的范围中排除可归属于一国但并未起到表达一国在解释公约方面的相关立场的行为。

 The Commission, however, considered that the requirement, that any relevant conduct must be “in the application of the treaty”, would sufficiently limit the scope of possibly relevant conduct.

 但委员会认为，任何相关行为必须是“适用条约”的行为这一要求可充分限制可能的相关行为的范围。

Since the concept of “application of the treaty” requires conduct in good faith, a manifest misapplication of a treaty falls outside this scope.

“适用条约”这一概念要求善意行为，因而明显的误用公约不在这一范围之内。  

(9) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5 comprises two sentences.

(9) 结论草案5的第2段由两句话组成。

The first sentence indicates that conduct other than that envisaged in paragraph 1, including by non-State actors, does not constitute subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32.

第一句话说明第1段所设想行为之外的行为，包括非国家行为者的行为，不构成第三十一和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例。

The phrase “other conduct” was introduced in order clearly to establish the distinction between the conduct contemplated in paragraph 2 and that contemplated in paragraph 1.

使用“其他行为”一词是为了明确规定第2段所考虑的行为和第1段所考虑的行为之间的区别。

At the same time, the Commission considered that conduct not covered by paragraph 1 may be relevant when “assessing” the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty.

同时，委员会认为，第1段未涵盖的行为在评估条约缔约方的嗣后惯例时可能具有意义。

(10) “Subsequent practice in the application of a treaty” will be brought about by those who are called to apply the treaty, which are normally the States parties themselves.

(10) “条约适用方面的嗣后惯例”将由根据条约要求须适用条约者(通常是缔约国本身)提出。

The general rule has been formulated by the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal as follows:

伊朗――美国索赔法庭制定的一般规则如下：

“It is a recognized principle of treaty interpretation to take into account, together with the context, any subsequent practice in the application of an international treaty.

“条约解释的一个公认原则是，要结合上下文一并考虑某项国际条约适用方面的任何嗣后惯例。

This practice must, however, be a practice of the parties to the treaty and one which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of that treaty.

不过，这种惯例必须是条约缔约国的惯例，并且确定了各缔约国关于条约解释的协定。

Whereas one of the participants in the settlement negotiations, namely Bank Markazi, is an entity of Iran and thus its practice can be attributed to Iran as one of the parties to the Algiers Declarations, the other participants in the settlement negotiations and in actual settlements, namely the United States banks, are not entities of the Government of the United States, and their practice cannot be attributed as such to the United States as the other party to the Algiers Declarations.”

尽管解决方案谈判的参加者之一，伊朗中央银行，是伊朗的一个实体，因而其惯例可归于作为《阿尔及尔宣言》缔约国之一的伊朗，但解决方案谈判和实际解决方案的其他参加者，即几家美国银行，并非美国政府的实体，因而它们的惯例不能如此归于作为《阿尔及尔宣言》另一当事方的美国”。

(11) The first sentence of the second paragraph of draft conclusion 5 is intended to reflect this general rule.

(11) 结论草案5第2段的第一句话旨在反映该一般规则。

It emphasizes the primary role of the States parties to a treaty who are the masters of the treaty and are ultimately responsible for its application.

它强调条约缔约国的主要作用，它们是条约的主人，并最终负责适用条约。

This does not exclude that conduct by non-State actors may also constitute a form of application of the treaty if it can be attributed to a State party.

这并不排除一种可能，即如果非国家行为者的行为可以归属于某一缔约国(例如通过监督)，它也可能构成适用条约的一种形式。

(12) “Other conduct” in the sense of paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5 may be that of different actors.

(12) 结论草案5第2段所述的“其他行为”可能是不同行为者的其他行为。

Such conduct may, in particular, be practice of parties which is not “in the application of the treaty”, or statements by a State, which is not party to a treaty, about the latter’s interpretation,http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/138852.pdf  or a pronouncement by a treaty monitoring body or a dispute settlement body in relation to the interpretation of the treaty concerned,  or acts of technical bodies which are tasked by Conferences of the States Parties to advise on the implementation of treaty provisions, or different forms of conduct or statements of non-State actors.

具体而言，这些行为可能包括不是缔约方“适用条约”的行为、非条约缔约方的国家关于条约解释的声明、http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/138852.pdf  条约监督机构或与解释所涉条约有关的争端解决机构的声明、  受缔约方会议委派就条约条款的落实提供咨询意见的技术机构的行为或非国家行为者的不同形式的行为或声明。

(13) The phrase “assessing the subsequent practice” in the second sentence of paragraph 2 should be understood in a broad sense as covering both the identification of the existence of a subsequent practice and the determination of its legal significance.

(13) 第2段第2句话中的“评估嗣后惯例”应被理解为从广义上涵盖查明嗣后惯例的存在和确定其法律意义。

Statements or conduct of other actors, such as international organizations or non-State actors, can reflect, or initiate, relevant subsequent practice of the parties to a treaty.

国际组织或非国家行为者等其他行为者的声明或行为有可能反映缔约国的相关嗣后惯例或成为其肇始者。

 Such reflection or initiation of subsequent practice of the parties by the conduct of other actors should not, however, be conflated with the practice by the parties to the treaty themselves, including practice which is attributable to them.

 但这种由其他行为者的行为反映或肇始的缔约国嗣后惯例不应被并入缔约国本身的惯例，包括归属于缔约方的惯例。

Activities of actors which are not State parties, as such, may only contribute to assessing subsequent practice of the parties to a treaty.

因而，非缔约方的行为者的活动仅有助于评估条约缔约方的嗣后惯例。

(14) Decisions, resolutions and other practice by international organizations can be relevant for the interpretation of treaties in their own right.

(14) 国际组织的决定、决议和其他惯例本身就可能与条约的解释相关。

This is recognized, for example, in article 2 (j) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations and between International Organizations which mentions the “established practice of the organization” as one form of the “rules of the organization”.

例如，《关于国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间条约法的维也纳公约》第2条(j)项就确认了这一点，其中提及“确立的惯例”，将其作为“组织的规则”的一种形式。

 Draft conclusion 5 only concerns the question whether the practice of international organizations may be indicative of relevant practice by States parties to a treaty.

 结论草案5仅涉及国际组织的惯例是否可以表明条约缔约国的相关惯例。

(15) Reports by international organizations at the universal level, which are prepared on the basis of a mandate to provide accounts on the State practice in a particular field, may enjoy considerable authority in the assessment of such practice.

(15) 全球性组织根据任务为说明某一特定领域国家惯例而编写的报告具有相当的权威性。

For example, the Handbook of the UNHCR on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (Handbook) is an important work which reflects and thus provides guidance for State practice.

例如，《难民署根据关于难民地位的1951年公约和1967年议定书确定难民身份的程序和标准手册》(《手册》)是一部重要出版物，反映了国家惯例，因而也提供了相关指导。

 The same is true for the so-called 1540 Matrix, which is a systematic compilation by the United Nations Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004) of implementation measures taken by Member States.

 同样的还有所谓的1540汇总表，该表是根据第1540 (2004)号决议设立的联合国安理会委员会对会员国所采取的执行措施的系统汇编。

 As far as the Matrix relates to the implementation of the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction (BWC),  as well as to the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), 10 it constitutes evidence for and an assessment of subsequent State practice to those treaties. 11

 只要汇总表涉及1972年《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》(《生物武器公约》)  以及1993年《化学武器公约》， 10 它就构成了这些条约嗣后国家惯例的证据，以及对这些条约嗣后国家惯例的评估。 11

(16) Other non-State actors may also play an important role in assessing subsequent practice of the parties in the application of a treaty.

(16) 其他非国家行为者也可能在评估缔约方适用公约方面发挥重要作用。

A pertinent example is the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). 12

http://www.mpepil.com 12 红十字国际委员会(红十字委员会)是一个相关实例。

Apart from fulfilling a general mandate conferred on it by the Geneva Conventions and by the Statutes of the Movement, 13 the ICRC occasionally provides interpretative guidance on the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols on the basis of a mandate from the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.

除了完成日内瓦四公约和运动章程赋予的一般性任务， 13 红十字委员会还不时就日内瓦四公约及各项附加议定书的解释提供指导，这是《国际红十字与红新月运动章程》规定的任务。

14 Article 5 (2) (g) of the Statutes provides:

14 该《章程》第5条第2款(7)项规定：

“The role of the International Committee, in accordance with its Statutes, is in particular: (…) (g) to work for the understanding and dissemination of knowledge of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts and to prepare any development thereof.”

“根据该委员会的章程，国际委员会的职责主要是：(…)(7)为了解和传播适用于武装冲突的国际人道法知识而努力工作，并为发展该法做好准备”。

On the basis of this mandate, the ICRC, for example, published in 2009 an “Interpretative Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law”.

2009年，红十字委员会根据这项任务发布了“关于根据国际人道主义法直接参与敌对行动概念的解释指南”。

15 The Guidance is the outcome of an “expert process” based on an analysis of State treaty and customary practice and it “reflect[s] the ICRC’s institutional position as to how existing IHL should be interpreted”.

15 该指南是基于有关国家条约和习惯做法的“专家进程”的成果，“反映了红十字委员会关于如何解释现行国际人道主义法的机构立场”。

16 In this context it is, however, important to note that States have reaffirmed their primary role in the development of international humanitarian law.

16 但在这方面，应注意到各国已重申其在发展国际人道主义法方面的主要作用。

Resolution 1 of the 31st Red Cross and Red Crescent Conference of 2011, while recalling “the important roles of the ICRC”, “emphasiz[es] the primary role of States in the development of international humanitarian law”. 17

2011年第31届红十字与红新月大会第1项决议在强调“红十字委员会的重要作用”的同时，“强调各国在发展国际人道主义法方面的主要作用”。 17

(17) Another example for conduct of non-State actors which may be relevant for assessing the subsequent practice of States parties is “The Monitor”, a joint initiative of the “International Campaign to Ban Landmines” and the “Cluster Munitions Coalition”.

(17) 在评估缔约方嗣后惯例时可能具有意义的非国家行为者行为的另一实例是“国际禁止地雷运动”和“集束弹药联盟”的一项联合举措―― “监测组织”。

“The Monitor” acts as a “de facto monitoring regime”http://www.the-monitor.org 18 for the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention) 19 and the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions (Dublin Convention).

“监测”起到了1997年《关于禁止使用、储存、生产和转让杀伤人员地雷及销毁此种地雷的公约》 (《渥太华公约》)http://www.the-monitor.org 18 和2008年《集束弹药公约》(《都柏林公约》) 19 “事实上的监测机制”的作用。

20 The Cluster Munitions Monitor lists pertinent statements and practice by States parties and signatories and identifies, inter alia, interpretative questions concerning the Dublin Convention. 21

20《集束弹药监测报告》列出了缔约国和签署国的相关声明和惯例，并确认，除其他外，涉及《都柏林公约》的各种解释性问题。 21

(18) The examples of the ICRC and of “The Monitor” show that non-State actors can provide valuable evidence of subsequent practice of parties, contribute to assessing this evidence, and even solicit its coming into being.

(18) 红十字委员会和“监测组织”的实例说明，非国家行为者可以提供缔约方嗣后惯例的宝贵证据，促进对这种证据的评估，甚至促使证据形成。

However, non-State actors can also pursue their own goals, which may be different from those of States parties.

但非国家行为者也可以追求其自身目标，而这些目标可能不同于缔约国的目标。

Their assessments thus must be critically reviewed.

因此对它们的评估意见需要严加审查。

(19) The Commission considered whether it should also refer, in the text of draft conclusion 5, to “social practice” as an example of “other conduct … which may be relevant when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty”.

(19) 委员会审议了是否应在结论草案5的案文中提及“社会惯例”，作为“在评估条约缔约方的嗣后惯例时可能具有意义…的其他行为。”

22 Taking into account the concerns expressed by several members regarding the meaning and relevance of that notion, the Commission considered it preferable to address the question of the possible relevance of “social practice” in the commentary.

22 考虑到一些委员就这一概念的含义和相关性表示的关切，委员会认为最好在评注中论述“社会惯例”可能的相关性问题。

(20) The European Court of Human Rights has occasionally considered “increased social acceptance” 23 and “major social changes” 24 to be relevant for the purpose of treaty interpretation.

(20) 欧洲人权法院有时认为“社会接受程度增加” 23 和“重大社会变革” 24 与条约解释目的相关。

The invocation of “social changes” or “social acceptance” by the Court, however, ultimately remains linked to State practice.

但法院援引“社会变革”或“社会接受”最终仍与国家惯例有关。

25 This is true, in particular, for the important cases of Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom 26 and Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom.

25 对于Dudgeon诉联合王国案 26 和Christine Goodwin诉联合王国案 27 等重要案件尤为如此。

27 In Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, the Court found that there was an “increased tolerance of homosexual behaviour” by pointing to the fact “that in the great majority of the member States of the Council of Europe it is no longer considered to be necessary or appropriate to treat homosexual practices of the kind now in question as in themselves a matter to which the sanctions of the criminal law should be applied”, and that it could therefore not “overlook the marked changes which have occurred in this regard in the domestic law of the member States”.

在Dudgeon诉联合王国案中，法院指出，“欧洲委员会大多数成员国认为，将当前所讨论的这种同性性行为当作一种本身应适用刑法制裁的事项来处理不再必要，也不再适当”，因此法院不能“忽视成员国国内法在这方面发生的显著变化”，从而裁定人们“更加宽容同性恋行为”。

28 The Court further pointed to the fact that “in Northern Ireland itself, the authorities have refrained in recent years from enforcing the law”.

28 法院还指出，“就在北爱尔兰本身，当局近年来也不再执行该法”。

29 And in Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom, the Court attached importance “to the clear and uncontested evidence of a continuing international trend in favour not only of increased social acceptance of transsexuals but of legal recognition of the new sexual identity of post-operative transsexuals”.

29 在Christine Goodwin诉联合王国案中，法院重视“明确、无可争议的证据所表明的一个持续的国际趋势，这一趋势不仅支持社会更加接受变性者，而且支持从法律上承认手术后变性者的新性别身份。 ”

(21) The European Court of Human Rights thus verifies whether social developments are actually reflected in State practice.

(21) 欧洲人权法院因此核实社会发展是否已实际体现在国家惯例中。

This was true, for example, in cases concerning the status of children born out of wedlock  and in cases that concerned the alleged right of certain Roma (“Gypsy”) people to have a temporary place of residence assigned by municipalities in order to be able to pursue their itinerant lifestyle.

例如，涉及非婚生儿童地位问题的案件  和关于宣称罗姆人(“吉普赛人”)有权由市政当局指定一个临时居住地，以便保持其居无定所的生活方式的案件  便是如此。

(22) It can be concluded that mere (subsequent) social practice, as such, is not sufficient to constitute relevant subsequent practice in the application of a treaty.

(22) 因此，可以断定，仅是这样的(嗣后)社会惯例不足以构成适用条约的相关嗣后惯例。

Social practice has, however, occasionally been recognized by the European Court of Human Rights as contributing to the assessment of State practice.

但欧洲人权法院有时承认社会惯例有助于评估国家惯例。

Chapter V Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction

第五章 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免

A. Introduction

A. 导言

40. The Commission, at its fifty-ninth session (2007), decided to include the topic “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction” in its programme of work and appointed Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin as Special Rapporteur.

40. 委员会在第五十九届会议(2007年)上决定将“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”这一专题列入工作方案，并任命罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生为特别报告员。

 At the same session, the Commission requested the Secretariat to prepare a background study on the topic, which was made available to the Commission at its sixtieth session.

 同届会议上，委员会请秘书处编写一份关于此专题的背景研究报告，该研究报告提交给了委员会第六十届会议。  

41. The Special Rapporteur submitted three reports.

41. 特别报告员提交了三份报告。

The Commission received and considered the preliminary report at its sixtieth session (2008) and the second and third reports at its sixty-third session (2011).

委员会第六十届会议(2008年)收到并审议了初步报告，第六十三届会议(2011年)收到并审议了第二次和第三次报告。

 The Commission was unable to consider the topic at its sixty-first session (2009) and at its sixty-second session (2010).

 委员会在第六十一届(2009年)和第六十二届会议(2010年)上未能审议本专题。  

42. The Commission, at its sixty-fourth session (2012), appointed Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández as Special Rapporteur to replace Mr. Kolodkin, who was no longer with the Commission.

42. 委员会第六十四届会议(2012年)任命康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士代替科洛德金先生担任特别报告员，科洛德金先生不再担任委员会委员。

The Commission received and considered the preliminary report of the newly appointed Special Rapporteur at the same session (2012).

委员会同届会议(2012年)收到并审议了新任特别报告员提交的初次报告。  

B. Consideration of the topic at the present session

B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况

43. The Commission had before it the second report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/661).

43. 委员会收到了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/661)。

The Commission considered the report at its 3164th to 3168th and 3170th meetings, on 15 to 17, 21, 22 and 24 May 2013, respectively.

委员会在分别于2013年5月15日至17日、21日、22日和24日举行的第3164至第3168次和第3170次会议上审议了该报告。

44. In the second report, the Special Rapporteur built upon the methodological approaches and general workplan set out in the preliminary report (A/CN.4/654), taking into account the debates, in 2012, in the Commission and the Sixth Committee.

44. 在第二次报告里，特别报告员在初次报告 (A/CN.4/654)中的处理方法和一般工作计划基础上更进一步，同时考虑到委员会和第六委员会在2012年期间的辩论。

The report considered: (a) the scope of the topic and of the draft articles; (b) the concepts of immunity and jurisdiction; (c) the difference between immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae; and (d) the identification of the normative elements of the regime of immunity ratione personae.

报告考虑了以下问题：(a) 专题及条款草案的范围；(b) 豁免和管辖的概念；(c) 属人豁免与属事豁免的区别；(d) 查明了构成属人豁免制度的基本规范。

On the basis of the analysis, six draft articles were presented for the consideration of the Commission.

在上述分析基础上，报告提出了六条草案供委员会审议。

These draft articles addressed the scope of the draft articles (draft article 1);  immunities not included in the scope of the draft articles (draft article 2);  definitions of criminal jurisdiction, immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction, immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae (draft article 3); 40 the subjective scope of immunity ratione personae (draft article 4); 41 the material scope of immunity ratione personae (draft article 5); 42 and the temporal scope of immunity ratione personae (draft article 6). 43

这些条文草案处理了条款草案的范围(第1条草案)；  条款草案的范围没有涵盖的豁免 (第2条草案)；  刑事管辖、外国刑事管辖豁免、属人豁免和属事豁免的定义(第3条草案)； 40 属人豁免的主体范围(第4条草案)； 41 属人豁免的实际范围(第5条草案)； 42 属人豁免的时间范围(第6条草案)。 43

45. Following its debate on the second report of the Special Rapporteur, the Commission, at its 3170th meeting on 24 May 2013, decided to refer the six draft articles contained therein to the Drafting Committee with the understanding that it would take into account the views expressed in the plenary debate.

45. 在对特别报告员第二次报告进行辩论之后， 委员会在2013年5月24日第3170次会议上决定将报告所载的六条草案转给起草委员会，同时有一项谅解是起草委员会将考虑到全体辩论中表达的意见。

46. At its 3174th meeting, on 7 June 2013, the Commission received the report of the Drafting Committee and provisionally adopted three draft articles (see section C.1. below).

46. 在2013年6月7日第3174次会议上，委员会收到起草委员会的报告并暂时通过了三条草案(见下文C.1节)。

47. At its 3193rd to 3196th meetings, on 6 and 7 August 2013, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft articles provisionally adopted at the present session (see section C.2 below).

47. 在2013年8月6日和7日第3193至第3196次会议上，委员会通过了本届会议暂时通过的条款草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。

C. Text of the draft articles on Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction provisionally adopted so far by the Commission

C. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免条款草案案文

1. Text of the draft articles

1. 条款草案案文

48. The text of the draft articles provisionally adopted so far by the Commission is reproduced below.

48. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的条款草案案文载录如下。

Part One Introduction

第一部分 导 言

Article 1 Scope of the present draft articles

第1条 本条款草案的范围

1. The present draft articles apply to the immunity of State officials 44 from the criminal jurisdiction of another State.

1. 本条款草案适用于国家官员 44 对另一国刑事管辖享有的豁免。

2. The present draft articles are without prejudice to the immunity from criminal jurisdiction enjoyed under special rules of international law, in particular by persons connected with diplomatic missions, consular posts, special missions, international organizations and military forces of a State.

2. 本条款草案不妨碍依照国际法特别规则享有的刑事管辖豁免，特别是与外交使团、领馆、特别使团、国际组织和一国军事力量相关的人员所享有的刑事管辖豁免。

Part Two Immunity ratione personae

第二部分 属人豁免

Article 3 Persons enjoying immunity ratione personae

第3条 享有属人豁免的人员

Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction.

国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属人豁免。

Article 4 Scope of immunity ratione personae

第4条 属人豁免的范围

1. Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae only during their term of office.

1. 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长仅在其任职期间享有属人豁免。

2. Such immunity ratione personae covers all acts performed, whether in a private or official capacity, by Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs during or prior to their term of office.

2. 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有的此种属人豁免涵盖他们在任职之前或任职期间的所有行为，无论是私人行为还是公务行为。

3. The cessation of immunity ratione personae is without prejudice to the application of the rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae.

3. 属人豁免的停止不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用。

2. Text of the draft articles and commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its sixty-fifth session

2. 委员会第六十五届会议暂时通过的条款草案案文及其评注

49. The text of the draft articles, together with commentaries, provisionally adopted by the Commission at the sixty-fifth session, is reproduced below.

49. 委员会第六十五届会议暂时通过的条款草案案文及其评注载录如下。

Part One Introduction

第一部分 导 言

Article 1 Scope of the present draft articles

第1条 本条款草案的范围

1. The present draft articles apply to the immunity of State officials 45 from the criminal jurisdiction of another State.

1. 本条款草案适用于国家官员 45 对另一国刑事管辖享有的豁免。

2. The present draft articles are without prejudice to the immunity from criminal jurisdiction enjoyed under special rules of international law, in particular by persons connected with diplomatic missions, consular posts, special missions, international organizations and military forces of a State.

2. 本条款草案不妨碍依照国际法特别规则享有的刑事管辖豁免，特别是与外交使团、领馆、特别使团、国际组织和一国军事力量相关的人员所享有的刑事管辖豁免。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft article 1 is devoted to establishing the scope of the draft articles on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction.

(1) 本条草案专门用于确定国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免条款草案的范围。

It incorporates in a single provision the dual perspective originally proposed by the Special Rapporteur in two separate articles.

它以单独一条容纳了特别报告员最初在两个不同条文中提议的双重内容。

46 Paragraph 1 explains the cases to which the draft articles apply, while paragraph 2 contains a saving or “without prejudice” clause listing the situations which, under international law, are governed by special regimes that are not affected by the present draft articles.

46 第1款解释条款草案适用的情况，而第2款载有一项但书或“不妨碍”条款，列出了在国际法上由特别制度管辖而不受本条款草案妨碍的情况。

In the past, the Commission has used various techniques for defining this dual dimension of the scope of a set of draft articles, 47 but in this case it has thought it preferable to combine both dimensions in a single provision, especially since this presents the advantage of facilitating the simultaneous treatment of both dimensions under a single title.

过去，委员会使用了各种手段界定一套条款草案范围的双重内容， 47 但在目前情况下，它认为在单独一条中将这两点内容结合起来更好，特别是因为这体现出在一个标题下便于同时处理两点内容的优势。

It also avoids the use in the title of a different article of expressions such as “do not apply”, “exclude” and “do not affect”, which some members of the Commission see as not entirely compatible with the “without prejudice” clause.

这也避免了在另一不同的条文中使用“不适用”、“排除”和“不影响”等表述，因为委员会一些委员认为这些表述与“不妨碍”条款不完全一致。

(2) Paragraph 1 establishes the scope of the draft articles in its positive dimension.

(2) 第1款从正面规定条款草案的范围。

To this end, in the paragraph, the Commission has decided to use the phrase “the present draft articles apply to”, which is the wording used recently in other draft articles adopted by the Commission that contain a provision referring to their scope. 48

为此，在第1条草案第1款，委员会决定使用“本条款草案适用于”这一短语，这是最近在委员会通过的其他载有范围规定的条款草案中使用的措辞。 48

On the other hand, the Commission considered that the scope of the draft articles should be defined as simply as possible, so that it could frame the rest of the draft articles and not affect or prejudge the other issues to be addressed later in other provisions in the text.

另一方面，委员会认为，本条款草案范围的界定应尽可能简单，从而可以为条款草案其余部分打下框架，并且不会影响或妨碍以后在草案其他各条中须处理的其他问题。

Accordingly, the Commission decided to make a descriptive reference to the scope, listing the elements comprising the title of the topic itself.

因此，委员会决定描述性地提及范围，列出了构成这一专题本身标题的要素。

For the same reason, the phrase “from the exercise of”, initially proposed by the Special Rapporteur, has been left out of the definition of the scope.

出于同样原因，从定义范围中排除了特别报告员最初提议的“行使”二字。

This phrase was interpreted by various members of the Commission in different and even contradictory ways, in terms of the consequences for the definition of the scope of foreign criminal jurisdiction.

就界定外国刑事管辖范围的后果来说，委员会各位委员对这二字的解释各不相同，甚至相互矛盾。

Account was also taken of the fact that the phrase “exercise of” is used in other draft articles formulated by the Special Rapporteur.

还考虑到的一个事实是，特别报告员在编写其他条草案时使用了“行使”二字。

49 The Commission was therefore of the view that the phrase was not needed to define the general scope of the draft articles and has reserved it for use in other parts of the draft articles in which it will have a better place.

49 因此，委员会认为，不需要用这二字来界定条款草案的一般范围，并且将它们留用于条款草案其他部分更合适的地方。

(3) Paragraph 1 covers the three elements defining the purpose of the draft articles, namely: (a) who are the persons enjoying immunity? (State officials); (b) what type of jurisdiction is affected by immunity? (criminal jurisdiction); and (c) in what domain does such criminal jurisdiction operate? (the criminal jurisdiction of another State).

(3) 第1款涵盖了界定条款草案宗旨的三个要素，即：(一) 谁能享受豁免？(国家官员)；(二) 豁免影响哪些类型管辖权？(刑事管辖权)；以及(三) 这类刑事管辖权是在什么领域行使的？(另一国的刑事管辖权)。

(4) As to the first element, the Commission has chosen to confine the draft articles to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction that may be enjoyed by those persons who represent or act on behalf of a State.

(4) 关于第一个要素，委员会选择将本条款草案限于代表一国的或为一国利益行事的人员可享有的外国刑事管辖豁免。

In the Commission’s previous work, the persons enjoying immunity have been referred to using the term “officials”.

在委员会以往的工作中，用“官员”一词指能享受豁免的人。

 However, the use of this term, and its equivalents in the other language versions, has raised certain problems to which the Special Rapporteur has drawn attention in her reports,  and which have also been pointed out by some members of the Commission.

 然而，使用这一术语以及其他语言文本的对等措辞，引起了若干问题。 特别报告员在她的报告中已经提请注意这一点，  并且委员会一些委员也指出过。

It should be noted, first, that the terms used in the various language versions are neither interchangeable nor synonymous.

首先，应当注意到，在各种语言文本中使用的术语是不可互换的，也不是同义词。

It should also be taken into account that these terms are not necessarily suitable for referring to each and every person to whom the present draft articles apply.

还应考虑到这些术语不一定适合本条款草案所适用的每一人员，特别是鉴于属人豁免与属事豁免之间的区别、以及每一类豁免所适用的不同类人员。

The Commission consequently considers that the definition of “official” (and its equivalents in the various language versions), as well as decisions on the terms to be used to refer to the persons to whom immunity applies, are matters requiring detailed consideration which, the Special Rapporteur has proposed, should be undertaken at a later stage, particularly in connection with the analysis of immunity ratione materiae.

因此，委员会认为“官员”(以及各种语言文本的对等措辞)的定义，以及关于用以指豁免所适用人员的术语的决定，是需要详细考虑的事项；特别报告员已经建议应在稍后阶段、特别是在分析属事豁免时进行。

Consequently, at the present stage of the work, the Commission has decided to continue to use the original terminology, on the understanding that it will be given consideration later.

因此，在现阶段的工作中，委员会决定继续使用原来的术语，但是将在以后予以审议。

This is reflected by the footnote in the text of draft article 1, paragraph 1.

这反映在第1条草案第1款的脚注上。

The use of the term “official” in the commentaries must be understood to be subject to the same reservation.

在评注中使用的“官员”一词，必须理解为受相同的保留条件约束。

(5) Secondly, the Commission has decided to confine the scope of the draft articles to immunity from criminal jurisdiction.

(5) 第二，委员会决定将条款草案范围限于刑事管辖豁免。

The present draft article is not intended to define the concept of criminal jurisdiction, which is being considered by the Commission in relation to another draft article.

本条草案不是为了界定委员会正在联系另一条草案而审议的刑事管辖权。

 Nevertheless, the Commission has debated the scope of “criminal jurisdiction” in relation to the acts that would be covered by the concept, particularly with reference to the extension of immunity to certain acts that are closely linked to the concept of personal inviolability, such as the arrest or detention of an individual.

 尽管如此，委员会还是针对“刑事管辖权”这一概念所涵盖的行为，特别是针对豁免范围可延及到与人身不可侵犯权密切相关的若干行为，比如对一人的逮捕或拘押等，讨论了“刑事管辖权”的范围问题。

With this in mind, and subject to later developments in the Commission’s treatment of this issue, for the purposes of defining the scope of the present draft articles, the reference to foreign criminal jurisdiction should be understood as meaning the set of acts linked to judicial processes whose purpose is to determine the criminal responsibility of an individual, including coercive acts that can be carried out against persons enjoying immunity in this context.

有鉴于此，并且在不影响委员会以后处理这一问题的发展情况的前提下，对于界定本条款草案的范围而言，凡提到外国刑事管辖，都应理解为是指一套与司法程序相关的行为，旨在确定一人是否负有刑事责任，包括在这方面可对享受豁免者采取的强制行为。

(6) Thirdly, the Commission decided to confine the scope of the draft articles to immunity from the “foreign” criminal jurisdiction, that which reflects the horizontal relations between States.

(6) 第三，委员会决定将本条款草案的范围限于国家间平行关系中称为“外国”的刑事司法管辖豁免。

This means that the draft articles will be applied solely in respect to the immunity from the criminal jurisdiction “of another State”.

这意味着条款草案仅适用于“另一国”的刑事司法管辖豁免。

Consequently, the immunities enjoyed before international criminal tribunals, which are subject to their own legal regime, will remain outside the scope of the draft articles.

因此，在具有本身法律制度的国际刑事法庭前享有的豁免将不在本条款草案的范围之内。

This exclusion must be understood to mean that none of the rules that govern immunity before such tribunals are to be affected by the content of the present draft articles.

这一排除条款必须理解为，本条款草案的内容将不会影响关于在这些法庭享有的豁免的任何规则。

Nevertheless, the need to consider the special problem presented by so-called mixed or internationalized criminal tribunals has been raised.

尽管如此，有委员指出，需要考虑到所谓混合或国际化的刑事法庭所提出的特殊问题。

Similarly, a question has been raised regarding the effect that existing international obligations imposed on States to cooperate with international criminal tribunals would have on the present draft articles.

同样，有委员提出了关于要求各国与各国际刑事法庭合作的一些现行国际义务可能对本条款草案产生何种影响的问题。

Although diverse views were expressed with regard to both subjects, it is not possible at this stage to definitively address these aspects.

虽然对这两个问题表达了各种意见，但在目前阶段，很难确切地处理这些问题。

(7) It must be emphasized that paragraph 1 refers to “immunity … from the criminal jurisdiction of another State”.

(7) 必须强调，本条草案第1款指的是“对另一国刑事管辖…的豁免”。

The use of the term “from” creates a link between the concepts of “immunity” and “foreign criminal jurisdiction” (or jurisdiction “of another State”) that must be duly taken into account.

使用“from”一词，在“豁免”和“外国刑事管辖”(或另一国“管辖”)的概念之间建立了一个必须正当考虑的联系。

On this point, the Commission is of the view that the concepts of immunity and foreign criminal jurisdiction are closely interrelated: it is impossible to view immunity in abstract terms, without relating it to a foreign criminal jurisdiction which, although it exists, will not be exercised by the forum State precisely because of the existence of immunity. Or, as the International Court of Justice has put it, “it is only where a State has jurisdiction under international law in relation to a particular matter that there can be any question of immunities in regard to exercise of that jurisdiction”.

关于这一点，委员会认为，豁免与外国刑事管辖的概念密切相关：不可能抽象地看豁免问题而不涉及外国刑事管辖权：后者尽管存在，但是由于豁免权的存在而法院地国不会行使；或者，如国际法院指出的，“只有在一国依照国际法对某具体案件有管辖权时，才会发生有关行使这一管辖的豁免问题”。  

(8) The Commission regards immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction as being procedural in nature.

(8) 委员会将外国刑事管辖豁免视为程序性的。

Consequently, immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction cannot constitute a means of exempting the criminal responsibility of a person enjoying immunity from the substantive rules of criminal law, a responsibility which accordingly is preserved, independently of the fact that a State cannot, through the exercise of its jurisdiction, determine that such responsibility exists at a specific moment and with regard to a given person.

因此，外国刑事管辖豁免不能构成免除享有豁免者按刑法实质性规则所负刑事责任的手段；这一责任相应地保留了下来，不论一国是否能通过行使管辖权在一个特定时刻对于一个特定的人员确定这一责任存在。

On the contrary, immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction is strictly a procedural obstacle or barrier to the exercise of a State’s criminal jurisdiction against the officials of another State.

相反，严格来说，外国刑事管辖豁免是一国对另一国官员行使刑事管辖权的程序性障碍或阻隔。

This position was affirmed by the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant case,  which is followed in the majority of State practice and in the literature.

国际法院在逮捕证案中确认了这一立场，  大部分国家实践和文献也采取了这一立场。

(9) Paragraph 2 refers to cases in which there are special rules of international law relating to immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction.

(9) 这条草案第二款涉及到在外国刑事管辖豁免方面存在着国际法特别规则的情况。

This category of special rules has its most well-known and frequently cited manifestation in the regime of privileges and immunities granted under international law to diplomatic agents and to consular officials.

这一类特别规则中最知名并经常引用的，是根据国际法赋予外交人员、以及在较低程度上赋予领事官员的特权和豁免制度。

 However, there are other examples in contemporary international law, both treaty-based and custom-based, which in the Commission’s view should likewise be taken into account for the purposes of defining the scope of the present draft articles.

 然而，当代国际法上也有以条约或惯例为基础的其他事例；委员会认为，对于界定本条款草案范围而言，也应同样考虑到这些事例。

Concerning those special regimes, the Commission considers that these are legal regimes that are well established in international law and that the present draft articles should not affect their content and application.

关于这些特别制度，委员会认为，它们是国际法上牢固确立的法律制度，因此本条款草案不应当影响其内容和适用。

It should be recalled that during the preparation of the draft articles on Jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, the Commission acknowledged the existence of special immunity regimes, albeit in a different context, and specifically referred to them in article 3, entitled “Privileges and immunities not affected by the present articles”.

应当忆及，在国家及其财产管辖豁免条款草案的编写过程中，委员会承认了特别豁免制度的存在，尽管是在不同的背景之下，并且在题为“不受本条款影响的特权和豁免”的第3条专门提到了它们。

The relationship between the regime for immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction set out in the draft articles and the special regimes just mentioned was established by the Commission with the inclusion of a saving clause in, paragraph 2, according to which the provisions of the present draft articles are “without prejudice” to what is set out in the special regimes; here the Commission has followed the wording it used before, in the draft articles on Jurisdictional immunities of States and their property.

委员会在第1条草案第2款中纳入一项但书，确立了条款草案所载的国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免一般制度与刚才所述的特别制度之间的关系，根据这一但书，本条款草案的规定“不妨碍”特别制度的规定；委员会在此沿用了以前在国家及其财产豁免条款草案中使用的措辞。

(10) The Commission has used the term “special rules” as a synonym for the words “special regimes” in its earlier work.

(10) 委员会在早先的工作中使用了“特别规则”一词，作为“特别制度”的同义词。

Although the Commission has not defined the concept of “special regime”, attention should be drawn to the conclusions of the Study Group on Fragmentation of International Law, particularly conclusions 2 and 3.

虽然委员会没有界定“特别制度”的概念，但是应注意国际法不成体系专题研究组的结论，特别是结论2和3。

 For the purposes of the present draft articles, the Commission understands “special rules” to mean those international rules, whether treaty- or custom-based, that regulate the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of persons connected with activities in specific fields of international relations.

 就本条款草案而言，委员会的理解是：“特别规则”意指那些依据条约或惯例来规范与国际关系具体领域中的活动相关的人员的外国刑事管辖豁免的国际规则。

The Commission sees such “special rules” as coexisting with the regime defined in the present draft articles, the special regime being applied in the event of any conflict between the two regimes.

委员会认为“特别规则”与本条款草案界定的制度是共存的，互不干扰；在两种制度之间发生矛盾的情况下，适用特别制度。

 In any event, the Commission considers that the special regimes in question are only those established by “rules of international law”, this reference to international law being essential for the purpose of defining the scope of the “without prejudice” clause.

 无论如何，委员会认为，有关的特别制度只是“国际法规则”设立的制度；援引国际法，对于界定“不妨碍”条款的范围至关重要。  

(11) The special regimes included in paragraph 2 relate to three areas of international practice in which norms regulating immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction have been identified, namely: (a) the presence of a State in a foreign country through diplomatic missions, consular posts and special missions; (b) the various representational and other activities connected with international organizations; and (c) the presence of a State’s military forces in a foreign country.

(11) 第2款涵盖的特别制度涉及到已经确定了外国刑事管辖豁免规范的三个国际惯例领域，分别是：(a) 一国以外交使团、领事馆和特别使团的形式存在于某一外国；(b) 与国际组织有关的各种派驻代表活动和其他活动；(c) 一国军事力量驻扎在某一外国。

Although in all three areas, treaty-based norms establishing a regime of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction may be identified, the Commission has not thought it necessary to include in paragraph 2 an explicit reference to such international conventions and instruments.

虽然在所有这三个领域都可找到以条约为基础的建立外国刑事管辖豁免制度的规范，但委员会认为没有必要在第2款中明确提及这类国际公约和文书。  

The first group includes special rules relating to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of persons connected with carrying out the functions of representation, or protection of the interests of the State in another State, whether on a permanent basis or otherwise, while connected with a diplomatic mission, consular post or special mission.

第一组包括的特别规则涉及到那些在另一国履行代表、国防或保护国家利益的职责的有关人员的外国刑事管辖豁免，无论他们是永久还是临时的，是派驻于外交使团、领馆还是特别使团的。

The Commission takes the view that the rules contained in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the Convention on Special Missions, as well as the relevant rules of customary law, fall into this category.

委员会认为，这一类中包括了《维也纳外交关系公约》、《维也纳领事关系公约》和《特别使团公约》所载的规则以及习惯法的有关规则。

The second group includes special rules applicable to the immunity from criminal jurisdiction enjoyed by persons connected with an activity in relation to or in the framework of an international organization.

第二组包括的特别规则适用于与国际组织相关或在其框架内开展活动的个人所享有的刑事管辖豁免。

In this category are included the special rules applicable to persons connected with missions to an international organization or delegations to organs of international organizations or to international conferences.

这一类中包含的特别规则适用与国际组织使命有关、或派往国际组织机关或国际会议的代表团有关人员。

 The Commission’s understanding is that it is unnecessary to include in this group of special rules those that apply in general to the international organizations themselves.

 委员会认为，没有必要在这组特别规则中包括一般来说适用于国际组织本身的规则。

However, it considers that this category does include norms applicable to the agents of an international organization, especially in cases when the agent has been placed at the disposal of the organization by a State and continues to enjoy the status of State official during the time when he or she is acting on behalf of and for the organization.

然而，它认为，这一类中的确包括那些适用于一国际组织代理人的规范，尤其是在代理人是由一国交由国际组织安置，并且在代表该组织期间内继续享受国家官员地位的情况下。

Regarding this second group of special regimes, the Commission has taken into account the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies, as well as other treaty-based and customary norms applicable in this area.

关于第二组特别制度，委员会已经参照了《关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权的维也纳公约》、《联合国特权和豁免公约》、《各专门机构特权及豁免公约》，以及在这方面适用的其他条约和习惯规范。

The third group of special rules includes those according immunity from criminal jurisdiction to persons connected with the military forces of a State located in a foreign State.

第三组特别规则包括了赋予与一国驻外国军事力量有关的人员的刑事管辖豁免的规范。

This category includes the whole set of rules regulating the stationing of troops in the territory of a third State, even those included in Status of Forces Agreements (the so-called SOFAs) and those included in headquarters agreements or military cooperation accords envisaging the stationing of troops.

这一类中包括一整套的规范在第三国境内常驻部队的规则，甚至部队地位协定、总部协定、或在设想永久驻军的军事合作协定中包括的规则。

Also included in this category are agreements made in connection with the short-term activities of military forces in a foreign State.

这一类中还包括关于军事力量在外国的短期、非永久性活动而达成的协议。

(12) The list of the special rules described in paragraph 2 is qualified by the words “in particular” to indicate that the clause does not exclusively apply to these special rules.

(12) 第2款所述的特别规则前面加上了“特别是”几个字，以此表示这一款并不是排他性地适用于这些特别规则。

In this connection, various members of the Commission drew attention to the fact that special rules in other areas may be found in practice, particularly in connection with the establishment in a State’s territory of foreign institutions and centres for economic, technical, scientific and cultural cooperation, usually on the basis of specific headquarters agreements.

在这方面，委员会多个委员提请委员会注意：在实践中可看到其他领域的特别规则，特别是在一国境内设立外国经济、技术、科学和文化合作机构和中心方面，这类机构和中心通常是以专门的总部协定为基础。

Although the Commission has accepted in general terms the existence of these special regimes, it has considered that there is no need to mention them in paragraph 2.

虽然委员会笼统地承认这些特别制度的存在，但认为没有必要在第2款提及。

(13) Lastly, it should be noted that the Commission considered the possibility of including in paragraph 2, the practice whereby a State unilaterally grants a foreign official immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction.

(13) 最后，应当指出的是，委员会考虑了能否在第2款中包括一国单方面向外国官员赋予外国刑事管辖豁免的做法。

However, the Commission decided against such inclusion.

然而，委员会决定不将这种情况写入第2款。

This issue may be revisited at a later stage in the consideration of work on the topic.

这一问题可在审议本专题工作的以后阶段重新审视。

(14) On the other hand, the Commission has considered that the formulation of paragraph 2 should parallel the structure of paragraph 1 of the draft article.

(14) 另一方面，委员会认为，第2款的写法应与本条草案第1款的结构保持平行。

It must thus be borne in mind that the present draft articles refer to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of certain persons described as “officials” and that consequently, this subjective element should also be reflected in the “without prejudice” clause.

因此，必须铭记：本条款草案说的是称为“官员”的特定人员的外国刑事管辖豁免，并且因此，这一主观上的因素也应当体现在“不妨碍”条款中。

This is why paragraph 2 refers expressly to “persons connected with”.

这就是为什么这一款明确提到“相关的人员”。

The phrase “persons connected with” has been used in line with the terminology in the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property (art. 3).

“相关的人员”几字是《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》(第三条)使用的措辞。

The scope of the term “persons connected with” will depend on the content of the rules defining the special regime that applies to them; it is therefore not possible a priori to draw up a single definition for this category.

“相关的人员”的范围将取决于界定适用于他们的特别制度的规则的内容，因此，不可能先验地为这一类别拟定一个单独定义。

This is also true for civilian personnel connected with the military forces of a State, who will be included in the special regime only to the extent that the legal instrument applicable in each case so establishes.

对于一国军事力量中的文职人员，也是如此；只有在每一情况下适用的法律文书所规定的范围内，特别制度才能涵盖他们。

(15) The combination of the terms “persons connected with” and “special rules” is essential in determining the scope and meaning of the saving or “without prejudice” clause in paragraph 2.

(15) 将“相关的人员”和“特别规则”结合起来，对于确定第1条第2款中的但书或“不妨碍”条款的范围和含义，必不可少。

The Commission considers that the persons covered in this paragraph (diplomatic agents, consular officials, members of special missions, agents of international organizations and members of the military forces of a State) are automatically excluded from the scope of the present draft articles, not by the mere fact of belonging to that category of officials, but by the fact that one of the special regimes referred to in draft article 1, paragraph 2, applies to them under certain circumstances.

委员会认为，本款涵盖的人员(外交代表、领事官员、特别使团成员、国际组织代理人和一国军队成员)被自动排除于本条款草案的范围，不是因为他们属于这一类别官员的单纯事实，而是因为第1条草案第2款所提到的特别制度之一在某些情况下适用于他们。

In such circumstances, the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction that these persons may enjoy under the special regimes applicable to them will not be affected by the provisions of the present draft articles.

在这种情况下，这些人员可在特别制度下享有的适用于他们的外国刑事管辖豁免不会受到本条款草案规定的影响。

Part Two Immunity ratione personae

第二部分 属人豁免

Article 3 Persons enjoying immunity ratione personae

第3条 享有属人豁免的人员

Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction.

国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属人豁免。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft article 3 lists the State officials who enjoy immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction, namely: the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs.

(1) 第3条草案列出了享有外国刑事管辖豁免的国家官员，包括：国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长。

The draft article confines itself to identifying the persons to whom this type of immunity applies, making no reference to its substantive scope, which will be dealt with in other draft articles.

该条文草案仅限于指出此类豁免适用的人员而未提及其实质性范围，该问题在其他条文草案中得到处理。

(2) The Commission considers that there are two reasons, representational and functional, for granting immunity ratione personae to Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs.

(2) 委员会认为，从代表和职能这两个方面看有理由给予国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长以属人豁免。

First, under the rules of international law, these three office holders represent the State in its international relations simply by virtue of their office, directly and with no need for specific powers to be granted by the State.  Second, they must be able to discharge their functions unhindered.

首先，根据国际法，任这些职位的人员仅凭其职务就可在国际关系中直接代表国家而无需国家专门授权其这样做，  其次，他们必须能够不受阻碍地行使职权。

 It is irrelevant whether those officials are nationals of the State in which they hold the office of Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs.

 这些人员是否为其任国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长的国家的公民无关紧要。

(3) The statement that the Heads of State enjoy immunity ratione personae is not subject to dispute, given that this is established in existing rules of customary international law.

(3) 国家元首享有属人豁免，对此没有争议，因为这一点在现行习惯国际法规则中已得到确立。

In addition, various conventions contain provisions referring directly to the immunity from jurisdiction of the Head of State.

此外，多项公约中都包括直接涉及国家元首的管辖豁免的规定。

In this connection, mention must be made of article 21, paragraph 1, of the Convention on Special Missions, which expressly acknowledges that when the Head of State leads a special mission, he or she enjoys, in addition to what is granted in the Convention, the immunities accorded by international law to Heads of State on an official visit.

在这方面，必须提及《特别使团公约》第21条第1款，其中明确表示国家元首带领特别使团时，他或她除《公约》中的规定外还享有国际法赋予进行正式访问的国家元首的豁免。

Similarly, article 50, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character refers to the other “immunities accorded by international law to Heads of State”.

与此类似，《关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权的维也纳公约》第五十条第1款提到了其他“国际法赋予国家元首的豁免”。

Along the same lines, albeit in a different field, the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property includes, in the saving clause in article 3, paragraph 2, an express reference to the immunities accorded under international law to Heads of State.

本着类似的原则，在另一不同领域，《联合国国家及其财产司法豁免公约》在第三条第2款的保留条款中明确提到了根据国际法赋予国家元首的豁免。

The immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of the Head of State has also been recognized in case law at both the international and national levels.

国家元首的外国刑事管辖豁免在国际和国内的判例法中也应得到承认。

Thus, the International Court of Justice has expressly mentioned the immunity of the Head of State from foreign criminal jurisdiction in the Arrest Warrant  and Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters  cases.

为此，国际法院在逮捕证案  和关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案  中明确提到国家元首享有外国刑事管辖豁免。

It must be emphasized that examples of national judicial practice, although limited in number, are consistent in showing that Heads of State enjoy immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction, both in the proceedings concerning the immunity of the Head of State and in the reasoning that such courts follow in deciding whether or not other State officials also enjoy immunity from criminal jurisdiction.

必须强调的是，国家司法惯例的先例虽然数量有限，但一直表明国家元首享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免，在事关国家元首豁免的程序和此类法院在决定是否其他国家官员也享有刑事管辖豁免时的论证中都是如此。

The Commission considers that the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione personae of the Head of State is accorded exclusively to persons who actually hold that office, and that the title given to the Head of State in each State, the conditions under which he or she acquires the status of Head of State (as a sovereign or otherwise) and the individual or collegial nature of the office are irrelevant for the purposes of the present draft article.

委员会认为，关于国家元首的外国刑事管辖属人豁免，该豁免仅赋予现任该职位的人员，各国给予国家元首的头衔、他或她获得国家元首身份的条件(主权或其他)以及该职位是个人还是集体性质，就本条款草案的目的而言无关紧要 。

(4) The recognition of immunity ratione personae in favour of the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs is a result of the fact that, under international law, their representative functions of the State have become recognized as approximate to those of the Head of State.

(4) 政府首脑和外交部长享有属人管辖豁免之所以得到承认是因为，依照国际法，其作为国家代表的职能接近于国家元首并且这一点得到承认。

Examples of this may be found in the recognition of full powers for the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs for the conclusion of treaties  and the equality of the three categories of officials in terms of their international protection  and their involvement in the representation of the State.

政府首脑和外交部长缔结条约的全权得到承认 、三类官员在享受国际保护  和在国际上参与代表国家方面  享有的平等都是这一现象的实例。

 The immunity of Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs has been referred to in the Convention on Special Missions, the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, and, implicitly, in the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property.

政府首脑和外交部长享有的豁免在《特别使团公约》、《关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权的维也纳公约》以及隐示地在《联合国国家及其财产司法豁免公约》中被提及。

 The inclusion of the Minister for Foreign Affairs in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, is particularly significant, since in its own draft articles on the subject, the Commission decided not to include government officials in the list of persons internationally protected,  but the Minister for Foreign Affairs was nevertheless included in the final Convention adopted by States.

 将外交部长纳入《关于防止和惩处侵害应受国际保护人员包括外交代表的罪行的公约》意义特别重大，因为委员会在关于该议题的条款草案中决定不将政府官员纳入受国际保护人员名单，  但外交部长还是纳入了最终由各国通过的《公约》。

All of the above-mentioned examples have emerged from the work of the Commission, which has on several occasions dealt with the question of whether or not expressly to include Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs in international instruments.

上述实例全部出自委员会的工作，委员会在工作中曾多次处理是否明确将国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长纳入国际文书的问题。

In this connection, there was noted that there was specific mention to the Head of State in article 3 of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property while excluding any express reference to the Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs.

如上文所述，最终每个案件各自通过了不同的解决方案。 对此，有委员提到，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第三条具体提及国家元首，只字未提政府首脑和外交部长。

However, there is very little reason to conclude that these examples mean that in the present draft article, the Commission must treat Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs differently. It is even less reasonable to conclude that the Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs must be excluded from draft article 3.

但没有多少理由可得出结论认为这些实例意味着在本条草案中委员会必须同样区别对待国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长，更没有理由得出结论认为政府首脑和外交部长必须排除在第3条草案之外。

A number of factors must be taken into account here.

为此目的必须考虑多种因素。

First, the present draft articles refer solely to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of State officials, whereas the Convention on Special Missions, and the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, refer to all the immunities from which Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs may enjoy.

首先，本套条款草案只涉及国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免，而《特别使团公约》和《关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权的维也纳公约》涉及国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长可能享有的所有豁免。

Secondly, the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property refers to the immunities of States; immunity from criminal jurisdiction remains outside its scope.

其次，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》涉及国家豁免；刑事管辖豁免仍在其范围之外。

 In addition, far from rejecting the immunities that might be enjoyed by the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Commission actually recognized them, but simply did not mention these categories specifically in article 3, paragraph 2, “since it would be difficult to prepare an exhaustive list, and any enumeration of such persons would moreover raise the issues of the basis and of the extent of the jurisdictional immunity exercised by such persons”.

 此外，委员会未曾声明反对政府首脑和外交部长可能享有的豁免：反之，委员会认可这些豁免，只是在第3条第2款中未专门提及这些类别，“因为难以列出穷尽清单，此外此类人员的任何列举将带来此类人员行使的管辖豁免依据和范围的问题”。

 And thirdly, it must also be borne in mind that all the examples mentioned above preceded the judgment by the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant case.

 第三，还应注意，上述所有实例都早于国际法院逮捕证案。

(5) In its judgment in the Arrest Warrant case, the International Court of Justice expressly stated that “in international law it is firmly established that, as also diplomatic and consular agents, certain holders of high-ranking office in a State, such as the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs, enjoy immunities from jurisdiction in other States, both civil and criminal.”

(5) 国际法院在逮捕证案的判决中明确表示，“国际法中已明确确立的一点是，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长等一些任国家高级官员的人员同外交和领事人员一样在他国享有管辖豁免，包括民事和刑事豁免”。

 This statement was later reiterated by the Court in the case concerning Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters.

 后来法院在关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案中重申了该声明。

 Both of these judgments were discussed extensively by the Commission, particularly with regard to the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

 委员会对两次声明都进行了大量讨论，特别是关于外交部长的问题。

During the discussion, most members expressed the view that the Arrest Warrant case reflects the current state of international law and that it must accordingly be concluded that there is a customary rule under which the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione personae of the Minister for Foreign Affairs is recognized.

讨论中，多数委员表示认为国际法院在逮捕证案中的判决反映了国际法发展至今的现状，因此应得出结论认为，认可外交部长的外国刑事管辖属人豁免是习惯规则。

In the view of these members, the position of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the special functions he or she carries out in international relations constitute the basis for the recognition of such immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction.

这些委员认为，外交部长的地位和及其在国际关系领域的特殊职能是承认这种外国刑事管辖豁免的依据。

On the other hand, some members of the Commission pointed out that the Court’s judgment was not sufficient grounds for concluding that a customary rule existed, as it did not contain a thorough analysis of the practice and that several judges expressed opinions that differed from the majority view.

另一方面，委员会一些委员指出，法院的判决不足以作为得出结论称存在习惯规则的依据，因为判决未充分分析惯例，且几位法官表达了不同于大多数人的意见。

 One member of the Commission who considers that the Court’s judgment does not show that there is a customary rule nevertheless said that, in view of the fact that the Court’s judgment in that case has not been opposed by States, the absence of a customary rule does not prevent the Commission from including that official among the persons enjoying immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction, as a matter of progressive development of international law.

 委员会一名委员认为法院的判决未表明存在习惯规则，但还是表示，鉴于法院对此案的判决未受到国家的反对，不存在习惯规则并不妨碍委员会在逐渐发展国际法的过程中将这类官员列入享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免的人员中。

(6) As to the practice of national courts, the Commission has also found that while there are very few rulings on the immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction of the Head of Government and almost none in respect of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the national courts that have had occasion to comment on this subject have nevertheless always recognized that those high-ranking officials do have immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction during their term of office.

(6) 关于国家法院的惯例，委员会还考虑到，判决涉及政府首脑外国刑事管辖属人豁免的情况极少，而涉及外交部长外国刑事管辖属人豁免的情况几乎不存在，尽管如此，曾对这一专题发表意见的国家法院总是承认这些高级官员在任期内确实享有外国刑事管辖豁免。

(7) As a result of the discussion, the Commission found that there are sufficient grounds in practice and in international law to conclude that the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction.

(7) 根据讨论，委员会发现，在实践和在国际法中有充分理由断定，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免。

Consequently, it has been decided to include them in draft article 3.

因此，委员会决定将他们列入第3条草案。

(8) The Commission has also looked into whether other State officials could be included in the list of the persons enjoying immunity ratione personae.

(8) 委员会还审查了其他类别的国家官员能否被列入享受属人豁免的人员清单。

This has been raised as a possibility by some members of the Commission in the light of the evolution of international relations, particularly the fact that high-ranking officials other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs are becoming increasingly involved in international forums and making frequent trips outside the national territory.

鉴于国际关系的发展，特别是国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长之外的高级官员正在越来越多地参与国际论坛并频繁到本国领土之外访问，委员会一些委员提出了这种可能性。

Some members of the Commission have supported the view that other high-ranking officials should be included in draft article 3 with a reference to the Arrest Warrant case, stating that the use of the words “such as” should be interpreted to extend the regime of immunity ratione personae to high-ranking State officials, other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs, who have major responsibilities within the State and who are involved in representation of the State in the fields of their activity.

委员会一些委员为支持他们关于高级官员应被列入第3条草案的看法援引了国际法院在逮捕证案中的判决，称使用“例如”一词应被解释为将属人豁免扩大至国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长之外、在国内拥有重大职权并在其活动领域中在国际上代表国家的高级官员。

In this connection, some members of the Commission have suggested that immunity ratione personae is enjoyed by a Minister of Defence or a Minister of International Trade.

在这方面，委员会一些委员建议，国防部长或国际贸易部长或许可以享有属人豁免。

Other members of the Commission, however, see the use of the words “such as” as not widening the circle of the persons who enjoy this category of immunity, since the Court uses the words in the context of a specific dispute, the subject of which is the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of a Minister for Foreign Affairs.

但另一方面，委员会其他委员认为使用“例如”一词不是为了扩大享有这类豁免者的范围，因为法院是在一项具体争端的上下文中使用该词的，而其中审议的正是一位外交部长的外国刑事管辖豁免。

Lastly, several members of the Commission have drawn attention to the difficulty inherent in determining which persons should be deemed to be “other high-ranking officials,” since this will depend to a large extent on each country’s organizational structure and method of conferring powers, which differ from one State to the next.

最后，还必须注意到，委员会的一些委员提请委员会注意确定哪些人应被视为“其他高级官员”本身即很困难，因为这在很大程度上取决于国家的组织结构和赋予职能的方式，而国与国之间在这方面各不相同。  

(9) In the case concerning Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, the International Court of Justice reverted to the subject of the immunity of high-ranking State officials other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs.

(9) 在关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案中，国际刑事法院重新提到国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长之外的其他高级国家官员的豁免这一主题，尽管该案的判决并不能得出法院承认这类高级官员的属人豁免的结论。

The Court dealt separately with the immunity of the Head of State of Djibouti and of the two other high-ranking officials, namely the Attorney-General (procureur de la République) and the Head of National Security.

必须回顾指出，法院分开处理了吉布提国家元首的豁免和总检察长(共和国总检察长)和国家安全主管等两位其他高级官员的豁免。

With regard to the Head of State, the Court made a very clear pronouncement that in general, he or she enjoys immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione personae, although that was not applicable in the specific case, since the invitation to testify issued by the French authorities was not a measure of constraint.

关于国家元首，法院明确宣布，一般而言，他享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免，尽管这种豁免并不具体适用于本案，因为法国当局发出的作证邀请并不是侮辱性的。

 With regard to the other high-ranking officials, the Court argued that the acts attributed to them were not carried out within the scope of their duties;  it considered that Djibouti did not make it sufficiently clear whether it was claiming State immunity, personal immunity or some other type of immunity; and it concluded that “the Court notes first that there are no grounds in international law upon which it could be said that the officials concerned were entitled to personal immunities, not being diplomats within the meaning of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, and the Convention on Special Missions of 1969 not being applicable in this case”.

 关于其他高级官员，法院认为，归于他们的行为不是在他们职责范围内实施的；  法院认为，吉布提没有充分明确的说明它主张的是国家豁免、属人豁免还是其他类型的豁免；法院断定，“法院注意到，首先，由于有关官员不是1961年《维也纳外交关系公约》所称的外交官，1969年《特别使团公约》也不适用于本案，因而国际法中没有理由支持有关官员享有属人豁免的说法”。

(10) In national judicial practice, a number of decisions deal with the immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction of other high-ranking officials.

(10) 在国家司法实践中，有多项判决涉及其他高级官员的外国刑事管辖属人豁免问题。

However, the decisions in question are not conclusive.

然而，所涉判决并没有得出确切的结论。

While some of the decisions are in favour of the immunity ratione personae of high-ranking officials such as the Minister of Defence or Minister of International Trade,  in others, the national courts found that the person under trial did not enjoy immunity, either because he or she was not a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs or because he or she did not belong to the narrow circle of officials who deserve such treatment,  which illustrates the major difficulty involved in identifying the high-ranking officials other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs who can indisputably be deemed to enjoy immunity ratione personae.

一些判决赞成国防部长或国际贸易部长等高级官员享有属人豁免，  而在其他判决中，国家法院判定受审人不享有豁免，或因为他或她不是国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长，或因为他或她不属于有资格享受这项待遇的少数官员，  这显示了确定除国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长以外可以被视为毫无争议地享有属人豁免的高级官员的主要难点。

It should also be pointed out, however, that in some of these decisions, the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of a high-ranking official is analysed from various perspectives (immunity ratione personae, immunity ratione materiae, State immunity, immunity deriving from a special mission), reflecting the uncertainty in determining precisely what might be the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction that is enjoyed by high-ranking officials other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs.

但还应当指出，在一些判决中，一名高级官员的外国刑事管辖豁免是从不同的角度进行分析的(属人豁免、属事豁免、国家豁免、源于特别使团的豁免)，这反映出在准确认定国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长以外的高级官员可享有的外国刑事管辖豁免是哪种豁免方面存在着不确定性。  

(11) On another level, it must be recalled that the Commission has already referred to the immunity of other high-ranking officials, in its draft articles on special missions and its draft articles on the representation of States in their relations with international organizations of a universal character.

(11) 在另一个层面上，应回顾指出，委员会在关于特别使团的条款草案和关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权的条款草案中已提及其他高级官员的豁免。

 It must be recalled that these instruments only establish a regime under which such persons continue to enjoy the immunities accorded to them under international law beyond the framework of those instruments.

 但应回顾指出，这些文书只不过是建立了一个制度，使此类人员在该制度下继续享有超越这些文书框架的国际法赋予他们的豁免权。

However, neither in the text of the draft articles nor in the Commission’s commentaries thereto is it clearly indicated what these immunities are and whether they do or do not include immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione personae.

然而，无论是在条款草案案文中，还是委员会对案文的评述中，都没有明确说明，这些豁免权是什么以及它们是否包括外国刑事管辖属人豁免。

It must also be emphasized that although these high-ranking officials may be deemed to be included in the category of “State representatives” mentioned in article 2, paragraph 1 (a) (iv), of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, that instrument — as previously mentioned — does not apply to “criminal proceedings”.

还必须强调的是，虽然这些高层官员可能被视为属于《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第2条第1款(b)(四)项中所称的“国家代表”，但如上文所述，该文书并不适用于“刑事诉讼”。

Nevertheless, some members of the Commission stated that high-ranking officials do benefit from the immunity regime of special missions, including immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction, when they are on an official visit to a third State as part of their fulfilment of the functions of representing the State in the framework of their substantive duties.

不过，一些委员会委员表示，作为在实质性职责框架内履行国家代表职能的一部分，高级官员在第三国进行正式访问时确实会受益于特别使团的豁免制度，包括外国刑事管辖豁免。

It was said that this offers a means of ensuring the proper fulfilment of the sectoral functions of this category of high-ranking officials at the international level.

有人说，这是一种确保这类高级官员在国际一级恰当履行部门职能的办法。

(12) In view of the foregoing, the Commission considers that other “high-ranking officials” do not enjoy immunity ratione personae for purposes of the present draft articles, but that this is without prejudice to the rules pertaining to immunity ratione materiae, and on the understanding that when they are on official visits, they enjoy immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction based on the rules of international law relating to special missions.

(12) 考虑到上文所述，委员会认为，为了本条款草案的目的，其他“高级官员”不享有属人豁免，但这并不影响关于属事豁免的规则，也不影响这样一种理解，即这些高级官员在进行正式访问时基于有关特别使团的国际法规则享有外国刑事管辖豁免。

(13) The phrase “from the exercise of” has been used in the draft article with reference both to immunity ratione personae and to foreign criminal jurisdiction.

(13) 条款草案中在提及属人豁免和外国刑事管辖时使用了“行使的”一词。

The Commission decided not to use the same phrase in draft article 1 (Scope of the present draft articles) so as not to prejudge the substantive aspects of immunity, in particular its scope, that will be taken up in other draft articles.

委员会决定在第1条草案(本条款草案的范围)中不使用该词，以避免预先判断将在其他条款草案中论述的豁免的实质性内容，特别是其范围。

 In the present draft article, the Commission has decided to retain the phrase “from the exercise of,” since it illustrates the relationship between immunity and foreign criminal jurisdiction and emphasizes the essentially procedural nature of the immunity that comes into play in relation to the exercise of criminal jurisdiction with respect to a specific act.

 在本条款草案中，委员会决定保留“行使的”一词，因为它说明了豁免和外国刑事管辖的关系，并强调了对具体行为行使刑事管辖时发挥作用的豁免本质上的刑事性质。  

Article 4 Scope of immunity ratione personae

第4条 属人豁免的范围

1. Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae only during their term of office.

1. 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长仅在其任职期间享有属人豁免。

2. Such immunity ratione personae covers all acts performed, whether in a private or official capacity, by Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs during or prior to their term of office.

2. 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有的此种属人豁免涵盖他们在任职之前或任职期间的所有行为，无论是私人行为还是公务行为。

3. The cessation of immunity ratione personae is without prejudice to the application of the rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae.

3. 属人豁免的停止不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft article 4 deals with the scope of immunity ratione personae from both the temporal and material standpoints.

(1) 第4条草案从时间和内容角度阐述了属人豁免的范围。

The scope of immunity ratione personae must be understood by looking at the temporal aspect (paragraph 1) in conjunction with the material aspect (paragraph 2).

必须将时间方面(第1款)与内容方面(第2款)相结合理解属人豁免的范围。

Although each of these aspects is conceptually distinct, the Commission has chosen to cover them in a single article, since this offers a more comprehensive view of the meaning and scope of the immunity enjoyed by Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs.

虽然这两个方面是不同概念，但是为了更加全面地理解国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有的这种豁免的含义和范围，委员会选择在同一条内涵盖这两个方面。

The Commission has decided to cover the temporal aspect first, since this gives a better understanding of the material scope of immunity ratione personae, which is limited to a specific period of time.

委员会决定先阐述时间方面，这样可以更好地理解属人豁免这种仅限于特定时间段的豁免的实质范围。

(2) With regard to the temporal scope of immunity ratione personae, the Commission has thought it necessary to include the term “only” so as to emphasize the point that this type of immunity applies to Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs exclusively during the period when they hold office.

(2) 关于属人豁免的时间范围，委员会认为有必要加上“仅”字，以强调国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有的这种豁免只在其任职期间适用。

This is consistent with the very reason for according such immunity, which is the special position held by such officials within the State’s organizational structure and which, under international law, places them in a special situation of having a dual representational and functional link to the State in the ambit of international relations.

这符合授予这种豁免的原因，即这些官员在国家的组织结构中担任的特殊职务，根据国际法，他们因此处于在国际关系中与国家有代表性和职务性双重联系的特殊地位。

Consequently, immunity ratione personae loses its significance when the person enjoying it ceases to hold one of those posts.

因此，当享有豁免者不再担任这些职务时，属人豁免便不再适用。

This position has been upheld by the International Court of Justice, which stated in the Arrest Warrant case that “(…) after a person ceases to hold the office of Minister for Foreign Affairs, he or she will no longer enjoy all of the immunities accorded by international law in other States.

这一立场也得到国际法院的支持，国际法院在逮捕证案判决中指出，“(…)当一人不再担任外交部长后，他(她)就不再享有国际法授予的在其他国家享有的一切豁免。

Provided that it has jurisdiction under international law, a court of one State may try a former Minister for Foreign Affairs of another State in respect of acts committed prior or subsequent to his or her period of office, as well as in respect of acts committed during that period of office in a private capacity”.

只要根据国际法拥有管辖权，一国的法院可以就另一国的前任外交部长在任期之前、之后的行为及其在任期间的私人行为，对其进行审判”。

 Although the Court was referring to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the same reasoning applies, a fortiori to the Head of State and the Head of Government.

 虽然国际法院只提到了外交部长，但是这一结论肯定也适用于国家元首和政府首脑。

Moreover, the limitation of immunity ratione personae to the period of time in which the persons enjoying such immunity hold office is also recognized in the conventions establishing special regimes of immunity ratione personae, particularly the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the Convention on Special Missions.

此外，确立属人豁免特别制度的公约，尤其是《维也纳外交关系公约》和《特别使团公约》也承认属人豁免仅限于享有属人豁免的人所任职的期间。

 The Commission itself, in its commentaries to the draft articles on Jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, stated that “the immunities ratione personae, unlike immunities ratione materiae which continue to survive after the termination of the official functions, will no longer be operative once the public offices are vacated or terminated.”

 委员会本身也在对关于国家及其财产的管辖豁免的条款草案的评注中也说过：“与在公职结束后仍然有效的属事豁免不同，属人豁免在职务腾出或终止后便不再有效。 ”

 The strict temporal scope of immunity ratione personae is also confirmed by various national court decisions.

 各种国内法院裁决也确认过属人豁免的严格时间范围。

Consequently, the Commission considers that after the term of office of the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs has ended, immunity ratione personae ceases.

 因此，委员会认为，国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长任期结束后，属人豁免即停止。

The Commission has not thought it necessary to indicate the specific criteria to be taken into account in order to determine when the term of office of the persons enjoying such immunity begins and ends, since this depends on each State’s legal order, and practice in this area varies.

委员会认为无需说明确定享有豁免者任期何时开始和结束的具体标准，因为这很大程度上取决于各国的法律，这方面的做法各不相同。

(3) During — and only during — the term of office, immunity ratione personae extends to all the acts carried out by the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs, both those carried out in a private capacity and those performed in an official capacity.

(3) 属人豁免涵盖国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长任职期间―― 仅限任职期间―― 的所有行为，不论是私人行为还是公务行为。

In this way, immunity ratione personae is configured as “full immunity”  with reference to any act carried out by any of the individuals just mentioned.

因此，属人豁免被定义为对上述个人任何行为的“完全豁免”。   

This configuration reflects State practice.

对属人豁免的这一描述反映了国家实践。

As the International Court of Justice stated in the Arrest Warrant case, with particular reference to a Minister for Foreign Affairs, extension of immunity to acts performed in both a private and official capacity is necessary to ensure that the persons enjoying immunity ratione personae are not prevented from exercising their specific official functions, since “[t]he consequences of such impediment to the exercise of those official functions are equally serious, (…) regardless of whether the arrest relates to alleged acts performed in an ‘official’ capacity or a ‘private’ capacity”.

正如国际法院在逮捕证案中特别提到逮捕外交部长问题时所述，对以私人身份和公务身份作出的行为都给予豁免是必要的，因为需要确保享有属人豁免者可以不受阻碍地行使公职，因为“(…)不论逮捕原因是公务行为还是私人行为，阻碍行使这类公职的后果同样严重。 ”

 Thus, “no distinction can be drawn between acts performed by a Minister for Foreign Affairs in an ‘official’ capacity, and those claimed to have been performed in a ‘private capacity’”.

 因此，用国际法院的话说就是，“无法区分外交部长以‘公务’身份所作的行为与据称以‘私人’身份所作的行为”。

 The same reasoning must apply, a fortiori, to the Head of State and Head of Government.

 不必说，同样的推理必然适用于国家元首和政府首脑。

(4) As regards the terminology used to refer to acts covered by immunity ratione personae, it must be borne in mind that no single, uniform wording is actually in use.

(4) 关于指代属人豁免涵盖的行为的术语，必须注意到，实际上没有单一、统一的措词。

For example, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations makes no express distinction between acts carried out in a private or official capacity in referring to acts to which the immunity from criminal jurisdiction of diplomatic agents extends, although it is understood to apply to both categories.

例如，《维也纳外交关系公约》在提到外交人员享有的刑事管辖豁免的行为时，没有明确区分私人行为与公务行为，不过理解为两种情况均适用。

 Moreover, the terminology in other instruments, documents and judicial decisions, as well as in the literature, also lacks consistency, with the use, among others, of the terms “official acts and private acts”, “acts performed in the exercise of their functions”, “acts linked to official functions” and “acts carried out in an official or private capacity”.

 此外，其他文书、文件、司法决定以及文献在用词上也缺乏一致性，有的用“官方行为和私人行为”，有的用“行使职能时所作的行为”，有的用“与公务有关的行为”，还有的用“以公务或私人身份所作的行为”。

In the present draft article, the Commission has found it preferable to use the phrase “acts performed, whether in a private or official capacity”, following its use by the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant case.

在本条款草案中，委员会认为最好沿用国际法院在上述逮捕证案中的用法，使用“无论是私人行为还是公务行为”这样的说法。

However, the Commission has not found it necessary to take a position at the present time on what types of acts should be considered “acts performed in an official capacity”, since this is a category of acts which will be taken up at a later stage, in connection with the analysis of immunity ratione materiae, and which should not be prejudged now.

不过，委员会认为目前还不需要确定哪些类型的行为应视为“以公务身份所作的行为”，因为之后将结合对属事豁免的分析讨论这类行为，现在不应做出预先判断。

It should also be pointed out that in adopting paragraph 2, the Commission has not concerned itself with the issue of possible exceptions to immunity, a subject that will be taken up at a later stage.

还应指出，委员会在通过第4条草案第2款时，没有涉及豁免的可能例外问题，该问题将在之后讨论。

(5) The Commission understands the term “acts” to refer both to acts and to omissions.

(5) 委员会认为“行为”一词既指作为，也指不作为。

Although the terminology to be employed has been the subject of debate, the Commission has chosen to use the term “acts” in line with the English text of the articles on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, article 1 of which uses the term “acts” in the sense that an act “may consist in one or more actions or omissions or a combination of both”.

虽然关于使用什么术语一直有争论，但是委员会按照关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的条款草案的英文案文，选用了“行为”一词，该草案第1条将“行为”定义为“可以包括一项或多项作为或不作为或两者兼而有之”。

 In addition, the term “act” is commonly used in international criminal law to define conduct (active and passive) from which criminal responsibility is established.

 此外，国际刑法通常使用“行为”一词指据以确立刑事责任的(主动和被动)行为。

In the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the term “acts” has been used in a general sense in articles 6, 7 and 8, without having elicited questions about whether both acts and omissions are included under that term, since this depends solely on each specific criminal offence.

《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第六、七、八条在一般意义上使用了“行为”一词，没有提出是否包括作为和不作为的问题，因为这取决于具体犯罪行为。

The statutes of the ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda use the term “act” to refer to conduct, both active and passive, constituting an offence falling within the competence of those tribunals.

前南斯拉夫和卢旺达问题特设国际法庭的规约使用“行为”一词指构成该法庭职权范围内犯罪行为的主动和被动行为。

The term “act” has also been used in various international treaties which are designed to impose obligations upon States but nevertheless specify conduct that may give rise to criminal responsibility.

规定国家义务的不同国际条约也使用了“行为”一词，但是具体说明了可能导致刑事责任的行为。

This is the case, for example, with the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (art. 2) and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (art. 1).

例如，《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》(第二条)和《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》(第一条)就是这样。

(6) The acts to which immunity ratione personae extends are those that a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs has carried out during or prior to their term of office.

(6) 属人豁免涵盖的行为是国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任职期间或上任之前的行为。

The reason for this is the purpose of immunity ratione personae, which relates both to protection of the sovereign equality of the State and to guarantees that the persons enjoying this type of immunity can perform their functions of representation of the State unimpeded throughout their term of office.

这与属人豁免的目的有关，即保护国家的主权平等，以及保障此类享有豁免者能够在任期内不受阻碍地行使在国际上代表国家的职能。

In this sense, there is no need for further clarification regarding the applicability of immunity ratione personae to the acts performed by such persons throughout their term of office.

因此，不需要进一步说明属人豁免适用于这些人在整个任期内的行为。

As regards acts performed prior to the term of office, it must be noted that immunity ratione personae applies to them only if the criminal jurisdiction of a third State is to be exercised during the term of office of the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs.

关于上任之前的行为，必须指出，只有当第三国要在国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间对其行使刑事管辖时，才适用属人豁免。

This is because, as the International Court of Justice stated in the Arrest Warrant case, “[…] no distinction can be drawn (…) between acts performed before the person concerned assumed office as Minister for Foreign Affairs and acts committed during the period of office.

正如国际法院在逮捕证案中所述，这是因为“[…]无法区分(…)该人担任外交部长之前所作的行为与在任期间所作的行为。

Thus, if a Minister for Foreign Affairs is arrested in another State on a criminal charge, he or she is clearly thereby prevented from exercising the functions of his or her office.

因此，如果一国的外交部长在另一国因刑事指控被捕，他/她显然无法行使其职能。

The consequences of such impediment to the exercise of those official functions are equally serious, regardless of whether (…) the arrest relates to acts allegedly performed before the person became the Minister for Foreign Affairs or to acts performed while in office.”

不论(…)逮捕原因是该人据称担任外交部长之前所作的行为还是在任期间所作的行为，阻碍行使这类公职的后果同样严重。”

In any event, it must be noted that, as the International Court of Justice has also stated in the same case, immunity ratione personae is procedural in nature and must be interpreted, not as exonerating a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs from criminal responsibility for acts committed during or prior to their term of office, but solely as suspending the exercise of foreign jurisdiction during the term of office of those high-ranking officials.

无论如何，必须指出，国际法院在该案中还称，属人豁免是程序性的，不得理解为摆脱或免除国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间或上任之前所作所为的刑事责任，只能理解为在这些高官在任期间，暂停行使外国管辖。

 Consequently, when the term of office ends, the acts carried out during or prior to the term of office cease to be covered by immunity ratione personae and may, in certain cases, be subject to the criminal jurisdiction that cannot be exercised during the term of office.

 因此，当任期结束后，在任期间或上任之前的行为不再享受属人豁免，在某些情况下，可能接受其在任期间不得对其行使的刑事管辖。

Lastly, it should be noted that immunity ratione personae does not in any circumstances apply to acts carried out by a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs after their term of office.

最后，应当指出，属人豁免无论如何都不适用于国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期结束后的行为。

Since they are now considered “former” Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs such immunity would have ceased when the term of office ends.

由于他们现在被认为是“前” 国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长，这种豁免随着任期的结束而终止。

(7) Paragraph 3 addresses what happens with respect to acts carried out in an official capacity while in office by the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs after their term of office ends. Paragraph 3 proceeds with the principle that immunity ratione personae ceases when the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs leaves office.

(7) 本条草案第3款处理的是：任期结束后，国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间以公务身份实施的行为将受到何种待遇？第3款遵循国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长离任后便不再享有属人豁免的原则。

Consequently, immunity ratione personae no longer exists after their term of office ends.

因此，任期结束后，属人豁免即终止。

Nevertheless, it must be kept in mind that a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs may, during their term of office, have carried out acts in an official capacity which do not lose that quality merely because the term of office has ended and may accordingly be covered by immunity ratione materiae.

不过，必须注意到，国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间可能以公务身份做出一些行为，这些行为不因任期结束而失去其公务性质，因此可能属于属事豁免的范围。

This matter has not been disputed in substantive terms, although it has been expressed variously in State practice, treaty practice and judicial practice.

虽然国家实践、条约实践和司法实践以不同方式表达了这一立场，但是尚未就该问题展开实质讨论。

Thus paragraph 3 sets forth a “without prejudice” clause on the potential applicability of immunity ratione materiae to such acts.

因此第3款中载述了关于属事豁免有可能适用于这些行为的“不妨碍”规定。

This does not mean that immunity ratione personae is prolonged past the end of term of office of persons enjoying such immunity, since that is not in line with paragraph 1 of the draft article.

这并不意味着属人豁免延续到享有豁免者任期结束后，因为那样不符合条款草案第1款。

Nor does it mean that immunity ratione personae is transformed into a new form of immunity ratione materiae which applies automatically by virtue of paragraph 3.

这也不意味着属人豁免变成因第4条草案第3款而自动适用的新的属事豁免。

The Commission considers that the “without prejudice” clause simply leaves open the possibility that immunity ratione materiae might apply to acts carried out in an official capacity and during their term of office by a former Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs when the rules governing that category of immunity make this possible.

委员会认为该“不妨碍”条款只是不排除这种可能性，即在符合关于属事豁免的规定时，可以对前国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间以公务身份实施的行为适用属事豁免。

Paragraph 3, does not prejudge the content of the immunity ratione materiae regime, which will be developed in Part III of the draft articles.

第4条草案第3款没有预先判断属事豁免机制的内容，这将在条款草案第三部分制定。

Chapter VI Protection of persons in the event of disasters

第六章 发生灾害时的人员保护

A. Introduction

A. 导言

50. The Commission, at its fifty-ninth session (2007), decided to include the topic “Protection of persons in the event of disasters” in its programme of work and appointed Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina as Special Rapporteur.

50. 委员会第五十九届会议(2007年)决定在其工作方案中列入“发生灾害时的人员保护”专题，并任命爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生为特别报告员。

 At the same session, the Commission requested the Secretariat to prepare a background study, initially limited to natural disasters, on the topic.

 在同一届会议上，委员会要求秘书处编写一份关于本专题的背景研究报告，最初只限于自然灾害。

51. At the sixtieth session (2008), the Commission had before it the preliminary report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/598), tracing the evolution of the protection of persons in the event of disasters, and identifying the sources of the law on the topic, as well as previous efforts towards codification and development of the law in the area.

51. 在第六十届会议上(2008年)，委员会收到特别报告员的初步报告(A/CN.4/ 598)，报告追踪了发生灾害时对人员的保护的演变，查明关于这个专题的法律渊源以及先前在该领域编纂和发展法律的努力。

It also presented in broad outline the various aspects of the general scope with a view to identifying the main legal questions to be covered and advancing tentative conclusions without prejudice to the outcome of the discussion that the report aimed to trigger in the Commission.

报告还概括叙述了专题的一般范围的各个方面，以确定所涉及的主要法律问题和提出暂定的初步结论，但不妨碍本报告着眼于在委员会引起的讨论的结果。

The Commission also had before it a memorandum by the Secretariat, focusing primarily on natural disasters (A/CN.4/590 and Add.1 to 3) and providing an overview of existing legal instruments and texts applicable to a variety of aspects of disaster prevention and relief assistance, as well as of the protection of persons in the event of disasters.

委员会还收到了秘书处的一份备忘录，主要侧重自然灾害(A/CN.4/590和Add.1至3)，概述了适用于各种灾害预防和救灾援助各个方面的现有法律文书和案文，以及在发生灾害时对人员的保护。

52. The Commission considered, at its sixty-first session (2009), the second report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/615 and Corr.1) analysing the scope of the topic ratione materiae, ratione personae and ratione temporis, and issues relating to the definition of “disaster” for purposes of the topic, as well as undertaking a consideration of the basic duty to cooperate.

52. 在第六十一届会议上(2009年)，委员会审议了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/615和Corr.1)。 该报告分析了专题的属事理由、属人理由和属时理由范围，以及本专题范围内有关“灾害”定义的问题，并且审议了合作的基本义务问题。

The report contained proposals for three draft articles.

报告中载有三条草案的案文建议。

The Commission also had before it written replies submitted by the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to the questions addressed to them by the Commission in 2008.

委员会还收到了联合国秘书处人道主义事务协调厅和红十字会及红新月会国际联合会对2008年向它们提出的问题所提交的书面答复。

53. At its sixty-second session (2010), the Commission provisionally adopted draft articles 1 (Scope), 2 (Purpose), 3 (Definition of disaster), 4 (Relationship with international humanitarian law) and 5 (Duty to cooperate), which had been considered at the previous session, at the 3057th meeting, held on 4 June 2010.

53. 在第六十二届会议(2010年)期间，委员会在2010年6月4日举行的第3057次会议上暂时通过了第1条草案(范围)、第2条草案(宗旨)、第3条草案(灾害的定义)、第4条草案(与国际人道主义法的关系)和第5条草案(合作的义务)。

The Commission further had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/629) providing an overview of the views of States on the work undertaken by the Commission, a consideration of the principles that inspire the protection of persons in the event of disasters, and a consideration of the question of the responsibility of the affected State.

委员会还收到了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/629)。 该报告概述了各国对委员会所开展的工作的意见，审议了激发发生灾害时人员保护工作的各项原则，并且审议了受灾国的责任问题。

Proposals for three further draft articles were made in the report.

该报告还提出了另外三条草案的案文建议。

54. At its sixty-third session (2011), the Commission provisionally adopted draft articles 6 (Humanitarian principles in disaster response), 7 (Human dignity), 8 (Human rights) and 9 (Role of the affected State), which had been considered at the previous session, at the 3102nd meeting, held on 11 July 2011.

54. 在第六十三届会议(2011年)期间，委员会在2011年7月11日举行的第3102次会议上暂时通过了第6条草案 (应对灾害的人道主义原则)、第7条草案(人的尊严)、第8条草案(人权)和第9条草案(受灾国的作用)。

The Commission also had before it the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/643 and Corr.1) containing, inter alia, a consideration of the responsibility of the affected State to seek assistance where its national response capacity is exceeded, the duty of the affected State not to arbitrarily withhold its consent to external assistance, and the right to offer assistance in the international community.

委员会收到了特别报告员的第四次报告(A/CN.4/643和Corr.1)。 该报告除其他外，审议了受灾国在灾害超过其国家应对能力时寻求援助的责任、受灾国不得任意拒绝外来援助的义务、以及国际社会提议援助的权利。

Proposals for a further three draft articles were made in the report.

报告中载有另外三条草案的案文建议。

The Commission provisionally adopted draft articles 10 (Duty of the affected State to seek assistance) and 11 (Consent of the affected State to external assistance) at the 3116th meeting, held on 2 August 2011, but was unable to conclude its consideration of draft article 12 owing to a lack of time.

委员会在2011年8月2日举行的第3116次会议上暂时通过了第10条草案(受灾国寻求援助的责任)和第11条草案(受灾国对外部援助的同意)，但由于时间不足，未能审议完第12条草案。

55. At its sixty-fourth session (2012), the Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/652) providing an overview of the views of States on the work undertaken by the Commission, a brief discussion of the Special Rapporteur’s position on the Commission’s question in Chapter III.C of its 2011 annual report, as well as a further elaboration of the duty to cooperate.

55. 在第六十四届会议(2012年)期间，委员会收到特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/652)，该报告概述了各国对委员会所开展的工作的意见，简要讨论了特别报告员对委员会在2011年年度报告第三章C节所提问题的意见，进一步阐述了合作的义务。

The report also contained a discussion of the conditions for the provision of assistance and the question of the termination of assistance.

报告还讨论了提供援助的条件和终止援助的问题。

Proposals for an additional three draft articles were made in the report. At its 3152nd meeting, on 30 July 2012, the Commission took note of draft articles 5 bis and 12 to 15, as provisionally adopted by the Draft Committee (A/CN.4/L.812).

委员会在2012年7月30日举行的第3152次会议上注意到了起草委员会暂时通过的第5条草案之二和第12至15条草案(A/CN.4/L.812)。

B. Consideration of the topic at the present session

B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况

56. At the present session, the Commission had before it the sixth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/662) dealing with aspects of prevention in the context of the protection of persons in the event of disasters, including disaster risk reduction, prevention as a principle of international law, and international cooperation on prevention.

56. 在本届会议上，委员会收到了特别报告员的第六次报告(A/CN.4/662)。 报告处理了发生灾害时的人员保护所涉及的预防问题，包括减少灾害风险、将预防视为国际法原则、预防方面的国际合作等。

The report further provided an overview of national policy and legislation.

报告还概述了各国的政策和法律。

Proposals for the following two draft articles were made in the report: draft articles 5 ter (Cooperation for disaster risk reduction)  and 16 (Duty to prevent).

报告提出了下述两条草案的案文建议：第5条草案之三(减少灾害风险的合作)  和第16条草案(预防的义务)。  

57. The Commission considered the sixth report at its 3175th to 3180th meetings, from 8 to 16 July 2013.

57. 委员会在2013年7月8日至16日的第3175次至3180次会议上审议了第六次报告。

58. At its 3180th meeting, on 16 July 2013, the Commission referred draft articles 5 ter and 16 to the Drafting Committee.

58. 在2013年7月16日第3180次会议上，委员会将第5条草案之三和第16条草案转交起草委员会。

59. The Commission adopted the report of the Drafting Committee on draft articles 5 bis and 12 to 15, which had been considered at the previous session, at the 3162nd meeting, held on 10 May 2013.

59. 在2013年5月10日的第3162次会议上，委员会通过了起草委员会关于上届会议曾审议过的第5条草案之二、之三及第12至第15条草案的报告。

The Commission further adopted the report of the Drafting Committee on draft articles 5 ter and 16, at the 3187th meeting, held on 26 July 2013 (sect. C.1 below).

委员会还在在2013年7月26日的第3187次会议上通过了起草委员会关于第五条草案之三和第16条草案的报告(见下文C.1节)。

60. At its 3190th and 3191st meeting, on 2 and 5 August 2013, the Commission adopted commentaries to draft articles 5 bis, 5 ter and 12 to 16 (sect. C.2 below).

60. 在2013年8月2日和5日的第3190和第3191次会议上，委员会通过了第5条草案之二、之三及第12至第16条草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。

C. Text of the draft articles on the Protection of persons in the event of disasters provisionally adopted so far by the Commission

C. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案案文

1. Text of the draft articles

1. 条款草案案文

61. The text of the draft articles provisionally adopted so far by the Commission is reproduced below.

61. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的条款草案案文载录如下。  

Article 1 Scope

第1条 范围

The present draft articles apply to the protection of persons in the event of disasters.

本条款草案适用于发生灾害时的人员保护。

Article 2 Purpose

第2条 宗旨

The purpose of the present draft articles is to facilitate an adequate and effective response to disasters that meets the essential needs of the persons concerned, with full respect for their rights.

本条款草案的宗旨是促进充分而有效地应对灾害以满足有关人员的基本需求，充分尊重其权利。

Article 3 Definition of disaster

第3条 灾害的定义

“Disaster” means a calamitous event or series of events resulting in widespread loss of life, great human suffering and distress, or large-scale material or environmental damage, thereby seriously disrupting the functioning of society.

“灾害”是指造成广泛的生命损失、巨大的人类痛苦和危难、或大规模的物质或环境损害，从而严重扰乱社会运转的一个灾难性事件或一系列事件。

Article 4 Relationship with international humanitarian law

第4条 与国际人道主义法的关系

The present draft articles do not apply to situations to which the rules of international humanitarian law are applicable.

本条款草案不适用于可适用国际人道主义法规则的情况。

Article 5 Duty to cooperate

第5条 合作的义务

In accordance with the present draft articles, States shall, as appropriate, cooperate among themselves, and with the United Nations and other competent intergovernmental organizations, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the International Committee of the Red Cross, and with relevant non-governmental organizations.

按照本条款草案，各国应酌情相互合作，并与联合国和其他主管的政府间组织、红十字会与红新月会国际联合会和红十字国际委员会，以及与有关的非政府组织合作。

Article 5 bis Forms of cooperation

第5条之二 合作的形式

For the purposes of the present draft articles, cooperation includes humanitarian assistance, coordination of international relief actions and communications, and making available relief personnel, relief equipment and supplies, and scientific, medical and technical resources.

为本条款草案的目的，合作包括提供人道主义援助，协调国际救灾行动和通信，提供救灾人员、救灾设备和物资以及科学、医学、技术资源。

Article 5 ter Cooperation for disaster risk reduction

第5条之三 减少灾害风险的合作

Cooperation shall extend to the taking of measures intended to reduce the risk of disasters.

合作应扩展至采取旨在减少灾害风险的措施。

Article 6 Humanitarian principles in disaster response

第6条 应对灾害的人道主义原则

Response to disasters shall take place in accordance with the principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality, and on the basis of non-discrimination, while taking into account the needs of the particularly vulnerable.

应对灾害应根据人道、中立和公正的原则，在不歧视的基础上进行，同时应考虑到特别弱势者的需要。

Article 7 Human dignity

第7条 人的尊严

In responding to disasters, States, competent intergovernmental organizations and relevant non-governmental organizations shall respect and protect the inherent dignity of the human person.

应对灾害时，国家、主管政府间国际组织和有关非政府组织应尊重和保护人的固有尊严。

Article 8 Human rights

第8条 人权

Persons affected by disasters are entitled to respect for their human rights.

灾民有权得到对其人权的尊重。

Article 9 Role of the affected State

第9条 受灾国的作用

1. The affected State, by virtue of its sovereignty, has the duty to ensure the protection of persons and provision of disaster relief and assistance on its territory.

1. 受灾国由于其主权，有责任在其领土上确保保护人员和提供抗灾救济和援助。

2. The affected State has the primary role in the direction, control, coordination and supervision of such relief and assistance.

2. 受灾国在指挥、控制、协调和监督抗灾救济和援助方面应发挥主要作用。

Article 10 Duty of the affected State to seek assistance

第10条 受灾国寻求援助的责任

To the extent that a disaster exceeds its national response capacity, the affected State has the duty to seek assistance from among other States, the United Nations, other competent intergovernmental organizations and relevant non-governmental organizations, as appropriate.

如所遭受的灾害超过了国家的应对能力，受灾国有责任酌情从其他国家、联合国、其他主管的政府间组织和有关非政府组织寻求援助。

Article 11 Consent of the affected State to external assistance

第11条 受灾国对外部援助的同意

1. The provision of external assistance requires the consent of the affected State.

1. 提供外部援助需要征得受灾国的同意。

2. Consent to external assistance shall not be withheld arbitrarily.

2. 受灾国不得任意拒绝外来援助。

3. When an offer of assistance is extended in accordance with the present draft articles, the affected State shall, whenever possible, make its decision regarding the offer known.

3. 对按照本条款草案提出的援助提议，受灾国应在可能的情形下告知就该援助提议作出的决定。

Article 12 Offers of assistance

第12条 提议援助

In responding to disasters, States, the United Nations, and other competent intergovernmental organizations have the right to offer assistance to the affected State.

在应对灾害时，各国、联合国、其他主管的政府间组织有权向受灾国提议援助。

Relevant non-governmental organizations may also offer assistance to the affected State.

有关的非政府组织也可向受灾国提议援助。

Article 13 Conditions on the provision of external assistance

第13条 对提供外部援助规定条件

The affected State may place conditions on the provision of external assistance.

受灾国可对提供外部援助规定条件。

Such conditions shall be in accordance with the present draft articles, applicable rules of international law, and the national law of the affected State.

此种条件须与本条款草案、适用的国际法规则以及受灾国国内法相符。

Conditions shall take into account the identified needs of the persons affected by disasters and the quality of the assistance.

条件应考虑到查明的受灾人员的需要以及援助的质量。

When formulating conditions, the affected State shall indicate the scope and type of assistance sought.

在拟订条件时，受灾国应指明所寻求的援助的范围和种类。

Article 14 Facilitation of external assistance

第14条 便利外部援助

1. The affected State shall take the necessary measures, within its national law, to facilitate the prompt and effective provision of external assistance regarding, in particular:

1. 受灾国应在其国内法范围内采取必要措施，便利迅速及有效地提供外部援助，尤其是：

(a) civilian and military relief personnel, in fields such as privileges and immunities, visa and entry requirements, work permits, and freedom of movement; and

(a) 对于民事救灾人员和军队救灾人员，在诸如特权和豁免、签证和入境要求、工作许可证、通行自由等方面提供便利；以及

(b) goods and equipment, in fields such as customs requirements and tariffs, taxation, transport, and disposal thereof.

(b) 对于货物和设备，在诸如海关要求和关税、征税、运输以及处置等方面提供便利。

2. The affected State shall ensure that its relevant legislation and regulations are readily accessible, to facilitate compliance with national law.

2. 受灾国应确保其有关法律和规章容易查阅，从而便利遵守国内法。

Article 15 Termination of external assistance

第15条 终止外部援助

The affected State and the assisting State, and as appropriate other assisting actors, shall consult with respect to the termination of external assistance and the modalities of termination.

受灾国和援助国以及适当时其他援助方，应就终止外部援助和终止的方式进行磋商。

The affected State, the assisting State, or other assisting actors wishing to terminate shall provide appropriate notification.

希望终止援助的受灾国、援助国或其他援助方应发出适当的通知。

Article 16 Duty to reduce the risk of disasters

第16条 减少灾害风险的义务

1. Each State shall reduce the risk of disasters by taking the necessary and appropriate measures, including through legislation and regulations, to prevent, mitigate, and prepare for disasters.

1. 每一国均应采取包括制订法律和规章在内的必要和适当的措施减少灾害风险，以防灾、减灾和备灾。

2. Disaster risk reduction measures include the conduct of risk assessments, the collection and dissemination of risk and past loss information, and the installation and operation of early warning systems.

2. 减少灾害风险的措施包括开展风险评估、收集和传播风险和以往损失信息、安装和操作预警系统。

2. Text of the draft articles and commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its sixty-fifth session

2. 委员会第六十五届会议暂时通过的条款草案案文及其评注

62. The text of the draft articles, together with commentaries, provisionally adopted by the Commission at the sixty-fifth session, is reproduced below.

62. 委员会第六十五届会议暂时通过的条款草案案文及其评注载录如下。

Article 5 bis Forms of cooperation

第5条之二 合作的形式

For the purposes of the present draft articles, cooperation includes humanitarian assistance, coordination of international relief actions and communications, and making available relief personnel, relief equipment and supplies, and scientific, medical and technical resources.

为本条款草案的目的，合作包括提供人道主义援助，协调国际救灾行动和通信，提供救灾人员、救灾设备和物资以及科学、医学、技术资源。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft article 5 bis seeks to clarify the various forms which cooperation between affected States, assisting States, and other assisting actors may take in the context of the protection of persons in the event of disasters.

(1) 第5条草案之二力求说明受灾国、援助国及其他援助方在发生灾害时可为保护人员开展的各种合作。

Cooperation is enshrined in general terms in draft article 5 as a guiding principle and fundamental duty with regard to the present topic, as it plays a central role in disaster relief efforts.