| A/71/10, 1614345E.docx (ENGLISH) | A/71/10, 1614345C.docx (CHINESE) |
| General Assembly | 大 会 |
| Official Records | 正式记录 |
| Seventy-first session | 第七十一届会议 |
| Supplement No. 10 (A/71/10) | 补编第10号(A/71/10) |
| Report of the International Law
Commission | 国际法委员会的报告 |
| Sixty-eighth session | 第六十八届会议 |
| (2 May-10 June and 4 July-12 August 2016) | (2016年5月2日至6月10日和7月4日至8月12日) |
| United Nations | 联合国 |
| • New York, 2016 | •纽约，2016 |
| 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 2016. | 委员会报告的排版本将载入《2016年国际法委员会年鉴》第二卷第二部分。 |
| Chapter I | 第一章 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 1. The International Law Commission held
the first part of its sixty-eighth session from 2 May to 10 June 2016 and the
second part from 4 July to 12 August 2016 at its seat at the United Nations
Office at Geneva. | 1. 国际法委员会分别于2016年5月2日至6月10日和2016年7月4日至8月12日在联合国日内瓦办事处委员会所在地举行了第六十八届会议第一期会议和第二期会议。 |
| The session was opened by Mr. Narinder
Singh, Chairperson of the sixty-seventh session of the Commission. | 本届会议由委员会第六十七届会议主席纳林德尔 •辛格先生主持开幕。 |
| A. Membership | A. 委员 |
| 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. 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 (People’s Republic of China) | 黄惠康先生(中华人民共和国) |
| 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. Roman A. Kolodkin (Russian
Federation) | 罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生(俄罗斯联邦) |
| 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) | 纳林德尔·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) |
| Sir Michael Wood (United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland) | 迈克尔·伍德爵士(大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国) |
| 2. The Commission consists of the
following members: | 2. 委员会由下列委员组成： |
| B. Officers and the Enlarged Bureau | B. 主席团成员和扩大的主席团 |
| 3. At its 3291st meeting, on 2 May 2016,
the Commission elected the following officers: | 3. 在2016年5月2日举行的第3291次会议上，委员会选出了下列主席团成员： |
| Chairperson: | 主席： |
| Mr. Pedro Comissário
Afonso | 佩德罗·科米萨里奥·阿丰索先生 |
| (Mozambique) | (莫桑比克) |
| First Vice-Chairperson: | 第一副主席： |
| Mr. Georg Nolte (Germany) | 格奥尔格·诺尔特先生(德国) |
| Second Vice-Chairperson: | 第二副主席： |
| Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia (Brazil) | 吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生(巴西) |
| Chairperson of the Drafting Committee: | 起草委员会主席： |
| Mr. Pavel Šturma
(Czech Republic) | 帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(捷克共和国) |
| Rapporteur: | 报告员： |
| Mr. Ki Gab Park (Republic of Korea) | 朴基甲先生(大韩民国) |
| 4. The Enlarged Bureau of the Commission
was composed of the officers of the present session, the previous
Chairpersons of the Commission and the Special Rapporteurs. | 4. 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。 |
| 5. The Commission set up a Planning Group
composed of the following members: Mr. Georg Nolte (Chairperson), Mr. Lucius
Caflisch, Mr. Pedro Comissário Afonso, Mr. Abdelrazeg
El-Murtadi Suleiman Gouider, Ms. Concepción Escobar
Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Hussein A.
Hassouna, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Ms. Marie G. Jacobsson, Mr. Kriangsak
Kittichaisaree, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Ahmed Laraba, Mr. Donald M. McRae,
Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Bernd H. Niehaus, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. Amos S. Wako, Mr. Nugroho Wisnumurti, Sir Michael Wood,
and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | 5. 委员会设立了由下列委员组成的规划组：格奥尔格·诺尔特先生(主席)、卢修斯·卡弗利施先生、佩德罗·科米萨里奥·阿丰索先生、阿卜杜勒拉齐克·穆尔塔迪·苏莱曼·古伊德尔先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、侯赛因·哈苏纳先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、玛丽·雅各布松女士、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、艾哈迈德·拉腊巴先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、贝恩德·尼豪斯先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、阿莫斯·瓦科先生、努格罗霍·维斯努穆尔蒂先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| C. Drafting Committee | C. 起草委员会 |
| 6. At its 3295th, 3302nd, 3304th, 3307th,
3311th, 3315th and 3322nd meetings, on 10, 20, 25 and 31 May and on 7 June,
and on 5 and 18 July 2016, the Commission established a Drafting Committee,
composed of the following members for the topics indicated: | 6. 委员会在分别于2016年5月10日、20日、25日和31日、6月7日以及7月5日和18日举行的第3295、3302、3304、3307、3311、3315和3322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) Protection of persons in the event of
disasters: Mr. Pavel Šturma (Chairperson), Mr.
Eduardo Valencia-Ospina (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr.
Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, Mr. Maurice Kamto, Mr. Kriangsak
Kittichaisaree, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Donald M. McRae, Mr. Sean D.
Murphy, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr.
Narinder Singh, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | (a) 发生灾害时的人员保护：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(主席)、爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生(特别报告员)、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、黄惠康先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、纳林德尔·辛格先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| (b) Crimes against humanity: Mr.
Pavel Šturma (Chairperson), Mr. Sean D. Murphy
(Special Rapporteur), Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Maurice
Kamto, Mr. Kriangsak Kittichaisaree, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Donald M.
McRae, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Narinder Singh, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. Amos S. Wako, Sir
Michael Wood, and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | (b) 危害人类罪：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(主席)、肖恩·墨菲先生(特别报告员)、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、纳林德尔·辛格先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、阿莫斯·瓦科先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| (c) Identification of customary
international law: Mr. Pavel Šturma
(Chairperson), Sir Michael Wood (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Pedro Comissário Afonso, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Maurice
Kamto, Mr. Kriangsak Kittichaisaree, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Donald M.
McRae, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Ernest
Petrič,
Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | (c) 习惯国际法的识别：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生帕维尔·什图马尔先生(主席)、迈克尔·伍德先生(特别报告员)、佩德罗·科米萨里奥·阿丰索先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| (d) Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties: Mr.
Pavel Šturma (Chairperson), Mr. Georg Nolte (Special
Rapporteur), Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Maurice Kamto, Mr. Kriangsak
Kittichaisaree, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Donald M. McRae, Mr. Sean D.
Murphy, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood, and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | (d) 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(主席)、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生(特别报告员)、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| (e) Protection of the atmosphere:
Mr. Pavel Šturma (Chairperson), Mr. Shinya Murase
(Special Rapporteur), Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr.
Kriangsak Kittichaisaree, Mr. Donald M. McRae, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Bernd
H. Niehaus, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr.
Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | (e) 保护大气层：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(主席)、村濑信也先生(特别报告员)、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、贝恩德·尼豪斯先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| (f) Provisional application of
treaties: Mr. Pavel Šturma (Chairperson), Mr.
Juan Manuel Gómez-Robledo (Special Rapporteur), Mr.
Mathias Forteau, Mr. Maurice Kamto, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Donald M.
McRae, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | (f) 条约的暂时适用：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(主席)、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生(特别报告员)、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| (g) Jus cogens: Mr. Pavel Šturma (Chairperson), Mr. Dire D. Tladi (Special Rapporteur), Mr.
Enrique J.A. Candioti, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Maurice
Kamto, Mr. Kriangsak Kittichaisaree, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Donald M.
McRae, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Ernest
Petrič,
Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Narinder Singh, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr.
Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | (g) 强行法：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(主席)、迪雷·特拉迪先生(特别报告员)、恩里克·坎迪奥蒂先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、纳林德尔·辛格先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| (h) Protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflicts: Mr. Pavel Šturma
(Chairperson), Ms. Marie G. Jacobsson (Special Rapporteur), Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud,
Mr. Kriangsak Kittichaisaree, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Donald M. McRae, Mr.
Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | (h) 与武装冲突有关的环境保护：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(主席)、玛丽·雅各布松女士(特别报告员)、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| 7. The Drafting Committee held a total of
51 meetings on the eight topics indicated above. | 7. 起草委员会就上列八项专题一共举行了51次会议。 |
| D. Working Groups | D. 工作组 |
| 8. At its 3291st meeting on 2 May 2016,
the Commission established a Working Group on Identification of customary
international law: Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez (Chairperson), Sir Michael Wood (Special Rapporteur), Mr.
Pedro Comissário Afonso, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau,
Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Maurice Kamto, Mr. Kriangsak Kittichaisaree, Mr.
Roman A. Kolodkin, Mr. Donald M. McRae, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D.
Murphy, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Pavel Šturma and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex
officio). | 8. 在2016年5月2日第3291次会议上，委员会设立了习惯国际法的识别工作组：马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生(主席)、迈克尔·伍德先生(特别报告员)、佩德罗·科米萨里奥·阿丰索先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、唐纳德·麦克雷先生、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| 9. The Planning Group reconstituted the Working
Group on the Long-term Programme of work: Mr. Donald M. McRae
(Chairperson), Mr. Lucius Caflisch, Mr. Abdelrazeg El-Murtadi Suleiman
Gouider, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna, Mr. Mahmoud D.
Hmoud, Mr. Maurice Kamto, Mr. Kriangsak Kittichaisaree, Mr. Roman A.
Kolodkin, Mr. Ahmed Laraba, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Ernest
Petrič,
Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Amos S.
Wako, Mr. Nugroho Wisnumurti, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Ki Gab Park (ex officio). | 9. 规划组重建了长期工作方案工作组：唐纳德·麦克雷先生(主席)、卢修斯·卡弗利施先生、阿卜杜勒拉齐克·穆尔塔迪·苏莱曼·古伊德尔先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、侯赛因·哈苏纳先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、江萨·吉滴猜萨里先生、罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生、艾哈迈德·拉腊巴先生、村濑信也先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生、阿莫斯·瓦科先生、努格罗霍·维斯努穆尔蒂先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德先生和朴基甲先生(当然成员)。 |
| E. Secretariat | E. 秘书处 |
| 10. Mr. Miguel de Serpa Soares,
Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel,
represented the Secretary-General. | 10. 主管法律事务厅副秘书长兼联合国法律顾问米格尔 •塞尔帕 •苏亚雷斯先生担任秘书长的代表。 |
| Mr. Huw Llewellyn, 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休 •卢埃林先生担任委员会秘书，并在法律顾问缺席时代表秘书长。 |
| Mr. Arnold Pronto, Principal Legal
Officer, served as Principal Assistant Secretary. | 特等法律干事阿诺德•普龙托先生担任首席助理秘书。 |
| Mr. Trevor Chimimba, Senior Legal
Officer, served as Senior Assistant Secretary. | 高级法律干事特雷沃尔•齐敏巴先生担任高级助理秘书。 |
| Ms. Patricia Georget, Ms. Hanna
Dreifeldt-Lainé and Mr. David Nanopoulos, Legal
Officers, served as Assistant Secretaries to the Commission. | 法律干事帕特里夏•若尔热女士、哈娜 •德雷菲尔特－莱恩女士和戴维 •纳诺波利斯先生担任委员会助理秘书。 |
| F. Agenda | F. 议程 |
| 11. At its 3291st meeting, on 2 May 2016,
the Commission adopted an agenda for its sixty-eighth session consisting of
the following items: | 11. 在2016年5月2日第3291次会议上，委员会通过了第六十八届会议议程，包括下列项目： |
| 1. Organization of the work of the
session. | 1. 会议工作安排。 |
| 2. Protection of persons in the event of
disasters. | 2. 发生灾害时的人员保护。 |
| 3. Immunity of State officials from
foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 3. 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| 4. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties. | 4. 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例。 |
| 5. Provisional application of treaties. | 5. 条约的暂时适用。 |
| 6. Identification of customary
international law. | 6. 习惯国际法的识别。 |
| 7. Protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflicts. | 7. 与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| 8. Protection of the atmosphere. | 8. 保护大气层。 |
| 9. Crimes against humanity. | 9. 危害人类罪。 |
| 10. Jus cogens. | 10. 强行法。 |
| 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-ninth
session. | 12. 第六十九届会议的日期和地点。 |
| 13. Cooperation with other bodies. | 13. 与其他机构的合作。 |
| 14. Other business. | 14. 其他事项。 |
| Chapter II | 第二章 |
| Summary of the work of the Commission at
its sixty-eighth session | 委员会第六十八届会议工作概况 |
| 12. With regard to the topic “Protection of persons in the event of disasters”, the Commission had before it the eighth report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/697) surveying the comments made by States and
international organizations, and other entities, on the draft articles on the
protection of persons in the event of disasters adopted on first reading at
the sixty-sixth session (2014) and making recommendations for consideration
by the Commission during the second reading. | 12. 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八次报告(A/CN.4/697)，报告概括评述了各国、各国际组织以及其他实体就第六十六届会议(2014年)上一读通过的发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案发表的评论，并提出建议，供委员会在二读期间审议。 |
| The Commission also had before it the
comments and observations received from Governments and international
organizations (A/CN.4/696 and Add.1) on the draft articles adopted on first
reading. | 委员会还收到各国政府和国际组织提交的关于一读通过的条款草案的评论和意见(A/CN.4/696和Add.1)。 |
| 13. The Commission subsequently adopted,
on second reading, a draft preamble and 18 draft articles, together with
commentaries thereto, on the protection of persons in the event of disaster,
and in accordance with article 23 of its statute recommended to the General
Assembly the elaboration of a convention on the basis of the draft articles
on the protection of persons in the event of disasters (chap. IV). | 13. 委员会随后就发生灾害时的人员保护专题二读通过了序言草案和18个条文草案及其评注，并根据其《章程》第23条建议大会在发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案基础上拟订一项公约(第四章)。 |
| 14. With respect to the topic “Identification of customary international law”, the Commission had before it the fourth report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/695 and Add.1), which contained, in particular,
suggestions for the amendments of several draft conclusions in light of the
comments by Governments. | 14. 关于“习惯国际法的识别”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第四次报告(A/CN.4/695和Add.1)。 尤其值得一提的是，该报告载有根据各国政府提出的评论编写的几项结论草案的建议修正案。 |
| It also addressed ways and means to make
the evidence of customary international law more readily available. | 该报告还谈及使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段。 |
| Finally, it provided a bibliography on
the topic. | 最后，报告提供了有关这一专题的参考书目。 |
| In addition, the Commission had before it
the memorandum by the Secretariat concerning the role of decisions of
national courts in the case law of international courts and tribunals of a
universal character for the purpose of the determination of customary
international law (A/CN.4/691). | 此外，委员会还收到秘书处的备忘录(A/CN.4/691)，备忘录论述了就确定习惯国际法而言国家法院的判决在普遍性国际法院和法庭的案例法方面发挥的作用。 |
| 15. As a result of its consideration of
the topic at the present session, the Commission adopted on first reading a
set of 16 draft conclusions, together with commentaries thereto, on
identification of customary international law. | 15. 委员会本届会议在对该专题进行审议之后，一读通过了关于习惯国际法识别问题的一套结论草案，共16项，包括评注。 |
| The Commission decided, in accordance
with articles 16 to 21 of its Statute, to transmit the draft conclusions,
through the Secretary-General, to Governments for comments and observations,
with the request that such comments and observations be submitted to the
Secretary-General by 1 January 2018 (chap. V). | 委员会根据其《章程》第16至21条决定，通过秘书长向各国政府转发这些结论草案，征求其评论和意见，并要求在2018年1月1日前向秘书长提交此种评论和意见(第五章)。 |
| 16. With respect to the topic “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties”, the Commission had
before it the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/694), which
addressed the legal significance, for the purpose of interpretation and as
forms of practice under a treaty, of pronouncements of expert bodies and of
decisions of domestic courts. | 16. 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四次报告(A/CN.4/694)，报告论及专家机构的声明和国内法院的裁决就解释条约而言以及作为条约之下的惯例形式而言，所具有的法律意义。 |
| The report also discussed the structure
and scope of the draft conclusions. | 该报告还讨论了结论草案的架构和范围。 |
| 17. As a result of its consideration of
the topic at the present session, the Commission adopted on first reading a
set of 13 draft conclusions, together with commentaries thereto, on
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties. | 17. 委员会本届会议审议该专题之后，一读通过了关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例问题的一套结论草案，共13项，包括评注。 |
| The Commission decided, in accordance
with articles 16 to 21 of its Statute, to transmit the draft conclusions,
through the Secretary-General, to Governments for comments and observations,
with the request that such comments and observations be submitted to the
Secretary-General by 1 January 2018 (chap. VI). | 委员会根据其《章程》第16至21条决定，通过秘书长向各国政府转发这些结论草案，征求其评论和意见，并要求在2018年1月1日前向秘书长提交此种评论和意见(第六章)。 |
| 18. With respect to the topic “Crimes against humanity”, the Commission
had before it the second report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/690), as
well as the memorandum by the Secretariat providing information on existing
treaty-based monitoring mechanisms which may be of relevance to the future
work of the International Law Commission (A/CN.4/698). | 18. 关于“危害人类罪”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第二次报告(A/ CN.4/690)，以及秘书处提供可能与国际法委员会今后工作有关的现有条约监督机制的资料的备忘录(A/CN.4/698)。 |
| The second report addressed, inter alia,
criminalization under national law, establishment of national jurisdiction,
general investigation and cooperation for identifying alleged offenders,
exercise of national jurisdiction when an alleged offender is present, aut
dedere aut judicare and fair treatment of an alleged offender. | 特别报告员的第二次报告除其他内容外，谈及在国内法中定为刑事犯罪、确定国家管辖权、开展一般性调查与合作以查明被指控罪犯、被指控罪犯所在地行使国家管辖权、引渡或审判原则，以及公平对待被指控罪犯等问题。 |
| 19. Following the debate in Plenary, the
Commission decided to refer the draft articles proposed by the Special
Rapporteur to the Drafting Committee. | 19. 继全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将特别报告员提议的条款草案转交起草委员会。 |
| Upon consideration of the report of the
Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.873), the Commission provisionally adopted draft
articles 5 to 10, together with commentaries thereto. | 在审议起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.873)后，委员会暂时通过了第5至第10条草案及其评注。 |
| The Commission also decided to refer to
the Drafting Committee the question of the liability of legal persons. | 委员会还决定将法人责任问题转交起草委员会。 |
| Following its consideration of a further
report of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.873/Add.1), the Commission
provisionally adopted paragraph 7 of draft article 5, together with the
commentary thereto (chap. VII). | 继对起草委员会的另一份报告(A/CN.4/L.873/Add.1)进行审议后，委员会暂时通过了第5条草案第7款及其评注(第七章)。 |
| 20. Concerning the topic “Protection of the atmosphere”, the
Commission had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/692), which, building upon the previous two reports, analysed several
key issues relevant to the topic, namely, the obligations of States to
prevent atmospheric pollution and mitigate atmospheric degradation and the
requirement of due diligence and environmental impact assessment. | 20. 关于“保护大气层”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/692)。 该报告在前两次报告的基础上，分析了与该专题有关的几个关键议题，即各国防止大气污染和减缓大气状况退化的义务，以及尽职和开展环境影响评估的要求。 |
| The report also explored questions
concerning sustainable and equitable utilization of the atmosphere, as well
as the legal limits on certain activities aimed at intentional modification
of the atmosphere. | 报告还探讨了可持续和公平利用大气层的相关问题，以及对旨在有意改变大气层的某些活动的法律限制。 |
| Consequently, five draft guidelines were
proposed on the obligation of States to protect the environment,
environmental impact assessment, sustainable utilization of the atmosphere,
equitable utilization of the atmosphere, and geoengineering, together with an
additional preambular paragraph. | 随后，就各国保护环境的义务、环境影响评估、大气层的可持续利用、大气层的公平利用和地球工程等问题提出了五条指南草案，以及一个额外的序言段落。 |
| 21. Following the debate in the
Commission, which was preceded by a dialogue with scientists organized by the
Special Rapporteur, the Commission decided to refer the five draft
guidelines, together with the preambular paragraph, as contained in the
Special Rapporteur’s third report, to the Drafting
Committee. | 21. 委员会在特别报告员组织下与科学家进行了对话，随后举行了辩论，并决定将特别报告员第三次报告所载的五条指南草案以及序言段落转交起草委员会。 |
| Upon its consideration of the report of
the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.875), the Commission provisionally adopted
draft guidelines 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and a preambular paragraph, together with
commentaries thereto (chap. VIII). | 在审议起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.875)后，委员会审暂时通过了指南3、4、5、6、7的草案和序言段落，包括评注(第八章)。 |
| 22. With regard to the topic “Jus cogens”, the Commission had before it
the first report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/693), which addressed
conceptual issues relating to peremptory norms (jus cogens), including their
nature and definition, and traced the historical evolution of peremptory
norms and, prior to that, the acceptance in international law of the elements
central to the concept of peremptory norms of global international law. | 22. 关于“强行法”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/693)，报告谈及强制性规范(强行法)的相关概念问题，包括其性质和定义，并追溯了强制性规范的历史演变，以及此前全球国际法中接受强制性规范概念核心要素的情况。 |
| The report further raised a number of
methodological issues on which the Commission was invited to comment, and
reviewed the debates held in the Sixth Committee in 2014 and 2015. | 该报告进一步提出了若干系统方法问题，并请委员会就此发表评论，报告还回顾了第六委员会于2014年和2015年进行的辩论。 |
| The Commission subsequently decided to
refer draft conclusions 1 and 3, as contained in the report of the Special
Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 委员会随后决定将特别报告员报告所载的结论草案1和3转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission subsequently took note of
the interim report of the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee on draft
conclusions 1 and 2 provisionally adopted by the Committee, which was
submitted to the Commission for information (chap. IX). | 随后，委员会注意到了起草委员会主席就该委员会暂时通过的结论1和结论2草案所作的临时报告。 该报告提交委员会供参考(第九章)。 |
| 23. With respect to the topic “Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts”, the Commission had before it the third report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/700), which focused on identifying rules applicable in
post-conflict situations, while also addressing some preventive issues to be
undertaken in the pre-conflict phase. | 23. 关于“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/700)。 该报告侧重于确定冲突后局势所适用的规则，与此同时亦论及冲突前阶段应采取的预防措施的一些相关问题。 |
| The report contained three draft
principles on preventive measures, five draft principles concerning primarily
the post-conflict phase and one draft principle on the rights of indigenous
peoples. | 该报告载有三项关于预防措施的原则草案、五项主要涉及冲突后阶段的原则草案，以及一项关于土著民族权利的原则草案。 |
| Following the debate in Plenary, the
Commission decided to refer the draft principles, as contained in the report
of the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 继全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将特别报告员报告所载的原则草案转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission subsequently received the
report of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.876), and took note of draft
principles 4, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18, provisionally adopted by the
Drafting Committee. | 之后，委员会收到起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.876)，并表示注意到起草委员会暂时通过的原则草案4、6、7、8、14、15、16、17和 18。 |
| Furthermore, the Commission provisionally
adopted the draft principles it had taken note of during its sixty-seventh
session, which had been renumbered and revised for technical reasons
(A/CN.4/L.870/Rev.1) by the Drafting Committee at the present session, together
with commentaries thereto (chap. X). | 此外，委员会暂时通过了第六十七届会议上曾表示注意到的几个原则草案。 起草委员会在本届会议上出于技术原因，对上述原则草案及其评注作了重新编号和修订(A/CN.4/L.870/Rev.1)(第十章)。 |
| 24. Concerning the topic “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction”, the Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/701), which analysed the question of limitations and
exceptions to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction. | 24. 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五次报告(A/CN.4/701)，报告分析了国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免权的限制和例外问题。 |
| Since at the time of its consideration
the report was only available to the Commission in two of the six official
languages of the United Nations, the debate in the Commission was commenced,
involving members wishing to comment on the fifth report at the sixty-eighth
session, and would be continued at the sixty-ninth session of the Commission. | 由于审议报告时，委员会仅收到联合国六种正式语文中的两种文本，因此委员会的辩论只是刚开始，在第六十八届会议上只有想就该专题发言的几个委员发言，委员会将在第六十九届会议上继续辩论。 |
| 25. Upon its consideration of the report
of the Drafting Committee on work done previously and taken note of by the
Commission during its sixty-seventh session (A/CN.4/L.865), the Commission
provisionally adopted draft articles 2 (f) and 6, together with commentaries
thereto (chap. XI). | 25. 委员会第六十七届会议曾表示，注意到起草委员会关于其之前所开展工作情况的报告(A/CN.4/L.865)，委员会在审议该报告之后，暂时通过了第2条(f)项草案和第6条草案及其评注(第十一章)。 |
| 26. With regard to the topic “Provisional application of treaties”, the
Commission had before it the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/699 and Add.1), which continued the analysis of the relationship of
provisional application to other provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention and
of the practice of international organizations with regard to provisional
application. | 26. 关于“条约的暂时适用”专题，委员会收到特别报告员的第四次报告(A/CN.4/699和A/CN.4/699/Add.1)，报告继续分析了暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》其他规定的关系以及国际组织在条约暂时适用方面的实践。 |
| The report included a proposal for a
draft guideline 10 on internal law and the observation of provisional
application of all or part of a treaty. | 报告载有一项关于国内法和对条约全部或部分的暂时适用的准则10草案提案。 |
| The addendum to the report contained
examples of recent European Union practice on provisional application of
agreements with third States. | 报告的增编收入了欧洲联盟在暂时适用与第三国协定方面最新的做法实例。 |
| 27. Following the debate in Plenary, the
Commission decided to refer draft guideline 10, as contained in the fourth
report of the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 27. 委员会在全体会议辩论之后决定，将特别报告员第四次报告所载的准则10草案转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission subsequently received the
report of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.877), and took note of draft
guidelines 1 to 4 and 6 to 9, provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee
during the sixty-seventh and sixty-eighth sessions. | 委员会随后收到起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.877)，委员会注意到起草委员会在第六十七和第六十八届会议上暂时通过的准则1至4和6至9的草案。 |
| Draft guideline 5 on unilateral
declarations had been kept in abeyance by the Drafting Committee to be
returned to at a later stage (chap. XII). | 关于单边声明问题的准则5草案被起草委员会搁置，留待日后再议(第十二章)。 |
| 28. As regards “Other
decisions and conclusions of the Commission”, the
Commission decided to request the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum on ways
and means for making the evidence of customary international law more readily
available, which would survey the present state of the evidence of customary
international law and make suggestions for its improvement and another
memorandum analysing State practice in respect of treaties (bilateral and
multilateral), deposited or registered in the last 20 years with the
Secretary-General, which provide for provisional application, including
treaty actions related thereto (chap. XIII, sect. A). | 28. 关于“委员会的其他决定和结论”，委员会决定，请秘书处就使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段编写一份备忘录，概括介绍习惯国际法证据问题的现状，并就如何改善提出建议；请秘书处另外编写一份备忘录，分析过去20年向秘书长交存或登记的对暂时适用作了规定的(双边和多边)条约方面的国家实践，包括与这些条约有关的条约行动(第十三章A节)。 |
| 29. The Commission also established a
Planning Group to consider its programme, procedures and working methods
(chap. XIII, sect. B). | 29. 委员会还设立了规划组，负责审议其方案、程序和工作方法(第十三章，B节)。 |
| The Commission decided to include in its
long-term programme of work the topics: (a) The settlement of international
disputes to which international organizations are parties; and (b) Succession
of States in respect of State responsibility (chap. XIII, sect. B). | 委员会决定在其长期工作方案中纳入以下专题：(a) 国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决；(b) 国家责任方面的国家继承(第十三章B节)。 |
| 30. The Commission recommended that it
holds the first part of its seventieth session in New York, and requested the
Secretariat to proceed with the necessary administrative and organizational
arrangements to facilitate this. | 30. 委员会建议，第七十届会议的第一期会议在纽约举行，请秘书处着手进行必要的行政和组织安排，以提供便利。 |
| The Commission recommended that a
seventieth anniversary commemorative event be held during its seventieth
session in 2018. | 委员会建议，在2018年召开的第七十届会议期间举办一场七十周年纪念活动。 |
| The commemorative event would be held in
two parts, the first during the first part of its seventieth session
recommended to be held in New York, and the second during the second part of
its seventieth session in Geneva (chap. XIII, sect. B). | 该纪念活动将分两部分举行，第一部分在建议于纽约召开的第七十届会议第一期会议期间举行，第二部分在日内瓦召开的第七十届会议第二期会议期间举行(第十三章B节)。 |
| 31. The Commission continued its exchange
of information with the International Court of Justice, the Inter-American
Juridical Committee, and the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public
International Law of the Council of Europe. | 31. 委员会继续与国际法院、美洲法律委员会以及欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会交流信息。 |
| An informal exchange of views was held
between members of the Commission and the International Committee of the Red
Cross (chap. XIII, sect. D). | 委员会委员与红十字国际委员会成员进行了非正式的意见交流(第十三章D节)。 |
| 32. The Commission decided that its
sixty-ninth session be held in Geneva from 1 May to 2 June and 3 July to 4
August 2017 (chap. XIII, sect. C). | 32. 委员会决定，第六十九届会议将于2017年5月1日至6月2日和7月3日至8月4日在日内瓦举行(第十三章C节)。 |
| Chapter III | 第三章 |
| Specific issues on which comments would
be of particular interest to the Commission | 委员会特别想听取意见的具体问题 |
| 33. The Commission considers as still
relevant the requests for information contained in Chapter III of the report
of its sixty-sixth session (2014) on the topics “Crimes
against humanity” and the “Protection
of the atmosphere”, as well as at its sixty-seventh
session (2015) on the topics “Provisional application
of treaties”, and “Jus cogens”, and would welcome any additional information. | 33. 委员会认为，第六十六届会议(2014年)报告第三章要求就专题“危害人类罪”和“保护大气层”以及第六十七届会议(2015年)要求就专题“条约的暂时适用”和“强行法”提供资料的请求仍然适用，并欢迎提供任何其他资料。 |
| 34. The Commission would welcome any
information on the issues mentioned in the paragraph above as well as the
following issues, by 31 January 2017, in order for it to be taken into
account in the respective reports of the Special Rapporteurs. | 34. 委员会欢迎在2017年1月31日之前就上一段所提到的问题和以下问题提供任何资料，以便特别报告员在各自报告中给予考虑。 |
| A. Immunity of State officials from
foreign criminal jurisdiction | A. 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免 |
| 35. The Commission would appreciate being
provided by States with information on their national legislation and
practice, including judicial and executive practice, with reference to the
following issues: | 35. 委员会希望各国提供资料，说明与以下问题有关的国内法律和实践，包括司法实践和行政实践： |
| (a) the invocation of immunity; | (a) 援引豁免； |
| (b) waivers of immunity; | (b) 放弃豁免； |
| (c) the stage at which the national
authorities take immunity into consideration (investigation, indictment,
prosecution); | (c) 国家主管当局在何阶段考虑豁免(调查、控告、起诉)； |
| (d) the instruments available to the
executive for referring information, legal documents and opinions to the
national courts in relation to a case in which immunity is or may be
considered; | (d) 在考虑或可能考虑豁免的案件中，行政部门向国内法院转交资料、法律文件和意见可使用的办法； |
| (e) the mechanisms for international
legal assistance, cooperation and consultation that State authorities may
resort to in relation to a case in which immunity is or may be considered. | (e) 在考虑或可能考虑豁免的案件中，国家主管当局可以利用的国际法律援助、合作及磋商机制。 |
| B. New topics | B. 新专题 |
| 36. The Commission decided to include in
its long-term programme of work two new topics, namely (a) Settlement of
international disputes to which international organizations are parties; and
(b) Succession of States in respect of State responsibility. | 36. 委员会决定在其长期工作方案里列入两项新专题，即(a) 国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决；(b) 国家责任方面的国家继承。 |
| In the selection of these topics, the
Commission was guided by the following criteria that it had agreed upon at
its fiftieth session (1998), namely that the topic | 在选择这些专题时，委员会遵循它在1998年所商定的下述标准，即 |
| (a) should reflect the needs of States in
respect of the progressive development and codification of international law; | (a) 专题应反映各国在逐渐发展和编纂国际法方面的需要； |
| (b) should be at a sufficiently advanced
stage in terms of State practice to permit progressive development and
codification; | (b) 专题在国家实践方面应处于足够成熟阶段，从而允许逐渐发展和编纂； |
| (c) should be concrete and feasible for
progressive development and codification; and | (c) 专题应具体可行，宜于逐渐发展和编纂； |
| (d) that the Commission should not
restrict itself to traditional topics, but could also consider those that
reflect new developments in international law and pressing concerns of the
international community as a whole. | (d) 委员会不应局限于传统专题，还应考虑那些反映国际法中新动态和整个国际社会紧迫关切事项的专题。 |
| The Commission would welcome the views of
States on these new topics. | 委员会欢迎各国对这些新专题发表看法。 |
| 37. In addition, the Commission would
welcome any proposals that States may wish to make concerning possible topics
for inclusion in its long-term programme of work. | 37. 此外，委员会欢迎各国就希望列入长期工作方案的专题提出任何建议。 |
| It would be helpful if such proposals
were accompanied by a statement of reasons in their support, taking into
account the criteria, referred to above, for the selection of topics. | 在提出这些建议时，最好同时说明理由，并考虑到上文提到的选择专题的标准。 |
| Chapter IV | 第四章 |
| Protection of persons in the event of
disasters | 发生灾害时的人员保护 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 38. At its fifty-ninth session (2007),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Protection
of persons in the event of disasters” in its
programme of work and to appoint Mr. Eduardo Valencia Ospina as Special
Rapporteur for the topic. | 38. 委员会第五十九届会议(2007年)决定在工作方案中列入“发生灾害时的人员保护”专题，并任命爱德华多 •巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生为专题特别报告员。 |
| In paragraph 7 of its resolution 62/66 of
6 December 2007, the General Assembly took note of the decision of the
Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会2007年12月6日第62/66号决议第7段注意到委员会将该专题纳入工作方案的决定。 |
| 39. From its sixtieth (2008) to
sixty-sixth sessions (2014), the Commission considered the topic on the basis
of seven successive reports submitted by the Special Rapporteur. | 39. 委员会从第六十届会议(2008年)到第六十六届会议(2014年)，在特别报告员连续提交的七份报告的基础上审议了这一专题。 |
| The Commission also had before it a
memorandum by the Secretariat and a set of written replies submitted by the
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to the questions addressed
to them by the Commission in 2008. | 委员会还收到了一份秘书处的备忘录，以及人道主义事务协调厅和红十字会与红新月会国际联合会对委员会2008年向它们提出的问题所提交的书面答复。 |
| 40. At its sixty-sixth session (2014),
the Commission adopted, on first reading, a set of 21 draft articles on the
protection of persons in the event of disasters, together with commentaries
thereto. | 40. 委员会第六十六届会议(2014年)一读通过了一套共21条关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案及其评注。 |
| It decided, in accordance with articles
16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft articles, through the
Secretary-General, to Governments, competent international organizations, the
International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Federation of
Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies for comments and observations. | 委员会根据《章程》第16至21条，决定通过秘书长向各国政府、有关国际组织、红十字国际委员会和红十字会与红新月会国际联合会转发这些条款草案，征求其评论和意见。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 41. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the eighth report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/697), as well as comments and observations received from Governments,
international organizations and other entities (A/CN.4/696 and Add.1). | 41. 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第八次报告(A/CN.4/697)以及各国政府、国际组织和其他实体提交的评论和意见(A/CN.4/696和Add.1)。 |
| 42. The Commission considered the eighth
report of the Special Rapporteur at its 3291st to 3296th meetings from 2 to
11 May 2016. | 42. 委员会在2016年5月2日至11日举行的第3291至第3296次会议上审议了特别报告员的第八次报告。 |
| At its 3296th meeting, held on 11 May
2016, the Commission referred the draft preamble, proposed by the Special
Rapporteur in his eighth report, and draft articles 1 to 21 to the Drafting
Committee, with the instruction that the Drafting Committee commence the
second reading of the draft articles taking into account the comments of
Governments, international organizations and other entities, the proposals of
the Special Rapporteur and the debate in the plenary on the Special
Rapporteur’s eighth report. | 委员会在2016年5月11日举行的第3296次会议上，将特别报告员第八次报告提出的序言草案以及第1至第21条条款草案转交起草委员会，并指示起草委员会结合各国政府、国际组织和其他实体的评论、特别报告员的建议以及关于特别报告员第八次报告的全会辩论，开始对条款草案进行二读。 |
| 43. The Commission considered the report
of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.871) at its 3310th meeting, held on 3
June 2016, and adopted the entire set of draft articles on the protection of
persons in the event of disasters, on second reading, at the same meeting
(sect. E.1 below). | 43. 委员会在2016年6月3日举行的第3310次会议上审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.871)，在同一会议上二读通过了关于发生灾害时的人员保护的整套条款草案(见下文E.1节)。 |
| 44. At its 3332nd to 3335th meetings,
from 2 to 4 August 2016, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the
aforementioned draft articles (sect. E.2 below). | 44. 委员会在2016年8月2日至4日举行的第3332至3335次会议上，通过了上述条款草案的评注(见下文E.2节)。 |
| 45. In accordance with its statute, the
Commission submits the draft articles to the General Assembly, together with
the recommendation set out below. | 45. 根据《章程》，委员会向大会提交条款草案以及下述建议。 |
| C. Recommendation of the Commission | C. 委员会的建议 |
| 46. At its 3335th meeting, held on 4
August 2016, the Commission decided, in accordance with article 23 of its
statute, to recommend to the General Assembly the elaboration of a convention
on the basis of the draft articles on the protection of persons in the event
of disasters. | 46. 在2016年8月4日举行的第3335次会议上，委员会根据其《章程》第23条，决定建议大会在发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案基础上拟订一项公约。 |
| D. Tribute to the Special Rapporteur | D. 向特别报告员表示感谢 |
| 47. At its 3335th meeting, held on 4
August 2016, the Commission, after adopting the draft articles on the
protection of persons in the event of disasters, adopted the following
resolution by acclamation: | 47. 在2016年8月4日举行的第3335次会议上，委员会在通过了关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案后，以鼓掌方式通过了以下决议： |
| “The International Law Commission, | “国际法委员会， |
| “Having adopted the draft articles on the
protection of persons in the event of disasters, | 通过了关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案， |
| “Expresses to the Special Rapporteur, Mr.
Eduardo Valencia Ospina, its deep appreciation and warm congratulations for
the outstanding contribution he has made to the preparation of the draft
articles through his tireless efforts and devoted work, and for the results
achieved in the elaboration of draft articles on the protection of persons in
the event of disasters.” | 向特别报告员爱德华多 •巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生表示深挚感谢和热烈祝贺，感谢并祝贺他以不懈的努力和专注的工作为起草条款草案做出杰出贡献，并使关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案的拟订工作取得成果。
” |
| E. Text of the draft articles on the
protection of persons in the event of disasters | E. 关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft articles | 1. 条款草案案文 |
| 48. The text of the draft articles
adopted by the Commission, on second reading, at its sixty-eighth session is
reproduced below. | 48. 委员会第六十八届会议二读通过的条款草案案文载录如下。 |
| Protection of persons in the event of
disasters | 发生灾害时的人员保护 |
| Bearing in mind Article 13, paragraph 1
(a), of the Charter of the United Nations, which provides that the General
Assembly shall initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of
encouraging the progressive development of international law and its
codification, | 铭记《联合国宪章》第十三条第一款(子)项，其中规定大会应发动研究，并作成建议，以提倡国际法之逐渐发展与编纂， |
| Considering the frequency and severity of
natural and human-made disasters and their short-term and long-term damaging
impact, | 考虑到自然灾害和人为灾害的频繁性和严重性以及灾害的短期和长期破坏性影响， |
| Fully aware of the essential needs of
persons affected by disasters, and conscious that the rights of those persons
must be respected in such circumstances, | 充分意识到受灾人员的基本需要，并意识到在受灾情况下，这些人员的权利必须得到尊重， |
| Mindful of the fundamental value of
solidarity in international relations and the importance of strengthening
international cooperation in respect of all phases of a disaster, | 意识到团结在国际关系中的基本价值以及在灾害的所有阶段加强国际合作的重要性， |
| Stressing the principle of the
sovereignty of States and, consequently, reaffirming the primary role of the
State affected by a disaster in providing disaster relief assistance, | 强调国家主权原则，因此重申受灾国在提供救灾援助方面承担主要作用， |
| Article 1 | 第1条 |
| Scope | 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 | 第2条 |
| Purpose | 宗旨 |
| The purpose of the present draft articles
is to facilitate the adequate and effective response to disasters, and
reduction of the risk of disasters, so as to meet 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和有效地应对灾害和减少灾害风险，以满足有关人员的基本需要，充分尊重其权利。 |
| Article 3 | 第3条 |
| Use of terms | 用语 |
| For the purposes of the present draft
articles: | 为本条款草案的目的： |
| (a) “disaster” means a calamitous event or series of events resulting in
widespread loss of life, great human suffering and distress, mass
displacement, or large-scale material or environmental damage, thereby
seriously disrupting the functioning of society; | (a) “灾害”是指造成广泛的生命损失、巨大的人类痛苦和危难、大规模流离失所、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； |
| (b) “affected
State” means a State in whose territory, or in
territory under whose jurisdiction or control, a disaster takes place; | (b) “受灾国”是指在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内发生灾害的国家； |
| (c) “assisting
State” means a State providing assistance to an
affected State with its consent; | (c) “援助国”是指经受灾国同意向其提供援助的国家； |
| (d) “other
assisting actor” means a competent intergovernmental
organization, or a relevant non-governmental organization or entity,
providing assistance to an affected State with its consent; | (d) “其他援助方”是指经受灾国同意向其提供援助的主管政府间组织或有关非政府组织或实体； |
| (e) “external
assistance” means relief personnel, equipment and
goods, and services provided to an affected State by an assisting State or
other assisting actor for disaster relief assistance; | (e) “外部援助”是指援助国或其他援助方为救灾援助而向受灾国提供的救灾人员、设备和物资以及服务； |
| (f) “relief
personnel” means civilian or military personnel sent
by an assisting State or other assisting actor for the purpose of providing
disaster relief assistance; | (f) “救灾人员”是指援助国或其他援助方为提供救灾援助而派遣的民事或军事人员； |
| (g) “equipment
and goods” means supplies, tools, machines, specially
trained animals, foodstuffs, drinking water, medical supplies, means of
shelter, clothing, bedding, vehicles, telecommunications equipment, and other
objects for disaster relief assistance. | (g) “设备和物资”是指为救灾援助提供的用品、工具、机器、经过专门训练的动物、食品、饮用水、医疗用品、栖身手段、衣物、铺盖用品、车辆、电信设备和其他物品。 |
| Article 4 | 第4条 |
| Human dignity | 人的尊严 |
| The inherent dignity of the human person
shall be respected and protected in the event of disasters. | 发生灾害时，人的固有尊严应得到尊重和保护。 |
| Article 5 | 第5条 |
| Human rights | 人权 |
| Persons affected by disasters are
entitled to the respect for and protection of their human rights in
accordance with international law. | 受灾人员有权依国际法得到对其人权的尊重和保护。 |
| Article 6 | 第6条 |
| Humanitarian principles | 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. | 应对灾害应按照人道、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 | 第7条 |
| Duty to cooperate | 合作的义务 |
| In the application of the present draft
articles, States shall, as appropriate, cooperate among themselves, with the
United Nations, with the components of the Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement, and with other assisting actors. | 适用本条款草案时，各国应酌情相互合作，并与联合国、红十字与红新月运动各组成部分及其他援助方合作。 |
| Article 8 | 第8条 |
| Forms of cooperation in the response to
disasters | 应对灾害的合作形式 |
| Cooperation in the response to disasters
includes humanitarian assistance, coordination of international relief actions
and communications, and making available relief personnel, equipment and
goods, and scientific, medical and technical resources. | 应对灾害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、设备和物资以及科学、医学、技术资源。 |
| Article 9 | 第9条 |
| Reduction of the risk of disasters | 减少灾害风险 |
| 1. Each State shall reduce the risk of
disasters by taking appropriate measures, including through legislation and
regulations, to prevent, mitigate, and prepare for disasters. | 1. 每一国应通过采取适当的防灾、减灾和备灾措施，包括通过制订法律和规章，减少灾害风险。 |
| 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，收集和传播风险信息和以往损失信息，以及安装和操作预警系统。 |
| Article 10 | 第10条 |
| Role of the affected State | 受灾国的作用 |
| 1. The affected State has the duty to
ensure the protection of persons and provision of disaster relief assistance
in its territory, or in territory under its jurisdiction or control. | 1. 受灾国有责任在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内确保对人员的保护和救灾援助的提供。 |
| 2. The affected State has the primary
role in the direction, control, coordination and supervision of such relief
assistance. | 2. 受灾国在指挥、控制、协调和监督此种救灾援助方面应承担主要作用。 |
| Article 11 | 第11条 |
| Duty of the affected State to seek
external assistance | 受灾国寻求外部援助的责任 |
| To the extent that a disaster manifestly
exceeds its national response capacity, the affected State has the duty to
seek assistance from, as appropriate, other States, the United Nations, and
other potential assisting actors. | 如所遭受的灾害明显超出受灾国的应对能力，则受灾国有责任酌情向其他国家、联合国及其他潜在援助方寻求援助。 |
| Article 12 | 第12条 |
| Offers of external assistance | 提议外部援助 |
| 1. In the event of disasters, States, the
United Nations, and other potential assisting actors may offer assistance to
the affected State. | 1. 发生灾害时，各国、联合国及其他潜在援助方可向受灾国提议援助。 |
| 2. When external assistance is sought by
an affected State by means of a request addressed to another State, the
United Nations, or other potential assisting actor, the addressee shall
expeditiously give due consideration to the request and inform the affected
State of its reply. | 2. 受灾国通过向另一国、联合国或其他潜在援助方提出请求而寻求外部援助时，受请求方应迅速对请求予以适当考虑并将其答复通知受灾国。 |
| Article 13 | 第13条 |
| Consent of the affected State to external
assistance | 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. 提供外部援助须征得受灾国的同意。 |
| 2. Consent to external assistance shall
not be withheld arbitrarily. | 2. 受灾国不得任意拒绝外部援助。 |
| 3. When an offer of external assistance
is made in accordance with the present draft articles, the affected State
shall, whenever possible, make known its decision regarding the offer in a
timely manner. | 3. 对按照本条款草案提出的援助提议，受灾国只要有可能，应及时告知就该援助提议作出的决定。 |
| Article 14 | 第14条 |
| Conditions on the provision of external
assistance | 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. | 此种条件应与本条款草案、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 15 | 第15条 |
| Facilitation of external assistance | 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, in particular regarding: | 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) relief personnel, in fields such as
privileges and immunities, visa and entry requirements, work permits, and
freedom of movement; and | (a) 对于救灾人员，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； |
| (b) equipment and goods, in fields such
as customs requirements and tariffs, taxation, transport, and the disposal
thereof. | (b) 对于设备和物资，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，从而便于遵守国内法。 |
| Article 16 | 第16条 |
| Protection of relief personnel, equipment
and goods | 保护救灾人员、设备和物资 |
| The affected State shall take the
appropriate measures to ensure the protection of relief personnel and of
equipment and goods present in its territory, or in territory under its
jurisdiction or control, for the purpose of providing external assistance. | 受灾国应采取适当措施，确保为提供外部援助目的而在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内的救灾人员、设备和物资得到保护。 |
| Article 17 | 第17条 |
| Termination of external assistance | 终止外部援助 |
| The affected State, the assisting State,
the United Nations, or other assisting actor may terminate external
assistance at any time. | 受灾国、援助国、联合国或其他援助方均可在任何时候终止外部援助。 |
| Any such State or actor intending to
terminate shall provide appropriate notification. | 任何希望终止援助的国家或行为方应发出适当的通知。 |
| The affected State and, as appropriate,
the assisting State, the United Nations, or other assisting actor shall
consult with respect to the termination of external assistance and the
modalities of termination. | 受灾国以及适当时，援助国、联合国或其他援助方，应就终止外部援助问题和终止方式进行磋商。 |
| Article 18 | 第18条 |
| Relationship to other rules of
international law | 与其他国际法规则的关系 |
| 1. The present draft articles are without
prejudice to other applicable rules of international law. | 1. 本条款草案不影响其他可适用的国际法规则。 |
| 2. The present draft articles do not
apply to the extent that the response to a disaster is governed by the rules
of international humanitarian law. | 2. 在应对灾害须遵守国际人道主义法规则的情况下，本条款草案不适用。 |
| 2. Text of the draft articles and
commentaries thereto | 2. 条款草案案文及其评注 |
| 49. The text of the draft preamble and
the draft articles, together with commentaries thereto, adopted by the
Commission on second reading, is reproduced below. | 49. 委员会二读通过的序言草案和条款草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Protection of persons in the event of
disasters | 发生灾害时的人员保护 |
| Bearing in mind Article 13, paragraph 1
(a), of the Charter of the United Nations, which provides that the General
Assembly shall initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of
encouraging the progressive development of international law and its
codification, | 铭记《联合国宪章》第十三条第一款(子)项，其中规定大会应发动研究，并作成建议，以提倡国际法之逐渐发展与编纂， |
| Considering the frequency and severity of
natural and human-made disasters and their short-term and long-term damaging
impact, | 考虑到自然灾害和人为灾害的频繁性和严重性以及灾害的短期和长期破坏性影响， |
| Fully aware of the essential needs of
persons affected by disasters, and conscious that the rights of those persons
must be respected in such circumstances, | 充分意识到受灾人员的基本需要，并意识到在受灾情况下，这些人员的权利必须得到尊重， |
| Mindful of the fundamental value of
solidarity in international relations and the importance of strengthening
international cooperation in respect of all phases of a disaster, | 意识到团结在国际关系中的基本价值以及在灾害的所有阶段加强国际合作的重要性， |
| Stressing the principle of the
sovereignty of States and, consequently, reaffirming the primary role of the
State affected by a disaster in providing disaster relief assistance, | 强调国家主权原则，因此重申受灾国在提供救灾援助方面承担主要作用， |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The preamble aims at providing a
conceptual framework for the draft articles, setting out the general context
in which the topic of the protection of persons in the event of disasters has
been elaborated and furnishing the essential rationale for the text. | (1) 序言旨在为本条款草案提供一个概念框架，阐述讨论发生灾害时的人员保护专题的一般背景，并说明案文的基本依据。 |
| (2) The first preambular paragraph
focuses on the mandate given to the General Assembly, under Article 13,
paragraph 1 (a), of the Charter of the United Nations, to encourage the
progressive development of international law and its codification and on the
consequential object of the International Law Commission, as provided in
article 1 of its statute. | (2) 序言第一段的重点是根据《联合国宪章》第十三条第一款(子)项赋予大会鼓励国际法的逐渐发展与编纂的任务，以及国际法委员会按照其章程第1条的规定由此而来的目标。 |
| It restates similar wording included in
recent final drafts of the Commission containing a preamble. | 这一段的措辞与委员会近期一份载有序言部分的最后草案中的措辞相似。 |
| It also serves, at the outset, to
highlight the fact that the draft articles contain elements of both
progressive development and codification of international law. | 这一段的作用还在于，一开始就强调条款草案中既包含国际法逐渐发展的要素，也包含国际法编纂的要素。 |
| (3) The second preambular paragraph calls
attention to the frequency and severity of natural and human-made disasters,
and their damaging impact, which have raised the concern of the international
community, leading to the formulation by the Commission of legal rules. | (3) 序言第二段要求注意自然灾害和人类灾害的频繁性和严重性及其造成的破坏性影响，这引起了国际社会的关切，导致委员会制订法律规则。 |
| The reference to “natural and human-made disasters” emphasizes
a distinctive characteristic of the draft articles when compared with other
similar instruments, which have a more restricted scope by being limited to
natural disasters. | “自然灾害和人为灾害”的提法强调了条款草案与范围较为有限、仅限于自然灾害的其他类似文书相比具有的独特性。 |
| On the contrary, disasters often arise
from complex sets of causes. | 相反，灾害的产生往往有各种复杂的原因。 |
| Furthermore, the draft articles are
intended to cover the various stages of the disaster cycle, focusing on
response and disaster risk reduction. | 另外，条款草案的意图是有覆盖灾害周期的各个阶段，以应对和减少灾害风险为重点。 |
| The reference to “short-term and long-term impact” is
intended to show that the focus of the draft articles is not just on the
immediate effects of a disaster. | “短期和长期”的提法用意是表明，条款草案的重点不仅仅是灾害的直接影响。 |
| It also implies a far-reaching approach,
addressing activities devoted to the recovery phase. | 这还意味着一种长远的做法，涉及恢复阶段进行的活动。 |
| (4) The third preambular paragraph
addresses the essential needs of the persons whose lives, well-being and
property have been affected by disasters, and reiterates that the rights of
those persons must be respected in such circumstances as provided for by the
draft articles. | (4) 序言第三段处理的是生命、福利和财产受到灾害影响的人的基本需要，并重申在此种情况下必须按照条款草案的规定尊重这些人员的权利。 |
| (5) The fourth preambular paragraph
recalls the fundamental value of solidarity in international relations, and
the importance of strengthening international cooperation in respect of all
phases of a disaster, both of which are key concepts underlying the topic and
which cannot be interpreted as diminishing the sovereignty of affected States
and their prerogatives within the limits of international law. | (5) 序言第四段回顾团结在国际关系中的基本价值和在灾害的所有阶段加强国际合作的重要性，两者都是这一专题的关键基本概念，不得被解释为减损受灾国的主权及其在国际法限度范围内的特权。 |
| Mention of “all
phases of disasters” recognizes the reach of the
articles into each component phase of the entire disaster cycle, as
appropriate. | “灾害的所有阶段”的提法确认，这些条款酌情涉及整个灾害周期的每个构成阶段。 |
| (6) The final preambular paragraph
stresses the principle of the sovereignty of States, and reaffirms the
primary role of the affected State in the provision of disaster relief
assistance, which is a core element of the draft articles. | (6) 最后序言段强调了国家主权原则，重申受灾国在提供救灾援助方面的主要作用，这是条款草案的一个核心内容。 |
| The reference to sovereignty, and the
primary role of the affected State, provides the background against which the
entire set of draft articles is to be understood. | 提及主权以及受灾国的主要作用，就提供了理解整套条款草案的背景。 |
| Article 1 | 第1条 |
| Scope | 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。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 1 establishes the scope
of the draft articles and tracks the formulation of the title of the topic. | (1) 第1条草案确立了本条款草案的范围，并沿用了本专题标题的说法。 |
| It sets the orientation of the draft
articles as being primarily focused on the protection of persons whose life,
well-being and property are affected by disasters. | 这条草案确立本条款草案方向基本上是侧重于生命、福利和财产受灾害影响的那些人的保护。 |
| Accordingly, as established in draft
article 2, the focus is on facilitating a response to disasters, as well as
reducing the risk of disasters, so as to adequately and effectively meet the
essential needs of the persons concerned, while fully respecting their
rights. | 因此，如第2条草案所规定，重点是应对灾害以及降低灾害风险，以便充分和有效地满足受灾人员的基本需要，同时充分尊重他们的权利。 |
| (2) The draft articles cover, ratione
materiae, the rights and obligations of States affected by a disaster in
respect of persons present in their territory (irrespective of nationality)
or in territory under their jurisdiction or control, and the rights and
obligations of third States and intergovernmental organizations and
non-governmental organizations and other entities in a position to cooperate,
particularly in the provision of disaster relief assistance as well as in the
reduction of disaster risk. | (2) 本条款草案从属事理由出发，涉及了受灾国相对于其领土内的人(无论其国籍如何)或受其管辖或控制的领土内的人而言所具有的权利和义务，以及有能力合作特别是在提供救灾援助和减少灾害风险方面有能力合作的第三国、国际组织和其他实体的权利和义务。 |
| Such rights and obligations are
understood to apply on two axes: the rights and obligations of States in
relation to one another and the rights and obligations of States in relation
to persons in need of protection. | 这种权利和义务的理解是，围绕两个方向适用：各国相互之间的权利和义务，各国相对于需要保护的人员的权利和义务。 |
| While the focus is on the former, the
draft articles also contemplate, albeit in general terms, the rights of
individuals affected by disasters, as established by international law. | 虽然重点放在前者，但条款草案也考虑了受灾个人按国际法规定享有的权利，尽管措辞是概括性的。 |
| The importance of human rights
protections in disaster situations is demonstrated by the increased attention
paid to the issue by human rights bodies established under the auspices of
the United Nations, as well as by regional international courts. | 在联合国主持下设立的人权机构以及一些区域国际法庭对人权问题的重视不断加强，这体现了在灾难条件下保护人权的重要性。 |
| Furthermore, as is elaborated in draft
article 3, the draft articles are not limited to any particular type of
disaster. | 另外，如第3条草案所述，条款草案并不限于任何一类特定灾害。 |
| A distinction between natural and
human-made disasters would be artificial and difficult to sustain in practice
in view of the complex interaction of different causes leading to disasters. | 鉴于导致灾害的不同原因之间复杂的互动关系，自然灾害和人为灾害的划分是武断的，在实际操作中也难以维持。 |
| (3) The scope ratione personae of the
draft articles is limited to natural persons affected by disasters. | (3) 条款草案的属人理由范围限于受灾害影响的自然人。 |
| In addition, the focus is primarily on
the activities of States and intergovernmental organizations, including
regional integration organizations, and other entities enjoying specific
international legal competence in the provision of disaster relief assistance
in the context of disasters. | 此外，侧重的主要是国家和国际组织以及在发生灾害时提供救灾援助方面享有特定国际法律权能的其他实体的活动。 |
| The activities of non-governmental
organizations and other private actors, sometimes collectively referred to as
“civil society” actors, are
included within the scope of the draft articles only in a secondary manner,
either as direct beneficiaries of duties placed on States (for example, of
the duty of States to cooperate, in draft article 7) or indirectly, as being
subject to the domestic laws implementing the draft articles of the affected
State, a third State or the State of nationality of the entity or private
actor. | 非政府组织和其他私人行为者有时统称为“民间社会”行为者，其活动也包括在条款草案的范围内，但处于次要地位，或作为国家义务(例如第7条草案中国家开展合作的义务)的直接受益人，或根据受灾国、第三国或实体或私人行为者国籍国的国内法律间接受益。 |
| Except where specifically indicated
otherwise, the draft articles cover international disaster response by both
international and domestic actors. | 除非另有具体说明，条款草案覆盖国际行为者和国内行为者两方面的国际灾害应对。 |
| The draft articles do not, however, cover
other types of international assistance, such as assistance provided by
States to their nationals abroad and consular assistance. | 但是，条款草案并不包括其他类型的国际援助，如各国在国外为其国民提供的援助以及领事协助。 |
| (4) As suggested by the phrase “in the event of” in the title of the
topic, the scope of the draft articles ratione temporis is primarily focused
on the immediate post-disaster response and early recovery phase, including
the post-disaster reconstruction phase. | (4) 如本专题的标题中“发生灾害时”这一短语所示，条款草案的范围依据属时理由，主要侧重于灾害发生后的立即应对行动以及早期的恢复阶段，包括灾后重建阶段。 |
| Nonetheless, as confirmed by draft
article 2, the pre-disaster phase falls within the scope of the draft
articles, and is the subject of draft article 9, which deals with disaster
risk reduction and disaster prevention and mitigation activities. | 尽管如此，如第2条草案所确认，灾害前阶段也属于条款草案的范围之内，是第9条草案的事项，该条处理的是减少灾害风险和灾害预防和缓解活动。 |
| (5) The draft articles are not limited,
ratione loci, to activities in the area where the disaster occurs, but also
cover those within assisting States and transit States. | (5) 从属地理由讲，本条款草案不局限于灾害发生地的活动，也包括那些援助国和过境国内的活动。 |
| Nor is the transboundary nature of a
disaster a necessary condition for the triggering of the application of the
draft articles. | 灾害具有跨界性质也不是引起条款草案适用的必要条件。 |
| Certainly, it is not uncommon for major
disasters to have a transboundary effect, thereby increasing the need for
international cooperation and coordination. | 当然，重大的灾害通常具有跨界影响，因而增加了国际合作与协调的必要性。 |
| Nonetheless, examples abound of major
international relief assistance efforts being undertaken in response to
disasters occurring solely within the territorial boundaries of a single
State, or within a territory under its jurisdiction or control. | 尽管如此，大量的例子也表明，重大的国际救灾活动主要针对发生在一国领土边界之内或受一国管辖或控制的领土内的灾害事件。 |
| In the event of a disaster, States have
the duty to protect all persons present in their territory, or in territory
under their jurisdiction or control, irrespective not only of nationality but
also of legal status. | 一旦发生灾害时，各国有责任保护在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内的所有人员，无论其国籍或法律身份如何。 |
| While different considerations may arise,
unless otherwise specified, the draft articles are not tailored with any
specific disaster type or situation in mind, but are intended to be applied
flexibly to meet the needs arising from all disasters, regardless of their
transboundary effect. | 虽然可能会有各种不同的考虑，但除非有另外明确规定，本条款草案不针对任何具体类型的灾害或情况，而是意在灵活地适用，以满足所有灾害所产生的需要，无论灾害是否具有跨界影响。 |
| Article 2 | 第2条 |
| Purpose | 宗旨 |
| The purpose of the present draft articles
is to facilitate the adequate and effective response to disasters and
reduction of the risk of disasters, so as to meet 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和有效地应对灾害和减少灾害风险，以满足有关人员的基本需要，充分尊重其权利。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 2 elaborates on draft article
1 (Scope) by providing further guidance on the purpose of the draft articles. | (1) 第2条是对第1条草案(范围)的阐述，就条款草案的目的提出了进一步的指导。 |
| The main issue raised relates to the
juxtaposition of “needs”
versus “rights”. | 提出的主要问题涉及“需要”与“权利”的关系问题。 |
| The Commission was aware of the debate in
the humanitarian assistance community on whether a “rights-based” approach as opposed to the more traditional “needs-based” approach was to be preferred,
or vice versa. | 委员会了解到人道主义援助领域人们进行过这样的辩论，即应该采用“基于权利”的做法，还是应该采用更为传统的“基于需要”的做法。 |
| The prevailing sense of the Commission
was that the two approaches were not necessarily mutually exclusive, but were
best viewed as being complementary. | 委员会的主流意见认为，两种做法并不一定相互排斥，而最好视为相互补充。 |
| The Commission settled for a formulation
that emphasized the importance of the response to a disaster, and the
reduction of the risk of disasters, that adequately and effectively meets the
“needs” of the persons
concerned. | 委员会最终采用的措辞，强调应对灾害和减少灾害风险的重要性，这就充分和有效地满足了受灾害影响人员的“需要”。 |
| Such response, or reduction of risk, has
to take place with full respect for the rights of such persons. | 开展这种应对或减少风险的工作时，必须充分尊重此类人员的权利。 |
| (2) Although not necessarily a term of
art, by “adequate and effective”, what is meant is a high-quality response or reduction of the
risk of disasters, so as to meet the essential needs of the persons affected
by the disaster. | (2) “充分和有效”不一定是专门术语，其实际含义是高质量的应对工作或减少灾害风险，满足受灾害影响的人员的基本需要。 |
| Similar formulations are to be found in
existing agreements, in the context of the response to disasters. | 类似的措辞也见于应对灾害的其他已有协定。 |
| These include “effective
and concerted” and “rapid and
effective” found in the 2015 Agreement on Disaster
Management and Emergency Response of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (hereinafter, “ASEAN Agreement”), as well as “proper and effective” used in the Tampere Convention on the Provision of
Telecommunication Resources for Disaster Mitigation and Relief Operations of
1998 (hereinafter, “Tampere Convention”). | 其中包括2015年《东南亚国家联盟灾害管理和紧急应对协定》(下称《东盟协定》)中出现的“有效和一致”以及“快速和有效”等词语，1998年《关于为减灾和救灾行动提供电信资源的坦佩雷公约》(下称《坦佩雷公约》)使用的“恰当和有效”等词语。 |
| Given the context in which such response
is to be provided, an element of timeliness is implicit in the term “effective”. | 鉴于进行各种应对时所存在的背景，及时性要素通常暗含于“有效”一词中。 |
| The more drawn-out the response, the less
likely it is that it will be effective. | 应对工作越是拖沓，其有效性越打折扣。 |
| This and other aspects of what makes a
response “adequate” and “effective” is the subject of other
provisions of the draft articles, including draft article 15. | 这一点，以及使应对“充分”和“有效”所涉的其他方面是包括第15条草案在内的本条款草案其他部分规定所处理的议题。 |
| Notwithstanding this, it is understood
that while a high standard is called for, it has, nonetheless, to be based in
what is realistic and feasible “on the ground” in any given disaster situation. | 尽管如此，有一项谅解是，虽然有必要采纳高标准，但在发生任何具体灾害时，标准必须建立在“实地”工作现实和可行的基础上。 |
| Hence, no reference is made, for example,
to the response having to be “fully” effective. | 因此，举例而言，在案文里没有提到应对必须是“完全”有效的。 |
| (3) While the main emphasis of the draft
articles is on the response to disasters, the dimension of disaster risk
reduction also falls within their scope and is the subject of draft article
9. | (3) 虽然本条款草案的主要重点是应对灾害，但减少灾害风险问题也在第9条草案范围之内，是该条的议题。 |
| In doing so, the draft articles
acknowledge the general recognition, within the international community (most
recently evidenced by the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction,
2015-2030, adopted in 2015), of the essential role of disaster risk
reduction. | 通过这种处理办法，条款草案承认国际社会范围内对于减少灾害风险这一基本作用的普遍认识(近期的证明是2015年通过的《2015-2030年仙台减少灾害风险框架》。 |
| The reference to “adequate and effective” action so as to “meet the essential needs of the persons concerned, with full
respect for their rights”, accordingly, applies
equally to disaster response and disaster risk reduction. | 因此，提到“充分和有效”地应对灾害和减少灾害风险以“满足有关人员的基本需要，充分尊重其权利”，对应对灾害和减少灾害风险同样适用。 |
| (4) The Commission decided not to
formulate the provision in the form of a general statement on the obligation
of States, as it was felt that it would not sufficiently highlight the
specific rights and obligations of the affected State. | (4) 委员会在拟定这一项规定时决定不采用一般性陈述的形式论述各国的义务，因为委员会觉得那样做不能足够地强调受灾国的具体权利和义务。 |
| It was not clear, for example, whether
such a formulation would sufficiently distinguish between different
obligations for different States, such as for the affected State as opposed
to assisting States. | 但这种措辞是否足够地区分了不同国家的不同义务，例如受灾国相对于援助国的不同义务，这点并不清楚。 |
| Accordingly, a reference to States was
not included, on the understanding that it was not strictly necessary for a
provision on the purpose of the draft articles. | 因此，在这一条里没有提到各国，所依据的谅解是，对于论述条款草案目的的规定而言，这不是严格必要的。 |
| The obligations of States are
specifically considered in other provisions of the draft articles. | 各国的义务在条款草案其他规定中得到具体的考虑。 |
| (5) The word “facilitate” reflects the vision of the Commission for the role that the draft
articles might play in the overall panoply of instruments and arrangements
that exist at the international level in the context of disaster relief
assistance, as well as disaster risk reduction. | (5) “促进”一词反映了委员会对于条款草案在灾害救援以及减少灾害领域目前国际上存在的众多文书和协定中可起的作用的设想。 |
| It was felt that while the draft articles
could not by themselves ensure a response, or the reduction of risk, they
were intended to facilitate an adequate and effective response or reduction
of risk. | 委员会觉得，条款草案本身不能保证对灾害作出应对或减少灾害风险，其目的是便利作出充分和有效的应对。 |
| (6) The qualifier “essential” before the term “needs” was included in order to indicate
more clearly that the needs being referred to are those related to survival
or similarly basic needs in the aftermath of a disaster. | (6) 在“需要”之前加上了形容词“基本”，这是为了更清楚地表明，这里所说的需要是在发生灾害之后与生存相关的需要或类似的基本需要。 |
| It was felt that “essential” clearly brought out the context
in which such needs arise. | 委员会觉得，“基本”明确地带出了这类需要所产生的背景。 |
| Such reference should be further
understood in the context of the importance of taking into account the needs
of the particularly vulnerable, as indicated in draft article 6. | 应结合第6条草案所示的考虑到特别弱势者需要的重要性，进一步理解这样的措辞。 |
| (7) By “persons
concerned” what is meant are people directly affected
by the disaster, including by being displaced thereby, as opposed to
individuals more indirectly affected. | (7) “有关人员”的意思是指直接受灾害影响的人，而不是那些更间接地受到影响的人。 |
| This term was inserted so as to qualify
the scope of the draft articles and is in conformity with the approach taken
by existing instruments, which focus on the provision of relief to persons
directly affected by a disaster. | 插入这一用语是为了界定本条款草案的适用范围，这与现有各文书所采取的做法是一致的，它们都侧重于向直接受灾害影响的人提供救济。 |
| This is not to say that individuals who
are more indirectly affected, for example, through loss of family members in
a disaster or who suffered economic loss owing to a disaster elsewhere, would
be without remedy or recourse. | 这不是说，更多地受到间接影响的个人，例如那些因灾害而失去家人或因其他地方遭受灾害而遭受经济损失的人便没有办法得到救济或帮助。 |
| Indeed, it is not the intention of the
Commission to state the legal rules applicable to such individuals in the
draft articles. | 实际上，委员会并不打算在本条款草案里说明适用于此类个人的法律规则。 |
| The inclusion within the scope of the
draft articles of disaster risk reduction implies that the “persons concerned” would cover those
likely to be affected by a future disaster, a determination to be made at the
national level based on an evaluation of the persons’
exposure and vulnerability. | 在条款草案范围之内列入减少灾害风险就意味着，“有关人员”包括有可能在未来的灾害中受灾的人，这是要依据对人员暴露和脆弱程度的评估在国家层面作出的判断。 |
| (8) The reference to “with full respect for their rights” aims
at ensuring that the rights in question be respected and protected, as
confirmed, in the context of human rights, by draft article 5. | (8) 提及“充分尊重其权利”，其目的是确保所涉权利应受到尊重和保护，有如第5条草案就人权所作的确认。 |
| In addition, the phrase intentionally
leaves the question of how rights are to be enforced to the relevant rules of
international law themselves. | 此外，这一短语目的是将这些权利如何实现的问题，留给有关的国际法规定本身来处理。 |
| While the draft articles primarily
envisage the application of human rights, which is the subject of draft
article 5, the reference to “rights” is not only a reference to human rights, but also, inter alia, to
rights acquired under domestic law. | 条款草案考虑的主要是人权的适用，这是第5条草案的议题，但是，提到“权利”不仅是指人权，而且除其他外也指按照国内法所获得的权利。 |
| Article 3 | 第3条 |
| Use of terms | 用语 |
| For the purposes of the present draft
articles: | 为本条款草案的目的： |
| (a) “disaster” means a calamitous event or series of events resulting in
widespread loss of life, great human suffering and distress, mass
displacement, or large-scale material or environmental damage, thereby
seriously disrupting the functioning of society; | (a) “灾害”是指造成广泛的生命损失、巨大的人类痛苦和危难、大规模流离失所、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； |
| (b) “affected
State” means a State in whose territory, or in
territory under whose jurisdiction or control, a disaster takes place; | (b) “受灾国”是指在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内发生灾害的国家； |
| (c) “assisting
State” means a State providing assistance to an
affected State with its consent; | (c) “援助国”是指经受灾国同意向其提供援助的国家； |
| (d) “other
assisting actor” means a competent intergovernmental
organization, or a relevant non-governmental organization or entity, providing
assistance to an affected State with its consent; | (d) “其他援助方”是指经受灾国同意向其提供援助的主管政府间组织或有关非政府组织或实体； |
| (e) “external
assistance” means relief personnel, equipment and
goods, and services provided to an affected State by an assisting State or
other assisting actor for disaster relief assistance; | (e) “外部援助”是指援助国或其他援助方为救灾援助而向受灾国提供的救灾人员、设备和物资以及服务； |
| (f) “relief
personnel” means civilian or military personnel sent
by an assisting State or other assisting actor for the purpose of providing
disaster relief assistance; | (f) “救灾人员”是指援助国或其他援助方为提供救灾援助而派遣的民事或军事人员； |
| (g) “equipment
and goods” means supplies, tools, machines, specially
trained animals, foodstuffs, drinking water, medical supplies, means of
shelter, clothing, bedding, vehicles, telecommunications equipment, and other
objects for disaster relief assistance. | (g) “设备和物资”是指为救灾援助提供的用品、工具、机器、经过专门训练的动物、食品、饮用水、医疗用品、栖身手段、衣物、铺盖用品、车辆、电信设备和其他物品。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The Commission’s practice, as reflected in most of the draft articles adopted on
diverse topics of international law, has been to include a provision on the “use of terms”. | (1) 正如围绕各种国际法专题已经通过的大多数条款草案所反映的那样，委员会的做法是在条款草案里加上“用语”规定。 |
| Some of the terms selected for inclusion
in draft article 3 were specifically singled out in the commentaries to
various draft articles as requiring definition. | 列入第3条草案里的某些术语会在各项条文草案的评注里单独提出来，说明为何需要界定。 |
| Other terms were included because of
their overall frequency of occurrence in the draft articles. | 另一些术语之所以列入是由于其在条款草案里的总体出现频率。 |
| Subparagraph (a) | (a)项 |
| (2) Subparagraph (a) defines the term “disaster” solely for the purposes of the
draft articles. | (2) (a) 项仅为本条款草案的目的界定“灾害”一语。 |
| The definition has been delimited so as
to properly capture the scope of the draft articles, as established in draft
article 1, while not, for example, inadvertently also dealing with other
serious events, such as political and economic crises, which may also
undermine the functioning of society, but which are outside the scope of the
draft articles. | 确定这一定义是要恰当把握第1条草案建立的条款草案范围，与此同时又不会无意地处理其他严重事件，例如政治和经济危机，这些危机也可能破坏社会的运转，但超出了条款草案的范围。 |
| Such delimitation is evident from two
features of the definition: (a) the emphasis placed on the existence of a
calamitous event that causes serious disruption of the functioning of
society; and (b) the inclusion of a number of qualifying phrases. | 这样的界定包含着两个特点：(a) 强调发生了导致社会运转被严重破坏的事件；(b) 包括了一些限定性短语。 |
| (3) The Commission considered the
approach of the Tampere Convention, which conceptualized a disaster as being
the consequence of an event, namely the serious disruption of the functioning
of society caused by that event, as opposed to being the event itself. | (3) 委员会审议了《坦佩雷公约》中的处理办法，该公约将灾害设想为一个事件的后果，即由于该事件而社会的运转遭受严重破坏，这有别于事件本身。 |
| The Commission was aware that such an
approach represented contemporary thinking in the humanitarian assistance
community, as confirmed, notably, by the 2005 World Conference on Disaster
Reduction, convened by the United Nations at Hyogo in Japan, as well as by
recent treaties and other instruments, including the 2007 Guidelines for the
Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and
Initial Recovery Assistance of the International Federation of Red Cross and
Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) (hereinafter, “IFRC
Guidelines”). | 委员会意识到，这样的处理办法代表了人道主义援助界目前所存在的思维，这正如2005年联合国在日本兵库举行的世界减灾大会所确认的，以及最近的条约和其他文书所确认的，包括2007年红十字会与红新月会国际联合会《国内便利和管理国际救灾和初期恢复援助工作导则》(下称《红十字会红新月会联会导则》)。 |
| Nonetheless, the Commission decided to
shift the emphasis back to the earlier conception of “disaster” as being a specific event, since
it was embarking on the formulation of a legal instrument, which required a
more concise and precise legal definition, as opposed to one that is more
policy oriented. | 尽管如此，委员会决定将重点恢复到早先的“灾害”概念中，即灾害是一个具体事件，因为委员会正在做的是拟订一项法律文书，要求有更简练和准确的法律定义，不同于更多地以政策为导向的那种定义。 |
| (4) The element requiring the existence
of an event is qualified in several ways. | (4) 须存在一项事件这一要素受到好几种限定。 |
| First, the reference to a “calamitous” event serves to establish a
threshold, by reference to the nature of the event, whereby only extreme
events are covered. | 首先，提到“灾难性”事件，这是通过提到事件的性质而确立一个门槛，即只有极端的事件才包含在内。 |
| This was inspired by the definition
embodied in the resolution on humanitarian assistance adopted by the
Institute of International Law at its 2003 Bruges session, which deliberately
established a higher threshold so as to exclude other acute crises. | 这一点受国际法学会2003年布鲁日会议通过的关于人道主义援助的决议中定义的启发，国际法学会有意确立这么高的门槛，以排除其他紧急事件。 |
| What constitutes “calamitous” is to be understood both by
application of the qualifier in the remainder of the provision, namely “… resulting in widespread loss of life, great human suffering and
distress, mass displacement, or large-scale material or environmental damage,
thereby seriously disrupting the functioning of society”; and by keeping in mind the scope and purpose of the draft
articles, as articulated in draft articles 1 and 2. | 对于“灾难性”一词的理解应该从两方面来进行，一是适用该条规定后一部分的限定语，即“造成普遍生命损失、巨大人类痛苦和危难、或大规模物质和环境损坏，从而严重扰乱社会运转”；另一方面须牢记条款草案的范围和目的，正如第1和第2条草案所说明的。 |
| In addition, reference is made to “event or series of events” in order to
cover those types of events, such as frequent small-scale disasters, that, on
their own, might not meet the necessary threshold, but that, taken together
would constitute a calamitous event for the purposes of the draft articles. | 此外，还提到“事件或一系列事件”，这是为了包含这样类型的事件，其本身可能达不到标准，但合在一起，可能构成本条款草案所说的灾难性事件。 |
| No limitation is included concerning the
origin of the event, that is whether it is natural or human-made, in
recognition of the fact that disasters often arise from complex sets of
causes that may include both wholly natural elements and contributions from
human activities. | 这一条里没有包含事件原因的限制，不论是人为还是自然原因，这是为了承认，灾害往往产生于复杂的原因，可能既包含完全天然的因素，也包含人类活动的因素。 |
| Likewise, the draft articles apply
equally to sudden-onset events (such as an earthquake or tsunami) and to
slow-onset events (such as drought or sea-level rise), as well as frequent small-scale
events (floods or landslides). | 与此类似，条款草案可以同样适用于突发事件(如地震或海啸等)和缓慢发生的事件(如干旱或海平面上升)以及频繁的小规模事件(洪水或滑坡)。 |
| (5) The event is further qualified by two
causation requirements. | (5) 事件另受两个因果要求的限定。 |
| First, for the event, or series of
events, to be considered “calamitous” in the sense required by the draft articles, it has to result in
one or more of four possible outcomes: widespread loss of life, great human
suffering and distress, mass displacement or large-scale material or
environmental damage. | 首先，对于事件或系列事件而言，如果要认定为条款草案所说的“灾难性”，事件须造成四项可能后果中的一个或更多：普遍生命损失、巨大的人类痛苦和危难，大规模流离失所或大规模物质和环境损害。 |
| Accordingly, a major event such as a
serious earthquake, which takes place in the middle of the ocean or in an
uninhabited area and which does not result in at least one of the four
envisaged outcomes, would not satisfy the threshold requirement in
subparagraph (a). | 因此，像一次严重地震这样的重大事件，如果发生在海洋中间或无人居住地区，并没有造成上面所设想的四个结果之一，就不符合(a)项草案所说的标准。 |
| Second, the nature of the event is
further qualified by the requirement that any, or all, of the four possible
outcomes, as applicable, result in the serious disruption of the functioning
of society. | 第二，事件的性质还加上了一条限定，即上述四个可能结果中的任何一个或全部结果都会造成社会运转遭受了严重破坏。 |
| In other words, an event that resulted
in, for example, large-scale material damage, but did not seriously disrupt
the functioning of society, would not, accordingly, satisfy the threshold
requirement. | 换句话说，有一个事件造成了大规模物质损害，但并没有严重扰乱社会的运转，这就不符合这一条中的要求。 |
| Hence, by including such causal elements,
the definition retains aspects of the approach taken in contemporary texts,
as exemplified by the Tampere Convention, namely by considering the
consequence of the event as a key aspect of the definition, albeit for
purposes of establishing the threshold for the application of the draft
articles. | 因此，通过加上这些因果要素，定义就保留了现在人们所用的案文中的做法，例如《坦佩雷公约》中的做法，即考虑事件的后果，将其视为定义的关键方面，虽然这只是为了确立适用本条款的门槛的目的。 |
| (6) The element of “widespread loss of life” is a refinement,
inspired by the 1995 Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement and Non-Governmental Organizations in Disaster Relief. | (6) “广泛的生命损失”，这一限定语受1995年《国际红十字会和红新月会运动和非政府组织救灾行为准则》的启发。 |
| The requirement of “widespread” loss of life serves to exclude
events that result in relatively low loss of life; it being borne in mind
that such events could nonetheless satisfy one of the other causal
requirements. | 规定了“广泛的”生命损失，目的是排除造成较少人员伤亡的事件。 需要牢记的是，这样的事件也可能满足其他的因果要求。 |
| Conversely, an event causing widespread
loss of life could, on its own, satisfy the causation requirement and could
result in the triggering of the application of the draft articles if it
resulted in the serious disruption of the functioning of society. | 相反，已造成广泛的生命损失的事件，如果使社会运转遭受严重破坏，其本身也能满足因果要求，因而可引起本条款草案的适用。 |
| (7) The possibility of “great human suffering and distress” was
included out of recognition that many major disasters are accompanied by
widespread loss of life or by great human suffering and distress, including
that occasioned by non-fatal injuries, disease or other health problems
caused by the disaster. | (7) 之所以加上“巨大的人类痛苦和危难”的可能性，是因为认识到许多重大的灾害伴随着广泛的生命损失，或伴随着巨大的人类痛苦和危难，包括灾害造成的非致命伤害、疾病或其他健康问题。 |
| Accordingly, cases where an event has
resulted in relatively localized loss of life, owing to adequate prevention
and preparation, as well as effective mitigation actions, but nonetheless has
caused severe dislocation resulting in great human suffering and distress
that seriously disrupt the functioning of society, would be covered by the
draft articles. | 因此，有时由于有充分的预防和准备工作以及有效的减轻灾害行动，当地造成的生命损失有限，但还是引起了巨大的人类痛苦和危难，并严重破坏了社会的运转，这样的情况依然在条款草案范围内。 |
| (8) Similarly, “mass
displacement” refers to one of the other consequences
of major disasters, namely the displacement of persons on a large scale. | (8) 同样，“大规模流离失所”也是指重大灾害的其他后果之一，即人员被迫大规模流离失所。 |
| Together with “great
human suffering and distress”, displacement by the onset
of a disaster is one of the two most common ways in which persons are
considered “affected” by the
disaster. | 与“巨大的人类痛苦和危难”一起，灾害发生造成的流离失所是认为人员受到灾害“影响”的两种最常见方式之一。 |
| Displacement affects persons through the
loss of access to livelihoods, social services and social fabric. | 流离失所状况使受灾者失去获得生计和社会服务以及融入社会结构的机会。 |
| In complying with their obligations set
forth in the draft articles, States should also take into account the
displacement dimension. | 各国在遵守条款草案规定的义务时，还应考虑到流离失所问题。 |
| The qualifier “mass” was included to align with the high threshold for the application
of the draft articles. | 加上“大规模”的形容词是要与适用条款草案的高标准取得一致。 |
| (9) “Large-scale
material or environmental damage” was included by the
Commission in recognition of the wide-scale damage to property, livelihoods
and economic, physical, social and cultural assets, as well as the
environment typically caused by major disasters and the resultant disruption
of the functioning of society arising from the severe setback for human
development and well-being that such a loss typically causes. | (9) 委员会将“大规模的物质或环境损害”列入条款，是为了确认重大灾害通常引起的大规模财产、生计和经济、物质、社会和文化财产以及环境破坏和这类损失通常会造成的人类发展和福利严重受挫引起的社会运转中断。 |
| It is to be understood that it is not the
environmental or property loss per se that would be covered by the draft
articles, but rather the impact on persons of such loss; thus avoiding a
consideration of economic loss in general. | 应该理解的是，环境或财产损失本身没有包含在条款草案范围内，而是这种损失对人类的影响，从而避免对经济损失的一般考虑。 |
| A requirement of economic loss might
unnecessarily limit the scope of the draft articles, by, for example,
precluding them from also dealing with activities designed to mitigate
potential future human loss arising from existing environmental damage. | 对经济损失加以规定，可能不必要地限制条款草案范围，例如使条款草案无法处理以减轻现有环境破坏可能给未来人类造成的损失为目的的某些活动。 |
| (10) As already alluded to, the
requirement of serious disruption of the functioning of society serves to
establish a high threshold that would exclude from the scope of the draft
articles other types of crises such as serious political or economic crises. | (10) 正如已经暗示过的，规定对社会运转造成严重破坏这一点是为了确立较高的门槛，将其他一些类型的危机排除在条款草案适用范围之外，例如严重的政治或经济危机。 |
| Moreover, differences in application can
be further borne out by the purpose of the draft articles, as established in
draft article 2, and by the fact that the type of protection required, and
rights involved, may be different, and are, to varying extents, regulated by
other rules of international law, in particular international humanitarian
law, as indicated in draft article 18. | 另外，适用方面的这种差别也表现在第2条草案所确立的条款草案的目的上，而事实上所需要的保护类型以及所涉及的权利都可能不同，在不同的程度上受其他国际法规则尤其是国际人道主义法的制约，正如第18条草案所表示的。 |
| A situation of armed conflict cannot be
qualified per se as a disaster for the purposes of the present draft
articles. | 就本条款草案而言，武装冲突局势本身不能被定性为灾害。 |
| The requirement of serious disruption
necessarily also implies the potential for such disruption. | 严重破坏的标准也意味着造成这种破坏的潜力。 |
| This means that the fact that a State
took appropriate disaster risk reduction measures or relief measures, in
accordance with established emergency plans in response to a disaster with
the potential to seriously disrupt the functioning of society, would not per
se exclude the application of the draft articles. | 这意味着，国家按照应对具有严重破坏社会运转潜力的灾害制订的应急计划采取了适当减少灾害风险措施或救济措施，本身并不能排除条款草案的适用。 |
| (11) While the four possible outcomes
envisaged provide some guidance on what might amount to a serious disruption
of the functioning of society, the Commission refrained from providing
further descriptive or qualifying elements, so as to leave some discretion in
practice. | (11) 虽然设想的这四种可能后果在一定程度上说明了什么可能构成严重破坏社会的运转，但委员会没有提出进一步的描述性或限定性因素，以便给实践留出一定的酌定余地。 |
| (12) The definition of “disaster”, for purposes of the draft
articles, is subject to the specification in draft article 18, paragraph 2,
that the draft articles do not apply to the extent that the response to a
disaster is governed by the rules of international humanitarian law. | (12) 就条款草案的目的而言，“灾害”的定义受第18条第2款草案具体规定的限制，即条款草案不适用于应对灾害须遵守国际人道主义法规则的情况。 |
| Subparagraph (b) | (b)项 |
| (13) Subparagraph (b), which defines the
term “affected State” for
purposes of the draft articles, is inspired by the definition of the same
term provided in the IFRC Guidelines. | (13) (b)项为条款草案的目的界定“受灾国”一语，是受到了《红十字会红新月会联会导则》中同一用语定义的启发。 |
| It reflects the basic orientation that
the draft articles are primarily addressed to States. | 所体现的方向是，条款草案的主要对象是国家。 |
| It also anticipates the centrality of the
role to be played by the State affected by the disaster, as established in
draft article 10. | 与第10条草案的规定一样，该项规定还预期受灾国所发挥作用的中心地位。 |
| (14) The key feature in disaster response
or disaster risk reduction is State control. | (14) 救灾或减少灾害风险的主要特点是国家控制。 |
| In most cases that would accord with
control exercised by the State upon whose territory the disaster occurs. | 在大多数情况下，这与其领土内发生灾害的国家所行使的控制是一致的。 |
| However, this does not necessarily
exclude other situations in which a State may exercise de jure jurisdiction,
or de facto control, over another territory in which a disaster occurs. | 然而，这并不一定排除另外的情况，即一国可针对发生灾害的另一个领土行使法律上的管辖或实际控制的情况。 |
| The phrase “in
whose territory, or in territory under whose jurisdiction or control” was inspired by the definition of “State
of origin” in draft article 2, subparagraph (d), of
the 2001 articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous
activities. | “指在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内”这一短语取自2001年预防危险活动的越境损害的条款草案中的第2条(d)项“起源国”的定义。 |
| (15) The Commission considered that a
State exercising jurisdiction or control over a territory (other than its
own) in which a disaster occurs would also be deemed an “affected State” for purposes of the draft
articles. | (15) 委员会认为，对发生灾害的另一个领土(非自己领土)或另一个地区行使管辖或控制的一国，为本条款草案的目的，也将被视为“受灾国”。 |
| Such possibility is also implicit in the
recognition, in article 18, that the draft articles would apply in the
context of so-called “complex disasters”, which occur in the same territory where an armed conflict is
taking place, to the extent that the response to the disaster in question is
not governed by the rules of international humanitarian law. | 此种可能性也在第18条草案中得到默认，该条承认，如果对所涉灾害的应对不在国际人道主义法规则范围内，本条款草案也在所谓“复杂灾害”情况下适用，这里指灾害与武装冲突发生在同一个领土内的情形。 |
| At the same time, the provision was
intentionally formulated to make the territorial link clear. | 同时，这条规定的措辞有意清楚地表明领土关系。 |
| As such, the reference to “jurisdiction” is not intended to include
States of nationality that may claim jurisdiction under international law
over individual persons affected by a disaster that occurs outside their
territory, or territory under their jurisdiction or control. | 因此，提到“管辖”并不是要包含根据国际法对在本国领土或其管辖和控制下的地区以外发生灾害的受灾个人具有管辖权的国家。 |
| The Commission recognized that the
implication of including States exercising jurisdiction or control was that,
in exceptional cases, there may be two affected States: the State upon whose
territory the disaster occurs and the State exercising jurisdiction or
control over the same territory. | 委员会认识到，将行使管辖或控制的国家包括在定义里，这样做的含义是，在特殊情况下，可能有两个受灾国：在其领土内发生灾害的国家和针对同一领土而对领土行使管辖或控制的国家。 |
| (16) The concluding phrase “a disaster takes place” is intended to
align the definition of “affected State” with that of “disaster”, in subparagraph (a). | (16) 末尾处“发生灾害”的短语，用意是使“受灾国”的定义同(a)项中的“灾害”定义取得一致。 |
| It seeks to strike a balance between the
option of placing the emphasis on the effects of a disaster, thereby
increasing the number of States that could potentially be considered “affected States”, as opposed to that of
focusing on the territorial component (where the event took place), which
could unnecessarily exclude States that suffer the consequences of the
disaster even though the event did not, strictly speaking, take place in
their territory (or territory under their jurisdiction or control). | 这个短语力求在两者之间取得一种平衡，一方面是把重点放在强调灾害影响上，这样就会增多有可能被视为“受灾国”的国家数目，另一方面是侧重领土内容(事件发生地)，这样可能会不必要地把虽然受灾，但严格地说灾害并不发生在其(或其管辖或控制下的)境内。 |
| Accordingly, an explicit renvoi to the
definition of “disaster”, in
subparagraph (a), is made in recognition of the fact that the draft articles
provide for a composite definition of disaster, covering both the event and
its effects, and implying that different States may be considered “affected”, for purposes of the draft
articles, in different scenarios. | 因此，(a)项明确提到“灾害”的定义是承认，条款草案的灾害定义是复合型的，既包括事件也包括影响，含义是，为条款草案的目的，不同的国家在不同的情景中都可被视为“受灾”。 |
| It also accords with the Commission’s approach of considering the consequence of the event as a key
element for purposes of establishing the threshold for the application of the
draft articles. | 这也符合委员会在确立适用本条款草案的门槛时将事件的后果视为一个关键因素的做法。 |
| Subparagraph (c) | (c)项 |
| (17) The definition of “assisting State” in subparagraph (c) is
drawn from the definition of “supporting State” in the 2000 Framework Convention on Civil Defence Assistance,
with the term “Beneficiary State” changed to “affected State”, which is the term utilized in the draft articles and defined in
subparagraph (b). | (17) (c)项中的“援助国”定义参照了2000年《民防援助框架公约》中“支援国”的定义，将“受惠国”改为“受灾国”，条款草案采用了这一用语，(b)项也作了界定。 |
| The phrase “a
State providing assistance” is a reference to the
concept of “external assistance”, which is defined in subparagraph (e), and which is undertaken on
the basis of the duty to cooperate in draft article 7, read together with
draft articles 8 and 9. | 短语“提供援助的国家”是对“外部援助”概念的提及，(e)项对此作了界定，提供“外部援助”是在第7条草案中的合作义务基础上进行的，应与第8和第9条草案一起来理解。 |
| (18) A State is only categorized as an “assisting State” once the assistance is
being or has been provided. | (18) 一国只有正在提供或已经提供援助之后才可归类为“援助国”。 |
| In other words, a State offering
assistance is not an “assisting State”, with the various legal consequences that flow from such
categorization, as provided for in the draft articles, until such assistance
has been consented to by the affected State, in accordance with draft article
13. | 换句话说，一个提议提供援助的国家不是“援助国”，由这种分类自然产生各种各样法律后果，正如本条款草案所规定的，直到这种援助已被受灾国按照第13条草案同意。 |
| Subparagraph (d) | (d)项 |
| (19) In addition to affected and
assisting States, the draft articles also seek to regulate the position of
other assisting actors. | (19) 除了受灾国和援助国，本条款草案也试图对其他援助方的地位作出规定。 |
| A significant proportion of contemporary
disaster risk reduction and disaster relief activities are undertaken by, or
under the auspices of, international organizations, including but not limited
to the United Nations, as well as non-governmental organizations and other
entities. | 当代减灾和救灾活动有相当大的比例是由国际组织实施或在国际组织主持下进行的，国际组织包括但不限于联合国，实施或主持这种活动的还可以是非政府组织和其他实体。 |
| This group of actors is collectively
referred to in the draft articles as “other assisting
actors”. | 本条款草案将这一组行为者统称为“其他援助方”。 |
| This reference is without prejudice to
the differing legal status of these actors under international law, which is
acknowledged in the draft articles, for example, in draft article 12. | 这一名称不妨碍这些行为者根据国际法所具有的各不相同的法律地位，这在条款草案里已经得到确认，例如在第12条草案。 |
| (20) The definition reflects the
commentary to draft article 7, which confirms the understanding that the term
“assisting actors” refers to,
in the formulation employed in draft article 7, the United Nations, the
components of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, and other assisting
actors. | (20) 这项定义反映了第7条草案的评注，第7条草案确认了这样的理解，即“援助方”指第7条草案措辞所提到的联合国、红十字和红新月运动各组成部分及其他援助方。 |
| The phrase “or
entity”, which is drawn, in part, from the ASEAN
Agreement, was added in recognition of the fact that not all actors that are
involved in disaster relief efforts can be categorized in one or the other
category mentioned. | “或实体”的短语部分上取自《东盟协定》，加上这个短语是确认，并非所有参与救灾工作的行为者都可以归入前边提到的这个或那个类别。 |
| In particular, that phrase is to be
understood as referring to entities such as the Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement. | 具体地说，这一短语应该理解为是专指红十字会和红新月会运动这类实体。 |
| (21) The Commission understood the
definition of “other assisting actors” as being limited, for purposes of the draft articles, to those
that are external to the affected State. | (21) 为本条款草案的目的，委员会对“其他援助方”定义的理解是仅限于受害国外部的援助方。 |
| Accordingly, the activities of domestic non-governmental
organizations, for example, are not covered. | 因此，举例而言，本国非政府组织的活动就不在此列。 |
| Nor would a domestic actor incidentally
fall within the scope of the draft articles through the act of securing, or
attempting to secure, assistance from abroad. | 国内行为者也不会因为从国外获得或试图获得援助而无意中被划入此列。 |
| (22) As with the definition of “assisting State”, in subparagraph (c), the
concluding phrase “providing assistance to that State
with its consent” is a reference to the central role
played by consent in the draft articles, in accordance with draft article 13. | (22) 至于(c)项中“援助国”的定义，末尾处“经受灾国同意向其提供援助”是指根据第13条草案，同意在条款草案中起到的中心作用。 |
| It is also included in recognition of the
broad range of activities typically undertaken by the entities in question,
in the context of both disaster risk reduction and the provision of disaster
relief assistance, and which are regulated by the draft articles. | 加上这个短语也是为了确认有关实体在减少灾害风险和提供救灾援助方面通常所开展的活动的广阔范围，而这两个方面都是本条款草案所要规范的。 |
| Subparagraph (e) | (e)项 |
| (23) Subparagraph (e) defines the type of
assistance that the draft articles envisage assisting States or other
assisting actors providing to the affected State, as a form of cooperation
anticipated in draft article 8. | (23) (e)项界定的是本条款草案所设想的援助国或其他援助方向受灾国提供的援助的类型，作为第8条草案所预想的合作的一种形式。 |
| (24) The formulation is based on both the
Guidelines on The Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence Assets in
Disaster Relief (also known as the “Oslo Guidelines”) and the 2000 Framework Convention on Civil Defence Assistance. | (24) (e)措辞参照了《在救灾中使用外国军事和民防资源的准则》（又称作《奥斯陆准则》）和2000年《民防援助框架公约》。 |
| The reference to “material” in the Oslo Guidelines was
replaced with “equipment and goods”, which is the term used in the draft articles, and which is
defined in subparagraph (g). | 以“设备和物资”代替了《奥斯陆准则》中的“物质”，这是本条款草案的用语，(g)项对此作了界定。 |
| (25) The phrase “provided
to an affected State by an assisting State or other assisting actor” reiterates the nature of the legal relationship between the
assisting State or actor and the affected State, as envisaged in the draft
articles. | (25) 短语“援助国或其他援助方…而向受灾国提供的”是指本条款草案所设想的援助国或援助方与受灾国的法律关系的性质。 |
| (26) The concluding clause seeks to
clarify the purpose for which external assistance ought to be provided,
namely “for disaster relief assistance”. | (26) 末尾短语旨在澄清提供外部援助应遵循的目的，即“为救灾援助”。 |
| The Commission understood that the
concept of “external assistance”, by definition, applied specifically to the response phase. | 委员会的理解是，“外部援助”从定义上说具体适用于应对阶段。 |
| While the formulation is cast in the
technical terminology of disaster response, it is understood to accord with
the relevant part of the overall purpose of the draft articles, as set out in
draft article 2, namely to “facilitate the adequate
and effective response to disasters … so as to meet
the essential needs of the persons concerned, with full respect for their
rights”. | 虽然措辞用的是救灾和减少灾害风险方面的技术术语，但人们能够理解这符合载于第2条草案的总体目标，即“促进充分和有效地应对灾害…以满足有关人员的基本需要，充分尊重其权利”。 |
| Subparagraph (f) | (f)项 |
| (27) The subparagraph defines the
personnel component of external assistance provided by assisting States or by
other assisting actors. | (27) 这项界定的是援助国或其他援助方提供外部援助的人员构成部分。 |
| The definition indicates the two types of
personnel who are typically sent for the purpose of providing disaster relief
assistance, namely “civilian”
or “military” personnel. | 该定义表明，为提供救灾援助或减少灾害风险的目的，通常派遣两类人员，即“民事”或“军事”人员。 |
| The reference to the latter category was
also inspired by the bilateral treaty between Greece and the Russian
Federation of 2000, and is intended as recognition of the important role
played by military personnel, as a category of relief personnel, in the
provision of disaster relief assistance. | 提及军事人员，这是受2000年希腊和俄罗斯联邦之间的双边条约的启发，旨在承认军事人员作为一个类别的救灾人员在提供救灾援助方面所发挥的重要作用。 |
| While the reference to military personnel
is more pertinent to the case of assisting States, the term “civilian” personnel is meant to be broad
enough to cover such personnel sent by assisting States and other assisting
actors. | 提及军事人员对于援助国来说更为相关，但“民事”人员一词意在让定义宽泛，能包括援助国和其他援助方所派遣的这类人员。 |
| That these are options open to some, but
not all, assisting entities (including States) is confirmed by the use of the
phrase in the alternative (“or”). | 对某些但并非所有的援助实体(包括国家在内)来说，这些是开放性的选择，短语里所用的选择性词语(“或”)确认了这一点。 |
| (28) It is understood that such personnel
are typically “specialized”
personnel, as referred to in the annex to General Assembly resolution 46/182
of 19 December 1991, in that what is expected are personnel who have the
necessary skill set and are provided with the necessary equipment and goods,
as defined in subparagraph (g), to perform the functions in question. | (28) 根据理解，这些人员通常是“专业”人员，正如大会1991年12月19日第46/182号决议附件中所提及的，即所期待的人员应具有必要的技能，并具有(g)项所界定的必要的设备和物资，以便履行所说的职能。 |
| (29) The phrase “sent
by” establishes a nexus between the assisting actor,
whether a State or other actor, and the personnel concerned. | (29) “派遣的”这个短语在援助实体(无论是国家还是其他行为者)与有关人员之间建立起了联系。 |
| The Commission decided against making a
reference to “acting on behalf of” in order not to prejudge any question related to the application
of the rules of international law on the attribution of conduct to States or
international organizations, given the primary role of the affected State as
provided for in draft article 10, paragraph 2. | 委员会决定不提及“代表…而行事”这样的说法，以避免预先判断将行为归属于国家或国际组织的国际法规则的适用性问题，因为正如第10条草案第2款所规定的，受灾国承担着主要作用。 |
| Subparagraph (g) | (g)项 |
| (30) As indicated in subparagraph (e), “equipment” and “goods” are a key component of the kind of external assistance being
envisaged in the draft articles. | (30) 如(e)项所示，“设备”和“物资”是本条款草案所设想的外部援助的重要组成部分。 |
| The formulation is drawn from the
commentary to draft article 15, as well as the resolution on humanitarian
assistance of the Institute of International Law. | 这一措辞是从第15条草案的评注及国际法学会人道主义援助决议里吸取的。 |
| The list covers the types of material
generally accepted to be necessary for the provision of disaster relief
assistance. | 该清单涵盖了普遍认为有必要提供的救灾援助物质的类型。 |
| That the list is not exhaustive is
confirmed by the reference to “other objects”. | 提及“其他物品”是为了确认该列表并不是详尽无遗。 |
| (31) Generally speaking, two types of
material are envisaged: the technical “equipment” required by the disaster relief personnel to perform their
functions, both in terms of their own sustenance and in terms of what they
require to provide relief, such as supplies, physical and electronic tools,
machines and telecommunications equipment; and “goods” that are necessary for the survival and fulfilment of the
essential needs of the victims of disasters, such as foodstuffs, drinking
water, medical supplies, means of shelter, clothing and bedding. | (31) 一般来说，设想到的有两种材料：救灾人员履行职责所需要的技术“设备”，这里既指他们自己维持生存所需要的设备，也指他们救灾所需要的东西，例如消耗品、物理工具和电子工具、机器和电信设备等；以及灾害受害者满足生存和基本需要所需的“物资”，例如食品、饮用水、医疗用品、栖身手段、衣物和铺盖用品等。 |
| Search dogs are specifically anticipated
in the phrase “specially trained animals”, which is drawn from Specific Annex J of the International
Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures (“Kyoto Convention”). | 对于“经过专门训练的动物”一语，人们会具体想到搜救犬，这一短语来自《京都公约》的专项附件J。 |
| The Commission considered the definition
to be sufficiently flexible also to include services that might be provided
by relief personnel. | 委员会认为定义具有足够的灵活性，还可包括救灾人员可能提供的服务。 |
| Article 4 | 第4条 |
| Human dignity | 人的尊严 |
| The inherent dignity of the human person
shall be respected and protected in the event of disasters. | 发生灾害时，人的固有尊严应得到尊重和保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 4 addresses the
principle of human dignity in the context of both disaster response and
disaster risk reduction. | (1) 第4条草案论述的是应对灾害背景下人的尊严原则。 |
| Human dignity is the core principle that
informs and underpins international human rights law. | 人的尊严是指导并支持国际人权法律的核心原则。 |
| In the context of the protection of
persons in the event of disasters, human dignity is situated as a guiding
principle for any action to be taken in the context of the provision of relief
assistance, in disaster risk reduction and in the ongoing evolution of
applicable laws. | 在发生灾害时保护人员的问题上，人的尊严是一个指导原则，对任何提供救助的行动及应对灾害方面的法律的不断发展都是如此。 |
| The Commission considered the centrality
of the principle to the protection of persons in the event of disasters as
sufficient justification for the inclusion of “human
dignity” in a separate, autonomous provision in the
body of the draft articles. | 委员会认为，这条原则在灾害条件下保护人员问题上的核心地位就是将“人的尊严”列入作为草案正文的一项单独、自主条款的充分理由。 |
| (2) The principle of human dignity
undergirds international human rights instruments and has been interpreted as
providing the ultimate foundation of human rights law. | (2) 人的尊严这一原则维系着国际人权文书，一直以来都将其解读为人权法律最根本的基础。 |
| Reaffirmation of “the dignity and worth of the human person”
is found in the preamble to the Charter of the United Nations, while the
preamble to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares “recognition of the inherent dignity … of
all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and
peace in the world”. | 《联合国宪章》的序言中再次肯定了“人格尊严和价值”，同时1948年《世界人权宣言》序言称，“对人类家庭所有成员的固有尊严[…]的承认，乃是世界自由、正义与和平的基础”。 |
| Affirmation of the principle of human
dignity can be found in the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial
Discrimination, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Convention on the Rights of
the Child and the Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities. | 下列文书中都肯定了人的尊严这一原则：《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》、《经济、社会和文化权利国际公约》、《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》、《消除对妇女一切形式歧视公约任择议定书》、《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》、《儿童权利公约》以及《残疾人权利公约》。 |
| The principle is also central to the
field of international humanitarian law. | 该原则在国际人权法领域也处于中心地位。 |
| The concept of personal dignity is
recognized in common article 3, paragraph 1 (c), of the Geneva Conventions
for the protection of war victims (hereinafter “1949
Geneva Conventions”), articles 75 and 85 of Protocol
I and article 4 of Protocol II. | 关于保护战争受难者的《日内瓦四公约》(下称《1949年日内瓦四公约》共同第三条第一(丙)款、第一议定书第七十五和第八十五条以及第二议定书第四条中承认了人的尊严。 |
| (3) The concept of human dignity also
lies at the core of numerous instruments at the international level directed
towards the provision of humanitarian relief in the event of disasters. | (3) 众多关于发生灾害时提供人道主义援助的国际文书也以人的尊严这一概念为核心。 |
| The IFRC Guidelines state that: “Assisting actors and their personnel should … respect the human dignity of disaster-affected persons at all
times. | 红十字与红新月联会《导则》称，“援助方及其人员应[…]时刻尊重受灾人员的尊严”。 |
| ” The General Assembly, in its resolution
45/100 14 December 1990, holds that “the abandonment
of the victims of natural disasters and similar emergency situations without
humanitarian assistance constitutes a threat to human life and an offence to
human dignity”. | 大会1990年12月14日第45/100号决议称，“对自然灾害及类似紧急情况的受害者置之不理且未向其提供人道主义援助，构成威胁人的生命及侵犯人的尊严”。 |
| The Institute of International Law
likewise was of the view that a failure to provide humanitarian assistance to
those affected by disasters constitutes “an offence
to human dignity”. | 国际法学会也表示，未向受灾人员提供人道主义援助构成“侵犯人的尊严”。 |
| (4) The precise formulation of the
principle adopted by the Commission, namely the “inherent
dignity of the human person”, is drawn from the
preamble of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights, and article 10, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights. | (4) 委员会采用的该原则的确切表述为“人的固有尊严”，该表述来自《经济、社会和文化权利国际公约》序言及《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十条第1款。 |
| This formulation has also been adopted in
instruments such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the
American Convention on Human Rights. | 《儿童权利公约》、《美洲人权公约》等文书也采用了这一表述。 |
| (5) The provision does not give an
express indication of the actors being addressed. | (5) 这条规定没有明确指出对象行为方。 |
| It could be considered that it applies
only to States, but not necessarily to “other
assisting actors”, given that different legal
approaches exist as to non-State entities owing legal obligations, under
international law, to protect the human dignity of an affected person. | 可以认为，这条规定只适用于国家，不一定适用于“其他援助方”，因为对依国际法具有保护受灾者尊严法律义务的非国家实体，存在不同的法律方针。 |
| Nonetheless, the provision should be
understood as applying to assisting States and those assisting actors (as
understood under draft article 3) capable of acquiring legal obligations
under international law. | 无论如何，应把这条规定理解为适用于国家和有能力在国际法下接受义务的援助方(如第3条下的理解)。 |
| The Commission recognizes the role played
both by affected States and assisting States in disaster response and risk
reduction activities (which are the subject of draft articles 9 to 16). | 委员会承认受灾国和援助国双方在应对灾害的活动中的作用(见第9至第16条草案)。 |
| Much of the activity in the field of
disaster response, and to a certain extent in that of disaster risk
reduction, occurs through organs of intergovernmental organizations,
non-governmental organizations and other non-State entities such as IFRC. | 应对灾害领域和一定程度上在减少灾害风险领域的许多活动是由政府间组织、非政府组织及红十字与红新月联会这样的其他非国家实体执行的。 |
| (6) The phrase “respected
and protected” accords with contemporary doctrine and
jurisprudence in international human rights law. | (6) “尊重和保护”这一表述，与现代理论和国际人权法的判例相一致。 |
| The formula is used in a number of
instruments that relate to disaster relief, including the Oslo Guidelines,
the Mohonk Criteria, the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, and the
Guiding Principles on the Right to Humanitarian Assistance. | 若干与抗灾救济有关的文书采用了这一表述，如《奥斯陆准则》、《莫洪克标准》、《关于境内流离失所问题的指导原则》、《人道主义援助权利指导原则》。 |
| In conjunction, the terms “respect” and “protect” connote a negative obligation to refrain from injuring the
inherent dignity of the human person and a positive obligation to take action
to protect human dignity. | “尊重和保护”并用，意含避免损害人的固有尊严的消极义务，也含采取行动保护人的尊严的积极义务。 |
| By way of example, the duty to protect
may require States to adopt legislation proscribing activities of third
parties in circumstances that threaten a violation of the principle of
respect for human dignity. | 例如，保护的义务可能要求各国通过法律，禁止第三方实施可能违反尊重人的尊严原则的活动。 |
| The Commission considered that an
obligation to “protect”
should be commensurate with the legal obligations borne by the respective
actors addressed in the provision. | 委员会认为，“保护”的义务应与条款中提及的各行为方所承担的法律义务相符。 |
| An affected State therefore holds the
primary role in the protection of human dignity, by virtue of its primary
role in the direction, control, coordination and supervision of disaster
relief assistance, as reflected in draft article 10, paragraph 2. | 受灾国担负着指导、控制、协调和监督救灾及援助的主要任务，如第10条草案第2段中所述，因此保护人的尊严的义务主要应由受灾国承担。 |
| Furthermore, each State shall be guided
by the imperative to respect and protect the inherent dignity of the human
person when taking measures to reduce the risk of disasters, as contemplated
in draft article 9. | 另外，每个国家在如第9条草案所述采取措施减少灾害风险时应遵循在应对灾害时尊重和保护人的固有尊严的义务。 |
| (7) The generic reference at the end of
the provision to “in the event of disasters”, which is the same formulation used in draft article 1, reflects
the general scope of the draft articles, which includes disaster risk reduction. | (7) 该条中“发生灾害时”的通用提法与第1条草案的措辞相同，反映出条款草案的一般范围，其中包括减少灾害风险。 |
| Article 5 | 第5条 |
| Human rights | 人权 |
| Persons affected by disasters are
entitled to the respect for and protection of their human rights in
accordance with international law. | 受灾人员有权依国际法得到对其人权的尊重和保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 5 reflects the broad
entitlement to human rights protection held by those persons affected by
disasters. | (1) 第5条草案想要体现的是，受灾人员广泛享有人权保护的权利。 |
| It also serves as a reminder of the duty
of States to ensure compliance with all relevant human rights obligations
applicable both during the disaster and the pre-disaster phase. | 这也有助于提醒国家有责任确保在灾害中和灾前阶段遵守所有相关的人权。 |
| The Commission recognizes an intimate
connection between human rights and the principle of human dignity reflected
in draft article 4, reinforced by the close proximity of the two draft
articles. | 委员会承认，人权与第4条草案所体现的人的尊严的原则密切相关，两条草案紧密衔接，强化了这种关联。 |
| (2) The general reference to “human rights” encompasses human rights
obligations expressed in relevant international agreements and those in
customary international law. | (2) 笼统提及“人权”时，包括了有关国际协定所表述及习惯国际法所反映的人权义务。 |
| Best practices for the protection of
human rights included in non-binding texts at the international level,
including, inter alia, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Operational
Guidelines on the Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural Disasters,
as well as the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, serve to
contextualize the application of existing human rights obligations to the
specific situation of disasters. | 国际层面不具约束力的文本中载录的人权保护最佳做法，其中包括机构间常设委员会《自然灾害情况下人员保护业务准则》和《关于境内流离失所问题的指导原则》所载的最佳做法，有助于针对特定的灾害情况适用现有人权义务。 |
| Protection under national law (such as
that provided in the constitutional law of many States) is also envisaged. | 还考虑到了国内法下的保护(如很多国家宪法法律规定的保护)。 |
| The formulation adopted by the Commission
indicates the broad field of human rights obligations, without seeking to
specify, add to or qualify those obligations. | 委员会采用的措辞指的是人权义务这一广泛领域，并非要指定、增加或限定这些义务。 |
| (3) As clarified in the commentary to
draft article 1, at paragraph (3), the scope ratione personae of the draft
articles covers the activities of States and international organizations,
including regional integration organizations, and other entities enjoying
specific international legal competence in the provision of disaster relief
assistance. | (3) 如第1条草案的评注第(3)段的澄清所述，条款草案的属人理由范围涵盖国家和国际组织的活动，包括区域一体化组织和具有提供救灾援助特定国际法律资格的其他实体。 |
| The Commission recognizes that the scope
and content of an obligation to protect the human rights of those persons
affected by disasters will vary considerably among those actors. | 委员会承认，对于不同的行为方，保护受灾人员的人权这一义务的范围和内容差别很大。 |
| The neutral phrasing adopted by the
Commission should be read in light of an understanding that distinct
obligations will be held by affected States, assisting States and various
other assisting actors, respectively. | 对委员会采用的中性措辞，应本着以下认识加以解读：受灾国、援助国及其他援助方各自有不同的义务。 |
| (4) The draft article recognizes the
entitlement of affected persons to “the respect for
and protection of” their human rights, which continue
to apply in the context of disasters. | (4) 本条草案承认受灾人员的人权应得到“尊重和保护”，这些人权在灾害的背景下继续适用。 |
| The phrase tracks that found in draft
article 4, on human dignity, thereby further confirming the linkage between
the two provisions. | 这一短语沿用了第4条草案关于人的尊严的用语，进一步确认了这两条规定之间的联系。 |
| The reference to the concept of “protection”, commonly found in existing
international instruments for the protection of human rights, is intended,
together with “respect”, as a
holistic formula describing the nature and extent of the obligations upon
States, and is to be read in light of the reference to “full respect for their rights” in draft
article 2. | “保护”概念常见于现有的保护人权国际文书，与“尊重”放在一起提及这个概念的用意是通过综合性的措辞说明各国义务的性质和范围，应参照第2条草案中的“充分尊重其权利”解读。 |
| Hence, States’
obligations are not restricted to avoiding interference with people’s rights (“respect”), but may extend, as required by the rules in question, to “protection” of their rights by, inter
alia, adopting a number of measures varying from passive non-interference to
active ensuring of the satisfaction of individual needs, all depending on the
concrete circumstances. | 这样，国家义务就不仅限于避免干涉人民的权利(尊重)，而是可能扩展范围，按照这些规则的要求伸展至“保护”其权利，除其他外，采取从被动的不干涉到主动的确保满足个人需要等多种措施，所有这些都取决于具体情况。 |
| In light of the scope of the draft
articles, set out in draft article 2, such measures also extend to the
prevention and avoidance of conditions that might lead to the violation of
human rights. | 考虑到第2条草案规定的范围，这类措施还可包括防止和避免可能导致人权受到侵犯的情况。 |
| (5) The Commission did not consider it
feasible to draw up an exhaustive list of all potentially applicable rights
and was concerned that such a list could lead to an a contrario
interpretation that rights not mentioned therein were not applicable. | (5) 委员会认为拟定所有可能适用的权利的详尽清单是不可行的，并且担心这样的清单可能导致另一种相反的解释，即没有提到的权利并不适用。 |
| (6) A particularly relevant right is the
right to life, as recognized in article 6, paragraph 1, of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights if a State is refusing to adopt
positive measures to prevent or respond to disasters that cause loss of life. | (6) 如果一国拒绝采取积极措施防止或应对造成生命损失的灾害，此时一项特别相关的权利便是生命权，正如《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第六条第1款所承认的。 |
| It was also understood that some of the
relevant rights are economic and social rights, which States parties to the
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and other applicable
conventions, have an obligation to realize progressively, including those
which provide minimum core obligations (in relation to the provision of
essential foodstuffs, essential health care, basic shelter and housing and
education for children) and which continue even in the context of a disaster. | 另外的理解是，其中一部分相关权利是经济和社会权利，对于这些权利，《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约》和其他适用公约的缔约国有义务逐步实现，其中包括规定了最基本的、而且在灾害条件下继续适用的核心义务(与提供必不可少的食品、必不可少的保健服务、基本住所和住房、儿童教育有关)的公约。 |
| Other applicable rights include, inter
alia, the right to receive humanitarian assistance; the rights of
particularly vulnerable groups (as anticipated in draft article 6) to have
their special protection and assistance needs taken into account; the right
of communities to have a voice in the planning and execution of risk
reduction, response and recovery initiatives; and the right of all persons
displaced by disasters to non-discriminatory assistance in obtaining durable
solutions to their displacement. | 其他适用的权利除其他外包括获得人道主义援助的权利；特别脆弱的群体(如第6条草案预期的那样)其特殊保护和援助需要得到考虑的权利；社区在规划和执行减少风险、应对和恢复的举措方面拥有发言权；因灾害流离失所的所有人接受无歧视的援助以便持久解决其流离失所问题的权利。 |
| References to specific rights are also to
be found in some of the commentaries to other draft articles. | 其他条款草案的一些评注也提到了一些具体权利。 |
| (7) The draft article intentionally
leaves open the question of how rights are to be enforced to the relevant
rules of international law themselves. | (7) 这一条草案刻意把这些权利如何实现的问题留给有关的国际法规则本身来处理。 |
| It is understood that there is often an
implied degree of discretion in the application of rights, conditioned by the
severity of the disaster, depending on the relevant rules recognizing or
establishing the rights in question. | 对此的理解是，在适用权利的问题上，往往暗含着一定的酌定权，视灾害的严重程度而定，同时取决于确认或确定有关权利的相关规则。 |
| Furthermore, the Commission considered
that the reference to “human rights” incorporates both the rights and limitations that exist in the
sphere of international human rights law. | 另外，委员会认为，提及“人权”之处，国际人权法律规定的权利和限制两者都包括在内。 |
| The reference to “human rights” is, accordingly, to the
whole of international human rights law, including in particular its
treatment of derogable and non-derogable rights. | 因此，提到“人权”是指整个国际人权法，包括其对可减损和不可减损的权利处理办法。 |
| As such, the provision contemplates an
affected State’s right of suspension or derogation
where recognized under existing international agreements, which is also
confirmed by the concluding phrase “in accordance
with international law”. | 这样，条款草案就考虑到了受灾国在现有国际协定下得到承认的中止或减损权，“依国际法”这一短语也确认了这层考虑。 |
| (8) The concluding reference to “in accordance with international law” also
serves to recall that there may be other rules of international law, such as
those dealing with refugees and internally displaced persons, which may have
a bearing on the rights of persons affected by disasters, a possibility also
envisaged in draft article 18. | (8) 提及“依国际法”还有助于忆及，可能还有其他国际法规则如关于难民和境内流离失所者的规则，会影响到受灾人员的权利，第18条草案也设想到了这种可能性。 |
| Article 6 | 第6条 |
| Humanitarian principles | 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. | 应对灾害应按照人道、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。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 6 establishes the key
humanitarian principles relevant to the protection of persons in the event of
disasters. | (1) 第6条草案规定了与发生灾害时的人员保护有关的主要人道主义原则。 |
| The Commission did not find it necessary
to determine whether these principles are also general principles of
international law and noted that the principles do not apply to the exclusion
of other relevant principles of international law. | 委员会认为不必确定这些原则是否也是国际法的一般原则，同时也指出这些原则不能用以排除国际法其他相关原则。 |
| The draft article recognizes the
significance of these principles to the provision of disaster relief
assistance, as well as in disaster risk reduction activities, where
applicable. | 这条草案承认这些原则对提供救灾援助以及适用时，对开展减少灾害风险活动，所具有的重要意义。 |
| (2) The principles of humanity,
neutrality and impartiality are core principles recognized as foundational to
humanitarian assistance. | (2) 人道、中立和公正这几个核心原则通常被视为人道主义援助的根本原则。 |
| The principles are likewise fundamental
to applicable laws in disaster relief efforts. | 这些原则也是救灾工作中可适用法律的根基。 |
| By way of example, the General Assembly,
in its resolution 46/182, notes that: “Humanitarian
assistance must be provided in accordance with the principles of humanity,
neutrality and impartiality”. | 例如，大会第46/182号决议指出，“必须按照人道、中立和公正的原则提供人道主义援助”。 |
| (3) The principle of humanity stands as
the cornerstone of the protection of persons in international law. | (3) 人道主义原则是国际法中人员保护工作的基石。 |
| Situated as an element both of international
humanitarian law and international human rights law, it informs the
development of laws regarding the protection of persons in the event of
disasters. | 作为国际人道主义法和国际人权法的一项共同内容，是制定发生灾害时人员保护方面法律的主要参照。 |
| Within the field of international
humanitarian law, the principle is most clearly expressed in the requirement
of humane treatment in common article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. | 国际人权法领域内，对该原则最明确的表达是1949年日内瓦四公约共同第三条中给予人道待遇的要求。 |
| However, as the International Court of
Justice affirmed in the Corfu Channel case (merits), among general and
well-recognized principles are “elementary
considerations of humanity, even more exacting in peace than in war”. | 然而，正如国际法院在科孚海峡案(实质问题)中所确认的，普遍认可的一般原则中包括“对人道主义的基本考虑，在和平时期比在战时更为艰巨”。 |
| Pictet’s
commentary on the principles of the Red Cross attributes three elements to
the principle of humanity, namely: to prevent and alleviate suffering; to
protect life and health; and to assure respect for the individual. | 皮克泰在对红十字会原则的评注中指出，人道主义原则有三个要素：“防止和减轻痛苦、保护生命与健康以及确保对个人的尊重”。 |
| In the specific context of disaster
relief, the Oslo Guidelines and the Mohonk Criteria affirm that the principle
of humanity requires that “[h]uman suffering must be
addressed wherever it is found”. | 具体到救灾问题，《奥斯陆准则》及《莫洪克标准》申明，根据人道主义原则的要求，“哪里有人类痛苦，哪里就要有应对行动”。 |
| (4) While the principle of neutrality is
rooted in the law of armed conflict, the principle is nonetheless applicable
in other branches of the law. | (4) 中立原则源于武装冲突法律，但这项原则同样适用于其他法律领域。 |
| In the context of humanitarian
assistance, the principle of neutrality requires that the provision of
assistance be independent of any given political, religious, ethnic or
ideological context. | 在人道主义援助问题上，中立原则要求提供援助应与任何特定政治、宗教、族裔或意识形态背景无关。 |
| The Oslo Guidelines and the Mohonk
Criteria both affirm that the assistance should be provided “without engaging in hostilities or taking sides in controversies
of a political, religious or ideological nature”. | 《奥斯陆准则》及《莫洪克标准》都确认，“提供人道主义援助时不得参加敌对行动，或在政治、宗教或意识形态的争议中表示立场”。 |
| As such, the principle of neutrality
indicates the apolitical nature of disaster response and affirms that
humanitarian activities may not be used for purposes other than responding to
the disaster at hand. | 这种中立原则表明了灾害应对的非政治性质，并申明人道主义活动除应对当前灾害之外不应用于其他目的。 |
| The principle ensures that the interest
of those persons affected by disasters are the primary concern of the
affected State and any other relevant actors in disaster response. | 该原则确保救灾工作中受灾人员的利益是受灾国及其他相关行为方的首要关切。 |
| Respect for the principle of neutrality
is central to facilitating the achievement of an adequate and effective response
to disasters, as outlined in draft article 2. | 遵守中立原则对促进开展第2条草案所述的适当且有效的救灾行动至关重要。 |
| (5) The principle of impartiality
encompasses three principles: non-discrimination, proportionality and
impartiality proper. | (5) 公正原则包含三项原则：不歧视、相称性和公正性本身。 |
| For reasons discussed below, the
principle of non-discrimination is articulated by the Commission not merely
as an element of draft article 6, but also as an autonomous principle of
disaster response. | 鉴于下述原因，委员会阐述不歧视原则时，不仅将其作为第6条草案的内容，也作为应对灾害工作的一个独立原则。 |
| Non-discrimination is directed towards
the removal of objective grounds for discrimination among individuals, such
that the provision of assistance to affected persons is guided solely by
their needs. | 不歧视的目标使人与人之间的歧视失去客观理由，这样受灾人员的需要就成了提供援助所遵循的唯一标准。 |
| The principle of proportionality
stipulates that the response to a disaster be proportionate to the scope of
that disaster and the needs of affected persons. | 相称性原则规定，应对灾害的行动应与受灾范围及受灾人员的需要相称。 |
| The principle also acts as a distributive
mechanism, enabling the provision of assistance to be delivered with
attention given to the most urgent needs. | 该原则也是一个分配机制，使得最迫切的需要能够在实际提供援助时得到关注。 |
| Impartiality proper reflects the
principle that no subjective distinctions be drawn among individuals in the
response to disasters. | 公正性本身体现的原则是，应对灾害时不应在人与人之间进行主观区分。 |
| The Commentary to the First Protocol
Additional to the Geneva Conventions thus conceptualizes impartiality as “a moral quality which must be present in the individual or
institution called upon to act for the benefit of those who are suffering”. | 《日内瓦四公约第一附加议定书》评注将公正性描述为“响应号召为遭受苦难者的利益而行动的个人或机构必须具备的道德素质”。 |
| By way of example, the Draft
International Guidelines for Humanitarian Assistance Operations provide that:
“Humanitarian assistance should be provided on an
impartial basis without any adverse distinction to all persons in urgent
need. ” | 例如，《国际人道主义援助行动导则草案》规定，“必须在公正的基础上提供人道主义援助，不应对任何迫切需要援助的人员加以不利区别”。 |
| As a whole, the principle of impartiality
requires that responses to disasters be directed towards full respect and
fulfilment of the needs of those affected by disasters in a manner that gives
priority to the needs of the particularly vulnerable. | 总的来说，按照公正性原则的要求，救灾应以充分尊重并满足受灾人员的需要为目标，并且将特别弱势群体的需要作为优先事项。 |
| (6) The principle of non-discrimination,
applicable also in the context of disaster risk reduction, reflects the
inherent equality of all persons and the determination that no adverse
distinction may be drawn between them. | (6) 不歧视原则也适用于减灾活动。 这项原则反映了人人生而平等以及不可对人加以不利的区别。 |
| Prohibited grounds for discrimination are
non-exhaustive and include ethnic origin, sex, nationality, political
opinions, race, religion and disability. | 受禁止的歧视理由难以穷尽，族裔出身、性别、国籍、政见、种族、宗教和残疾都包括在其中。 |
| The Commission determined that
non-discrimination should be referred to as an autonomous principle in light
of its importance to the topic at hand. | 委员会决定，鉴于不歧视对本专题的重要性，应将其作为一个独立的原则。 |
| Such an approach has also been taken by
the Institute of International Law in its 2003 resolution on humanitarian
assistance, which stipulates that the offer and distribution of humanitarian
assistance shall occur “without any discrimination on
prohibited grounds”. | 国际法学会关于人道主义援助的2003年决议也采取了这一做法，该决议规定，人道主义援助的提供和分配应“不带有任何出于受禁止的理由的歧视”。 |
| The IFRC Guidelines likewise specify that
assistance be provided to disaster-affected persons without “any adverse distinction (such as in regards to nationality, race,
ethnicity, religious beliefs, class, gender, disability, age, and political
opinions)”. | 红十字与红新月联会《导则》也规定，为受灾人员提供援助时不应带有“任何不利区别(例如在国籍、种族、族裔、宗教信仰、阶层、残疾、年龄、政见等方面)”。 |
| (7) The principle of non-discrimination
is not to be taken as excluding the prospect of “positive
discrimination” as appropriate. | (7) 不应认为不歧视原则排斥酌情实行“积极歧视”的预期。 |
| The phrase “while
taking into account the needs of the particularly vulnerable” in draft article 6 reflects this position. | 第6条草案中的“同时考虑到特别弱势者的需要”即体现了这一立场。 |
| The term “vulnerable” encompasses both groups and individuals. | “弱势者”一词涵盖了群体和个人。 |
| For this reason, the neutral expression “vulnerable” was preferred to either “vulnerable groups” or “vulnerable persons”. | 因此，“弱势者”这一中性表达，既可指“弱势群体”也可指“弱势个人”。 |
| The qualifier “particularly” was used in recognition of the fact that those affected by
disaster are by definition vulnerable. | 使用限定词“特别”是因为考虑到受灾人员本身就是弱势者这一事实。 |
| The specific phrasing of “particularly vulnerable” is drawn from
article 4, paragraph 3 (a), of the IFRC Guidelines, which refer to the
special needs of “women and particularly vulnerable
groups, which may include children, displaced persons, the elderly, persons
with disabilities, and persons living with HIV and other debilitating
illnesses”. | “特别弱势者”这一说法来自红十字与红新月联合会《导则》第4条第3(a)款，其中提到“妇女和特别弱势者，包括儿童、流离失所者、老人、残疾人、艾滋病毒感染者及其他重病患者”的特殊需要。 |
| The qualifier is also mirrored in the
resolution on humanitarian assistance adopted by the Institute of
International Law, which refers to the requirement to take into account the needs
of the “most vulnerable”. | 国际法学会通过的关于人道主义援助的决议也使用了该限定词，其中提及了考虑“最弱势者”的需要这一要求。 |
| Similarly, the General Assembly, in its
resolution 69/135 of 12 December 2014, requested: | 同样，大会在2014年12月12日第69/135号决议中也请： |
| “Member States, relevant humanitarian
organizations of the United Nations system and other relevant humanitarian
actors to ensure that all aspects of humanitarian response, including
disaster preparedness and needs assessments, take into account the specific
humanitarian needs and vulnerabilities of all components of the affected
population, in particular girls, boys, women, older persons and persons with
disabilities, including in the design and implementation of disaster risk
reduction, humanitarian and recovery programming and post-humanitarian
emergency reconstruction, and in this regard encourages efforts to ensure
gender mainstreaming … .” The
Commission decided against including a list of vulnerable groups within the
draft article itself in recognition of the relative nature of vulnerability. | “会员国、联合国系统相关人道主义组织和其他相关人道主义行为体确保人道主义应急措施的所有方面，包括备灾和需求评估，都要考虑到灾民所有组成部分，特别是女孩、男孩、妇女、老人和残疾人的具体人道主义需要和脆弱情况，包括在减少灾害风险工作的设计和执行过程中、人道主义和复原方案的制订以及在人道主义紧急情况后重建工作中这样做，在这一方面鼓励作出各种努力，确保性别平等观点主流化…”委员会决定不在本条草案内列入一份弱势群体清单，是认为弱势具有相对性质。 |
| What was important was less a fixed
iteration of particularly vulnerable subgroups of individuals within the
broader body of persons affected, or potentially affected, by a disaster, and
more a recognition that the principle of non-discrimination includes within
it the positive obligation to give specific attention to the needs of the
particularly vulnerable. | 重要的是，在受灾或可能受灾的广泛个人群体内不赘述固定的特别弱势的亚群体，而是确认不歧视原则包含对特别弱势者需要予以特别关注的积极义务。 |
| The term “particularly
vulnerable” is deliberately open-ended to include not
only the categories of individuals usual associated with the concept, as
mentioned above, but also other possible individuals that might find
themselves being particularly vulnerable in the wake of a disaster, such as
non-nationals. | “特别弱势者”一词是故意开放的，不仅包括上述与本概念相关的个人类别，也包括在灾害后也处于特别脆弱状况的其他可能个人，如非本国国民。 |
| (8) The Commission understood the
reference to “taking into account” in a broad sense, so as also to cover, inter alia, accessibility
to information and community participation, including engagement of
vulnerable groups in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation
and assistance provided in the event of a disaster, as well as in preparing
for the possibility of a disaster. | (8) 委员会认为，这里提到的“考虑到”是广义的，除其他外也包括发生灾害时获得信息和社区参与，包括弱势群体参与设计、实施、监督、评估和援助，以及应对灾害的准备。 |
| (9) The Commission was cognizant of the
fact that disasters frequently affect women, girls, boys and men differently. | (9) 委员会认识到，灾害对妇女和女童、男人和男童的影响往往会不同。 |
| In many contexts, gender inequalities
constrain the influence and control of women and girls over decisions
governing their lives as well as their access to resources such as finance,
food, agricultural inputs, land and property, technologies, education,
health, secure housing and employment. | 在很多情况下，性别不平等限制了妇女和女童的影响力和控制权，她们无法平等参与对影响其生活的决定以及获得资源，如资金、食品、农业投入品、土地和财产、技术、教育、卫生、安全住房和就业机会。 |
| They are often disproportionately
affected and exposed to risks, including increased loss of life and
livelihoods and gender-based violence, during and in the aftermath of
disasters. | 她们受到的影响可能特别大，在灾害发生时或发生后，面临各种风险，其中包括更多地失去生命和生计，遭受性别暴力等。 |
| It is increasingly recognized that women
and girls — like men and boys — possess skills and capacity to prepare for, respond to and
recover from crisis, as actors and partners both in disaster risk reduction
and humanitarian action. | 人们日益认识到，妇女和女童与男人和男童一样，也拥有技术和能力，可以作为减灾和人道主义行动的参与者和合作伙伴，参与备灾、救灾和灾后恢复。 |
| The capacity and knowledge of women and
girls plays an important part in individual as well as community resilience. | 妇女和女童的能力和知识可在个人和社区抗灾中发挥重要作用。 |
| The significance of taking a gender-based
approach to disaster risk management has been recognized, including in both
the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations
and Communities to Disasters and the Sendai Framework. | 从基于性别的视角进行灾害风险管理的重要性已得到各方面的认可，包括《2005-2015年兵库行动框架：加强国家和社区的抗灾能力》和《仙台框架》。 |
| Article 7 | 第7条 |
| Duty to cooperate | 合作的义务 |
| In the application of the present draft
articles, States shall, as appropriate, cooperate among themselves, with the
United Nations, with the components of the Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement, and with other assisting actors. | 适用本条款草案时，各国应酌情相互合作，并与联合国、红十字与红新月运动各组成部分及其他援助方合作。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Effective international cooperation
is indispensable for the protection of persons in the event of disasters. | (1) 有效的国际合作是发生灾害时保护人员不可或缺的。 |
| The duty to cooperate is well established
as a principle of international law and can be found in numerous
international instruments. | 合作的义务是一项公认的国际法原则，在众多国际文书中均有表述。 |
| The Charter of the United Nations
enshrines it, not least with reference to the humanitarian context in which
the protection of persons in the event of disasters places itself. | 《联合国宪章》一再申明这一原则，特别提及发生灾害时保护人员这一人道主义情势。 |
| Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Charter
clearly spells it out as one of the purposes of the Organization: | 《宪章》第一条第三款明确规定联合国的宗旨之一是： |
| “To achieve international cooperation in
solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or
humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human
rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race,
sex, language, or religion.” | “促成国际合作，以解决国际间属于经济、社会、文化、及人类福利性质之国际问题，且不分种族、性别、语言、或宗教，增进并激励对于全体人类之人权及基本自由之尊重”。 |
| Articles 55 and 56 of the Charter
elaborate on Article 1, paragraph 3, with respect to international
cooperation. | 《宪章》第五十五和第五十六条在有关国际合作方面对第一条第三款进行了详细阐述。 |
| Article 55 of the Charter reads: | 第五十五条规定： |
| “With a view to the creation of
conditions of stability and well-being which are necessary for peaceful and
friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal
rights and self-determination of peoples, the United Nations shall promote: | “为造成国际间以尊重人民平等权利及自决原则为根据之和平友好关系所必要之安定及福利条件起见，联合国应促进： |
| “a. | “(子) |
| higher standards of living, full
employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development; | 较高之生活程度，全民就业，及经济与社会进展； |
| “b. | “(丑) |
| solutions of international economic,
social, health, and related problems; and international cultural and
educational cooperation; and | 国际间经济、社会、卫生及有关问题之解决；国际间文化及教育合作； |
| “c. | “(寅) |
| universal respect for, and observance of,
human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race,
sex, language, or religion.” | 全体人类之人权及基本自由之普遍尊重与遵守，不分种族、性别、语言或宗教”。 |
| Article 56 of the Charter reads: | 《宪章》第五十六条规定： |
| “All Members pledge themselves to take
joint and separate action in cooperation with the Organization for the
achievement of the purposes set forth in Article 55.” | “各会员国担允采取共同及个别行动与本组织合作，以达成第五十五条所载之宗旨”。 |
| The general duty to cooperate was
reiterated as one of the principles of international law in the Declaration
on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and
Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations
in the following terms: | 《关于各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系和合作的国际法原则宣言》以下列措辞重申一般合作责任是国际法的原则之一： |
| “States have the duty to cooperate with
one another, irrespective of the differences in their political, economic and
social systems, in the various spheres of international relations, in order
to maintain international peace and security and to promote international economic
stability and progress, the general welfare of nations and international
cooperation free from discrimination based on such differences.” | “各国不问在政治、经济及社会制度上有何差异均有义务在国际关系之各方面彼此合作，以期维持国际和平与安全，并增进国际经济安定与进步、各国之一般福利及不受此种差异所产生歧视之国际合作。” |
| (2) Cooperation takes on special
significance with regard to international human rights obligations that have
been undertaken by States. | (2) 对于各国所承担的国际人权义务来说，合作具有特别意义。 |
| The International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights refers explicitly to international cooperation as
a means of realizing the rights contained therein. | 《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》明确地将国际合作称为实现该《公约》所载权利的一种手段。 |
| This has been reiterated by the Committee
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its general comments relating to
the implementation of specific rights guaranteed by the Covenant. | 经济、社会、文化权利委员会在关于执行该《公约》所保障的具体权利的一般性意见中重申了这一规定。 |
| International cooperation gained
particular prominence in the 2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities, which reaffirms existing international obligations in relation
to persons with disabilities “in situations of risk,
including situations of armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies and the
occurrence of natural disasters”. | 国际合作在2006年《残疾人权利公约》中尤显突出，《公约》重申了“在危难情况下，包括在发生武装冲突、人道主义紧急情况和自然灾害时”存在着的对残疾人的国际义务。 |
| (3) With regard to cooperation in the
context of disaster relief assistance, the General Assembly recognized, in
resolution 46/182, that: | (3) 关于救灾援助时的合作，大会在第46/182号决议中确认： |
| “The magnitude and duration of many
emergencies may be beyond the response capacity of many affected countries. | “许多紧急情况的规模和持续的时间可能不是许多受灾国的能力可以应付的。 |
| International cooperation to address
emergency situations and to strengthen the response capacity of affected countries
is thus of great importance. | 因此进行国际合作以处理紧急情况和加强受灾国的应付能力是非常重要的。 |
| Such cooperation should be provided in
accordance with international law and national laws ….” | 应根据国际法和各国法律提供这种合作…” |
| Furthermore, with regard to cooperation
in the context of risk reduction, the Sendai Framework’s guiding principles, paragraph 19 (a), indicate that: “Each State has the primary responsibility to prevent and reduce
disaster risk, including through international, regional, subregional,
transboundary and bilateral cooperation. ” | 此外，关于减灾情况下的合作，《仙台框架》指导原则第19(a)段指出，“每个国家都负有通过国际、区域、次区域、跨界和双边合作预防和减少灾害风险的首要责任”。 |
| In addition, there exist a vast number of
instruments of specific relevance to the protection of persons in the event
of disasters, which demonstrate the importance of international cooperation
in combating the effects of disasters. | 发生灾害时的人员保护问题，已有大量与之具体相关的文书，显示出国际合作对抗击灾害影响的重要性。 |
| Not only are these instruments in
themselves expressions of cooperation, they generally reflect the principle
of cooperation relating to specific aspects of disaster governance in the
text of the instrument. | 这些文书不仅本身便是合作的表述，而且文书案文中普遍反映出在灾害治理具体方面应实行合作的原则。 |
| Typically in bilateral agreements, this
has been reflected in the title given to the instrument, denoting either
cooperation or (mutual) assistance. | 就双边协议而言，这通常体现在文书标题中，明确表示合作或(相互)援助。 |
| Moreover, the duty to cooperate, in the
vast majority of cases, is framed as one of the objectives of the instrument
or is attributed positive effects towards their attainment. | 此外，合作义务在大多数情况下被列为文书的目标之一或被视为对这些目标具有积极作用。 |
| Again, the Tampere Convention is of
relevance in this respect as it indicates in paragraph 21 of its preamble
that the parties wish “to facilitate international
cooperation to mitigate the impact of disaster”. | 同样，《坦佩雷公约》也与之相关，《公约》序言第21段指出，各缔约方期望“促进国际合作以减轻灾害所造成的影响”。 |
| Another example can be found in an
agreement between France and Malaysia: | 另一实例是法国与马来西亚之间的一项协定： |
| “Convinced of the need to develop
cooperation between the competent organs of both Parties in the field of the
prevention of grave risks and the protection of populations, property and the
environment ….” | “坚信，双方主管机构需要在预防严重风险以及保护人口、财产和环境方面发展合作…” |
| (4) Cooperation, however, should not be
interpreted as diminishing the primary role of the affected State as provided
for in draft article 10, paragraph 2. | (4) 然而，合作不应解释为削弱受灾国承担的主要作用，正如第10条草案第2款所规定的。 |
| Furthermore, the principle of cooperation
is to be understood also as being complementary to the duty of the
authorities of the affected State to take care of the persons affected by
natural disasters and similar emergencies occurring in its territory, or in
territory under its jurisdiction or control (draft article 10, paragraph 1). | 此外，合作原则应理解为是对受灾国义务的补充，即受灾国当局有义务照顾受其境内发生的自然灾害和类似紧急情况影响的人(第10条草案第1款)。 |
| (5) A key feature of activity in the
field of disaster relief assistance is international cooperation not only
among States, but also with intergovernmental and non-governmental
organizations. | (5) 救灾援助领域活动的一个重要特点是国际合作，不仅是各国之间的合作，而且是与国际组织和非政府组织的合作。 |
| The importance of their role has been
recognized for some time. | 这些组织的作用得到承认已经有一段时间了。 |
| In its resolution 46/182, the General
Assembly confirmed that: | 大会在第46/182号决议里确认： |
| “Intergovernmental and non-governmental
organizations working impartially and with strictly humanitarian motives
should continue to make a significant contribution in supplementing national
efforts.” | “…不偏不倚地工作和具有纯粹人道主义动机的政府间和非政府间组织应继续在补充国家努力方面作出重要贡献”。 |
| In its resolution 2008/36 of 25 July
2008, the Economic and Social Council recognized: | 经济及社会理事会在2008年7月25日第2008/36号决议中确认： |
| “… the benefits of engagement of and
coordination with relevant humanitarian actors to the effectiveness of
humanitarian response, and encourage[d] the United Nations to continue to
pursue efforts to strengthen partnerships at the global level with the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, relevant humanitarian
non-governmental organizations and other participants of the Inter-Agency
Standing Committee.” | “…承认有关人道主义行为者的参与以及与其协调可提高人道主义应急行动的效力，并鼓励联合国继续努力，加强与国际红十字与红新月运动、有关人道主义非政府组织和机构间常设委员会其他参与机构建立的全球伙伴关系”。 |
| (6) Draft article 7 recognizes the
central importance of international cooperation to international disaster
relief assistance activities, as well as in the reduction of disaster risk. | (6) 第7条草案承认国际合作在国际救灾援助以及减少灾害风险方面的中心作用。 |
| It reflects a legal obligation for the
various parties concerned. | 该条草案反映了各有关当事方的法律义务。 |
| The nature of the obligation of
cooperation may vary, depending on the actor and the context in which
assistance is being sought and offered. | 合作义务的性质可能依参与方和寻求或提供援助的情况而不尽相同。 |
| The nature of the legal obligation to
cooperate is dealt with in specific provisions (hence the opening phrase “[i]n the application of the present draft articles”), particularly draft articles 8, on response to disasters, and 9,
concerning the reduction of risk of disasters. | 合作的法律义务性质在具体条款中论述(为此，本条的开头语是“适用本条款草案时”)，尤其是在应对灾害的第8条草案和在减少灾害风险的第9条草案。 |
| The Commission inserted the phrase “as appropriate”, which qualifies the
entire draft article, both as a reference to existing specific rules that
establish the nature of the obligation to cooperate among the various actors
mentioned in the draft article, and as an indication of a degree of latitude
in determining, on the ground, when cooperation is or is not “appropriate”. | 委员会加上了“酌情”一词，是修饰整个条款草案，既指本条草案所提及各参与方之间合作义务的具体规则，也表明在确定合作是否“适当”时在实地留有一定回旋余地。 |
| It does not qualify the level of
cooperation being envisaged, but rather the actors with whom the cooperation
should take place. | 该条没有规定预期的合作水平，只是说明应该与哪些援助方进行合作。 |
| (7) In addition to cooperation among
States, draft article 7 also envisages cooperation with assisting actors. | (7) 除国家之间的合作外，第7条草案还设想与援助方的合作。 |
| Express reference is made to cooperation
with the United Nations, in recognition of the central role played by the
Organization in the coordination of relief assistance. | 明确提及与联合国的合作，是确认该组织在协调救灾援助活动方面的中心作用。 |
| The Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) enjoys a special mandate, in accordance with
General Assembly resolution 46/182 of 19 December 1991, to assist in the
coordination of international assistance. | 根据大会1991年12月19日第46/182号决议，人道主义事务协调厅负有协助协调国际援助的特殊任务。 |
| Under that resolution, the Assembly
established the high-level position of Emergency Relief Coordinator as the
single United Nations focal point for complex emergencies as well as for
natural disasters. | 大会在该决议中确定了紧急救济协调员的高级别职位，是作为联合国应对复杂紧急情况以及自然灾害情况的统一协调人。 |
| The Emergency Relief Coordinator
processes requests from affected Member States for emergency assistance
requiring a coordinated response, serves as a central focal point concerning
United Nations emergency relief operations and provides consolidated
information, including early warning on emergencies. | 例如，紧急救济协调员负责处理受灾会员国的需要协调行动的紧急援助请求，充当联合国紧急救援行动的中央协调人，并提供综合信息，包括紧急情况早期预警。 |
| (8) The reference to “other assisting actors” imports the
definition contained in draft article 3, subparagraph (d), which includes
competent intergovernmental organizations and relevant non-governmental
organizations or entities. | (8) 提及“其他援助方”是引入第3条(d)款草案中的定义，其中包括主管政府间组织和有关非政府组织或实体。 |
| The Commission felt it appropriate to
single out one such group of entities, namely the components of the Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement, in recognition of the important role played by the
Movement in international cooperation in the context of the situations
covered by the draft articles. | 委员会认为需要专门提及一组这类实体机构，即红十字与红新月运动各组成部分，以承认这一运动在本条款草案所涉情况下国际合作中发挥的重要作用。 |
| The reference to the components of the
Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement includes the International Committee of
the Red Cross as a consequence of the fact that the draft articles may also
apply in complex emergencies involving armed conflict. | 红十字和红新月运动各组成部分的提法包含红十字国际委员会，因为条款草案也可能适用于涉及武装冲突的复杂紧急情况。 |
| As indicated in paragraph (18) of the
commentary to draft article 3, the category of “other
assisting actors” is intentionally broad. | 如第3条草案评注第(18)段所述，“其他援助方”的范畴是有意保持广义。 |
| In the reduction of the risk of
disasters, the cooperation with other actors is enshrined in the Sendai
Framework’s paragraph 19 (b), which indicates that “[d]isaster risk reduction requires that responsibilities be shared
by central Governments and relevant national authorities, sectors and
stakeholders”, and paragraph 19 (d), which indicates
that “[d]isaster risk reduction requires an
all-of-society engagement and partnership”. | 在减少灾害风险方面与其他援助方的合作也见于《仙台框架》第19(b)段，该段指出，“减少灾害风险需要各国中央政府和相关国家当局、部门和利益攸关方根据各自国情和治理制度共同承担责任”，第19(d)段也提及“减少灾害风险需要全社会的参与和合作伙伴关系”。 |
| (9) The forms of cooperation in the
context of the response phase are covered by draft article 8, and in risk
reduction by draft article 9. | (9) 救灾阶段的合作形式见第8条草案，而减灾阶段的合作形式见第9条草案。 |
| Article 8 | 第8条 |
| Forms of cooperation in the response to
disasters | 应对灾害的合作形式 |
| Cooperation in the response to disasters
includes humanitarian assistance, coordination of international relief
actions and communications, and making available relief personnel, equipment
and goods, and scientific, medical and technical resources. | 应对灾害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、设备和物资以及科学、医学、技术资源。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 8 seeks to clarify the
various forms which cooperation between affected States, assisting States and
other assisting actors may take in the context of response to disasters. | (1) 第8条草案力求说明受灾国、援助国及其他援助方应对灾害时开展各种合作的形式。 |
| Cooperation is enshrined in general terms
in draft article 7 as a guiding principle and fundamental duty with regard to
the present topic, as it plays a central role in disaster relief efforts. | 第7条草案笼统表述合作，视之为本专题的指导原则和基本义务，因为合作在救灾行动中发挥中心作用。 |
| The essential role of cooperation lends
itself to a more detailed enunciation of the kinds of cooperation relevant in
this context. | 由于合作的重要作用，需要在本条中更加详细说明相关合作形式。 |
| The present draft article is therefore
designed to elaborate further on the meaning of draft article 7, without
creating any additional legal obligations. | 因此，本条草案旨在进一步阐述第7条草案的含义，而又不增加任何法律义务。 |
| (2) The list of forms of cooperation in
draft article 8 — humanitarian assistance,
coordination of international relief actions and communications, and making
available relief personnel, relief equipment and goods, and scientific,
medical and technical resources — is loosely based on
the second sentence of paragraph 4 of article 17 of the articles on the law
of transboundary aquifers. | (2) 第8条草案列出的合作形式――人道主义援助；协调国际救灾行动和通信；提供救灾人员、设备和物资以及科学、医学、技术资源――大致基于《跨界含水层法》条款草案第17条第4款第二句。 |
| That paragraph explains the general
obligation to cooperate in article 7 of those articles by describing the
cooperation necessary in emergency situations. | 该款说明那些条款第7条中的一般合作义务，描述了紧急情况下需开展的合作。 |
| The second sentence of paragraph 4 of
article 17 reads: | 第17条第4款第二句规定： |
| “Cooperation may include coordination of
international emergency actions and communications, making available
emergency response personnel, emergency response equipment and supplies,
scientific and technical expertise and humanitarian assistance.” | “合作可包括协调紧急情况的国际行动和通信，提供应急人员、应急设备和物资、科技专业知识和人道主义援助”。 |
| As this provision had been specifically
drafted with reference to a related context — namely,
the need for cooperation in the event of an emergency affecting a
transboundary aquifer — the Commission felt that its
language was a useful starting point for the drafting of draft article 8. | 鉴于上述规定是针对有关背景――发生影响跨界含水层的紧急情况时需要合作――专门起草的，委员会认为其文字是起草第8条草案的有益出发点。 |
| However, the text of draft article 8 was
tailored to appropriately reflect the context and purpose of the present
draft articles and to ensure that it took into account the major areas of
cooperation dealt with in international instruments addressing disaster
response. | 然而，第8条草案案文也有修改，以便适当反映本专题条款草案的背景和目的，确保考虑关于救灾的国际文书中提到的主要合作领域。 |
| Similar language is contained in the
ASEAN Declaration on Mutual Assistance on Natural Disasters, of 26 June 1976,
which states that: | 1976年6月26日《东盟自然灾害互助宣言》载有类似文字，其中指出： |
| “Member Countries shall, within their
respective capabilities, cooperate in the improvement of communication
channels among themselves as regards disaster warnings, exchange of experts
and trainees, exchange of information and documents, and dissemination of
medical supplies, services and relief assistance.” | “成员国应在各自的能力范围内，合作改进以下方面的沟通渠道：灾害预警、专家和学员交换、信息和文件交流，以及医疗物资、服务和救灾援助的分发”。 |
| In a similar vein, in explaining the
areas in which it would be useful for the United Nations to adopt a
coordinating role and encourage cooperation, General Assembly resolution
46/182 calls for coordination with regard to “specialized
personnel and teams of technical specialists, as well as relief supplies,
equipment, and services … ”. | 同样，在说明联合国应在哪些领域发挥协调作用和鼓励合作时，大会在第46/182号决议中呼吁协调“专门人员和技术专家小组，以及救灾物资、设备和服务…”。 |
| (3) The beginning of draft article 8
confirms that the forms of cooperation being referred to are those relevant
in the response phase following the onset of a disaster or in the
post-disaster recovery phase. | (3) 第8条草案开头确认，所指的合作形式是灾害开始后的救灾阶段或灾后恢复阶段的合作形式。 |
| They are by their nature concerned with
the provision or facilitation of relief assistance to affected persons. | 就其性质而言，是向受影响人员提供或便利提供救济援助。 |
| Cooperation in the pre-disaster phase,
including disaster prevention, preparedness and mitigation, is dealt with in
draft article 9. | 同样，灾前阶段的合作，包括防灾、备灾和缓解等方面的合作，在第9条草案中论述。 |
| At the same time, draft article 8, which
is to be read in light of the other draft articles, is oriented towards the
purpose of the topic as a whole as stated in draft article 2, namely, “to facilitate an adequate and effective response to disasters … so as to meet the essential needs of the persons concerned, with
full respect for their rights”. | 因此，需要参照其他条款草案一并阅读第8条草案，该条草案着力实现第2条草案所述整个专题的宗旨，即“促进充分而有效地应对灾害以满足有关人员的基本需要，充分尊重其权利”。 |
| In the context of the present topic, the
ultimate goal of the duty to cooperate, and therefore of any of the forms of
cooperation referred to in draft article 8, is the protection of persons
affected by disasters. | 在本专题范围内，合作义务的最终目的，即第8条草案提到的任何形式合作的最终目的是保护受灾人员。 |
| (4) While the draft article highlights
specific forms of cooperation, the list is not meant to be exhaustive, but is
instead illustrative of the principal areas in which cooperation may be
appropriate according to the circumstances. | (4) 本条草案着重指出具体的合作形式，无意包罗万象，只是说明可能适合具体情况的主要合作领域。 |
| The non-exhaustive nature of the list is
emphasized by the use of the word “includes” and its equivalent in the other official languages. | 使用“包括”一词，以及其他正式语文中对应的词，强调了列举并非详尽无疑。 |
| The Commission determined that the
highlighted forms are the main areas in which cooperation may be warranted
and that the forms are broad enough to encapsulate a wide variety of
cooperative activities. | 委员会确定，条款中提到的形式只是可能需要合作的主要领域，这些形式范围广泛，足以囊括众多不同的合作活动。 |
| Cooperation may, therefore, include the
activities mentioned, but is not limited to them; other forms of cooperation
not specified in the present draft article are not excluded, such as:
financial support; technology transfer covering, among others, technology
relating to satellite imagery; training; information-sharing; joint
simulation exercises and planning; and undertaking needs assessments and
situation overview. | 因此，合作可包括、但不仅限于条款中提到的活动；不排除本条草案没有明确提到的其他合作形式，例如资金支持、技术转让(其中包括与卫星图像有关的技术)、培训、共享信息以及联合模拟演习和规划，需求评估和情况审查。 |
| (5) As draft article 8 is illustrative of
possible forms of cooperation, it is not intended to create additional legal
obligations for either affected States or other assisting actors to engage in
certain activities. | (5) 第8条草案只是说明可能的合作形式，不是为受灾国或援助方规定参加某些活动的额外法律义务。 |
| Notwithstanding this, cooperation may
also take place in the context of existing obligations. | 尽管如此，合作也可在现有义务下进行。 |
| For example, an affected State may have a
duty to inform or notify, at the onset of a disaster, other States and other
assisting actors that have a mandated role to gather information, provide
early warning and coordinate assistance provided by the international
community. | 例如，受灾国有义务在灾害开始时告知或通知负有收集资料、提供早期预警和协调国际社会援助等法定责任的其他国家和其他援助方。 |
| Such duty was envisaged in article 17 of
the articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities,
adopted in 2001, which provides: | 这项义务是2001年通过的预防危险活动带来的跨界损害的条款所规定的，其中指出： |
| “The State of origin shall, without delay
and by the most expeditious means at its disposal, notify the State likely to
be affected of an emergency concerning an activity within the scope of the
present draft articles and provide it with all relevant and available information.” | “起源国应毫不迟延地以可以获得的最迅速手段，向可能受影响的国家告知本条款草案范围内某项活动涉及的紧急情况，并向其提供一切有关的现有资料”。 |
| (6) The forms that cooperation may take
will necessarily depend upon a range of factors, including, inter alia, the
nature of the disaster, the needs of the affected persons and the capacities
of the affected State and other assisting actors involved. | (6) 可采取的合作形式必然取决于一系列因素，除其他外包括灾害性质、受灾人员需要、受灾国和其他援助方能力。 |
| As with the principle of cooperation
itself, the forms of cooperation in draft article 8 are meant to be
reciprocal in nature, as cooperation is not a unilateral act, but rather one
that involves the collaborative behaviour of multiple parties. | 与合作原则本身一样，第8条草案所列的合作形式旨在表明一种相互性，因为合作并非单方面行为，而是涉及多方的合作行为。 |
| The draft article is therefore not
intended to be a list of activities in which an assisting State may engage,
but rather areas in which harmonization of efforts through consultation on
the part of both the affected State and other assisting actors may be
appropriate. | 因此，本条草案不是为了列举援助国可参与活动的清单，而是说明受灾国和其他援助方双方可通过协商采取协调行动的领域。 |
| (7) Cooperation in the areas mentioned
must be in conformity with the other draft articles. | (7) 此外，提到的合作领域必须与其他条文草案保持一致。 |
| For example, as with draft article 7, the
forms of cooperation touched upon in draft article 8 must be consistent with
draft article 10, which grants the affected State the primary role in
disaster relief assistance, as a consequence of its sovereignty. | 例如，与第7条草案一样，第8条草案提到的合作形式必须与第10条草案一致，该条承认受灾国由于其主权而在救灾援助中起主要作用。 |
| Cooperation must also be undertaken in
accordance with the requirement of consent of the affected State to external
assistance (draft article 13), as well as the recognition that the affected
State may place appropriate conditions on the provision of external
assistance, particularly with respect to the identified needs of persons
affected by a disaster and the quality of the assistance (draft article 14). | 合作还必须符合受灾国对外部援助表示同意的要求(第13条草案)，并遵行承认受灾国可对外部援助提出适当条件的规定，特别是了解受灾人员需要和保证援助质量(第14条草案)。 |
| Cooperation is also related to draft
article 15, which recognizes the role of the affected State in the
facilitation of prompt and effective assistance to persons affected by a
disaster. | 合作还与第15条草案有关，该条承认受灾国应发挥作用，促进迅速及有效地向受灾人员提供援助。 |
| As such, and since draft article 8 does
not create any additional legal obligations, the relationship between the
affected State, assisting State, and other assisting actors with regard to
the above-mentioned forms of cooperation will be regulated in accordance with
the other provisions of the present draft articles. | 鉴此，也由于第8条草案没有规定任何额外的法律义务，受灾国、援助国及其他援助方在开展上述形式合作时的关系将遵行本专题条款草案的其他规定。 |
| (8) Humanitarian assistance is
intentionally placed first among the forms of cooperation mentioned in draft
article 8, as the Commission considers this type of cooperation of paramount
importance in the context of disaster relief. | (8) 第8条草案提到的合作形式中，特意将人道主义援助放在第一位，这是因为委员会认为这种合作在救灾工作中最重要。 |
| The second category — coordination of international relief actions and communications — is intended to be broad enough to cover most cooperative efforts
in the disaster relief phase, and may include the logistical coordination,
supervision and facilitation of the activities and movement of disaster
response personnel and equipment and the sharing and exchange of information
pertaining to the disaster. | 第二类合作――协调国际救灾行动和通信――希望尽可能涵盖救灾阶段的大多数合作努力，可包括后勤协调、监督、为救灾人员和设备的活动及通行提供便利，以及分享和交流与灾害有关的信息。 |
| Though information exchange is often
referred to in instruments that emphasize cooperation in the pre-disaster
phase as a preventive mode to reduce the risk of disasters, communication and
information is also relevant in the disaster response phase to monitor the
developing situation and to facilitate the coordination of relief actions
among the various actors involved. | 虽然强调灾前合作的文书经常提到信息交流是减少灾害风险的预防手段， 但是通信和信息对于在救灾过程中监督灾情发展、推动协调各参与方的救援行动也十分重要。 |
| A number of instruments deal with
communication and information-sharing in the disaster relief context. | 许多文书都提到了救灾过程中的通信和信息分享问题。 |
| The mention of “making
available relief personnel, equipment and goods, and scientific, medical and
technical resources” refers to the provision of any
and all resources necessary for disaster response operations. | 提到“提供救灾人员、设备和物资以及科学、医学、技术资源”是指提供救灾行动所需的任何及一切资源。 |
| The reference to “personnel” may entail the provision of and
cooperation among medical teams, search and rescue teams, engineers and
technical specialists, translators and interpreters, or other persons engaged
in relief activities on behalf of one of the relevant actors — affected State, assisting State or other assisting actors. | 提到“人员”是指可能需要提供医疗小组、搜寻和救援小组、工程师和技术专家、笔译和口译员，或代表某参与方――受灾国、援助国或其他援助方――参加救援行动的其他人员，并需要他们之间的合作。 |
| The term “resources” covers scientific, technical and medical expertise and knowledge
as well as equipment, tools, medicines or other objects that would be useful
for relief efforts. | “资源”一词涵盖科学、技术和医学专长和知识，以及设备、工具、药物，或对救援有用的其他物品。 |
| Article 9 | 第9条 |
| Reduction of the risk of disasters | 减少灾害风险 |
| 1. Each State shall reduce the risk of
disasters by taking appropriate measures, including through legislation and
regulations, to prevent, mitigate, and prepare for disasters. | 1. 每一国应通过采取适当的防灾、减灾和备灾措施，包括通过制订法律和规章，减少灾害风险。 |
| 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，收集和传播风险信息和以往损失信息，以及安装和操作预警系统。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 9 deals with the duty
to reduce the risk of disasters. | (1) 第9条草案论述减少灾害风险的义务。 |
| The draft article is composed of two
paragraphs. | 这条草案由两款组成。 |
| Paragraph 1 establishes the basic
obligation to reduce the risk of disasters by taking certain measures and
paragraph 2 provides an indicative list of such measures. | 第1款规定采取某些措施以减少灾害风险的基本义务，第2款列出这类措施的指示性清单。 |
| (2) As indicated in draft article 2, the
reduction of the risk of disasters falls within the purpose of the present
draft articles. | (2) 如第2条草案所述，本条款草案的宗旨是减少灾害风险。 |
| The concept of disaster risk reduction
has its origins in a number of General Assembly resolutions and has been
further developed through the 1994 World Conference on Natural Disaster
Reduction in Yokohama, the Hyogo Framework for Action and the Sendai
Framework, as well as several sessions of the Global Platform for Disaster
Risk Reduction. | 减少灾害风险概念最初来自大会的一些决议，后经由1994年横滨减少自然灾害世界会议、
《兵库行动框架》和《仙台框架》以及全球减少灾害风险平台几届会议得到进一步发展。 |
| (3) At the fourth session of the Global
Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction in 2013, the concluding summary by the
Chair drew attention to the “growing recognition that
the prevention and reduction of disaster risk is a legal obligation,
encompassing risk assessments, the establishment of early warning systems,
and the right to access risk information”. | (3) 在2013年全球减少灾害风险平台第四届会议上，主席在总结概要中提请注意：“人们日益认识到，预防和减少灾害风险是一项法律义务，涵盖风险评估、安装预警系统、以及获得风险信息权”。 |
| At the Third United Nations World Conference
on Disaster Risk Reduction, “States also reiterated
their commitment to address disaster risk reduction and the building of
resilience to disasters with a renewed sense of urgency”. | 在第三次联合国减少灾害风险世界会议上，“各国重申它们承诺以新的紧迫感解决减少灾害风险和建设抗灾能力问题”。 |
| The Sendai Framework indicated that “it is urgent and critical to anticipate, plan for and reduce
disaster risk in order to more effectively protect persons, communities and
countries” and called for “accountability
for disaster risk creation … at all levels. ” | 《仙台框架》指出，“当务之急是预测、规划和减少灾害风险，以更有效地保护个人、社区和国家”，需要“在各级…对创造灾害风险…问责”。 |
| Furthermore, the Sendai Framework stated,
as a principle, that “each State has the primary
responsibility to prevent and reduce disaster risk, including through
international, regional, subregional, transboundary and bilateral cooperation”. | 此外，《仙台框架》还指出，作为一项原则，“每个国家都负有首要责任预防和减少灾害风险，包括为此开展国际、区域、次区域、跨界和双边合作”。 |
| Finally, with the aim to achieve “the substantial reduction of disaster risk and losses in lives,
livelihoods and health and in the economic, physical, social, cultural and
environmental assets of persons, businesses, communities and countries”, the Sendai Framework indicated that “the
following goal must be pursued: [p]revent new and reduce existing disaster
risk through the implementation of integrated and inclusive economic,
structural, legal, social, health, cultural, educational, environmental,
technological, political and institutional measures that prevent and reduce
hazard exposure and vulnerability to disaster, increase preparedness for response
and recovery, and thus strengthen resilience.” | 最后，为了"大幅度减少灾害风险与生命、生计和健康损失，以及人员、企业、社区和国家的经济、实体、社会、文化和环境资产的损失”，
《仙台框架》指出，“必须设法实现以下目标：预防产生新的灾害风险和减少现有的灾害风险，为此要采取综合性和包容性的经济、结构、法律、社会、卫生、文化、教育、环境、技术、政治和体制措施，防止和减少危险程度和受灾脆弱性，加强备灾和恢复准备，从而提高抗灾能力”。 |
| (4) The Commission bases itself on the
fundamental principles of State sovereignty and non-intervention and, at the
same time, draws on principles emanating from international human rights law,
including the obligations undertaken by States to respect and protect human
rights, in particular the right to life. | (4) 委员会遵循国家主权和不干涉的基本原则，同时汲取国际人权法产生的原则，包括各国有义务尊重、保护人权，特别是生命权。 |
| Protection entails a positive obligation
on States to take the necessary and appropriate measures to prevent harm from
impending disasters. | 保护就要求各国承担起积极义务，采取必要适当措施，防止即将发生的灾害造成损害。 |
| This is confirmed by the decisions of
international tribunals, notably the European Court of Human Rights judgments
in the Öneryildiz v. Turkey and Budayeva and Others v. Russia cases, which
affirmed the duty to take preventive measures. | 这一点得到了国际法庭裁决的认可，可参见欧洲人权法院关于厄内尔伊尔迪兹诉土耳其案和在布达耶娃等人诉俄罗斯案的裁决。 |
| In addition, draft article 9 draws
inspiration from a number of international environmental law principles,
including the “due diligence”
principle. | 这些裁决确认了采取预防措施的责任。 此外，第9条草案借鉴了若干国际环境法原则，包括“尽职”原则。 |
| (5) An important legal foundation for
draft article 9 is the widespread practice of States reflecting their
commitment to reduce the risk of disasters. | (5) 第9条草案的重要法律基础是反映各国承诺减少灾害风险的广泛实践。 |
| States and international organizations
have adopted multilateral, regional and bilateral instruments concerned with
reducing the risk of disasters, including: | 各国和各国际组织通过了减少灾害风险的具有约束力的多边、区域和双边协议，其中包括： |
| the Paris Agreement (2015); Transforming
our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (2015); the Addis
Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for
Development (2015); | 《巴黎协定》(2015年)；
《改变我们的世界――2030年可持续发展议程》(2015年)； 第三次发展筹资问题国际会议《亚的斯亚贝巴行动议程》(2015年)； |
| the SIDS Accelerated Modalities of Action
(SAMOA) Pathway (2014); the ASEAN Agreement; the Beijing Action for Disaster
Risk Reduction in Asia (2005); | 小岛屿发展中国家快速行动方式(萨摩亚途径)(2014年)；《东盟协定》；《亚洲减少灾害风险北京行动计划》(2005年)； |
| the Delhi Declaration on Disaster Risk
Reduction in Asia (2007); the Kuala Lumpur Declaration on Disaster Risk
Reduction in Asia (2008); | 《亚洲减少灾害风险德里宣言》(2007年)；《亚洲减少灾害风险吉隆坡宣言》(2008年)； |
| the Incheon Declaration on Disaster Risk
Reduction in Asia and the Pacific 2010; | 《2010年亚太减轻灾害风险仁川宣言》； |
| the Incheon Regional Roadmap and Action
Plan on Disaster Risk Reduction through Climate Change Adaptation in Asia and
the Pacific, reaffirming the Hyogo Framework for Action and proposing Asian
initiatives for climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction
considering vulnerabilities in the region; “The way
forward: climate and disaster resilient development in the Pacific” (meeting statement) of the Pacific Platform for Disaster Risk
Management (2014); | 《亚太适应气候变化减轻灾害风险仁川区域路线图》，重申了《兵库行动纲领》，提出了考虑到该区域脆弱性的适应气候变化和减少灾害风险的亚洲倡议；太平洋区域灾害风险管理论坛第六届会议成果文件：“前进方向：太平洋区域具有气候抵御力和抗灾能力的发展”(2014年)； |
| the Framework of Cooperation on
Strengthening Regional Cooperation of Disaster Management Authorities of
Central Asian and South Caucasus Region in the Area of Disaster Risk
Reduction (2015); | 中亚和南高加索地区灾害管理部门在减少灾害风险方面加强区域合作的框架(2015年)； |
| the African Union Africa Regional
Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction of 2004, which was followed by a
programme of action for its implementation (originally for the period between
2005 and 2010, but later extended to 2015); | 2004年《非洲联盟减少灾害风险非洲区域战略》， 随后又有实施该战略的行动方案(原定为2005-2010年，后来延长至2015年)； |
| the East African Community Disaster Risk
Reduction and Disaster Management Bill (2013); four sessions of the African
Regional Platform on Disaster Risk Reduction, the most recent one being in
2013; the Yaoundé Declaration on the Implementation
of the Sendai Framework in Africa (2015); | 东非共同体减少灾害风险和灾害管理法案(2013年)； 第四届非洲区域减少灾害风险平台会议，最近的一届是在2013年； 《非洲执行〈仙台框架〉的雅温得宣言》(2015年)； |
| the Arab Strategy for Disaster Risk
Reduction 2020; the Sharm El Sheikh Declaration on Disaster Risk Reduction
(2014); the Asuncion Declaration “Guidelines towards
a Regional Action Plan for the Implementation of the Sendai Framework
2015-2030” (2016); the Aqaba Declaration on Disaster
Risk Reduction in Cities (2013); | 《2020年阿拉伯减少灾害风险战略》；《沙姆沙伊赫减少灾害风险宣言》(2014年)； 《亚松森宣言――2015-2030年执行〈仙台框架〉的区域行动计划准则》(2016年)； 《城市减少灾害风险的亚喀巴宣言》(2013年)； |
| the Latin American Parliament Protocol on
Disaster Risk Management in Latin America and the Caribbean (2013); the
Guayaquil Communiqué of the Fourth Session of the
Regional Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction in the Americas (2014); the
Nayarit Communiqué on Lines of Action to Strengthen
Disaster Risk Reduction in the Americas (2011); | 《拉丁美洲和加勒比地区灾害风险管理的拉丁美洲议会议定书》(2013年)；《美洲减少灾害风险区域平台第四届会议的瓜亚基尔纳亚里特公报》(2014年)；《美洲加强减少灾害风险行动路线纳亚里特公报》(2011年)； |
| the Outcome of the European ministerial
meeting on disaster risk reduction: towards a post-2015 framework for
disaster risk reduction — building the resilience of
nations and communities to disasters (2014); 6th annual meeting of the
European Forum for Disaster Risk Reduction — Roadmap
for the Implementation of the Sendai Framework (2015); | 欧盟减少灾害风险部长级会议的成果：2015年后减少灾害风险框架――加强国家和社区的抗灾能力(2014年)；欧洲减少灾害风险论坛第六届年会――执行《仙台框架》路线图(2015年)； |
| “Solidarity in Action”, Joint Statement of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the
South East Europe Cooperation Process (2013); the European Union’s Civil Protection Mechanism (2013); | “团结行动”，东南欧合作进程外交部长联合声明(2013年)；欧盟民事保护机制(2013年)； |
| resolution 6 on strengthening legal
frameworks for disaster response, risk reduction and first aid, adopted by
the 32nd International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (2015); | 红十字会与红新月会第32届国际会议关于加强救灾、减少风险和急救的法律框架的第6号决议(2015年)； |
| and the European Commission Action Plan
on the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (2016). | 《欧洲委员会执行〈减少灾害风险仙台框架〉的行动计划(2015-2030年)》(2016年)。 |
| (6) Recognition of this commitment is
further shown by the incorporation by States of disaster risk reduction
measures into their national policies and legal frameworks. | (6) 各国对这一承诺的认可也体现在各国将减少灾害风险措施纳入国家政策和法律框架。 |
| A compilation of national progress
reports on the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action and other
sources indicate that, as of 2016, 64 States or areas reported having
established specific policies on disaster risk reduction, evenly spread
throughout all continents and regions, including the major hazard-prone
locations. | 从各国执行《兵库行动框架》进展报告汇编中可以看到，截至2016年，已有64个国家或地区报告说它们制定了减少灾害风险的专门政策，这些国家或地区均匀地分布于各大洲和各个地区，包括主要易受灾地区。 |
| They are: Algeria; Anguilla; Argentina;
Armenia; Bangladesh; Bolivia (Plurinational State of); Brazil; British Virgin
Islands; Canada; Cape Verde; Chile; Colombia; Cook Islands; Costa Rica; Côte
d’Ivoire; Cuba; Dominican Republic; Fiji; Finland;
Georgia; Germany; Ghana; Guatemala; Honduras; India; Indonesia; Italy; Japan;
Kenya; Lao People’s Democratic Republic; Lebanon;
Madagascar; Malawi; Malaysia; Maldives; Marshall Islands; Mauritius; Mexico;
Mongolia; Morocco; Mozambique; Nepal; New Zealand; Nicaragua; Nigeria;
Norway; Panama; Paraguay; Peru; Poland; Saint Kitts and Nevis; Saint Lucia;
Samoa; Senegal; Sri Lanka; Sweden; Switzerland; Syrian Arab Republic;
Thailand; the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; United Republic of Tanzania;
United States of America; Vanuatu; and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of). | 这些国家或地区是：阿尔及利亚、安吉拉、阿根廷、亚美尼亚、孟加拉国、多民族玻利维亚国、巴西、英属维尔京群岛、加拿大、佛得角、智利、哥伦比亚、库克群岛、哥斯达黎加、科特迪瓦、古巴、多米尼加共和国、斐济、芬兰、格鲁吉亚、德国、加纳、危地马拉、洪都拉斯、印度、印度尼西亚、意大利、日本、肯尼亚、老挝人民民主共和国、黎巴嫩、马达加斯加、马拉维、马来西亚、马尔代夫、马绍尔群岛、毛里求斯、墨西哥、蒙古、摩洛哥、莫桑比克、尼泊尔、新西兰、尼加拉瓜、尼日利亚、挪威、巴拿马、巴拉圭、秘鲁、波兰、圣基茨和尼维斯、圣卢西亚、萨摩亚、塞内加尔、斯里兰卡、瑞典、瑞士、阿拉伯叙利亚共和国、泰国、前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国、坦桑尼亚联合共和国、美利坚合众国、瓦努阿图、委内瑞拉玻利瓦尔共和国。 |
| More recently, the United Nations Office
for Disaster Risk Reduction identified 93 States that had adopted national
platforms for disaster risk reduction, which, in accordance with the Sendai
Framework, are government coordination forums composed of relevant
stakeholders aimed “to, inter alia, identify sectoral
and multisectoral disaster risk, build awareness and knowledge of disaster
risk through sharing and dissemination of non-sensitive disaster risk
information and data, contribute to and coordinate reports on local and
national disaster risk, coordinate public awareness campaigns on disaster risk,
facilitate and support local multisectoral cooperation (e.g. among local
governments) and contribute to the determination of and reporting on national
and local disaster risk management plans and all policies relevant for
disaster risk management”. | 最近，联合国国际减灾战略署(联合国减灾署)查明已有93个国家建立了国家减灾平台。 按照《仙台框架》，这一平台是相关利益相关方组成的政府协调机制，旨在“除其他外，通过分享和传播非敏感灾害风险信息和数据，查明部门和多部门灾害风险，提高对灾害风险的认识和了解，协助和协调编制地方和国家灾害风险报告，协调开展关于减少灾害风险的公共宣传活动，促进和支持地方多部门合作(如地方政府之间的合作)，协助确定和报告国家和地方灾害风险管理计划，以及所有灾害风险管理相关政策”。 |
| Several countries have adopted legislation
specifically addressing disaster risk reduction either as stand-alone
legislation or as part of a broader legal framework concerning both disaster
risk management and disaster response, including: Algeria; Cameroon; China;
Cambodia, Dominican Republic; El Salvador; Estonia; France; Georgia,
Guatemala; Haiti; Hungary; India; Indonesia; Italy; Madagascar; Namibia; New
Zealand; Pakistan; Peru; Philippines; Republic of Korea; Slovenia; South
Africa; Thailand; and the United States of America. | 一些国家制定了减少灾害风险法律，或是专门法律，或是灾害风险管理和应对灾害的法律框架的一部分。 这些国家包括：阿尔及利亚、
喀麦隆、 中国、 柬埔寨、 多米尼加共和国、 萨尔瓦多、 爱沙尼亚、 法国、 格鲁吉亚、 危地马拉、 海地、 匈牙利、 印度、 印度尼西亚、 意大利、 马达加斯加、
纳米比亚、 新西兰、 巴基斯坦、 秘鲁、 菲律宾、 大韩民国、 斯洛文尼亚、 南非、 泰国、 美国。 |
| (7) Draft article 9 is to be read
together with the rules of general applicability in the present draft
articles, including those principally concerned with the response to a
disaster. | (7) 应结合本条款草案中的普遍适用规则，包括主要涉及应对灾害的规则一起阅读第9条草案。 |
| (8) Paragraph 1 starts with the words “Each State”. | (8) 第1款以“每一国”开始。 |
| The Commission opted for this formula
over “States” for the sake of
consistency with the draft articles previously adopted, where care had been
taken to identify the State or States that bore the legal duty to act. | 委员会选择这一措辞，而不是英文复数“各国”，是为了与先前通过的小心确定负有采取行动的法律责任的一国或多国的条款草案保持一致。 |
| In contrast to those draft articles
dealing directly with disaster response where a distinction exists between an
affected State or States and other States, in the pre-disaster phase the
obligation in question applies to every State. | 相比那些直接涉及灾害应对的条文草案(受灾国有别于其他国家)，灾前阶段的有关义务适用于每一国。 |
| Furthermore, as is evident from paragraph
2, the obligation to reduce risk implies measures primarily taken at the
domestic level. | 此外，第2款中显而易见的是，减少风险的义务主要要求在国内一级采取措施。 |
| Any such measures requiring interaction
between States or with other assisting actors are meant to be covered by
draft article 7. | 第7条草案旨在涵盖国家之间或与其他援助方之间互动的这类措施。 |
| In other words, the obligation applies to
each State individually. | 换言之，这一义务分别适用于每一个国家。 |
| Hence the Commission decided against
using the word “States” also
to avoid any implication of a collective obligation. | 因此，委员会决定不使用英文复数“各国”，也是避免暗示任何集体义务。 |
| (9) The word “shall” signifies the existence of the international legal obligation to
act in the manner described in the paragraph and is the most succinct way to
convey the sense of that legal obligation. | (9) “应”一词表示存在以这一款所述方式行事的国际法律义务，是表达这一法律义务的含义的最简洁方式。
这条草案的标题确认了这一点，说的是减少灾害风险的“义务”。 |
| While each State bears the same
obligation, the question of different levels of capacity among States to
implement the obligation is dealt with under the phrase “by taking appropriate measures”. | 虽然每一国都承担同样的义务，但是以“采取适当的措施”这一短语处理了各国之间履行义务能力的水平不同问题。 |
| (10) The obligation is to “reduce the risk of disasters”. | (10) 义务是“减少灾害风险”。 |
| The Commission adopted the present
formula in recognition of the fact that the contemporary view of the
international community, as reflected in several major pronouncements,
notably, and most recently, in the Sendai Framework, is that the focus should
be placed on the reduction of the risk of harm caused by a hazard, as
distinguished from the prevention and management of disasters themselves. | 委员会采纳了本用语，以承认数个主要宣言尤其是最近的《仙台框架》所体现的当代国际社会观点，即重点应是减少危险因素造成损害的风险，这有别于防止和管理灾害本身。 |
| Accordingly, the emphasis in paragraph 1
is placed on the reduction of the risk of disasters. | 因此，第1款的重点是减少灾害风险。 |
| This is achieved by taking certain
measures so as to prevent, mitigate and prepare for such disasters. | 实现这一点就要采取某些防灾、减灾和备灾措施。 |
| The duty being envisaged is one of
conduct and not result; in other words not to completely prevent or mitigate
a disaster, but rather to reduce the risk of harm potentially caused thereby. | 设想的义务是行为义务而不是结果义务；换句话说，不是完全防止或减少灾害的义务，而是减少可能引起的损害风险的义务。 |
| (11) The phrase “by
taking appropriate measures” indicates the specific
conduct being required. | (11) “采取适当的…措施”一语指出所要求的具体行为。 |
| In addition to the further specification
about legislation and regulations explained in paragraph (13) below, the “measures” to be taken are qualified by the
word “appropriate”, which
accords with common practice. | 除下文第(13)段对法律和规章的进一步解释外，以“适当”这个词来界定应采取的“措施”，是普遍的做法。 |
| The use of the word “appropriate”, therefore, serves the
function of specifying that it is not just any general measures that are
being referred to, but rather specific and concrete measures aimed at
prevention, mitigation and preparation for disasters. | 因此，使用“适当”在于指出所说的不是任何一般措施，而是专门和具体的防灾、减灾、备灾措施。 |
| What might be “appropriate” in any particular case is to be understood in terms of the stated
goal of the measures to be taken, namely “to prevent,
mitigate, and prepare for disasters” so as to reduce
risk. | 在任何特定情况下，什么可能是“适当”的，将按照应采取措施的既定目标来理解，即“防灾、减灾和备灾”以减少风险。 |
| This is to be evaluated within the
broader context of the existing capacity and availability of resources of the
State in question, as has been noted in paragraph (9) above. | 如上文第(9)段指出的，这应在有关国家现有能力和可用资源的更广泛背景下进行评估。 |
| Accordingly, the reference to “taking appropriate measures” is meant to
indicate the relative nature of the obligation. | 因此，“采取适当的措施”的提法是为了说明义务的相对性。 |
| The fundamental requirement of due
diligence is inherent in the concept of “appropriate”. | 尽职的基本要求是“适当”概念所固有的。 |
| It is further understood that the
question of the effectiveness of the measures is implied in that formula. | 因此，进一步理解是，这一措辞也暗含着措施的成效问题。 |
| (12) The paragraph indicates by means of
the phrase “including through legislation and
regulations”, the specific context in which the
corresponding measures are to be taken. | (12) 借助于“包括通过制订法律和规章”这一短语，这一款指出了应采取的相应措施的具体背景。 |
| The envisaged outcome consists of a
number of concrete measures that are typically taken within the context of a
legislative or regulatory framework. | 预期的成果包括根据法律或规章框架而专门采取的一些具体措施。 |
| Accordingly, for those States that do not
already have such a framework in place, the general obligation to reduce the
risk of disasters would also include an obligation to put such a legal
framework into place so as to allow for the taking of the “appropriate” measures. | 因此，对于仍然没有制订这类框架的国家，减少灾害风险的一般义务也包括制订这一法律框架的义务，从而能够采取“适当的”措施。 |
| The phrase “legislation
and regulations” is meant to be understood in broad
terms to cover as many manifestations of law as possible, it being generally
recognized that such law-based measures are the most common and effective way
to facilitate (hence the word “through”) the taking of disaster risk reduction measures at the domestic
level. | 应在广义上理解“法律和规章”几字，以涵盖尽可能多的法律表现形式；普遍承认的一点是：这些基于法律的措施是促进(因此有“通过”一词)在国内一级采取减少灾害风险措施的最常见、最有效的方式。 |
| (13) The word “including” indicates that while “legislation and
regulations” may be the primary methods, there may be
other arrangements under which such measures could be taken. | (13) 限定词“包括”表明，尽管“法律和规章”可能是主要的方法，但还可能有其他可以据之采取这些措施的安排。 |
| The word “including” was chosen in order to avoid the interpretation that the adoption
and implementation of specific legislation and regulations would always be
required. | 选择“包括”一词，以避免解释为始终要求通过和执行具体的法律和规章。 |
| This allows a margin of discretion for
each State to decide on the applicable legal framework, it being understood
that having in place a legal framework that anticipates the taking of “appropriate measures” is a sine qua non
for disaster risk reduction. | 这将允许每一国有一定的自由裁量权来决定适用的法律框架；同时有一项理解是：具有一个预期采取“适当的措施”的法律框架，是减少灾害风险的一个必要条件。 |
| (14) The phrase “through
legislation and regulations” imports a reference to
ensuring that mechanisms for implementation and accountability for
non-performance be defined within domestic legal systems. | (14) “通过制定法律和规章”这一短语意味着需确保在国内法律制度中界定执行机制和针对不执行的问责制。 |
| Such issues, though important, are not
the only ones that could be the subject of legislation and regulations in the
area of disaster risk reduction. | 这类问题虽然重要，但不是减少灾害风险领域的法律和规章可处理的唯一内容。 |
| (15) The last clause, namely “to prevent, mitigate, and prepare for disasters”, serves to describe the purpose of the “appropriate” measures that States are to take during the pre-disaster phase to
address exposure, vulnerability and the characteristics of a hazard, with the
ultimate goal of reducing disaster risk. | (15) “防灾、减灾和备灾”这一短语用于说明国家在灾前阶段应采取的解决风险、脆弱性和危害特点的“适当”措施的目的，这些措施最终目标是减少灾害风险。 |
| The phrase tracks the formula used in
major disaster risk reduction instruments. | 这句话沿循了减少灾害风险主要文书使用的措辞。 |
| The Commission was cognizant of the fact
that adopting a different formulation could result in unintended a contrario
interpretations as to the kinds of activities being anticipated in the draft
article. | 委员会认识到的一个事实是：采用不同措辞可能会导致对本条草案所设想的活动类别出现意想不到的相反解释。 |
| In addition, the Commission was of the
opinion that this clause would also address the Sendai Framework’s requirement to prevent new, and reduce existing, risk, and thus
strengthen resilience. | 此外，委员会认为，这一条款也将涉及《仙台框架》关于预防新的风险和减少现有风险，从而增加抗灾能力的要求。 |
| (16) The Terminology on Disaster Risk
Reduction prepared by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction in
2009 illustrates the meaning of each of the three terms used, prevention,
mitigation and preparedness: | (16) 联合国减灾署在2009年编写的《减少灾害风险词汇》
说明了防灾、减灾和备灾这三个用语各自的含义： |
| “Prevention [is] [t]he outright avoidance
of adverse impacts of hazards and related disasters. | “防灾是全面防止致灾因子和相关灾害的不利影响…。 |
| “… Prevention (i.e. disaster prevention)
expresses the concept and intention to completely avoid potential adverse
impacts through action taken in advance. | “…预防或防灾表达的是通过事先采取行动，完全避免潜在不利影响的概念和意愿…。 |
| … Very often the complete avoidance of
losses is not feasible and the task transforms to that of mitigation. | 很多情况下，完全避免损失是不可能的，所以防灾任务转变成了减灾任务。 |
| Partly for this reason, the terms
prevention and mitigation are sometimes used interchangeably in casual use. | 部分是这个原因，有时防灾和减灾术语被不经意地交替使用”。 |
| “Mitigation [is] [t]he lessening or
limitation of the adverse impacts of hazards and related disasters. | “减灾是‘减轻或限制致灾因子和相关灾害的不利影响， |
| “… The adverse impacts of hazards often
cannot be prevented fully, but their scale or severity can be substantially
lessened by various strategies and actions. … | “…致灾因子的不利影响通常无法完全避免，但可以通过各种战略和行动切实地减轻它们的规模或危害程度。 |
| It should be noted that in climate change
policy ‘mitigation’ is
defined differently, being the term used for the reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions that are the source of climate change.[] | …应该注意在气候变化政策里“减轻”的表述不一样，即减少作为气候变化根源的温室气体排放”。 |
| “Preparedness [is] [th]e knowledge and
capacities developed by governments, professional response and recovery
organizations, communities and individuals to effectively anticipate, respond
to, and recover from, the impacts of likely, imminent or current hazard
events or conditions. | “备灾是‘由政府、专业灾害响应和恢复机构、社区和个人建立的知识和能力，对可能发生的、即将发生的、或已经发生的危险事件或条件，以及它们的影响进行有效的预见、应对和恢复…。 |
| “… Preparedness action is carried out
within the context of disaster risk management and aims to build the
capacities needed to efficiently manage all types of emergencies and achieve
orderly transitions from response through to sustained recovery. | “…备灾行动是在整个灾害风险管理的范围内进行的，目的是建立有效管理所有突发事件的能力，实现有序地从灾害响应到稳固恢复的过渡。 |
| Preparedness is based on a sound analysis
of disaster risks and good linkages with early warning systems … [The measures to be taken] must be supported by formal
institutional, legal and budgetary capacities.” | 好的备灾基于对灾害风险的良好分析，与预警系统的良好衔接…[应采取的措施]必须要有一个正规机构、相关法律和预算的支持”。 |
| The Commission is cognizant that the
above terms may be subject to further refinements by the General Assembly on
the basis of the outcome of the Open-ended Intergovernmental Expert Working
Group on Indicators and Terminology relating to Disaster Risk Reduction, established
by its resolution 69/284 of 3 June 2015. | 委员会认识到上述用语可以根据关于减少灾害风险指标和术语问题不限成员名额政府间专家工作组的成果，由大会做进一步的推敲。
该工作组是根据2015年6月3日第69/284号决议建立的。 |
| (17) Paragraph 2 lists three categories
of disaster risk reduction measures, namely: the conduct of risk assessments;
the collection and dissemination of risk and past loss information; and the
installation and operation of early warning systems. | (17) 第2款列出三类减少灾害风险的措施，即：开展风险评估、收集和传播风险信息和以往损失信息、以及安装和操作预警系统。 |
| As noted in paragraph (3) above, these
three measures were singled out in the Chair’s
summary at the conclusion of the fourth session of the Global Platform for
Disaster Risk Reduction held in May 2013. | 正如上文评注第(3)段指出的，2013年5月举行的减少灾害风险全球平台第四届会议结束时，主席在总结中强调了这三个措施。 |
| The Commission decided to refer expressly
to the three examples listed as reflecting the most prominent types of
contemporary disaster risk reduction efforts. | 委员会决定明确提及列出的三个实例，以反映最突出类型的当代减少灾害风险努力。 |
| The relevance of such measures was
further confirmed by their inclusion in the Sendai Framework. | “包括”一词表示所列举的并非详尽无遗。 |
| The word “include” serves to indicate that the list is non-exhaustive. | 列举这三项措施不影响目前正在或未来可能开展的旨在减少灾害风险的其他活动。 |
| The listing of the three measures is
without prejudice to other activities aimed at the reduction of the risk of
disasters that are being undertaken at present or which may be undertaken in
the future. | (18) 可采取的结构性和非结论性的实际措施是无数的，依赖于社会、环境、金融、文化和其他相关情况。 |
| (18) The practical structural and
non-structural measures that can be adopted are innumerable and depend on the
social, environmental, financial, cultural and other relevant circumstances. | 公共和私营部门的实践以及《仙台框架》等有关文书提供了丰富的实例。 |
| Practice in the public and private
sectors as well as instruments, such as the Sendai Framework, provide a
wealth of examples, among which may be cited: community-level preparedness
and education; the establishment of disaster risk governance frameworks;
contingency planning; setting-up of monitoring mechanisms; land-use controls;
construction standards; ecosystems management; drainage systems; social
safety-nets addressing vulnerability and resilience; risk disclosure; risk-informed
investments; and insurance. | 其中可援引的有：社区一级的备灾和教育；建立灾害治理框架；应急规划；设立监督机制；土地用途控制；建筑标准；生态系统管理；排水系统；解决脆弱性和抵御能力的社会安全网；风险披露；对风险知情后的投资；以及保险。 |
| (19) The three consecutive measures
listed in paragraph 2 share a particular characteristic: they are
instrumental to the development and applicability of many if not all other
measures concerning normative frameworks and definitions of priorities or
investment planning, both in the public and the private sector. | (19) 第2款所列的三个连续措施具有一个共同特征：都有助于制订和适用许多即使并非全部的其他措施，涉及法律框架以及公共和私营部门确定优先事项或投资规划。 |
| (20) The first measure — risk assessments — is about generating
knowledge concerning hazards, exposure and vulnerabilities as well as
disaster risk trends. | (20) 第一项措施――风险评估――涉及培养有关危险、风险和脆弱性以及灾害风险趋势的知识。 |
| As such, it is the first step towards any
sensible measure to reduce the risk of disasters. | 因此，这是任何减少灾害风险的明智措施的第一步。 |
| Without a sufficiently solid
understanding of the circumstances and factors, and their characteristics,
that drive disaster risk no measure can be defined and enacted effectively. | 如果没有足够确切地了解灾害风险的情况、因素和特点，就不能制定和颁布有效的措施。 |
| Risk assessments also compel a closer
look at local realities and the engagement of local communities. | 风险评估也迫使各方更仔细了解当地实际情况和当地社区参与。 |
| (21) The second measure — the collection and dissemination of risk and past loss
information — is the next step. | (21) 第二项措施――收集和传播风险信息和以往损失信息――是下一个步骤。 |
| Reducing disaster risk requires action by
all actors in the public and private sectors and civil society. | 减少灾害风险，需要公私部门和民间社会中所有参与者的行动。 |
| Collection and dissemination should
result in the free availability of risk and past loss information, which is
an enabler of effective decisions and action. | 收集和传播的结果应是免费提供风险和以往损失信息，能够推动有效的决策和行动。 |
| It allows all stakeholders to assume
responsibility for their actions and to make a risk-informed determination of
priorities for planning and investment purposes; it also enhances
transparency in transactions and public scrutiny and control. | 它使所有利益攸关方能够为自己的行动承担责任，并更好地确定规划和投资重点；它也增强了交易透明度以及公众监督和控制。 |
| The Commission wishes to emphasize the
desirability of the dissemination and free availability of risk and past loss
information, as it is the reflection of the prevailing trend focusing on the
importance of public access to such information. | 委员会希望强调：需要传播和免费提供风险信息和以往损失信息，因为这反映了关注公众获取此类信息的重要性这一流行趋势。 |
| The Commission, while recognizing the
importance of that trend, felt that it was best dealt with in the commentary
and not in the body of paragraph 2, since making it a uniform legal
requirement could prove burdensome for States. | 委员会尽管认识到这一趋势重要，但认为最好在评注中，而不是在第2款案文中阐述；因为将它作为统一的法律规定，可能让各国感觉负担过重。 |
| (22) The third measure concerns early
warning systems, which are instrumental both in initiating and implementing
contingency plans, thus limiting the exposure to a hazard; as such, they are
a prerequisite for effective preparedness and response. | (22) 第三项措施是预警系统；它同时有助于启动和实施应急计划，从而限制危险的出现；正因为如此，这是有效备灾和应对的一个先决条件。 |
| (23) As explained in paragraph (8) above,
draft article 9 concerns the taking of the envisaged measures within the
State. | (23) 如上文第8段所解释的，第9条草案事关在国内采取预想的措施。 |
| Any inter-State component would be
covered by the duty to cooperate in draft article 7. | 第7条草案的合作义务将涵盖任何国家间的措施。 |
| Accordingly, the extent of any
international legal duty relating to any of the listed or not listed measures
that may be taken in order to reduce the risk of disasters is to be
determined by way of the relevant specific agreements or arrangements each
State has entered into with other actors with which it has the duty to
cooperate. | 因此，有关任何列举和未列举的、为减少灾害风险可能采取的措施的国际法律义务的程度，应以每一国与其他的、该国有义务与之合作的行为者订立的相关具体协议或安排来确定。 |
| Article 10 | 第10条 |
| Role of the affected State | 受灾国的作用 |
| 1. The affected State has the duty to
ensure the protection of persons and provision of disaster relief assistance
in its territory, or in territory under its jurisdiction or control. | 1. 受灾国有责任在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内确保对人员的保护和救灾援助的提供。 |
| 2. The affected State has the primary
role in the direction, control, coordination and supervision of such relief
assistance. | 2. 受灾国在指挥、控制、协调和监督此种救灾援助方面应承担主要作用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 10 is addressed to an
affected State in the context of the protection of persons in the event of a
disaster upon its territory, or in territory under its jurisdiction or
control. | (1) 第10条草案针对的是受灾国在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内发生灾害时保护人员的情况。 |
| The term “role” in the title is a broad formulation intended to cover as well the
“function” of a State. | 标题中“作用”一词的含义宽泛，也包括国家的“职能”。 |
| Paragraph 1 reflects the obligation of an
affected State to protect persons and to provide disaster relief assistance. | 第1款体现了受灾国保护人员及提供救灾援助的义务。 |
| Paragraph 2 affirms the primary role held
by an affected State in the response to a disaster upon its territory, or in
a territory under its jurisdiction or control. | 第2款确认了受灾国在应对其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内的灾害时的主要作用。 |
| (2) Draft article 10 is premised on the
core principle of sovereignty as highlighted in the preamble to the present
draft set of articles. | (2) 第10条草案的前提是本套条款草案的序言中强调的主权核心原则。 |
| Both the principles of sovereignty and
its corollary, non-intervention, inform the Charter of the United Nations,
and numerous international legal instruments and judicial pronouncements. | 主权原则及从其推论出来的不干涉原则都体现于《联合国宪章》，并得到了众多国际法律文书和司法声明的承认。 |
| In the context of disaster relief
assistance, General Assembly resolution 46/182 affirms: “The sovereignty, territorial integrity and national unity of
States must be fully respected in accordance with the Charter of the United
Nations.” | 在救灾援助问题上，大会第46/182号决议确认，“必须按照《联合国宪章》充分尊重各国的主权、领土完整和国家统一”。 |
| (3) The duty held by an affected State to
ensure the protection of persons and the provision of disaster relief
assistance in its territory, as recognized in paragraph 1, stems from its
sovereignty. | (3) 第1款确认了受灾国有责任在其领土内确保对人员的保护和救灾援助的提供，这一责任源自其主权。 |
| The further reference to “or in territory under its jurisdiction or control” has been inserted to align the text with the expanded meaning of
the term “affected State” in
draft article 3, subparagraph (b). | 之所以又插入“或受其管辖或控制的领土”一语，是为了与第3条草案(b)项中“受灾国”含义有所扩大的行文保持一致。 |
| (4) The conception of a bond between
sovereign rights and concomitant duties upon a State was expressed in
particular by Judge Alvarez in an individual opinion in the Corfu Channel case: | (4) 关于一国的主权权利与相应的责任之间的联系这一理念，阿尔瓦雷斯法官在“科孚海峡案”的独立意见中曾特别作过表述： |
| “By sovereignty, we understand the whole
body of rights and attributes which a State possesses in its territory, to
the exclusion of all other States, and also in its relations with other States. | “我们理解的主权是指一国在其领土内排除所有其他国家所具有的以及在与他国关系中所具有的一整套权利和属性。” |
| “Sovereignty confers rights upon States
and imposes obligations on them.” | “主权赋予国家权利，也使其承担义务。 ” |
| (5) Paragraph 1 emphasizes that the
affected State is the actor that holds the duty to protect persons located
within its territory or within a territory under its jurisdiction or control. | “主权赋予国家权利，也使其承担义务。 ” (5) 第1款强调，受灾国是负有保护身处其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内的人员这一责任的行为方。 |
| The Commission considered that the term “duty” was more appropriate than the term “responsibility”, which could be
misunderstood given its use in other contexts. | 委员会认为“责任”一词比“职责”更为妥当。 鉴于“职责”一词在其他语境里使用，在这里使用可能被误解。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 further reflects the
primary role held by a State in disaster response. | (6) 第2款进一步体现了国家在灾害应对中起着主要作用。 |
| For the reasons expressed above, the
Commission decided to adopt the word “role” rather than “responsibility” in articulating the position of an affected State. | 由于上述原因，委员会决定采用“作用”一词而不用“职责”来表述受灾国的地位。 |
| The adoption of the term “role” was inspired by General Assembly
resolution 46/182, which affirms, inter alia, that an affected State “has the primary role in the initiation, organization,
coordination, and implementation of humanitarian assistance within its
territory”. | 采用“作用”一词受到了大会第46/182号决议的启发，该决议中称，受灾国“在其境内发起、组织、协调和执行人道主义援助方面起主要作用”。 |
| Use of the word “role” rather than “responsibility” allows some flexibility for States in the coordination of
disaster response activities. | 采用“作用”一词而不用“职责”在灾害应对活动的协调方面给各国留出一定灵活余地。 |
| Language implying an obligation upon
States to direct or control disaster response activities may, conversely, be
too restrictive for States that preferred to take a more limited role in
disaster response coordination because, for example, they faced a situation
of limited resources. | 含有国家有义务指挥或控制灾害应对活动之意的措辞可能反而对一些倾向于在灾害应对的协调方面发挥较有限的作用的国家具有过强的限制性，这些国家例如由于资源有限，倾向于发挥有限的作用。 |
| (7) The primacy of an affected State is
also grounded in the long-standing recognition in international law that the
State is best placed to determine the gravity of an emergency situation and
to frame appropriate response policies. | (7) 受灾国的主要作用还受到另一启发：国际法早已承认一国最能判断紧急情况的严重性并制定适当的应对政策。 |
| The affirmation in paragraph 2 that an
affected State holds the primary role in the direction, control, coordination
and supervision of disaster relief assistance should be read in concert with
the duty of cooperation outlined in draft article 7. | 第2款中称，受灾国起着指挥、控制、协调和监督抗灾救济和援助的主要作用，这一点应与第7条草案所述的合作义务一并解读。 |
| In this context, draft article 10,
paragraph 2, confirms that an affected State holds the primary position in
the cooperative relationships with other relevant actors contemplated in
draft article 7. | 这样看来，第10条草案第2款肯定了受灾国在与第7条草案中提到的其他相关行为方的合作关系中起着主要作用。 |
| (8) Reference to the “direction, control, coordination and supervision” of disaster relief assistance is drawn from article 4, paragraph
8, of the Tampere Convention. | (8) “指挥、控制、协调和监督”救灾援助的提法来自《坦佩雷公约》第4条第8款。 |
| The Tampere Convention formula is gaining
general acceptance in the field of disaster relief assistance and represents
more contemporary language. | 《坦佩雷公约》在救灾援助领域日益广被接受，而且措辞较为现代。 |
| The formula reflects the position that an
affected State exercises control over the manner in which relief operations
are carried out, which shall be in accordance with international law,
including the present draft articles. | 这种表述体现了受灾国在以何种方式遵照国际法(包括本条款草案)开展救灾行动方面拥有控制权的立场。 |
| Such control by an affected State is not
to be regarded as undue interference with the activities of an assisting
actor. | 受灾国的这种控制权不能视为对援助方的活动的不当干涉。 |
| (9) The Commission departed from the
Tampere Convention in deciding not to include a reference to “national law” in its articulation of the
primary role of an affected State. | (9) 委员会采用了与《坦佩雷公约》有所不同的措辞，决定本条中在表述受灾国的主要作用时不提及“本国法律”。 |
| In the context of the Tampere Convention,
the reference to national law indicates that appropriate coordination
requires consistency with an affected State’s
domestic law. | 《坦佩雷公约》中提及本国法律之处表明，妥善的协调须与受灾国的国内法保持一致。 |
| The Commission decided not to include
this reference in light of the fact that the internal law of an affected
State may not in all cases regulate or provide for the primary position of a
State in disaster response situations. | 委员会决定在本条中不提及这一点，因为可能并非所有受灾国的国内法都规范或规定了国家在灾害应对情况下的主要作用。 |
| Article 11 | 第11条 |
| Duty of the affected State to seek
external assistance | 受灾国寻求外部援助的责任 |
| To the extent that a disaster manifestly
exceeds its national response capacity, the affected State has the duty to
seek assistance from, as appropriate, other States, the United Nations, and
other potential assisting actors. | 如所遭受的灾害明显超出受灾国的应对能力，则受灾国有责任酌情向其他国家、联合国及其他潜在援助方寻求援助。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 11 addresses the
particular situation in which a disaster manifestly exceeds a State’s national response capacity. | (1) 第11条草案是关于灾害超过国家应对能力的特殊情况。 |
| In these circumstances, an affected State
has the duty to seek assistance from, as appropriate, other States, the
United Nations, and other potential assisting actors as defined in draft
article 3, subparagraph (d). | 在这种情况下，受灾国有责任酌情向其他国家、联合国及第3条草案(d)项所定义的其他潜在援助方寻求援助。 |
| The duty expounded in draft article 11 is
a specification of draft articles 7 and 10. | 第11条草案中阐述的义务是第7和第10条草案的详细说明。 |
| Paragraph 1 of draft article 10
stipulates that an affected State has the duty to ensure the protection of
persons and provision of disaster relief assistance in its territory, or in
territory under its jurisdiction or control. | 第10条草案第1款规定，受灾国有责任在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内确保人员的保护和救灾援助的提供。 |
| The draft article affirms the obligation
of the affected State to do its utmost to provide assistance to persons in a
territory under its jurisdiction or control. | 该条文草案申明了受灾国对在其管辖或控制的领土内的人员全力提供援助的义务。 |
| The duty to cooperate also underlies an
affected State’s duty to the extent that a disaster
manifestly exceeds its national response capacity. | 合作的责任也构成受灾国在灾害明显超出其国家应对能力时的责任的基础。 |
| Draft article 7 affirms that the duty to
cooperate is incumbent upon not only potential assisting States or other
potential assisting actors, but also affected States where such cooperation
is appropriate. | 第7条草案申明，在适宜进行此种合作的情形下，潜在援助国或其他潜在援助方和受灾国都有合作的义务。 |
| The Commission considers that where an
affected State’s national capacity is manifestly
exceeded seeking assistance is both appropriate and required. | 委员会认为，在灾害明显超出受灾国应对能力的情形下，寻求援助既是适当的，也是必要的。 |
| (2) The draft article stresses that a
duty to seek assistance arises only to the extent that the national response
capacity of an affected State is manifestly exceeded. | (2) 本条草案强调，寻求援助的责任只来源于明显超出受灾国的国家应对能力这一点。 |
| The words “to the
extent that” clarify that the national response
capacity of an affected State may not always be sufficient or insufficient in
absolute terms. | “如所遭受的灾害…”这一条件语用于澄清下面一点：受灾国的国家应对能力可能不总是绝对地够或绝对地不够。 |
| An affected State’s national capacity may be manifestly exceeded in relation to one
aspect of disaster relief operations, although the State remains capable of
undertaking other operations. | 可能会在救灾行动的一个方面明显超出受灾国的国家能力，但该国仍然能够进行其他行动。 |
| As a whole, the phrase “[t]o the extent that a disaster manifestly exceeds its national
response capacity” encompasses the situation in which
a disaster appears likely to manifestly exceed an affected State’s national response capacity. | 作为一个整体，“明显超出受灾国的应对能力”一语涵盖了灾害可能明显超出受灾国应对能力的情况。 |
| This flexible and proactive approach is
in line with the fundamental purpose of the draft articles as expressed in
draft article 2. | 这种灵活和积极的做法符合第2条草案中所表达的条款草案根本目的。 |
| The approach facilitates an adequate and
effective response to disasters that meets the essential needs of the persons
concerned, with full respect for their rights. | 这种做法有利于充分和有效地应对灾害，以满足有关人员的基本需要，同时充分尊重他们的权利。 |
| Recognition of the duty upon States in
these circumstances reflects the Commission’s concern
to enable the provision of timely and effective disaster relief assistance. | 确认各国在这种情况下的责任反映了委员会对及时和有效提供救灾援助的关注。 |
| (3) The Commission considers that the
duty to seek assistance in draft article 11 also derives from an affected
State’s obligations under international human rights
instruments and customary international law. | (3) 委员会认为，在第11条草案中寻求援助的责任也来源于受灾国根据国际人权文书和习惯国际法承担的义务。 |
| Recourse to international support may be
a necessary element in the fulfilment of a State’s
international obligations towards individuals where the resources of the
affected State are inadequate to meet protection needs. | 诉诸国际社会的支持可能是受灾国自身的资源不足以满足保护需要时对个人履行一国的国际义务的必要元素。 |
| While this may occur also in the absence
of any disaster, as alluded to in the commentary to draft article 5, a number
of human rights are directly implicated in the context of a disaster,
including the right to life, the right to adequate food, the right to health
and medical services, the right to safe drinking water, the right to adequate
housing, clothing and sanitation and the right to be free from
discrimination. | 虽然如第5条草案评注中所提到的，这种情况在没有任何灾害时也可能发生，但灾害的发生直接关系到若干人权，其中包括生命权、适足食物权、健康权和医疗服务权、安全饮用水权、适足住房、服装和卫生权以及不受歧视的权利。 |
| The Commission notes that the Human
Rights Committee has said (see general comment No. 6 on the right to life)
that a State’s duty in the fulfilment of the right to
life extends beyond mere respect to encompass a duty to protect the right by
adopting positive measures. | 委员会注意到，人权事务委员会说过(见关于生命权的第6号一般性意见)，一个国家履行生命权的职责超越了仅仅予以尊重的范围，而延伸到采取积极措施保护这一权利的责任。 |
| The right to life is non-derogable under
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, even in the event
of a “public emergency which threatens the life of
the nation” — which has been recognized to include a “natural catastrophe” by the Human Rights
Committee in general comment No. 29. | 根据《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》，生命权是不可克减的，即使是发生“威胁到一个民族的生命的公共紧急状态” ――人权事务委员会在其第29号一般性意见中已确认这种状态包括“自然灾害”。 |
| The International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights states that in pursuance of the right to food: | 《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》指出，依据获得粮食的权利： |
| “The States Parties will take appropriate
steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the
essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent.” | “缔约国将采取适当的步骤以保证实现这一权利，承认为此基于自愿同意而实行国际合作的基本重要性。 ” |
| The Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights noted, in general comment No. 12 on the right to adequate
food (article 11 of the Covenant), that if a State party maintains that
resource constraints make it impossible to provide access to food to those in
need: | 经济、社会及文化权利委员会在关于适足食物权(《公约》第十一条)的第12号一般性意见中指出，如果一个缔约国认为资源的限制使它不可能对需要的人提供食物： |
| “the State has to demonstrate that every
effort has been made to use all the resources at its disposal in an effort to
satisfy, as a matter of priority, those minimum obligations. … | “国家必须证明已尽力作出努力，作为一个优先事项，使用可供其处置的所有资源，去满足这些最低限度的义务。 |
| A State claiming that it is unable to
carry out its obligation for reasons beyond its control therefore has the
burden of proving that this is the case and that it has unsuccessfully sought
to obtain international support to ensure the availability and accessibility
of the necessary food.” | […]因此，声称由于无法控制的原因无法履行其义务的国家必须承担举证责任，证明情况的确如此，并且它没有成功地寻求获得国际支持，以确保所需食物的供应和获得”。 |
| The Commission therefore notes that “appropriate steps” to be taken by a State
include seeking international assistance where domestic conditions are such
that the right to food cannot be realized. | 因此，委员会指出，一国采取的“适当措施”，包括在国内条件到了无法实现获得粮食的权利的情况下寻求国际援助。如果一国本身断言无法履行其义务，则应当采取这一步骤。 |
| (4) Specific references to the protection
of rights in the event of disasters are made in the African Charter on the
Rights and Welfare of the Child and the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities. | (4) 《非洲儿童权利和福利宪章》和《残疾人权利公约》具体提到在发生灾害时对权利的保护。 |
| Under article 23 of the African Charter
on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, States shall take “all appropriate measures” to ensure that
children seeking or holding refugee status, as well as those who are
internally displaced due to events including “natural
disaster”, are able to “receive
appropriate protection and humanitarian assistance in the enjoyment of the
rights set out in this Charter and other international human rights and
humanitarian instruments to which the States are Parties”. | 根据《非洲儿童权利和福利宪章》第23条，各国应采取“一切适当措施”，以确保寻求或持有难民地位的儿童以及那些由于包括“自然灾害”在内的事件而在国内流离失所的人在享受本宪章和各国参与缔结的其他国际人权和人道主义文书所载述的权利方面能够“得到适当的保护和人道主义援助”。 |
| The Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities refers to the obligation of States towards disabled persons
in the event of disasters: | 《残疾人权利公约》提到国家在发生灾害时对残疾人的义务： |
| “States Parties shall take, in accordance
with their obligations under international law, including international
humanitarian law and international human rights law, all necessary measures
to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in
situations of risk, including situations of armed conflict, humanitarian
emergencies and the occurrence of natural disasters.” | “按照国际法，包括国际人道主义法和国际人权法规定的义务，缔约国应采取一切必要措施，在风险情况，包括发生武装冲突、人道主义突发事件和自然灾害的情况下，落实对残疾人的保护及其安全。” |
| The phrase “all
necessary measures” may encompass recourse to
possible assistance from members of the international community in the event
that an affected State’s national capacity is
manifestly exceeded. | “一切必要措施”一语可包括当灾害明显超出受灾国应对能力时接受可能来自国际社会成员的援助。 |
| Such an approach would cohere with the
guiding principle of humanity as applied in the international legal system. | 这种做法符合国际法律体系中所适用的人道主义指导原则。 |
| The International Court of Justice
affirmed in the Corfu Channel case that among general and well-recognized
principles are “elementary considerations of
humanity, even more exacting in peace than in war”. | 国际法院在科孚海峡案中申明，基本的人道考虑为普遍和公认的原则，“基本的人道考虑，在和平时期比战争时期还要严格”。 |
| Draft article 6 affirms the core position
of the principle of humanity in disaster response. | 第6条草案确认人道主义原则在应对灾害中的核心地位。 |
| (5) The Commission considers that a duty
to “seek” assistance is more
appropriate than a duty to “request” assistance in the context of draft article 11. | (5) 委员会认为，在第11条草案的范围内，有责任“寻求”援助比有责任“请求”援助的措辞适当。 |
| The Commission derives this formulation
from the duty outlined in the resolution on humanitarian assistance adopted
by the Institute of International Law, which notes: | 委员会这一表述源自于国际法学会通过的关于人道主义援助的决议中所列出的责任，其中指出： |
| “Whenever the affected State is unable to
provide sufficient humanitarian assistance to the victims placed under its
jurisdiction or de facto control, it shall seek assistance from competent
international organizations and/or from third States.” | “当受灾国无法向在其管辖或实际控制下的受害者提供足够的人道主义援助时，应当向主管的国际组织和/或第三国寻求援助。 ” |
| Similarly, the IFRC Guidelines hold that: | 同样，红十字与红新月联合会《导则》认为： |
| “If an affected State determines that a
disaster situation exceeds national coping capacities, it should seek
international and/or regional assistance to address the needs of affected
persons.” | “如果受灾国确定灾情超出国家的应对能力，应寻求国际和/或地区的援助，以解决受影响人员的需要。
” |
| In addition, the guiding principles
annexed to General Assembly resolution 46/182 also appear to support a duty
on the affected State to have recourse to international cooperation where an
emergency exceeds its response capacity: | 此外，大会第46/182号决议所附的指导原则似乎也支持受灾国在紧急情况超出其应对能力的情形下有责任求助于国际合作： |
| “The magnitude and duration of many
emergencies may be beyond the response capacity of many affected countries. | “许多紧急情况的严重性和持续时间可能超出了许多受灾国的应对能力。 |
| International cooperation to address
emergency situations and to strengthen the response capacity of affected
countries is thus of great importance. | 因此，进行国际合作以处理紧急情况和加强受灾国的应对能力是非常重要的。 |
| Such cooperation should be provided in
accordance with international law and national laws.” | 这种合作应按照国际法和国内法提供。 ” |
| (6) The alternate formulation of “request” is incorporated in the Oslo
Guidelines, which note that: “If international
assistance is necessary, it should be requested or consented to by the
Affected State as soon as possible upon the onset of the disaster to maximise
its effectiveness. ” | (6) “请求”的另一种提法载于《奥斯陆准则》，其中指出，“如果国际援助是必要的，应由受灾国在灾害一发生时为了最大限度地发挥救灾的效益而尽快请求或同意国际援助”。 |
| The Commission considers that a “request” of assistance carries an
implication that an affected State’s consent is
granted upon acceptance of that request by an assisting State or other
assisting actor. | 委员会认为，“请求”给予援助意味着在援助国或其他援助方接受这一请求时受灾国同意接受其援助。 |
| In contrast, the Commission is of the
view that a duty to “seek”
assistance implies a broader, negotiated approach to the provision of
international aid. | 与此相反，委员会认为，有责任“寻求”援助意味着对国际援助的提供展开更广泛的协商。 |
| The term “seek” entails the proactive initiation by an affected State of a
process through which agreement may be reached. | “寻求”一词意指受灾国采取主动行动谋求达成协议。 |
| Draft article 11 therefore places a duty
upon affected States to take positive steps actively to seek out assistance
to the extent that a disaster manifestly exceeds its national response
capacity. | 因此，第11条草案责成受灾国在灾害明显超出其国家应对能力时积极寻求援助。 |
| (7) An affected State will be in the
best position, in principle, to determine the severity of a disaster situation
and the limits of its national response capacity. | (7) 受灾国政府原则上最能够判断灾情的严重性和国家应对能力的局限。 |
| Having said this, this assessment and
that its assessment of the severity of a disaster must be carried out in good
faith. | 尽管这么说，受灾国还必须真诚评估灾害的严重程度。 |
| The principle of good faith is expounded
in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly
Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the
United Nations, which stipulates that “[e]very State
has the duty to fulfil in good faith” obligations
assumed by it “in accordance with the Charter of the
United Nations”, “obligations
under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law” and “obligations under international
agreements valid under the generally recognized principles and rules of
international law”. | 《各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系及合作之国际法原则之宣言》阐述了诚意原则， 其中规定，“每一国均有责任一秉诚意履行其按照联合国宪章”担负的义务、
“依公认之国际法原则与规则”所担负的义务以及“在依公认国际法原则与规则系属有效之国际协定下”所担负的义务。 |
| A good faith assessment of the severity
of a disaster is an element of an affected State’s
duty to ensure the protection of persons and provision of disaster relief
assistance pursuant to draft article 10, paragraph 1. | 对灾害严重程度真诚进行评估是受灾国根据第10条草案第1款确保人员的保护和救灾援助的提供的责任的一个要素。 |
| (8) The phrase “as
appropriate” was adopted by the Commission to
emphasize the discretionary power of an affected State to choose from other
States, the United Nations, and other potential assisting actors the
assistance that is most appropriate to its specific needs. | (8) 委员会采用“酌情”一词是要强调受灾国从其他国家、联合国及其他潜在援助方中选择最适合其特定需要之援助的自由裁量权。 |
| The term further reflects that the duty
to seek assistance does not imply that a State is obliged to seek assistance
from every source listed in draft article 11. | 该词进一步反映寻求协助的责任并不意味着一国有责任从第11条草案中所列出的每一个来源寻求援助。 |
| The phrase “as
appropriate” therefore reinforces the fact that an
affected State has the primary role in the direction, control, coordination
and supervision of the provision of disaster relief assistance, as outlined
in draft article 10, paragraph 2. | 因此，“酌情”一词强调了第10条草案第2款所述的受灾国在指挥、控制、协调和监督救灾援助上起主要作用这一点。 |
| (9) The existence of a duty to seek
assistance to the extent that national capacity is manifestly exceeded does
not imply that affected States should not seek assistance in disaster
situations of a lesser magnitude. | (9) 在灾害明显超出受灾国应对能力的情形下存在着寻求援助的责任，这并不意味着受灾国在灾情较轻时不应寻求援助。 |
| The Commission considers cooperation in
the provision of assistance at all stages of disaster relief to be central to
the facilitation of an adequate and effective response to disasters and a
practical manifestation of the principle of solidarity. | 委员会认为，在提供救灾援助的各个阶段进行合作，对充分和有效应对灾害具有主要作用，并且是团结原则的实际体现。 |
| Even if an affected State is capable and
willing to provide the required assistance, cooperation and assistance by
international actors will in many cases ensure a more adequate, rapid and
extensive response to disasters and an enhanced protection of affected
persons. | 即使受灾国有能力且愿意提供所需的援助，国际行为方的合作与援助在许多情况下将确保更可充分、迅速和广泛地应对灾害和加强保护受影响的人。 |
| Article 12 | 第12条 |
| Offers of external assistance | 提议外部援助 |
| 1. In the event of disasters, States, the
United Nations, and other potential assisting actors may offer assistance to
the affected State. | 1. 发生灾害时，各国、联合国及其他潜在援助方可向受灾国提议援助。 |
| 2. When external assistance is sought by
an affected State by means of a request addressed to another State, the United
Nations, or other potential assisting actor, the addressee shall
expeditiously give due consideration to the request and inform the affected
State of its reply. | 2. 受灾国通过向另一国、联合国或其他潜在援助方提出请求而寻求外部援助时，受请求方应迅速对请求予以适当考虑并将其答复通知受灾国。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 12 acknowledges the
interest of the international community in the protection of persons in the
event of disasters, which is to be viewed as complementary to the primary
role of the affected State enshrined in draft article 10. | (1) 第12条草案承认国际社会愿意在发生灾害时保护人员，这被视为对第10条草案所载受灾国主要作用的补充。 |
| It is an expression of the principles of
solidarity and cooperation, highlighted in the preamble, which underlie the
whole set of draft articles on the topic, the latter principle being
specifically embodied in draft articles 7 to 9. | 本条文草案表达了序言中所强调的作为本专题整套条款草案的基础的团结与合作原则，而合作原则具体体现于第7至第9条草案。 |
| (2) Draft article 12 is only concerned
with “offers” of assistance,
not with the actual “provision” thereof. | (2) 第12条草案只涉及“提议”援助，不涉及实际“提供”援助。 |
| Such offers, whether made unilaterally or
in response to a request, are essentially voluntary and should not be
construed as recognition of the existence of a legal duty to assist. | 这类提议，不论是单方面提出还是应要求提出，本质上属于自愿性质，不应视为承认存在援助的法律义务。 |
| Nor does an offer of assistance create
for the affected State a corresponding obligation to accept it. | 援助提议也并不导致受灾国有相应的义务要接受该提议。 |
| In conformity with the principle of the
sovereignty of States and the primary role of the affected State, stressed in
the preamble and which inform the whole set of draft articles, an affected
State may accept in whole or in part, or not accept, offers of assistance
from States or non-State actors in accordance with the conditions set forth
in draft article 13. | 根据序言中强调的且贯穿于整套条款草案的国家主权原则和受灾国承担的主要作用，受灾国可按照第13条草案所规定的条件，选择全部或部分接受或者不接受国家或非国家行为方的援助提议。 |
| (3) Offers of assistance must be made
consistent with the principles set forth in these draft articles, in
particular in draft article 6. | (3) 援助提议必须符合本条款草案特别是第6条草案中申明的各项原则。 |
| Such offers of assistance cannot be
regarded as interference in the affected State’s
internal affairs. | 这种援助提议不得视为干涉受灾国内部事务。 |
| This conclusion accords with the
statement of the Institute of International Law in its 1989 resolution on the
protection of human rights and the principle of non-intervention in internal
affairs of States: | 这一论断符合国际法学会在1989年关于“保护人权和不干涉他国内部事务原则”的决议中的声明： |
| “An offer by a State, a group of States,
an international organization or an impartial humanitarian body such as the
International Committee of the Red Cross, of food or medical supplies to
another State in whose territory the life or health of the population is
seriously threatened, cannot be considered an unlawful intervention in the
internal affairs of that State.” | “国家、国家集团、国际组织或红十字国际委员会等公正的人道主义机构向领土内人民生命或健康遭到严重威胁的国家提出提供粮食或医疗物资，不得视为对该国内部事务的非法干涉。
” |
| (4) Draft article 12 addresses the
question of offers of assistance to affected States made by those most likely
to be involved in such offers after the occurrence of a disaster, namely
States, the United Nations and other assisting actors. | (4) 第12条草案是关于最有可能在发生灾害后提出援助提议的行为方向受灾国提议援助的问题，这些行为方就是各国、联合国及其他援助方。 |
| The term “other
assisting actor”, qualified by the word “potential”, is defined in draft article 3,
subparagraph (d), to comprise a competent intergovernmental organization or a
relevant non-governmental organization or entity. | 冠以条件修饰语“潜在”的“其他援助方”一词在第3条草案(d)项中有定义，它包含主管政府间组织或有关非政府组织或实体。 |
| The United Nations and intergovernmental
organizations not only are entitled, as mandated by their constituent
instruments, but are also encouraged to make offers of assistance to the affected
State. | 联合国及政府间组织根据其组成文书不仅有权提议援助，而且鼓励它们向受灾国提议援助。 |
| (5) Non-governmental organizations or
entities may be well placed, because of their nature, location and expertise,
to provide assistance in response to a particular disaster. | (5) 非政府组织或实体基于其性质、所在位置和专长，完全能够针对特定灾害提供援助。 |
| The position of non-governmental
organizations or entities in carrying out relief operations is not a novelty
in international law. | 非政府组织或实体在开展救援行动方面的地位在国际法中并不鲜见。 |
| The 1949 Geneva Conventions already
provided that, in situations of armed conflict: | 1949年日内瓦四公约已经规定，在武装冲突情况下： |
| “An impartial humanitarian body, such as
the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the
Parties to the conflict.” | “公正的人道主义团体，如红十字国际委员会，得向冲突之各方提供服务。 ” |
| Similarly, Protocol II to the 1949 Geneva
Conventions provides that: | 同样，1949年日内瓦四公约第二附加议定书规定： |
| “Relief societies located in the
territory of the High Contracting Party, such as Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red
Lion and Sun) organizations, may offer their services for the performance of
their traditional functions in relation to the victims of the armed conflict. | “在缔约一方领土内的救济团体，如红十字会(红新月会、红狮与太阳会)组织，得提供服务，对武装冲突受难者执行其传统的职务。 |
| The civilian population may, even on its
own initiative, offer to collect and care for the wounded, sick and
shipwrecked.” | 平民居民即使在其自己主动下，也得提供收集和照顾伤者、病者和遇船难者的服务。” |
| The important contribution of
non-governmental organizations or entities, working with strictly
humanitarian motives, in disaster response was stressed by the General
Assembly in its resolution 43/131 of 8 December 1988 on humanitarian
assistance to victims of natural disasters and similar emergency situations.
In that resolution, the Assembly, inter alia, invited all affected States to “facilitate the work of [such] organizations in implementing
humanitarian assistance, in particular the supply of food, medicines and
health care, for which access to victims is essential” and appealed “to all States to give their
support to [those] organizations working to provide humanitarian assistance,
where needed, to the victims of natural disasters and similar emergency
situations”. | 大会1988年12月8日题为“向自然灾害和类似紧急情况的受害者提供人道主义援助”的第43/131号决议强调了纯粹出于人道主义动机而工作的非政府组织或实体在救灾工作中的重要贡献，除其他外，大会在该决议中请所有受灾国“便利[这类]组织提供人道主义援助的工作，特别是提供粮食、药品和医疗保健，而这些援助切需到达灾民手中”，并呼吁“所有国家支持向自然灾害和类似紧急情况的灾民提供人道主义援助的[那些]组织”。 |
| (6) The use of the verb “may” in paragraph 1 is intended to
emphasize that, in the context of offers of external assistance, what matters
is the possibility open to all potential assisting actors to make an offer of
assistance, regardless of their status and the legal grounds on which they
can base their action. | (6) 第1款中使用副词“可”是要强调，就提议外部援助而言，重要的是使所有潜在援助方都可以提议援助，不论其地位和能够采取行动的法律依据为何。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 finds inspiration in
article 3 (e) of the 2000 Framework Convention on Civil Defence Assistance,
according to which: “Offers of, or requests for,
assistance shall be examined and responded to by recipient States within the
shortest possible time. | (7) 第2款受到了2000年《民防援助框架公约》第3条(e)项的启发，后者载明：“接受国应在尽可能短的时间内审查和答复援助提议或请求”。 |
| ” The paragraph aims at introducing a
greater balance within the text of the draft articles as a whole, by
providing a countervailing obligation on the part of States, or other
potential assisting actors, when confronted with a request by an affected
State for external assistance. | 第2款的目的是在整套条款草案中实现更大的平衡，为各国或其他潜在援助方在受灾国请求提供外部援助时规定一种反向的义务。 |
| The obligation is established in parallel
to that in draft article 13, paragraph 3, namely the obligation of the
affected State to make known its decision regarding an offer made to it in a
timely manner. | 该义务与第13条草案第3款中规定的受灾国及时告知就援助提议所作决定这一义务相平行。 |
| However, the obligation is formulated
differently in each of the two articles in recognition that the position of
an affected State, in the wake of a disaster falling within the scope of the
present draft articles, is different from that of an assisting State or other
assisting actor. | 然而，这两条对义务的表述有所不同，这是因为在发生了属于本条款草案适用范围的灾害之后，受灾国的地位有别于援助国或其他援助方。 |
| (8) Paragraph 2 has three components. | (8) 第2款由三部分组成。 |
| First, the seeking of external assistance
by the affected State triggers the application of the provision. | 首先，受灾国寻求外部援助即触发了该款的适用。 |
| While, in draft article 11, the duty on
the affected State is a general duty to “seek” assistance, this paragraph deals with the scenario where specific
assistance is sought by the affected State “by means
of a request addressed to” the enumerated list of
potential assisting actors. | 与第11条草案中受灾国“寻求”援助的一般责任不同的是，这一款针对的是受灾国通过向列明的潜在援助方“提出请求”而寻求特定援助的情况。 |
| Such specification is important since it
limits the application of the provision to specific requests, and not general
appeals for assistance. | 这种特定性很重要，因为它限制了该款只适用于特定的请求而非一般的援助呼吁。 |
| (9) Second, the provision refers to the
various addressees of a request for assistance, including other States, the
United Nations and other potential assisting actors, which is a
cross-reference to the definition in draft article 3, subparagraph (d). | (9) 其次，该款提及援助请求的各种对象，其中包括其他国家、联合国和其他潜在援助方，这交叉引用了第3条草案(d)项中的定义。 |
| The United Nations is singled out for
special mention given the central role it plays in receiving requests for
assistance. | 单单特别提到联合国，是因为联合国在接收援助请求方面起着中心作用。 |
| (10) Third, paragraph 2 sets an
obligation on the addressee or addressees of the specific request, which is
structured in two parts: first, to give due consideration to the request;
and, second, to inform the affected State of its or their reply thereto. | (10) 第三，第2款为特定请求的对象规定了一项义务。
该义务有两个部分：第一部分是对请求予以适当考虑；第二部分是将其答复通知受灾国。 |
| Both obligations contain the term “expeditiously”, which is a reference to
timeliness. | 两部分义务均含有修饰语“迅速”，指的是要及时。 |
| The formulation of the obligation to give
“due consideration to the request” is drawn from similar wording in article 19, of the articles on
diplomatic protection, adopted in 2006. | “对请求予以适当考虑”这一义务表述取自2006年通过的关于外交保护的条款第19条中的类似措辞。 |
| The word “due” is meant less in the sense of timeliness, which is already
covered by the notion of expeditious, and more as a reference to giving the
request careful consideration. | “适当”一词更多的是指对请求给予认真的考虑而不是指时间上的及时，因为“迅速”的概念已经包含时间上的适当性了。 |
| Article 13 | 第13条 |
| Consent of the affected State to external
assistance | 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. 提供外部援助须征得受灾国的同意。 |
| 2. Consent to external assistance shall
not be withheld arbitrarily. | 2. 受灾国不得任意拒绝外部援助。 |
| 3. When an offer of external assistance
is made in accordance with the present draft articles, the affected State
shall, whenever possible, make known its decision regarding the offer in a
timely manner. | 3. 对按照本条款草案提出的援助提议，受灾国只要有可能，应及时告知就该援助提议作出的决定。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 13 addresses consent of
an affected State to the provision of external assistance. | (1) 第13条草案是关于受灾国对提供外部援助的同意。 |
| As a whole, it creates for affected
States a qualified consent regime in the field of disaster relief operations. | 作为一个整体，该条文草案为受灾国在救灾行动方面创建一个附有条件的同意制度。 |
| Paragraph 1 reflects the core principle
that implementation of international relief assistance is contingent upon the
consent of the affected State. | 第1款反映了国际救灾援助的实施需要受灾国同意这一核心原则。 |
| Paragraph 2 stipulates that consent to
external assistance shall not be withheld arbitrarily, while paragraph 3
places a duty upon an affected State to make known, whenever possible, its
decision regarding an offer of external assistance in a timely manner. | 第2款规定，对外部援助不得任意拒绝，而第3款正式责成受灾国在只要有可能应及时告知其就援助提议作出的决定。 |
| (2) The principle that the provision of
external assistance requires the consent of the affected State is fundamental
to international law. | (2) 提供外部援助需要受灾国同意是国际法的根本原则。 |
| Accordingly, paragraph 3 of the guiding
principles annexed to General Assembly resolution 46/182 notes that “humanitarian assistance should be provided with the consent of the
affected country and in principle on the basis of an appeal by the affected
country”. | 因此，大会第46/182号决议所附载的指导原则第3段指出，“人道主义援助应获得受灾国的同意，并原则上根据受灾国的呼吁予以提供”。 |
| The Tampere Convention stipulates that “[n]o telecommunication assistance shall be provided pursuant to
this Convention without the consent of the requesting State Party”, while the ASEAN Agreement notes that “external
assistance or offers of assistance shall only be provided upon the request or
with the consent of the affected Party”. | 《坦佩雷公约》规定，“没有提出请求的缔约国同意，不应该根据本公约提供电信援助”，而《东盟协定》则指出，“外部援助或援助提议应只在受灾国提出请求或同意后予以提供”。 |
| Recognition of the requirement of State
consent to the provision of external assistance comports with the position in
draft article 10, paragraph 2, that an affected State has the primary role in
the direction, control, coordination and supervision of disaster relief
assistance in its territory or in territory under its jurisdiction or
control. | 承认外部援助的提供须征得受灾国同意符合第10条草案第2款的立场：受灾国在指挥、控制、协调和监督其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内的救灾援助方面起主要作用。 |
| (3) The recognition, in paragraph 2, that
an affected State’s right to refuse an offer is not
unlimited reflects the dual nature of sovereignty as entailing both rights
and obligations. | (3) 第2款中承认受灾国拒绝提议的权利并非是不受限制的，这一点反映了主权同时引起权利和义务的双重性质。 |
| This approach is reflected in paragraph 1
of draft article 10, which affirms that an affected State “has the duty to ensure the protection of persons and provision of
disaster relief assistance in its territory or in territory under its
jurisdiction or control”. | 这种做法体现在第10条草案第1款，其中申明受灾国“有责任在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内确保人员的保护和救灾援助的提供”。 |
| (4) The Commission considers that the
duty of an affected State to ensure protection and assistance to those within
its territory, or in territory under its jurisdiction or control, in the
event of a disaster, is aimed at preserving the life and dignity of the
persons affected by the disaster and guaranteeing the access of persons in
need to humanitarian assistance. | (4) 委员会认为，发生灾害时受灾国在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内确保人员得到保护和向他们提供援助的责任旨在维护受灾害影响的人的生命和尊严并保证这些人员获得所需要的人道主义援助。 |
| This duty is central to securing the
right to life of those within an affected State’s
territory, or in territory under its jurisdiction or control. | 这一责任是确保受灾国领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内的人员的生命权的核心。 |
| The Human Rights Committee has
interpreted the right to life as embodied in article 6 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to contain the obligation for States
to adopt positive measures to protect this right. | 人权事务委员会将《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第六条所载述的生命权解释为包含国家有义务采取积极措施以保护这项权利。 |
| An offer of assistance that is met with
refusal might thus under certain conditions constitute a violation of the
right to life. | 因此，拒绝援助提议在一定条件下可能构成对生命权的侵犯。 |
| The General Assembly reaffirmed in its resolutions
43/131 of 8 December 1988 and 45/100 of 14 December 1990 that “the abandonment of the victims of natural disasters and similar
emergency situations without humanitarian assistance constitutes a threat to
human life and an offence to human dignity”. | 大会重申其1988年12月8日第43/131号和1990年12月14日第45/100号决议，“遗弃自然灾害和类似紧急情况的受害者而不给予人道主义援助构成了威胁人类生命和侵犯人类尊严的罪行。
” |
| (5) Recognition that an affected State’s discretion regarding consent is not unlimited is reflected in
the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. | (5) 承认受灾国对同意的自由裁量权并非不受限制这一点载反映于“对国内流离失所问题的指导原则”。 |
| The Guiding Principles, which have been
welcomed by the former Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly in
unanimously adopted resolutions and described by the Secretary-General as “the basic international norm for protection” of internally displaced persons, provide: | 前人权委员会和大会以协商一致方式通过的各项决议欢迎这些指导原则，秘书长也形容它们是使在国内流离失所者获得“保护的基本国际规范”，指出： |
| “Consent [to offers of humanitarian
assistance] shall not be arbitrarily withheld, particularly when authorities
concerned are unable or unwilling to provide the required humanitarian
assistance.” | “[对人道主义援助提议]不得任意拒绝，特别是当有关当局不能或不愿提供必要的人道主义援助的时候。” |
| The Institute of International Law dealt
twice with the question of consent in the context of humanitarian assistance. | 国际法学会两度处理过人道主义援助方面的同意问题。 |
| Its 1989 resolution on the protection of
human rights and the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of
States, article 5, paragraph 2, states in the authoritative French text: | 其关于“保护人权和不干涉各国内部事务的原则”的1989年决议第5条草案第2款的正式法文本载明： |
| “Les États sur le territoire desquels de
telles situations de détresse [où la population est gravement menacée dans
sa vie ou sa santé] existent ne refuseront pas
arbitrairement de pareilles offres de secours humanitaires.” | “Les États sur le territoire desquels de
telles situations de détresse [où la population est gravement menacée dans
sa vie ou sa santé] existent ne refuseront pas
arbitrairement de pareilles offres de secours humanitaires. (在其领土上出现这些紧急情况[人民的生命或健康受到严重威胁]的国家不得任意拒绝此种人道主义救援提议)” |
| In 2003, the Institute of International
Law revisited this issue, stipulating in its resolution on humanitarian
assistance under the heading “Duty of affected States
not arbitrarily to reject bona fide humanitarian assistance”: | 国际法学会在2003年重新审视这个问题，在关于人道主义援助的决议中，在标题“受灾国不能任意拒绝善意的人道主义援助提议”之下规定： |
| “Affected States are under the obligation
not arbitrarily and unjustifiably to reject a bona fide offer exclusively
intended to provide humanitarian assistance or to refuse access to the
victims. | “受灾国有义务不能任意和无理拒绝纯粹为了提供人道主义援助的善意提议或拒绝救援受害者。 |
| In particular, they may not reject an
offer nor refuse access if such refusal is likely to endanger the fundamental
human rights of the victims or would amount to a violation of the ban on
starvation of civilians as a method of warfare.” | 特别是，他们不得拒绝援助的提议，也不能拒绝救援，如果这种拒绝可能危及受害者的基本人权，或将违反不得作为一种作战方法使平民陷于饥饿的禁令。” |
| (6) In the context of armed conflict, the
Security Council has frequently called upon parties to the conflict to grant
humanitarian access, and on a number of occasions it has adopted measures in
relation to humanitarian relief operations. | (6) 在武装冲突情况下，安全理事会经常要求冲突各方允许人道主义援助的进出，并多次通过了与人道主义救济行动有关的措施。 |
| In response to the humanitarian crisis
caused by the conflict in Syria, the Security Council has adopted a more
proactive approach. | 为应对叙利亚冲突造成的人道主义危机，安全理事会采取了更为积极的做法。 |
| In resolution 2139 (2014) of 22 February,
it condemned all cases of denial of humanitarian access and recalled that “arbitrary denial of humanitarian access and depriving civilians of
objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief
supply and access, can constitute a violation of international humanitarian
law”. | 在2014年2月22日第2139 (2014)号决议中，它谴责所有不让人道主义人员和物资进出的行为，并回顾“任意剥夺平民生存不可缺少的物品，包括蓄意阻碍救济物资的供应和获取，可构成违反国际人道主义法行为”。 |
| In resolution 2165 (2014) of 14 July
2014, the Security Council decided to authorize United Nations humanitarian
agencies and their implementing partners to use routes across conflict lines
and specified border crossings to provide humanitarian assistance to people
in need, with notification by the United Nations to the Syrian authorities. | 在2014年7月14日第2165(2014)号决议中，安全理事会决定授权联合国人道主义机构及其执行伙伴在联合国通知叙利亚当局后使用越过冲突线的路线和特定边界过境点，把人道主义援助送交需要援助的人。 |
| (7) The term “withheld” implies a temporal element in the determination of arbitrariness. | (7) “拒绝”一词隐含一个确定任意性的时间因素。 |
| Both the refusal of assistance, and the
failure of an affected State to make known a decision in accordance with
draft article 13, paragraph 3, within a reasonable time frame, may be deemed
arbitrary. | 受灾国拒绝援助和没有按照第13条草案第3款草案在合理的时间范围内告知决定可能会被视为任意的。 |
| This view is reflected in General
Assembly resolutions 43/131 and 45/100, which each include the following
preambular paragraphs: | 这种观点见于大会第43/131号决议 和第45/100号决议，其中包括以下序言段： |
| “Concerned about the difficulties that
victims of natural disasters and similar emergency situations may experience
in receiving humanitarian assistance, | “关注自然灾害和类似紧急情况的受害者在接受人道主义援助方面可能会遇到的困难， |
| “Convinced that, in providing
humanitarian assistance, in particular the supply of food, medicines or
health care, for which access to victims is essential, rapid relief will
avoid a tragic increase in their number”. | 深信在提供人道主义援助特别是食品、药品或保健方面，访问受害者是必不可少的，迅速救援可避免灾民人数增加的不幸景象。” |
| The 2000 Framework Convention on Civil
Defence Assistance likewise reflects among the principles that States
parties, in terms of providing assistance in the event of a disaster,
undertake to respect that: “Offers of, or requests
for, assistance shall be examined and responded to by recipient States within
the shortest possible time.” | 同样，2000年《民防援助框架公约》除了其他原则以外反映：各缔约国承诺在发生灾害时提供援助方面，“受援国务必审查援助的提议或请求并在最短期间内提出答复”。 |
| (8) The term “arbitrary” directs attention to the basis of an affected State’s decision to withhold consent. | (8) “任意”一词针对的是受灾国决定不予同意的依据。 |
| The determination of whether the withholding
of consent is arbitrary must be determined on a case-by-case basis, although
as a general rule several principles can be adduced. | 确定不予同意是否为任意，必须视具体情况而定，虽然作为一般规则，可以举出几个原则。 |
| First, the Commission considers that
withholding consent to external assistance is not arbitrary where a State is
capable of providing, and willing to provide, an adequate and effective
response to a disaster on the basis of its own resources. | 首先，委员会认为，倘若一个国家依靠自身资源能够且愿意提供适当和有效应对灾害的措施，则对外部援助不予同意不是任意的。 |
| Second, withholding consent to assistance
from one external source is not arbitrary if an affected State has accepted
appropriate and sufficient assistance from elsewhere. | 其次，倘若受灾国已经接受了来自他处的适当和足够的援助，则对某一外部来源的援助不予同意也不是任意的。 |
| Third, the withholding of consent is not
arbitrary if the relevant offer is not made in accordance with the present
draft articles. | 再其次，倘若有关提议并非按照本条款草案提出，则不予同意就不是任意的。 |
| In particular, draft article 6
establishes that humanitarian assistance must take place in accordance with
the principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality, and on the basis of
non-discrimination. | 尤其是，第6条草案规定，人道主义援助必须按照人道、中立和公正的原则在不歧视的基础上进行。 |
| Conversely, where an offer of assistance
is made in accordance with the draft articles and no alternate sources of
assistance are available, there would be a strong inference that a decision
to withhold consent is arbitrary. | 相反，若援助提议是按照本条款草案提出的，而且没有任何其他援助来源，则有很强的论据认为不予同意的决定是任意作出的。 |
| (9) In 2013, the Secretary-General
requested the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs to engage
in further analysis on the issue of arbitrary withholding of consent to
humanitarian relief operations. | (9) 2013年，秘书长请人道主义事务协调厅进一步分析任意拒绝同意接受人道主义救济行动及其后果的问题。 |
| According to the resulting guidance
document, consent is withheld arbitrarily if: | 根据随后产生的指导文件，下列情况属于任意拒绝同意： |
| (a) it is withheld in circumstances that
result in the violation by a State of its obligations under international
law; | (a) 拒绝同意导致一国违反其在国际法下的义务； |
| or (b) the withholding of consent
violates the principles of necessity and proportionality; | 或(b) 拒绝同意违反了必要和相称原则； |
| or (c) consent is withheld in a manner
that is unreasonable, unjust, lacking in predictability or that is otherwise
inappropriate. | 或(c) 拒绝同意是不合理、不公正、不可预料或在其他方面不适当的。 |
| Even if the guidance addresses situations
of armed conflict, it provides valuable insights in order to establish
factors for the determination of when withholding of consent can be
considered “arbitrary”. | 尽管准则针对的是武装冲突的情况，但对哪些因素可据以判定拒绝同意能否被视为“任意”提供了宝贵的看法。 |
| It is evident that, in fact as well as in
law, situations of armed conflict differ from disasters. | 从事实上和法律上说，武装冲突的情况显然有别于发生灾害的情况。 |
| Nevertheless, in the context of the
non-arbitrary withholding of consent, the subjacent legal issue presents
itself in similar terms in both kinds of situation. | 但就非任意拒绝同意而言，两种情况所涉及的法律问题是差不多的。 |
| (10) An affected State’s discretion to determine the most appropriate form of assistance
is an aspect of its primary role in the direction, control, coordination and
supervision of disaster relief assistance under draft article 10, paragraph
2. | (10) 受灾国确定援助的最适当形式的自由裁量权，是它根据第10条草案第2款在指挥、控制、协调和监督救灾援助方面的主要作用的一个方面。 |
| This discretion must be exercised in good
faith in accordance with an affected State’s
international obligations. | 这种自由裁量权必须根据受灾国的国际义务真诚地行使。 |
| The Commission encourages affected States
to give reasons where consent to assistance is withheld. | 委员会鼓励受灾国说明拒绝同意援助的原因。 |
| The provision of reasons is fundamental
to establishing the good faith of an affected State’s
decision to withhold consent. | 说明原因，对确定受灾国拒绝同意援助的决定是否属于真诚至关重要。 |
| The absence of reasons may act to support
an inference that the withholding of consent is arbitrary. | 不说明原因，可能成为论证对援助不予同意属于任意的一个理据。 |
| (11) In this vein, it is generally
accepted in international law that good faith has, inter alia, the purpose of
limiting the admissible exercise of rights and discretion. | (11) 为此，国际法公认，除其他外，“真诚”的目的是对准许的权利和自由裁量权行使予以限制。 |
| The International Court of Justice and
international arbitral tribunals have in a number of cases examined this
function of good faith. | 国际法院及一些国际仲裁庭在若干案件中审议了“真诚”的这一作用。 |
| Thus, good faith serves as an outer limit
of sovereignty and the exercise of discretion, both in cases where the
decision of a State necessitates the taking into account of political
factors, as well as when the performance of treaty obligations is at stake. | 因此，“真诚”成为主权和自由裁量权行使的外部限制因素，这既适用于一国的决定必须考虑到政治因素的情况，也适用于关系到条约义务的履行的情况。 |
| A fortiori this is the case when the
treaty provision in question imposes positive obligations to act in a certain
manner, as for example in article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights referred to above. | 这尤其适用于有关条约规定载有以某种方式行事的积极义务的情况，例如上文提到的《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第六条。 |
| (12) In paragraph 3, the Commission opted
for the phrase “make known its decision regarding the
offer in a timely manner” to give a certain degree of
flexibility to affected States in determining how best to respond to offers
of assistance. | (12) 在第3款中，委员会采用“及时告知就该援助提议作出的决定”这一短语，是为了使受灾国在确定如何以最好的方式答复援助提议方面有一定程度的灵活性。 |
| It is recognized that a rigid duty
formally to respond to every offer of assistance may place too high a burden
on affected States in disaster situations. | 人们认识到，对提供援助的每一个提议作出正式反应的刚性责任可能对处于灾害情况下的受灾国造成太大的负担。 |
| This is balanced by the indication that
the decision ought to be timely, so as to allow the actor or actors offering
the external assistance the opportunity to react appropriately. | 作为平衡，该款又表示应及时作出决定，以便提议外部援助的行为方有适当反应的机会。 |
| The Commission considers the current
formulation to encompass a wide range of possible means of response,
including a general publication of the affected State’s decision regarding all offers of assistance. | 委员会认为目前的行文涵盖广泛的答复方式，包括由受灾国公布其对所有援助提议所作的决定。 |
| The paragraph applies to both situations
where an affected State accepts assistance and situations in which an
affected State withholds its consent. | 这一款适用于受灾国同意接受援助和不同意接受援助这两种情况。 |
| (13) The Commission considers the phrase “whenever possible” to have a restricted
scope. | (13) 委员会认为“只要有可能”一语的含义范围有限。 |
| The phrase directs attention to extreme
situations where a State is incapable of forming a view regarding consent due
to the lack of a functioning Government or circumstances of equal incapacity. | 这个短语提请注意一国由于缺乏一个可发挥职能的政府或同样丧失工作能力的原因而无法就同意与否形成意见的极端情况。 |
| The phrase is thus meant to convey the
sense of general flexibility on which the provision is built. | 因此，该短语的目的在于表示这一款具有某种弹性。 |
| The phrase also circumscribes the
applicability of the expression “in a timely manner”. | 短语还为“及时”一词划定了适用范围。 |
| The Commission is further of the view
that an affected State is capable of making its decision known in the manner
it feels most appropriate if the exceptional circumstances outlined in this
paragraph are not applicable. | 委员会还认为，受灾国倘若没有本段所述的特殊情况，就能使用它认为最适当的方式告知其所作的决定。 |
| Article 14 | 第14条 |
| Conditions on the provision of external
assistance | 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. | 此种条件应与本条款草案、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。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 14 addresses the
setting of conditions by the affected State on the provision of external
assistance in its territory or in territory under its jurisdiction or
control. | (1) 第14条草案涉及受灾国对在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内提供外部援助设定条件的问题。 |
| It affirms the right of the affected
State to place conditions on such assistance, in accordance with the present
draft articles and applicable rules of international and national law. | 本条草案肯定了受灾国有权根据本条款草案以及国际和国内法的适用规定，对提供外部援助规定条件。 |
| The draft article indicates how such
conditions are to be determined. | 本条草案说明了如何确定这些条件。 |
| The identified needs of the persons
affected by disasters and the quality of the assistance guide the nature of
the conditions. | 查明的受灾人员的需要和援助的质量决定了条件的性质。 |
| It also requires the affected State, when
formulating conditions, to indicate the scope and type of assistance sought. | 本条还要求受灾国在拟定条件时指明所寻求的援助的范围和种类。 |
| (2) The draft article furthers the
principle enshrined in draft article 10, which recognizes the primary role of
the affected State in the direction, control, coordination and supervision of
disaster relief assistance in its territory, or in territory under its
jurisdiction or control. | (2) 本条草案进一步体现了第10条草案规定的原则，第10条草案确认受灾国在指挥、控制、协调和监督在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内的救灾援助方面应发挥主要作用。 |
| By using the phrasing “may place conditions”, which accords with
the voluntary nature of the provision of assistance, draft article 14
acknowledges the right of the affected State to impose conditions for such
assistance, preferably in advance of a disaster’s
occurrence but also in relation to specific forms of assistance by particular
actors during the response phase. | 第14条草案采用“可…规定条件”的说法(这符合提供援助的自愿性质)，便是承认受灾国有权对这类援助施加条件，这最好在灾害发生前进行，不过也可以在救灾过程中就已知援助方的具体援助形式规定条件。 |
| The Commission makes reference to “external” assistance because the scope of
the provision covers the assistance provided by third States or other
assisting actors, but not assistance provided from internal sources, such as
domestic non-governmental organizations. | 委员会提到“外部”援助是因为本条的范围是第三国或其他援助方提供的援助，但不包括来自国内的援助，如国内非政府组织提供的援助。 |
| (3) The draft article places limits on an
affected State’s right to condition assistance, which
must be exercised in accordance with applicable rules of law. | (3) 本条草案对受灾国规定援助条件的权利设置了限制，即必须依据适用的法律规则施加条件。 |
| The second sentence outlines the legal
framework within which conditions may be imposed, which comprises “the present draft articles, applicable rules of international law,
and the national law of the affected State”. | 第二句列出了可施加条件的法律框架，包括“本条款草案、适用的国际法规则以及受灾国国内法”。 |
| The Commission included the phrase “the present draft articles” to stress that
all conditions must be in accordance with the principles reflected in the
draft articles, there being no need to repeat an enumeration of the
humanitarian and legal principles already addressed elsewhere, notably,
sovereignty, good faith and the humanitarian principles dealt with in draft
article 6, that is, humanity, neutrality, impartiality and
non-discrimination. | 委员会提到“本条款草案”，以强调所有条件都必须符合条款草案所体现的原则，因此无需再次列举其他条款已经阐述过的人道主义和法律原则，特别是主权、诚信以及第6条草案中提到的人道主义原则，即人道、中立、公正和不歧视原则。 |
| (4) The reference to national law
emphasizes the authority of domestic laws in the particular affected area. | (4) 提到国内法，是为了强调国内法在具体受灾地区的权威。 |
| It does not, however, imply the prior
existence of national law (internal law) addressing the specific conditions
imposed by an affected State in the event of a disaster. | 但这并不意味着事先就存在专门规范发生灾害时受灾国施加的具体条件的国内法(内部法)。 |
| Although there is no requirement of
specific national legislation before conditions can be fixed, they must be in
accordance with whatever relevant domestic legislation is in existence in the
affected State, as envisaged in draft article 15. | 虽然不要求在规定条件之前必须存在专门的国内法，但是规定的条件必须如第15条草案所设想的那样，符合受灾国现有的相关国内法律。 |
| (5) The affected State and the assisting
actor must both comply with the applicable rules of national law of the
affected State. | (5) 受灾国和援助方都必须遵守受灾国国内法的适用规则。 |
| The affected State may only impose
conditions that are in accordance with such laws and the assisting actor must
comply with such laws at all times throughout the duration of assistance. | 受灾国只可依据这类法律施加条件，援助方在整个援助期间都必须遵守这类法律。 |
| This reciprocity is not made explicit in
the draft article, since it is inherent in the broader principle of respect
for national law. | 本条草案没有明确说明这种相互性，因为遵守国内法这一普遍原则本身就体现了这种相互性。 |
| Existing international agreements support
the affirmation that assisting actors must comply with national law. | 现有国际协定支持援助方必须遵守国内法的观点。 |
| The ASEAN Agreement, for example,
provides in article 13, paragraph 2, that: “Members
of the assistance operation shall respect and abide by all national laws and
regulations. ” | 例如，《东盟协定》第13条第2款规定，“援助行动的成员必须尊重并遵守所有国内法律和规章。” |
| Several other international agreements
also require assisting actors to respect national law or to act in accordance
with the law of the affected State. | 其他一些国际协定也要求援助方遵守国内法 或依据受灾国的法律开展活动。 |
| (6) The duty of assisting actors to
respect national law implies the obligation to require that: members of the
relief operation observe the national laws and regulations of the affected
State; the head of the relief operation take all appropriate measures to
ensure the observance of the national laws and regulations of the affected
State; and assisting personnel cooperate with national authorities. | (6) 援助方遵守国内法的义务意味着它们有义务要求救援行动成员遵守受灾国的国内法律和规章，
要求救援行动负责人采取一切适当措施确保遵守受灾国的国内法律和规章， 要求援助人员与受灾国当局合作。 |
| The obligation to respect the national
law and to cooperate with the authorities of the affected State accords with
the overarching principle of the sovereignty of the affected State and the
principle of cooperation. | 遵守受灾国国内法并与受灾国当局合作的义务与受灾国主权至上的原则和合作原则是一致的。 |
| (7) The right to condition assistance is
the recognition of a right of the affected State to deny unwanted or unneeded
assistance, and to determine what and when assistance is appropriate. | (7) 规定援助条件的权利承认受灾国有权拒绝不想要或不需要的援助，并有权决定援助内容和时间。 |
| The third sentence of the draft article
gives an explanation of what is required of conditions set by affected
States, namely, that they must “take into account” not only the identified needs of the persons affected by
disasters but also the quality of the assistance. | 本条草案第三句解释了受灾国设定条件需满足的要求，即条件不仅必须“考虑到”查明的受灾人员的需要，而且还必须考虑到援助的质量。 |
| Nevertheless, the phrase “take into account” does not denote that
conditions relating to the identified needs and the quality of assistance are
the only ones that States can place on the provision of external assistance. | 不过，“考虑到”一词并不表示国家对提供外部援助只能规定与查明的需要和援助质量有关的条件。 |
| (8) The Commission included the word “identified” to signal that the needs must
be apparent at the time conditions are set and that needs can change as the
situation on the ground changes and more information becomes available. | (8) 委员会使用“查明的”一词，以显示设定条件时必须有明显的需要，而且随着实地情况的变化以及更多信息的出现，需要也可能随之变化。 |
| It implies that conditions should not be
arbitrary, but be formulated with the goal of protecting those affected by a
disaster. | 这意味着不应任意施加条件，而应当以保护受灾人员为目标拟定条件。 |
| “Identified”
indicates that there must be some process by which needs are made known,
which can take the form of a needs assessment, preferably also in
consultation with assisting actors. | “查明的”表示必须存在某些了解需要的程序，可采取需求评估的形式，而且最好与援助方磋商进行。 |
| However, the procedure to identify needs
is not predetermined and it is left to the affected State to follow the most
suitable one. | 不过，查明需要的程序不是事先设定的，而是由受灾国选择其认为最合适的程序。 |
| This is a flexible requirement that may
be satisfied according to the circumstances of a disaster and the capacities
of the affected State. | 这不是一项硬性规定，须视灾害的具体情况和受灾国的能力而定。 |
| In no instance should identifying needs
hamper or delay prompt and effective assistance. | 无论如何，查明需要不应妨碍或耽误迅速和有效的援助。 |
| The provision of the third sentence is
meant to “meet the essential needs of the persons
concerned” in the event of a disaster, as expressed
in draft article 2, and should be viewed as further protection of the rights
and needs of persons affected by disasters. | 第三句的规定旨在如第2条草案所述，在发生灾害时“满足有关人员的基本需要”，应视为对受灾人员权利和需要的进一步保护。 |
| The reference to “needs” in both draft articles is broad
enough to encompass the special needs of women, children, the elderly,
persons with disabilities, and vulnerable or disadvantaged persons and
groups. | 这两条草案中提到的“需要”范围广泛，足以涵盖妇女、儿童、老人和残疾人以及脆弱或弱势人员和群体的特殊需要。 |
| (9) The inclusion of the word “quality” is meant to ensure that affected
States have the right to reject assistance that is not necessary or that may
be harmful. | (9) 使用“质量”一词是为了确保受灾国有权拒绝不必要或可能有害的援助。 |
| Conditions may include restrictions based
on, inter alia, safety, security, nutrition and cultural appropriateness. | 条件可包括：出于安全、安保、营养和文化适当性等因素而施加的限制。 |
| (10) Draft article 14 contains a
reference to the “scope and type of assistance
sought. ” | (10) 第14条草案提及“寻求的援助的范围和种类”。 |
| This is in line with previous
international agreements that contain a similar provision. | 之前的一些国际协定也载有类似规定。 |
| By the use of the words “shall indicate” the draft article puts the
onus on the affected State to specify the type and scope of assistance sought
when placing conditions on assistance. | 本条草案使用“应指明”等字，规定受灾国在规定援助条件时有责任明确说明寻求的援助种类和范围。 |
| At the same time, it implies that once
fixed, the scope and type of such assistance will be made known to the
assisting actors that may provide it, which would facilitate consultations. | 与此同时，这意味着援助的范围和种类一旦确定，便将告知可能提供援助的援助方，以方便磋商。 |
| This will increase the efficiency of the
assistance process and will ensure that appropriate assistance reaches those
in need in a timely manner. | 这将提高援助进程的效率，并确保及时向困难人群提供适当的援助。 |
| (11) The Commission considered several
possibilities for the proper verb to modify the word “conditions”. | (11) 关于用什么动词来修饰“条件”一词，委员会考虑了多种可能。 |
| The Commission’s
decision to use two different words, “place” and “formulate”,
is a stylistic choice that does not imply differentiation of meaning between
the two uses. | 委员会决定使用两个不同的词――“规定”和“拟定”，这是为了避免用词重复，并不表示不同的含义。 |
| Article 15 | 第15条 |
| Facilitation of external assistance | 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, in particular regarding: | 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) relief personnel, in fields such as
privileges and immunities, visa and entry requirements, work permits, and
freedom of movement; and | (a) 对于救灾人员，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； |
| (b) equipment and goods, in fields such
as customs requirements and tariffs, taxation, transport, and the disposal
thereof. | (b) 对于设备和物资，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，从而便于遵守国内法。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 15 addresses the
facilitation of external assistance. | (1) 第15条草案涉及便利外部援助问题。 |
| This includes ensuring that national law
accommodates the provision of prompt and effective assistance. | 这包括确保国内法有利于提供迅速和有效的援助。 |
| To that effect, it further requires, in
paragraph 2, the affected State to ensure that its relevant legislation and
regulations are readily accessible to assisting actors. | 为此，该条第2款还要求受灾国确保援助方能够容易查阅到其有关法律和规章。 |
| (2) The draft article provides that
affected States “shall take the necessary measures” to facilitate the prompt and effective provision of assistance. | (2) 本条草案规定，受灾国“应…采取必要措施”，便利迅速及有效地提供援助。 |
| The phrase “take
necessary measures, within its national law” may
include, inter alia, legislative, executive or administrative measures. | “在其国内法范围内采取必要措施”可包括立法、执行或行政等措施。 |
| Measures may also include actions taken
under emergency legislation, as well as permissible temporary adjustment or
waiver of the applicability of particular national legislation or
regulations, where appropriate. It can also extend to practical measures
designed to facilitate external assistance, provided that they are not
prohibited by national law. | 措施还可以包括根据紧急状态法采取行动，以及在允许的范围内酌情临时调整或放弃某些国内法律或规章的适用，也包括为便利外部援助而采取的不会受国内法禁止的实际措施。 |
| In formulating the draft article in such
a manner, the Commission encourages States to allow for temporary
non-applicability of their national laws that might unnecessarily hamper
assistance in the event of disasters and for appropriate provisions on
facilitation to be included within their national law so as not to create any
legal uncertainty in the critical period following a disaster when such
emergency provisions become necessary. | 委员会如此拟订本条草案，是为了鼓励各国允许在发生灾害时暂不适用某些可能不必要地妨碍援助的国内法律，并在国内法中添加适当便利条款，以免在灾后需要这类紧急条款的关键时期造成任何法律上的不确定性。 |
| Certain facilitation measures may also
remain necessary even after the need for assistance has passed, in order to
guarantee an efficient and appropriate withdrawal, handover, exit and/or
re-export of relief personnel, equipment and unused goods upon termination of
external assistance. | 即使过了需要援助的时候，仍可能需要某些便利化措施，以保证救灾人员、设备和未用物资在外部援助终止后以高效率而适当的方式退出、移交、撤离和(或)再出口。 |
| This is emphasized by the use of the
expression “disposal thereof”
in paragraph 1 (b). | 第1款(b)项使用“处置”一词便是为了强调了这一点。 |
| While the focus of draft article 15 is on
the affected State, the facilitation for the benefit of persons affected by
disasters implies that a transit State will likely take the necessary measures,
within its national law, to ensure an effective provision of external
assistance. | 虽然第15条草案的重点在受灾国上，但是，提供便利造福受灾人员意味着，过境国也可能为确保切实提供外部援助而在其国内法范围内采取必要措施。 |
| (3) The draft article outlines examples
of areas of assistance in which national law should enable the taking of
appropriate measures. | (3) 本条草案列出了国内法应允许采取适当措施的援助领域。 |
| The words “in
particular” before the examples indicate that this is
not an exhaustive list, but rather an illustration of the various areas that
may need to be addressed by national law to facilitate prompt and effective
assistance. | 列举前使用的“尤其是”一词表明没有列出所有情况，而是说明了国内法可能需要为迅速及有效的援助提供便利的不同领域。 |
| Guidance on such measures can be found in
relevant instruments, such as the 2007 IFRC Guidelines and the related 2013
Model Act for the Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster
Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance. | 有关此类措施的指导说明见相关文书，如2007年《红十字与红新月联会导则》及相关的2013年《关于国际救灾和灾后初期恢复重建援助便利化和规范化的示范法》。 |
| (4) Subparagraph (a) envisages facilities
for relief personnel. | (4) 本条(a)项规定须为救灾人员提供便利。 |
| The areas addressed in the subparagraph
provide guidance on how personnel can be better facilitated. | 该项提到的领域就如何更好地为救灾人员提供便利作出了指导。 |
| Granting of privileges and immunities to
assisting actors is an important measure included in many international
agreements to encourage the help of foreign aid workers. | 授予援助方特权和豁免是许多国际协定所载鼓励外国救援人员提供帮助的一项重要措施。 |
| Waiver or expedition of visa and entry
requirements and work permits is necessary to ensure prompt assistance. | 免签证或快速办理签证以及在入境要求和工作许可证方面提供便利，这是确保迅速提供援助的关键。 |
| Without a special regime in place,
workers may be held up at borders or be unable to work legally during the
critical days after a disaster, or forced to exit and re-enter continually so
as not to overstay their visas. | 如果没有特殊机制，救援人员可能被拦在边境，或无法在灾害发生后的关键几天合法地开展工作，或为避免逗留时间超过签证期限而不得不反复出入境。 |
| Freedom of movement means the ability of
workers to move freely within a disaster area in order to properly perform
their specifically agreed functions. | 通行自由意味着救援人员能够在灾区自由通行，以充分履行专门商定的职责。 |
| Unnecessary restriction of movement of
relief personnel inhibits workers’ ability to provide
flexible assistance. | 对救援人员的通行自由施加不必要的限制将遏制救援人员灵活提供援助的能力。 |
| (5) Subparagraph (b) addresses equipment
and goods, as defined in draft article 3, subparagraph (g), which encompasses
supplies, tools, machines, specially trained animals, foodstuffs, drinking
water, medical supplies, means of shelter, clothing, bedding, vehicles,
telecommunications equipment and other objects for disaster relief
assistance. | (5) 本条(b)项涉及第3条草案(g)项所界定的设备和物资，包括用品、工具、机器、经过专门训练的动物、食物、饮用水、医疗用品、栖身手段、衣物、铺盖用品、车辆、电信设备以及救灾援助所需的其他物品。 |
| The Commission intends that this category
also includes search dogs, which are normally regarded as goods and
equipment, rather than creating a separate category for animals. | 委员会希望将该类别也包括搜救犬(一般被视为设备和物资类，而不是作为单独的动物类)。 |
| Goods and equipment are essential to the
facilitation of effective assistance and national laws must be flexible to
address the needs of persons affected by disasters and to ensure prompt
delivery. | 物资和设备是为有效援助提供便利的关键，国内法必须灵活应对受灾人员的需要，确保迅速提供物资和设备。 |
| Customs requirements and tariffs, as well
as taxation, should be waived or lessened in order to reduce costs and
prevent delay in the provision of goods. | 应取消或放松海关规定，减免关税和其他税金，以降低成本，避免耽误物资运送。 |
| Equipment and goods that are delayed can
quickly lose their usefulness and normal procedures in place aiming at
protecting the economic interests of a State can become an obstacle in
connection with aid equipment that can save lives or provide needed relief. | 设备和物资如果不能及时送到，可能很快就派不上用场了，通常的程序旨在保护一国经济利益，但是可能阻碍拯救生命或提供所需援助的救援设备的送达。 |
| States can therefore reduce, prioritize
or waive inspection requirements at borders with regard to equipment and
goods related to assisting States and other assisting actors. | 因此，各国可以减少、优先处理或免除对援助国和其他援助方的有关设备和物资的过境检查。 |
| National regulation can also address
overflight and landing rights, tools, minimization of documentation required
for import and transit of equipment and goods and temporary recognition of
foreign registration of vehicles. | 国家条例也可以规定飞越和着陆权利、工具，尽量减少设备和物资的进口和过境所需文件，暂时承认外国车辆注册。 |
| Subparagraph (b) does not provide an
exhaustive list of potential measures aimed at facilitating external
assistance in relation to equipment and goods. | 本条(b)项并未列举旨在便利设备和物资方面的外部援助的所有可以采取的措施。 |
| For instance, given the crucial role of
telecommunications in emergency situations, it will often be necessary to
reduce or limit regulations restricting the use of telecommunication
equipment or of the radio-frequency spectrum, as envisaged by the 1998
Tampere Convention. | 例如，鉴于电信在紧急状况中的关键作用，常常需要按1998年《坦佩雷公约》的规定，减少或限制使用限制电信设备或无线电频谱的使用的条例。 |
| (6) The second paragraph of the draft
article requires that all relevant legislation and regulations be readily
accessible to assisting actors. | (6) 本条草案第2款要求所有有关法律和规章对援助方而言，容易查阅。 |
| By using the words “readily accessible”, what is required is
ease of access to such laws, including, when necessary, their translation
into other languages, without creating the burden on the affected State to
provide this information separately to all assisting actors. | “容易查阅”是说这类法律必须查阅方便，包括必要时翻译成其他语文，无需受灾国专门向每个援助方分别提供这些信息。 |
| This paragraph also confirms the
importance of States introducing domestic regulations concerning the
facilitation of external assistance in advance of disasters, as envisaged in
draft article 9, paragraph 1. | 本条还确认，国家必须按照第9条草案第1款的规定，在发生灾害之前就采用有关便利外部援助的国内条例。 |
| Article 16 | 第16条 |
| Protection of relief personnel, equipment
and goods | 保护救灾人员、设备和物资 |
| The affected State shall take the
appropriate measures to ensure the protection of relief personnel and of
equipment and goods present in its territory, or in territory under its
jurisdiction or control, for the purpose of providing external assistance. | 受灾国应采取适当措施，确保为提供外部援助目的而在其领土或受其管辖或控制的领土内的救灾人员、设备和物资得到保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 16 establishes the
obligation for the affected State to take the measures that would be
appropriate in the circumstances to ensure the protection of relief
personnel, equipment and goods involved in the provision of external
assistance. | (1) 第16条草案为受灾国规定了义务：它应采取在当时情况下适当的措施，保证参与提供外部援助的救灾人员、设备和物资得到保护。 |
| Taking into account the often chaotic
situations arising from disasters, the security concerns for such individuals
and objects might create obstacles for the carrying out of activities aimed
at giving support to the victims, thus reducing the likelihood that their
essential needs would be properly satisfied. | 考虑到灾害往往带来的混乱情况，对这类个人和物品安全的担心可能造成一些障碍，妨碍开展旨在向受害者提供支持的活动，从而降低了使受灾者基本需要得到恰当满足的可能性。 |
| (2) This draft article, therefore,
complements draft article 15 in establishing a coherent set of obligations
whereby the affected State is expected to perform a series of activities that
are necessary in order to guarantee to assisting States and other assisting
actors the possibility to deliver efficient and prompt assistance. | (2) 因此，本条草案补充了第15条草案，两者一起为受灾国确立了一套一致的义务，根据这些义务，受灾国应开展一系列必要活动，以保证援助国和其他援助方有可能提供有效和及时的援助。 |
| Nevertheless, the two provisions have a
somewhat different focus and approach. | 然而，这两项规定在侧重点和做法上有所不同。 |
| Draft article 15 highlights the need for
the affected State to establish a domestic legal order capable of
facilitating the external assistance, mainly through the adoption of a series
of legislative and regulatory actions. | 第15条草案强调受灾国需要建立能够便利外部援助的国内法律秩序，办法主要是采取一系列立法和监管行动。 |
| On the other hand, the question of the
protection of relief personnel and their equipment and goods has
traditionally — and for compelling policy reasons
owing to its nature and the kind of measures to be adopted — been dealt with as a distinct matter, deserving of its own
separate treatment, as the present draft article does. | 另一方面，救灾人员及其设备和物资的保护问题由于其性质和可采取的措施的种类，出于迫不得已的政策原因历来是作为单独事项来处理的，本条草案便是一例。 |
| (3) The measures to be adopted by the
affected State may vary in content and can imply different forms of State
conduct due to the context-driven nature of the obligation concerned. | (3) 因有关义务特别易受背景影响这一性质，受灾国采取的措施可能在内容上有所变化，并可能意味着采取不同形式的国家行为。 |
| In particular, the flexibility inherent
in the concept of “appropriate measures” suggests that the affected State may assume different obligations
depending on the actors involved in potential threats to relief personnel,
equipment and goods. | 具体而言，“适当措施”的概念本来就具有灵活性含义，这就表明，视可能给救灾人员、设备和物资构成潜在威胁的行为者的身份而定，受灾国可能承担不同的义务。 |
| (4) A preliminary requirement for the
affected State is to prevent its organs from adversely affecting relief
activities. | (4) 对受灾国的初步要求是，必须防止本国机关给救援活动造成不利影响。 |
| In this case, the duty imposed on the
affected State is not to cause harm to the personnel, equipment and goods
involved in external assistance through acts carried out by its organs. | 在这种情况下，给受灾国规定的义务是不通过其机关开展的行动给参与外部援助的人员、设备和物资造成损害。 |
| (5) Secondly, draft article 16
contemplates a series of measures to be adopted to prevent detrimental
activities caused by non-State actors aimed, for instance, at profiting from
the volatile security conditions that may ensue from disasters in order to
obtain illicit gains from criminal activities directed against disaster
relief personnel, equipment and goods. | (5) 其次，第16条草案设想了一系列可采纳的措施，用以防止非国家行为者进行有害的活动，例如这种活动的目的是利用灾害之后可能会出现的不稳定的安全情况，从针对救灾人员、设备和物资的犯罪活动中获得非法收益。 |
| The affected State is not expected to
succeed, whatever the circumstances, in preventing the commission of harmful
acts but rather to endeavour to attain the objective sought by the relevant
obligation. | 不是期望受灾国不管情况如何都要成功防止出现有害行为，而是期望它去努力实现有关义务的目的。 |
| In particular, the wording “appropriate measures” allows a margin of
discretion to the affected State in deciding what actions to take in this
regard. | 具体而言，“适当措施”这一措辞给了受灾国一定程度的自由裁量权，让受灾国决定在这方面采取什么行动。 |
| It requires the State to act in a
diligent manner in seeking to avoid the harmful events that may be caused by
non-State actors. | 它要求国家以勤勉方式行事，力求避免可能由非国家行为者造成的伤害事件。 |
| Measures to be taken by States in the
realization of their best efforts to achieve the expected objective are
context-dependent. | 国家在为达到预期目标而作出最大努力方面采取何种措施须视情况而定。 |
| Consequently, draft article 16 does not
list the means to achieve the result aimed at, as this obligation can assume
a dynamic character according to the evolving situation. | 因此，第16条草案没有列出实现这一结果可用的手段，因为这一义务视情况的变化，可具有动态特性。 |
| (6) Diverse circumstances might be
relevant to evaluate the appropriateness of the measures to be taken in a
disaster situation in implementation of this obligation. | (6) 可以参考多种情况来评价在发生灾害的情况下为履行这项义务而采取的措施是否适当。 |
| These include the difficulties that a
State might encounter when attempting to perform its regular activities, due
to the unruly situation created by the magnitude of the disaster and the
deterioration of its economic situation, and the extent of the resources at
the disposal of the concerned State, which might have been seriously affected
by the disaster, as well as its capacity to exercise control in some areas
involved in the disaster. | 这些情况包括一国在试图开展常规活动时，因这场灾害的规模以及该国经济形势的恶化而产生的难以控制的局面、可能受到灾害严重影响的相关国家缺少可支配的资源的情况以及该国在一些灾区行使控制的能力而可能遇到的困难。 |
| The same applies to the security
conditions prevailing in the relevant area of operations and the attitude and
behaviour of the humanitarian actors involved in relief operations. | 这些情况也包括有关行动区域的安全形势和参与救援行动的人道主义行动者的态度和行为。 |
| In fact, even if external actors are
requested to consult and cooperate with the affected State on matters of
protection and security they might disregard the directive role attributed to
the local authorities, thus increasing the possibility of their being faced
with security risks. | 事实上，即使要求外来行动者在保护与安全问题上与受灾国磋商合作，但他们还是可能无视属于地方当局的指挥作用，从而增加他们面临安全风险的可能性。 |
| Furthermore, if harmful acts are directed
against relief personnel, equipment and goods, the affected State shall
address them by exercising its inherent competence to repress crimes
committed within the area on which a disaster occurs. | 此外，如果有害行为针对的是救灾人员、设备和物资，则受灾国应处理这些行为，行使其固有的管辖权来惩治灾区发生的犯罪行为。 |
| (7) International humanitarian actors can
themselves contribute to the realization of the goal sought by adopting, in
their own planning and undertaking of operations, a series of mitigation
measures geared to reducing their vulnerability to security threats. | (7) 国际人道主义行动者自己也可以促进实现所追求的目标，通过在其行动规划和实施过程中采取一系列的措施，降低遭受安全威胁的可能性。 |
| This may be achieved, for instance,
through the elaboration of proper codes of conduct, training activities and
furnishing appropriate information about the conditions under which their
staff are called upon to operate and the standards of conduct they are
required to meet. | 可通过各种措施来做到这一点，例如，制定恰当的行为守则，开展培训活动，提供适当的信息，介绍其人员开展活动时所处的条件，他们须遵守的行为标准等等。 |
| In any event, the adoption of such
mitigating measures should not interfere with the taking of autonomous
measures by the affected State. | 无论如何，采取这类降低风险的措施不应干扰受灾国自主采取措施。 |
| (8) At the same time, it must be
emphasized that security risks should be evaluated having in mind the
character of relief missions and the need to guarantee to victims an adequate
and effective response to a disaster. | (8) 与此同时，必须强调的是，在对安全风险进行评价时不应该忘记救灾任务的特点和保证向灾民提供充分和有效的救灾反应的需要。 |
| Draft article 16 should not be
misinterpreted as entailing the creation of unreasonable and disproportionate
hurdles for relief activities. | 第16条草案不应被误解为会导致给救灾活动设置不合理和不相称的障碍。 |
| As already emphasized with regard to
draft article 15, the measures that, based on security concerns, may be
adopted to restrict the movement of relief personnel should not result in
unnecessarily inhibiting the capacity of these actors to provide assistance
to the victims of disasters. | 正如前面围绕第15条草案已经强调过的那样，基于安全考虑可能采取的限制救灾人员行动的措施不应导致不必要地限制这些行为者向受灾者提供援助的能力。 |
| (9) Similarly, the possibility of
resorting to armed escorts in disaster relief operations to dispel safety
concerns should be strictly assessed according to the best practices
developed in this area by the main humanitarian actors. | (9) 同样，对于在救灾行动中是否可以使用武装护送人员以消除安全顾虑的问题，应严格根据由主要人道主义行动者在这方面建立起来的最佳做法进行评估。 |
| Particular attention is drawn to the 2013
Inter-agency Standing Committee Non-binding Guidelines on the Use of Armed
Escorts for Humanitarian Convoys, which are designed to assist relevant
actors in evaluating, in an appropriate manner, the taking of such a
sensitive course of action. | 在此特别提醒注意2013年机构间常设委员会制订的“武装护送人道主义车队非约束性指南”，
其目的是协助有关行为者恰当地评估是否采取这种敏感的行动方案。 |
| As explained in that document,
humanitarian convoys will not, as a general rule, use armed escorts unless
exceptional circumstances are present that make the use of armed escorts
necessary. | 正如该文件所解释的那样，人道主义车队通常不会使用武装护送，除非有特殊情况存在，必须使用武装护送。 |
| In order for the exception to be adopted,
the consequences of and the possible alternatives to the use of armed escorts
should be considered by the relevant actors, especially taking into account
that the security concerns that may prevail in disaster situations may be far
less serious than those present in other scenarios. | 为了确认特殊情况，相关行为者应考虑武装护送的后果和可能的替代办法，尤其应考虑到灾害情况下可能出现的普遍安全问题可能远不如其他情况下存在的安全问题严重。 |
| (10) Draft article 16 provides protection
for “relief personnel, equipment and goods”, that is, the pertinent persons and objects qualified as such in
draft article 3, subparagraphs (f) and (g), and involved in providing
external assistance. | (10) 第16条草案规定须保护“救灾人员、设备和物资”，即为第3条草案(f)项和(g)项所界定的参与提供外部援助的这类人员和物品提供保护。 |
| As emphasized in other provisions of the
current draft articles, mainly draft articles 10 and 13, external assistance
is contingent upon the consent of the affected State, which has the primary
role in the direction, control, coordination and supervision of such
activities. | 正如本条款草案中其他一些规定、主要是第10条和第13条草案所强调的那样，外部援助应以受灾国的同意为前提，受灾国在指挥、控制、协调和监督这类活动方面应发挥主要作用。 |
| Therefore, once the affected State has
requested assistance or has accepted offers submitted by assisting States, it
shall endeavour to guarantee the protection prescribed in draft article 16. | 因此，一旦受灾国请求援助，或已接受援助国的援助提议，受灾国就应努力保障第16条草案所规定的保护。 |
| (11) Such a comprehensive approach is
relevant for the proper fulfilment of the obligation enshrined in draft
article 16. | (11) 这种全面的处理办法对于正确履行第16条草案规定的义务是有用的。 |
| Domestic authorities are best placed to
assure a proper safety framework for the performance of relief activities. | 国内当局最能够确保为救灾活动的实施确立一个适当的安全框架。 |
| In particular, they are requested to
evaluate the security risks that might be incurred by international relief
personnel, to cooperate with them in dealing with safety issues and to
coordinate the activities of external actors, taking into account those
concerns. | 具体而言，国内当局应该考虑到安全方面的关切，评估国际救灾人员可能面临的安全风险，与他们合作处理安全问题，并协调外部行为者的活动。 |
| (12) In accordance with draft article 3,
subparagraph (f), the relief personnel that would potentially benefit from
draft article 16 may belong to either the civilian or military personnel
sent, as the case may be, by an assisting State or other assisting actor,
namely a competent intergovernmental organization, or a relevant
non-governmental organization or entity, providing assistance to an affected
State with its consent. | (12) 根据第3条草案(f)项，可能受益于第16条草案的救灾人员可能属于援助国或其他援助方，即主管政府间组织、或有关非政府组织或实体经受灾国同意而向其派遣的提供援助的民事或军事人员(视情况而定)。 |
| All these categories are, thus, pertinent
regarding the application of draft article 16. | 因此，所有这些类别对于第16条草案的适用而言都是相关的。 |
| The reference to the term “external assistance” reflects the
position, also affirmed in the commentary to draft article 14, that the
articles only regulate the activities of actors that are external to the
affected State. | “外部援助”这一说法反映了第14条草案评注内已经申明的立场， 即本条款只规范受灾国以外的行为者的活动。 |
| (13) Equipment and goods, as defined in
draft article 3, subparagraph (g), relating to the activities of relief
personnel, likewise benefit from the application of draft article 16. | (13) 第3条草案(g)项所界定的与救灾人员的活动有关的设备和物资同样受益于第16条草案的适用。 |
| Being at the disposal of assisting States
or other assisting actors, equipment and goods will be covered by the
application of draft article 16 independently from their origin. | 由援助国或其他援助方支配的设备和物资不论来自于何处，都将属于第16条的适用范围。 |
| These objects could also be directly
acquired in the domestic market of the affected State. | 这些物品也可以在受灾国的国内市场上直接购买。 |
| The wording “present
in its territory or in territory under its jurisdiction or control” is intended to clarify this aspect. | “处于该国领土或受该国管辖或控制的领土内”这一措辞正是为了澄清这一问题。 |
| Article 17 | 第17条 |
| Termination of external assistance | 终止外部援助 |
| The affected State, the assisting State,
the United Nations, or other assisting actor may terminate external
assistance at any time. | 受灾国、援助国、联合国或其他援助方均可在任何时候终止外部援助。 |
| Any such State or actor intending to
terminate shall provide appropriate notification. | 任何希望终止援助的国家或行为方应发出适当的通知。 |
| The affected State and, as appropriate,
the assisting State, the United Nations, or other assisting actor shall
consult with respect to the termination of external assistance and the
modalities of termination. | 受灾国以及适当时，援助国、联合国或其他援助方，应就终止外部援助问题和终止方式进行磋商。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 17 deals with the
question of termination of external assistance. | (1) 第17条草案涉及终止外部援助的问题。 |
| The provision is comprised of three
sentences. | 这条草案包含三句话。 |
| The first sentence confirms the basic
right of the actors concerned, namely the affected State, the assisting
State, the United Nations, or other assisting actor, to terminate external
assistance at any time. | 第一句确认有关各方(即受灾国、援助国、联合国或其他援助方)在任何时候终止外部援助的基本权利。 |
| The second sentence sets out the
requirement that parties intending to terminate assistance provide
appropriate notification. | 第二句要求打算终止援助的一方发出适当的通知。 |
| The third sentence concerns the
requirement that the affected State and, as appropriate, the assisting State,
the United Nations, or other assisting actor consult each other as regards
the termination of external assistance, including the modalities of such
termination. | 第三句要求受灾国以及适当时援助国、联合国或其他援助方就终止外部援助问题包括终止方式进行磋商。 |
| It is understood that the reference to
termination of assistance includes both whole or partial termination. | 大家都了解，终止援助包括全部终止和部分终止。 |
| An express reference to the United
Nations among the potential assisting actors has also been made in draft
article 17, given its central role in the provision of relief assistance. | 鉴于联合国在提供救援方面的中心作用，第17条草案在潜在援助方中还特别提到了联合国。 |
| (2) When an affected State accepts an
offer of assistance, it retains control over the duration for which that
assistance will be provided. | (2) 受灾国在接受援助提议后，仍保留对援助期限的控制权。 |
| Draft article 10, paragraph 2, explicitly
recognizes that the affected State has the primary role in the direction,
control, coordination and supervision of disaster relief assistance in its
territory. | 第10条草案第2款明确肯定了受灾国在指挥、控制、协调和监督其领土内的救灾援助方面应发挥主要作用。 |
| For its part, draft article 13 requires
the consent of the affected State to external assistance, with the caveat
that consent shall not be withheld arbitrarily. | 第13条草案规定，提供外部援助须征得受灾国的同意，但前提是受灾国不得任意拒绝外部援助。 |
| The combined import of the foregoing
provisions is that the affected State can withdraw consent, thereby
terminating external assistance. | 结合上述两项规定来看，受灾国可以撤销同意，从而终止外部援助。 |
| (3) Draft article 17 does not recognize
the right of only the affected State to unilaterally terminate assistance. | (3) 第17条草案不承认唯有受灾国拥有单方面终止援助的权利。 |
| Instead, the Commission acknowledges that
assisting States, the United Nations and other assisting actors may
themselves need to terminate their assistance activities. | 相反，委员会承认援助国及其他援助方本身也可能需要终止其援助活动。 |
| Draft article 17 thus preserves the right
of any party to terminate the assistance being provided. | 因此，第17条草案保留了任何一方终止正在提供的援助的权利。 |
| (4) Draft article 17 should be read in
light of the purpose of the draft articles, as indicated in draft article 2. | (4) 应当结合第2条草案所述条款草案的宗旨解读第17条草案。 |
| Accordingly, decisions regarding the
termination of assistance are to be made taking into consideration the needs
of the persons affected by disaster, namely, whether and how far such needs
have been met so that the termination of external assistance does not
adversely impact persons affected by a disaster as a premature decision to
terminate assistance could be a setback for recovery. | 因此，在做出终止援助的决定时，应考虑受灾人员的需要，即考虑他们的需要是否及在多大程度上得到了满足，以便终止外部援助不对受灾人员产生不利影响，因为过早地决定终止援助可能使恢复工作遭受挫折。 |
| (5) The Commission anticipates that
termination may become necessary for a variety of reasons and at different
stages during the provision of assistance. | (5) 委员会预计在提供援助的不同阶段，可能会出于各种原因需要终止援助。 |
| The relief operations may reach a stage
where either the affected State or one or more of the assisting actors feel
they must cease operations. | 救援行动可能会达到受灾国或一个或多个援助方停止救援行动才合理的阶段。 |
| Circumstances leading to termination may
include instances in which the resources of an assisting State or other
assisting actor are depleted or where the occurrence of another disaster
makes the diversion of resources necessary. | 导致终止援助的情况可能包括：援助国或其他援助方资源耗尽，或发生其他灾害，必须转移资源。 |
| In a similar vein, affected States ought
to be able to terminate assistance that had become irrelevant or had deviated
from the original offers. | 同样，受灾国应能终止不再相关或偏离最初提议的援助。 |
| Draft article 17 is flexible, allowing
for the adjustment of the duration of assistance according to the circumstances,
while implying that parties should consult in good faith. | 第17条草案没有作硬性规定，允许根据情况调整援助期限，同时暗示各方应真诚磋商。 |
| Draft article 17 is drafted in bilateral
terms, but it does not exclude the scenario of multiple assisting actors
providing external assistance. | 第17条草案是从双边角度起草的，但不排除多个援助方提供外部援助的情况。 |
| (6) In the Commission’s 1989 draft articles on the status of the diplomatic courier and
the diplomatic bag not accompanied by diplomatic courier and draft optional
protocols thereto, article 9, paragraph 2, states that “the diplomatic courier may not be appointed from among persons
having the nationality of the receiving State except with the consent of that
State, which may be withdrawn at any time”. | (6) 在委员会的1989年关于外交信使和沒有外交信使护送的外交邮袋的地位的条款草案及其任择议定书草案
中，第9条第2款规定，“非经接受国同意，不得委派具有接受国国籍的人为外交信使，此項同意可随时撤销”。 |
| According to the corresponding
commentary, “the words ‘at
any time’ are not intended to legitimize any
arbitrary withdrawal of consent”. | 根据对这一款的评注，“‘随时’二字的目的并不是使专断地撤销同意…合法化”。 |
| (7) The second sentence establishes a
requirement of notification by the party intending to terminate external
assistance. | (7) 第二句规定打算终止外部援助的一方应发出通知。 |
| Appropriate notification is necessary to
ensure a degree of stability in the situation, so that no party is adversely
affected by an abrupt termination of assistance. | 要想确保形势保持一定程度的稳定，就必需发出适当的通知，以避免任何一方因援助突然中断而蒙受损失。 |
| The provision is drafted flexibly so as
to anticipate notification before, during or after the consultation process. | 本条款未作硬性规定，在磋商进程之前、期间或之后都可以发出通知。 |
| No procedural constraints have been
placed on the notification process. | 没有对通知程序施加程序上的限制。 |
| However, notification should be “appropriate” according to the
circumstances, including the form and timing, preferably early, of the
notification. | 不过，应根据具体情况发出“适当的”通知，包括以适当的形式、在适当的时间发出通知，而且最好尽早通知。 |
| (8) The requirement to consult, in the
third sentence, reflects, as stressed in the preamble, the spirit of
solidarity and cooperation implicit throughout the draft articles and the
principle of cooperation enshrined in draft articles 7 and 8. | (8) 第三句的磋商要求反映了序言所强调的并贯穿于本套条款草案的团结与合作精神，以及第7和第8条草案所载的合作原则。 |
| The word “modalities” refers to the procedures to be followed in terminating
assistance. | “方式”指终止援助需遵循的程序。 |
| Even though termination on a mutual basis
may not always be feasible, consultation in relation to the modalities would
enable the relevant parties to facilitate an amicable and efficient
termination. | 虽然双方同时想终止援助的情况并不总会发生，但是就终止方式进行磋商将有助于有关各方友好、有效地终止援助。 |
| The reference to the term “as appropriate” clarifies that the
anticipated consultation takes place between the affected State, on the one
hand, and, on the other hand, any other actor (whether an assisting State,
the United Nations or other assisting actor) providing the assistance. | “适当时”的提法是为了澄清，预期的磋商是在受灾国与提供援助的另一方(不论是援助国、联合国还是其他援助方)之间进行的。 |
| Article 18 | 第18条 |
| Relationship to other rules of
international law | 与其他国际法规则的关系 |
| 1. The present draft articles are without
prejudice to other applicable rules of international law. | 1. 本条款草案不影响其他可适用的国际法规则。 |
| 2. The present draft articles do not
apply to the extent that the response to a disaster is governed by the rules
of international humanitarian law. | 2. 在应对灾害须遵守国际人道主义法规则的情况下，本条款草案不适用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 18 deals with the
relationship between the draft articles and other rules of international law.
It seeks to clarify the way in which the draft articles interact with certain
rules of international law that either deal with the same subject matter as
the draft articles or are not directly concerned with disasters but would
nonetheless apply in situations covered by the draft articles. | (1) 第18条草案处理本条款草案与国际法其他规则之间的关系，目的是澄清本条款草案与某些国际法规则发生互动的方式，这些国际法规则处理的事项与本条款草案处理的事项相同，或者虽不直接涉及灾害，但仍然会适用于本条款草案所涵盖的情况。 |
| (2) The reference to “other rules” in the title aims at
safeguarding the continued application of existing obligations regarding
matters covered by the present draft articles. | (2) 在标题中提及“其他规则”是为了确保关于本条款草案所涉事宜的现有义务得以继续适用。 |
| The formulation “other
applicable rules of international law”, in paragraph
1, is intentionally flexible, without referring to such other rules as being “special” in relation to the draft
articles, since that may or may not be the case depending on their content. | 第1款中“其他可适用的国际法规则”的提法是有意不作硬性规定，而不将此类其他规则称为与条款草案相对的“特别”规则，因为视其内容而定，这些规则可能是、也可能不是“特别”规则。 |
| (3) Paragraph 1 is meant to cover
different forms of “other applicable rules of international
law”. | (3) 第1款意在涵盖各种不同形式的“其他可适用的国际法规则”。 |
| Those include, in particular, more
detailed rules enshrined in treaties the scope of which falls ratione
materiae within that of the present draft articles (for example, regional or
bilateral treaties on mutual assistance in case of disasters) as well as
those included in treaties devoted to other matters but which contain
specific rules addressing disaster situations. | 这些规则尤其包括范围也在本条款草案属事管辖范围内的条约(如关于在发生灾害时相互援助的区域或双边条约)所载的比较具体的规则，以及那些专注于其他事项但含有处理灾害情况的某些具体规则的条约所载的规则。 |
| (4) This draft article also deals, in
paragraph 1, with the interaction between the present draft articles and
rules of international law that are not directly concerned with disasters,
but that nonetheless may be applied in the event of disasters. | (4) 本条款草案第1款还处理本条款草案与不直接涉及灾害但在灾害发生时仍可以适用的国际法规则之间的互动问题。 |
| Examples would be provisions concerning
the law of treaties — in particular, those related to
supervening impossibility of performance and fundamental change of
circumstances — as well as the rules on the
responsibility of States and international organizations and the
responsibility of individuals. | 例子有关于条约法的规定，特别是那些涉及因发生意外不可能履行和情况发生根本改变的规定，以及关于国家和国际组织的责任以及个人责任的规则。 |
| The provision confirms that such a
category of rules is not displaced by the present draft articles. | 这项规定确认，这一类规则不受本条款草案的影响。 |
| (5) The without prejudice clause in draft
article 18 also applies to the rules of customary international law. | (5) 第18条草案中的不影响条款也适用于习惯国际法规则。 |
| In fact, the draft articles do not cover
all the issues that may be relevant in the event of disasters. | 事实上，本条款草案没有涵盖在发生灾害时可能相关的所有问题。 |
| Moreover, the draft articles do not
intend to preclude the further development of rules of customary
international law in this field. | 此外，条款草案无意排除习惯国际法规则在这一领域的进一步发展。 |
| As such, the draft article is inspired by
the preambular paragraph of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of
1969, which states that “the rules of customary
international law will continue to govern questions not regulated by the
provisions of the present Convention”. | 因此，本条草案受到1969年《维也纳条约法公约》 序言段的启发，其中规定：“凡未经本公约各条规定之问题，将仍以国际习惯法规则为准”。 |
| (6) In addition, it should be borne in
mind that rules of general application not directly concerned with disasters
might also be contained in treaty law. | (6) 此外，不应忘记，不直接涉及灾害的普遍适用的规则也可能载于条约法中。 |
| The Commission therefore considered that
the wording “other applicable rules of international
law” was the most appropriate to indicate all rules
of international law that might interact with the draft articles, for it
expresses the idea that the without prejudice clause in draft article 18
applies to all categories of international law rules. | 因此，委员会认为，“其他可适用的国际法规则”是说明可能与本条款草案发生互动的所有国际法规则的最合适的措辞，它表达了这样的思想，即第18条草案中的不影响条款适用于所有类别的国际法规则。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 deals specifically with
the relationship between the draft articles and international humanitarian
law. | (7) 第2款具体处理条款草案与国际人道主义法的关系问题。 |
| The provision is formulated in a manner
intended to clarify the relationship by giving precedence to the rules of
international humanitarian law. | 这一条规定之所以这样措辞，就是为了澄清这种关系，表明优先适用国际人道主义法规则。 |
| (8) The Commission considered including
an express exclusion of the applicability of the draft articles in situations
of armed conflict as a further element in the definition of “disaster” (draft article 3, subparagraph
(a)), so as to avoid any interpretation that, for purposes of the draft
articles, armed conflict would be covered to the extent that the threshold
criteria in draft article 3 were satisfied. | (8) 委员会曾考虑过，加进明确的措辞排除这些条款草案适用于武装冲突情况作为“灾害”定义(第3条草案(a)项)的另一要素，以避免任何这样的解释，即为条款草之的目的，只要如第3条草案所述的门槛标准得到满足，武装冲突便包括在内。 |
| Such approach was not followed since a
categorical exclusion could be counterproductive, particularly in situations
of “complex emergencies”
where a disaster occurs in an area where there is an armed conflict. | 委员会没有采用这样的做法，因为将其明确地排除在外可能于事无补，尤其是在“复杂紧急情况”下，即灾害发生于存在着武装冲突的地区。 |
| A blank exclusion of the applicability of
the draft articles because of the coexistence of an armed conflict would be
detrimental to the protection of the persons affected by the disaster,
especially when the onset of the disaster predated the armed conflict. | 因同时存在武装冲突便明确排除条款草案适用，将不利于保护受灾害影响的人，特别是当灾害发生于武装冲突之前时。 |
| (9) In such situations, the rules of
international humanitarian law shall be applied as lex specialis, whereas the
rules contained in the present draft articles would continue to apply “to the extent” that legal issues raised by
a disaster are not covered by the rules of international humanitarian law. | (9) 在这种情况下，国际人道主义法规则应作为特别法适用，而本条款草案所载的规则，只要灾害引起的法律问题不在国际人道主义法规则的范围内，则将继续适用。 |
| The present draft articles would thus
contribute to filling legal gaps in the protection of persons affected by
disasters during an armed conflict while international humanitarian law shall
prevail in situations regulated by both the draft articles and international
humanitarian law. | 通过这样做，本条款草案将有助于填补在保护受武装冲突期间发生的灾害影响的人员方面可能存在的法律空白；对于同时受本条款草案和国际人道主义法调整的情况，国际人道主义法将保持优先地位。 |
| In particular, the present draft articles
are not to be interpreted as representing an obstacle to the ability of
humanitarian organizations to conduct, in times of armed conflict (be it
international or non-international) even when occurring concomitantly with
disasters, their humanitarian activities in accordance with the mandate
assigned to them by international humanitarian law. | 具体而言，本条款草案不得解释为妨碍人道主义组织在即使与灾害同时发生的武装冲突(不论是国际还是非国际性的武装冲突)时按照国际人道主义法赋予的任务，开展人道主义活动。 |
| Chapter V | 第五章 |
| Identification of customary international
law | 习惯国际法的识别 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 50. At its sixty-fourth session (2012),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Formation
and evidence of customary international law” in its
programme of work and appointed Sir Michael Wood as Special Rapporteur. | 50. 委员会第六十四届会议(2012年)决定将“习惯国际法的形成与证据”专题列入工作方案，并任命迈克尔•伍德爵士为特别报告员。 |
| At the same session, the Commission had
before it a note by the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/653). | 在该届会议上，委员会收到特别报告员的说明(A/CN.4/653)。 |
| Also at the same session, the Commission
requested the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum identifying elements in the
previous work of the Commission that could be particularly relevant to this
topic. | 在同届会议上，委员会还请秘书处编写一份备忘录，说明委员会此前的工作中可能与此专题尤为相关的要素。 |
| 51. At its sixty-fifth session (2013),
the Commission considered the first report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/663), as well as a memorandum by the Secretariat on the topic
(A/CN.4/659). | 51. 委员会第六十五届会议(2013年)审议了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/ 663)，以及秘书处关于该专题的一份备忘录(A/CN.4/659)。 |
| At the same session, the Commission
decided to change the title of the topic to “Identification
of customary international law”. | 在同届会议上，委员会决定将专题标题改为“习惯国际法的识别”。 |
| 52. At its sixty-sixth session (2014),
the Commission considered the second report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/672) and decided to refer draft conclusions 1 to 11, as contained in
the second report of the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 52. 委员会第六十六届会议(2014年)审议了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/ 672)， 并决定将特别报告员第二次报告所载结论草案1至11转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission subsequently considered
the interim report of the Drafting Committee on “Identification
of customary international law”, containing the eight
draft conclusions provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the
sixty-sixth session. | 委员会随后审议了起草委员会关于“习惯国际法的识别”的临时报告，其中载有起草委员会在第六十六届会议期间暂时通过的八条结论草案。 |
| 53. At its sixty-seventh session (2015),
the Commission considered the third report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/682) and decided to refer to the Drafting Committee the draft
conclusions contained in that report. | 53. 委员会第六十七届会议(2015年)审议了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/ 682)，并决定将报告所载的各条结论草案转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission subsequently took note of
draft conclusions 1 to 16 as provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee
at the sixty-sixth and sixty-seventh sessions (A/CN.4/L.869). | 委员会随后注意到起草委员会在第六十六和第六十七届会议期间暂时通过的结论草案1至16(A/CN.4/L.869)。 |
| The Commission also requested the
Secretariat to prepare a memorandum concerning the role of decisions of
national courts in the case-law of international courts and tribunals of a
universal character for the purpose of the determination of customary
international law. | 委员会还请秘书处编写一份备忘录，说明就确定习惯国际法而言国内法院的判决在普遍性国际法院和法庭的判例法中的作用。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 54. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/695), and an addendum to that report (A/CN.4/695/Add.1) providing a
bibliography on the topic. | 54. 在本届会议上，委员会收到了特别报告员的第四次报告(A/CN.4/695)和载有此专题文献书目的报告增编(A/CN.4/695/Add.1)。 |
| The fourth report addressed the
suggestions made by States and others on the draft conclusions provisionally
adopted and contained suggestions for the amendment of several draft
conclusions in light of the comments received. | 第四次报告列出了各国和其他方面就暂时通过的结论草案提出的建议，并载有根据已收到的评论意见对若干结论草案提出的修改建议。 |
| It also addressed ways and means to make
the evidence of customary international law more readily available, recalling
the background of the prior work of the Commission on that matter as a basis
for further consideration by the Commission in the context of the topic. | 该报告还探讨了使习惯国际法的证据更易于查考的方式和方法，并回顾了委员会先前工作的背景，作为委员会进一步审议此专题的基础。 |
| In addition, the Commission had before it
a memorandum by the Secretariat concerning the role of decisions of national
courts in the case-law of international courts and tribunals of a universal
character for the purpose of the determination of customary international law
(A/CN.4/691). | 此外，委员会还收到了秘书处编写的关于就确定习惯国际法而言国内法院判决在普遍性国际法院和法庭的判例法中作用的备忘录(A/CN.4/691)。 |
| 55. The Commission considered the fourth
report of the Special Rapporteur, as well as the memorandum by the
Secretariat, at its 3301st to 3303rd meetings, from 19 to 24 May 2016. | 55. 委员会在2016年5月19日至24日举行的第3301至第3303次会议上，审议了特别报告员的第四次报告以及秘书处的备忘录。 |
| At its 3303rd meeting, on 24 May 2016,
the Commission referred to the Drafting Committee the proposed amendments to
the draft conclusions contained in the fourth report of the Special
Rapporteur. | 委员会在2016年5月24日举行的第3303次会议上，向起草委员会转交了特别报告员第四次报告所载结论草案的拟议修正案。 |
| 56. At its 3303rd meeting, on 24 May
2016, the Commission also requested the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum
on ways and means for making the evidence of customary international law more
readily available, which would survey the present state of the evidence of
customary international law and make suggestions for its improvement. | 56. 委员会还在2016年5月24日举行的第3303次会议上请秘书处编写一份备忘录，说明使习惯国际法的证据更易于查考的方法和手段，这份备忘录将调查习惯国际法证据的现状，并提出改进建议。 |
| 57. The Commission considered and adopted
the report of the Drafting Committee on draft conclusions 1 to 16
(A/CN.4/L.872) at its 3309th meeting, on 2 June 2016. | 57. 委员会在2016年6月2日举行的第3309次会议上审议并通过了起草委员会关于结论草案1至16的报告(A/CN.4/L.872)。 |
| It accordingly adopted a set of 16 draft
conclusions on identification of customary international law on first reading
(sect. C.1 below). | 相应地，委员会一读通过了一套关于习惯国际法的识别的16条结论草案(见下文C.1节)。 |
| 58. At its 3291th meeting, on 2 May 2016,
the Commission decided to establish an open-ended working group, under the
Chairmanship of Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, to assist the Special Rapporteur in the preparation of the
draft commentaries to the draft conclusions to be adopted by the Commission. | 58. 委员会在2016年5月2日举行的第3291次会议上，决定设立一个不限成员名额工作组，由马塞洛
•巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生任主席，协助特别报告员编写将供委员会通过的结论草案的评注草案。 |
| The working group held five meetings
between 3 and 11 May 2016. | 2016年5月3日至11日，工作组举行了五次会议。 |
| 59. At its 3338th to 3340th meetings, on
5 and 8 August 2016, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft
conclusions on identification of customary international law (see sect. C.2
below). | 59. 委员会在2016年8月5日和8日举行的第3338至第3340次会议上，通过了关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。 |
| 60. At its 3340th meetings on 8 August
2016, the Commission decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its
statute, to transmit the draft conclusions (sect. C below), through the
Secretary-General, to Governments for comments and observations, with the
request that such comments and observations be submitted to the
Secretary-General by 1 January 2018. | 60. 委员会在2016年8月8日举行的第3340次会议上，根据其《章程》第16至第21条，决定通过秘书长将各条结论草案(见下文C节)转交各国政府征求评论和意见，并请各国政府在2018年1月1日之前向秘书长提交这些评论和意见。 |
| 61. At its 3340th meeting, on 8 August
2016, the Commission expressed its deep appreciation for the outstanding
contribution of the Special Rapporteur, Sir Michael Wood, which had enabled
the Commission to bring to a successful conclusion its first reading of the
draft conclusions on identification of customary international law. | 61. 委员会在2016年8月8日举行的第3340次会议上，向特别报告员迈克尔
•伍德爵士表示深深的感谢，由于他的杰出贡献，委员会得以圆满结束了对关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案的一读。 |
| C. Text of the draft conclusions on
identification of customary international law adopted by the Commission | C. 委员会通过的关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft conclusions | 1. 结论草案案文 |
| 62. The text of the draft conclusions
adopted by the Commission on first reading is reproduced below. | 62. 委员会一读通过的关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案案文载录如下。 |
| Identification of customary international
law | 习惯国际法的识别 |
| Part One | 第一部分 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| Conclusion 1 | 结论1 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
way in which the existence and content of rules of customary international
law are to be determined. | 本结论草案论及如何确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容。 |
| Part Two | 第二部分 |
| Basic approach | 基本方法 |
| Conclusion 2 | 结论2 |
| Two constituent elements | 两个构成要素 |
| To determine the existence and content of
a rule of customary international law, it is necessary to ascertain whether
there is a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio juris). | 要确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，必须查明是否存在一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| Conclusion 3 | 结论3 |
| Assessment of evidence for the two
constituent elements | 评估两个构成要素的证据 |
| 1. In assessing evidence for the purpose
of ascertaining whether there is a general practice and whether that practice
is accepted as law (opinio juris), regard must be had to the overall context,
the nature of the rule, and the particular circumstances in which the
evidence in question is to be found. | 1. 为查明是否存在一项一般惯例及该惯例是否被接受为法律(法律确信)而对证据进行评估时，必须考虑到总体背景、规则的性质以及有关证据所处的具体情况。 |
| 2. Each of the two constituent elements
is to be separately ascertained. | 2. 两个构成要素中的每一要素必须单独予以确定。 |
| This requires an assessment of evidence
for each element. | 这就要求评估每一要素的证据。 |
| Part Three | 第三部分 |
| A general practice | 一般惯例 |
| Conclusion 4 | 结论4 |
| Requirement of practice | 惯例的要求 |
| 1. The requirement, as a constituent
element of customary international law, of a general practice means that it
is primarily the practice of States that contributes to the formation, or
expression, of rules of customary international law. | 1. 关于须有一般惯例的要求作为习惯国际法的构成要素，意味着主要是国家惯例有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述。 |
| 2. In certain cases, the practice of
international organizations also contributes to the formation, or expression,
of rules of customary international law. | 2. 在某些情况下，国际组织的惯例也有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述。 |
| 3. Conduct of other actors is not
practice that contributes to the formation, or expression, of rules of
customary international law, but may be relevant when assessing the practice
referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 3. 其他行为者的行为不是有助于习惯国际法规则形成或表述的惯例，但在评估第1和第2段所指的惯例时可能相关。 |
| Conclusion 5 | 结论5 |
| Conduct of the State as State practice | 作为国家惯例的国家行为 |
| State practice consists of conduct of the
State, whether in the exercise of its executive, legislative, judicial or
other functions. | 国家惯例由国家行为构成，不论该行为是行使行政、立法、司法职能，还是行使其他职能。 |
| Conclusion 6 | 结论6 |
| Forms of practice | 惯例的形式 |
| 1. Practice may take a wide range of
forms. It includes both physical and verbal acts. | 1. 惯例可有多种形式，既包括实际行为，也包括言语行为。 |
| It may, under certain circumstances,
include inaction. | 在某些情况下，还可包括不作为。 |
| 2. Forms of State practice include, but
are not limited to: diplomatic acts and correspondence; conduct in connection
with resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference; conduct in connection with treaties; executive
conduct, including operational conduct “on the ground”; legislative and administrative acts; and decisions of national
courts. | 2. 国家惯例的形式包括但不限于：外交行为和信函；与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为；与条约有关的行为；执行行为，包括“实地”作业行为；立法和行政行为；各国法院的判决。 |
| 3. There is no predetermined hierarchy
among the various forms of practice. | 3. 各种不同形式的惯例之间没有预先确定的等级。 |
| Conclusion 7 | 结论7 |
| Assessing a State’s practice | 评估国家惯例 |
| 1. Account is to be taken of all
available practice of a particular State, which is to be assessed as a whole. | 1. 应考虑特定国家的所有已知的惯例，作为一个整体进行评估。 |
| 2. Where the practice of a particular
State varies, the weight to be given to that practice may be reduced. | 2. 如果特定国家的惯例不一致，可减少赋予该惯例的权重。 |
| Conclusion 8 | 结论8 |
| The practice must be general | 惯例必须具备一般性 |
| 1. The relevant practice must be general,
meaning that it must be sufficiently widespread and representative, as well
as consistent. | 1. 有关惯例必须具备一般性，即必须足够普及和有代表性，还必须是一贯的。 |
| 2. Provided that the practice is general,
no particular duration is required. | 2. 只要惯例具备一般性，就不要求特定存续时间。 |
| Part Four | 第四部分 |
| Accepted as law (opinio juris) | 被接受为法律(法律确信) |
| Conclusion 9 | 结论9 |
| Requirement of acceptance as law (opinio
juris) | 被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求 |
| 1. The requirement, as a constituent
element of customary international law, that the general practice be accepted
as law (opinio juris) means that the practice in question must be undertaken
with a sense of legal right or obligation. | 1. 关于一般惯例须被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求作为习惯国际法的构成要素，意味着有关惯例的采用必须带有一种法律权利或义务感。 |
| 2. A general practice that is accepted as
law (opinio juris) is to be distinguished from mere usage or habit. | 2. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例不同于单纯的常例或习惯。 |
| Conclusion 10 | 结论10 |
| Forms of evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris) | 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式 |
| 1. Evidence of acceptance as law (opinio
juris) may take a wide range of forms. | 1. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据可有多种形式。 |
| 2. Forms of evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris) include, but are not limited to: public statements made on
behalf of States; official publications; government legal opinions;
diplomatic correspondence; decisions of national courts; treaty provisions;
and conduct in connection with resolutions adopted by an international
organization or at an intergovernmental conference. | 2. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式包括但不限于：以国家名义发表的公开声明；官方出版物；政府的法律意见；外交信函；国内法院的判决；条约规定；与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为。 |
| 3. Failure to react over time to a
practice may serve as evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris), provided
that States were in a position to react and the circumstances called for some
reaction. | 3. 在有关国家有能力做出反应并且有关情况也要求做出某种反应的情况下，对一种惯例经过一定时间而没有做出反应，可用作已接受其为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| Part Five | 第五部分 |
| Significance of certain materials for the
identification of customary international law | 某些材料对于识别习惯国际法的意义 |
| Conclusion 11 | 结论11 |
| Treaties | 条约 |
| 1. A rule set forth in a treaty may
reflect a rule of customary international law if it is established that the
treaty rule: | 1. 条约所载的规则可反映习惯国际法规则，条件是能够确定该条约规则： |
| (a) codified a rule of customary
international law existing at the time when the treaty was concluded; | (a) 将条约缔结时已经存在的一项习惯国际法规则编纂成法； |
| (b) has led to the crystallization of a
rule of customary international law that had started to emerge prior to the
conclusion of the treaty; or | (b) 将条约缔结之前开始形成的一项习惯国际法规则具体化； |
| (c) has given rise to a general practice
that is accepted as law (opinio juris), thus generating a new rule of
customary international law. | (c) 形成了一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例，从而产生了一项新的习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. The fact that a rule is set forth in a
number of treaties may, but does not necessarily, indicate that the treaty rule
reflects a rule of customary international law. | 2. 一项规则在多项条约中出现，可能但并不一定表明该条约规则反映了一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| Conclusion 12 | 结论12 |
| Resolutions of international
organizations and intergovernmental conferences | 国际组织和政府间会议的决议 |
| 1. A resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference cannot, of
itself, create a rule of customary international law. | 1. 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议本身并不能创立一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. A resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference may provide
evidence for establishing the existence and content of a rule of customary
international law, or contribute to its development. | 2. 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议可为确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及内容提供证据，或促进其发展。 |
| 3. A provision in a resolution adopted by
an international organization or at an intergovernmental conference may
reflect a rule of customary international law if it is established that the
provision corresponds to a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio
juris). | 3. 如果能够确定国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议中的某项规定与一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例相一致，则该规定可反映一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| Conclusion 13 | 结论13 |
| Decisions of courts and tribunals | 法院和法庭的判决 |
| 1. Decisions of international courts and
tribunals, in particular of the International Court of Justice, concerning
the existence and content of rules of customary international law are a
subsidiary means for the determination of such rules. | 1. 国际性法院和法庭特别是国际法院涉及习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的判决，是确定此类规则的辅助手段。 |
| 2. Regard may be had, as appropriate, to
decisions of national courts concerning the existence and content of rules of
customary international law, as a subsidiary means for the determination of
such rules. | 2. 也可酌情考虑将各国法院涉及习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的判决用作确定此类规则的辅助手段。 |
| Conclusion 14 | 结论14 |
| Teachings | 学说 |
| Teachings of the most highly qualified
publicists of the various nations may serve as a subsidiary means for the
determination of rules of customary international law. | 各国最权威的国际法专家的学说可用作确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段。 |
| Part Six | 第六部分 |
| Persistent objector | 一贯反对者 |
| Conclusion 15 | 结论15 |
| Persistent objector | 一贯反对者 |
| 1. Where a State has objected to a rule
of customary international law while that rule was in the process of
formation, the rule is not opposable to the State concerned for so long as it
maintains its objection. | 1. 如果一国在一项习惯国际法规则的形成过程中对其表示反对，只要该国坚持其反对立场，则该规则不可施用于该国。 |
| 2. The objection must be clearly
expressed, made known to other States, and maintained persistently. | 2. 反对立场必须明确表示，向其他国家公开，并始终坚持。 |
| Part Seven | 第七部分 |
| Particular customary international law | 特别习惯国际法 |
| Conclusion 16 | 结论16 |
| Particular customary international law | 特别习惯国际法 |
| 1. A rule of particular customary international
law, whether regional, local or other, is a rule of customary international
law that applies only among a limited number of States. | 1. 特别习惯国际法规则，不论是区域的、地方的还是其他层面的，都是仅在数量有限的国家之间适用的习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. To determine the existence and content
of a rule of particular customary international law, it is necessary to
ascertain whether there is a general practice among the States concerned that
is accepted by them as law (opinio juris). | 2. 要确定一项特别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，必须查明有关国家之间是否存在一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| 2. Text of the draft conclusions and
commentaries thereto | 2. 结论草案案文及其评注 |
| 63. The text of the draft conclusions and
commentaries thereto adopted by the Commission on first reading at its
sixty-eighth session is reproduced below. | 63. 委员会第六十八届会议一读通过的结论草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Identification of customary international
law | 习惯国际法的识别 |
| General commentary | 总评注 |
| (1) The present draft conclusions concern
the methodology for identifying rules of customary international law. | (1) 本结论草案论及习惯国际法规则的识别方法。 |
| They seek to offer practical guidance on
how the existence (or non-existence) of rules of customary international law,
and their content, are to be determined. | 这些草案试图就确定习惯国际法规则的存在(或不存在)及内容的方法提供实际指导。 |
| This matter is not only of concern to
specialists in public international law; others, including those involved
with national courts, are increasingly called upon to apply or advise on
customary international law. | 这一事项不仅令国际公法专家们关注；其他人员，包括参与国内法院工作的人员，也越来越多地被要求适用习惯国际法或就习惯国际法提供咨询意见。 |
| Whenever doing so, a structured and
careful process of legal analysis and evaluation is required to ensure that a
rule of customary international law is properly identified, thus promoting
the credibility of the particular determination. | 每当此时，就需要开展条理清楚且细致的法律分析，以确保妥善识别习惯国际法规则，从而提高具体判定的可信度。 |
| (2) Customary international law remains an
important source of public international law. | (2) 习惯国际法仍然是国际公法的重要渊源。 |
| In the international legal system, such
unwritten law, deriving from practice accepted as law, can be an effective
means for subjects of international law to regulate their behaviour and it is
indeed often invoked by States and others. | 在国际法律体系中，这种源自被接受为法律的惯例的不成文法可以成为国际法主体规范其行为的有效手段，而且国家和其他方面也确实常常援引这种法律。 |
| Customary international law is, moreover,
among the sources of international law listed in Article 38, paragraph 1, of
the Statute of the International Court of Justice, which refers, in
subparagraph (b), to “international custom, as
evidence of a general practice accepted as law”. | 另外，习惯国际法也是《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款所列的国际法渊源之一，《规约》该款(丑)项提到了“国际习惯，作为通例之证明而经接受为法律者”。 |
| This wording reflects the two constituent
elements of customary international law: a general practice and its
acceptance as law (also referred to as opinio juris). | 这一措辞反映了习惯国际法的两个构成要素：一项一般惯例，以及该惯例被接受为法律(又称“法律确信”)。 |
| (3) The identification of customary
international law is a matter on which there is a wealth of material,
including case law and scholarly writings. | (3) 习惯国际法的识别这一事项有着丰富的相关材料，包括判例法和学术著作。 |
| The draft conclusions reflect the
approach adopted by States, as well as by international courts and tribunals
and within international organizations. | 结论草案反映了各国、国际性法院和法庭以及在国际组织内部采取的做法。 |
| Recognizing that the process for the
identification of customary international law is not always susceptible to
exact formulations, they aim to offer clear guidance without being overly
prescriptive. | 结论草案承认，识别习惯国际法的程序并不总是能够精确地描述，草案旨在提供明确的指导，而不做出过于硬性的规定。 |
| (4) The 16 draft conclusions that follow
are divided into seven parts. | (4) 下文所载的16条结论草案分为七个部分。 |
| Part One deals with scope and purpose. | 第一部分论及范围和目的。 |
| Part Two sets out the basic approach to
the identification of customary international law, the “two element” approach. | 第二部分阐述习惯国际法的基本识别方法，即“两要素”方法。 |
| Parts Three and Four provide further
guidance on the two constituent elements of customary international law,
which also serve as the criteria for its identification, “a general practice” and “acceptance as law” (opinio juris). | 第三和第四部分就习惯国际法的两个构成要素提供进一步指导，这两个构成要素也是习惯国际法的识别标准，即“一项一般惯例”和“被接受为法律”(法律确信)。 |
| Part Five addresses certain categories of
materials that are frequently invoked in the identification of rules of
customary international law. | 第五部分论及在识别习惯国际法规则时频繁援引的某些类别的材料。 |
| Parts Six and Seven deal with two
exceptional cases: the persistent objector; and particular customary
international law (being rules of customary international law that apply only
among a limited number of States). | 第六和第七部分论及两种例外情况：一贯反对者和特别习惯国际法(仅在数量有限的国家之间适用的习惯国际法规则)。 |
| Part One | 第一部分 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| Part One, comprising a single draft
conclusion, defines the scope of the draft conclusions, outlining their
function and purpose. | 第一部分只包括一条结论草案，该部分确定了结论草案的范围，同时扼要说明了结论草案的功能和目的。 |
| Conclusion 1 | 结论1 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
way in which the existence and content of rules of customary international
law are to be determined. | 本结论草案论及如何确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 1 is introductory in
nature. | (1) 从本质上而言，结论草案1是介绍性的。 |
| It provides that the draft conclusions
concern the way in which rules of customary international law are to be
identified, that is, the legal methodology for undertaking that exercise. | 该条规定，各条结论草案论及习惯国际法规则的识别方法，即在开展识别工作时使用的法律方法。 |
| (2) The term “customary
international law” is used throughout the draft
conclusions, being in common use and most clearly reflecting the nature of
this source of international law. | (2) 结论草案均采用了“习惯国际法”这一术语，该术语较为常用，且最能清楚地反映这一国际法渊源的性质。 |
| Other terms that are sometimes found in
legal instruments (including constitutions), in case law and in scholarly
writings include “custom”, “international custom”, and “international customary law” as well as “the law of nations” and “general international law”. | 法律文书(包括宪法)、判例法和学术著作中有时使用的其他术语包括“习惯”、“国际习惯”和“国际习惯法”以及“万民法”和“一般国际法”。 |
| The reference to “rules” of customary international law
includes rules that are sometimes referred to as “principles” (of law) because they have a more general and fundamental character. | 提到习惯国际法“规则”时，所指对象包括那些因为具有更加通用、更加基本的特点而有时被称为(法律)“原则”的规则。 |
| (3) The terms “identify” and “determine”
are used interchangeably in the draft conclusions and commentaries. | (3) “识别”与“确定”这两个术语在本结论草案及评注中可以互换。 |
| The reference to determining the “existence and content” of rules of
customary international law reflects the fact that while often the need is to
identify both the existence and the content of a rule, in some cases it is
accepted that the rule exists but its precise scope is disputed. | 草案提到了要确定习惯国际法的“存在及内容”，这反映出，虽然往往既需要识别规则是否存在也需要识别规则有何内容，但有时也会仅承认规则存在，但对其具体范围仍有争议。 |
| This may be the case, for example, where
there is disagreement as to whether a particular formulation (usually set out
in texts such as treaties or resolutions) does in fact equate to an existing
rule of customary international law, or where the question arises whether
there are exceptions to a recognized rule of customary international law. | 例如，当各方对某特定表述(往往是条约或决议等案文中的表述)是否事实上等同于一项现行习惯国际法规则的问题存在分歧，或是就某项公认的习惯国际法规则是否存在例外情况的问题提出疑问时，就可能出现上述情况。 |
| (4) Dealing as they do with the
identification of rules of customary international law, the draft conclusions
do not address, directly, the processes by which customary international law
develops over time. | (4) 结论草案在论及习惯国际法规则的识别时，并未直接论及习惯国际法随时间发展的过程。 |
| Yet in practice identification cannot
always be considered in isolation from formation; the identification of the
existence and content of a rule of customary international law may well
involve consideration of the processes by which it has developed. | 但在实践中，并不能始终将习惯国际法的识别与其形成分隔开来；要识别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，很可能涉及对其发展过程的考虑。 |
| The draft conclusions thus inevitably
refer in places to the formation of rules; they do not, however, deal
systematically with how rules emerge, or how they change or terminate. | 因此，结论草案不可避免地在多处提到了规则的形成；但是，这些草案并未有系统地论及规则是如何产生、改变或终止的。 |
| (5) A number of other matters fall
outside the scope of the draft conclusions. | (5) 还有若干其他事项不属于结论草案的范围。 |
| First, they do not address the content of
customary international law; they are concerned only with the methodological
issue of how rules of customary international law are to be identified. | 首先，结论草案没有论及习惯国际法的内容，而是仅涉及习惯国际法的识别方法问题。 |
| Second, no attempt is made to explain the
relationship between customary international law and other sources of
international law; the draft conclusions touch on this only in so far as is
necessary to explain how rules of customary international law are to be
identified, for example the relevance of treaties for such purpose. | 第二，结论草案没有试图解释习惯国际法与国际法的其他渊源之间的关系，只有在为了解释习惯国际法规则的识别方法而必须谈到这一问题时，例如在解释条约对识别习惯国际法规则的意义时，才述及了这一问题。 |
| Third, the draft conclusions are without
prejudice to questions of hierarchy among rules of international law,
including those concerning peremptory norms of general international law (jus
cogens), or questions concerning the erga omnes nature of certain
obligations. | 第三，结论草案并不影响国际法规则之间的等级问题，包括涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的问题，或某些义务的普遍适用性的问题。 |
| Finally, the draft conclusions do not
address the position of customary international law within national legal
systems. | 最后，结论草案没有论及习惯国际法在各国法律体系内部的地位问题。 |
| Part Two | 第二部分 |
| Basic approach | 基本方法 |
| Part Two sets out the basic approach to
the identification of customary international law. Comprising two draft
conclusions, it specifies that determining a rule of customary international
law requires establishing the existence of the two constituent elements: a
general practice, and acceptance of that practice as law (opinio juris). | 第二部分阐述习惯国际法的基本识别方法，包括两条结论草案，指出确定一项习惯国际法规则需要确定存在两个构成要素：一项一般惯例以及该惯例被接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| This requires a careful analysis of the
evidence for each element. | 这要求对每一要素的证据进行认真分析。 |
| Conclusion 2 | 结论2 |
| Two constituent elements | 两个构成要素 |
| To determine the existence and content of
a rule of customary international law, it is necessary to ascertain whether
there is a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio juris). | 要确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，必须查明是否存在一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 2 sets out the basic
approach, according to which the identification of a rule of customary
international law requires an inquiry into two distinct, yet related, questions:
whether there is a general practice and whether such general practice is
accepted as law (that is, accompanied by opinio juris). | (1) 结论草案2阐明了基本方法，即识别习惯国际法的规则需要调查两项独立而相关的问题：是否存在一项一般惯例，及该惯例是否被接受为法律(即伴有法律确信）。 |
| In other words, one must look at what States
actually do and seek to understand whether they recognize an obligation or a
right to act in that way. | 换言之，必须审视各国实际上是怎么做的，并试图理解它们是否承认存在着这样做的义务或权利。 |
| This methodology, the “two element approach”, underlies the draft
conclusions and is widely supported by States, in case law, and in scholarly
writings. | “两要素法”是结论草案的基础，也得到各国判例法和学术著作的广泛支持。 |
| It serves to ensure that the exercise of
identifying rules of customary international law results in determining only
such rules as actually exist. | 该方法旨在确保识别习惯国际法规则的工作只确定实际存在的此类规则。 |
| (2) A general practice and acceptance of
that practice as law (opinio juris) are the two constituent elements of
customary international law; together they are the essential conditions for
the existence of a rule of customary international law. | (2) 一项一般惯例和该惯例被接受为法律(法律确信)是习惯国际法的两个构成要素；这两个要素共同构成习惯国际法规则存在的必要条件。 |
| The identification of such a rule thus
involves a close examination of available evidence to establish their
presence in any given case. | 因此，要识别这一规则，就必须细致研究已知的证据，确定在任何给定案件中均存在这两项要素。 |
| This has been confirmed, inter alia, in
the case law of the International Court of Justice, which refers to “two conditions [that] must be fulfilled”
and has repeatedly laid down that “the existence of a
rule of customary international law requires that there be “a settled practice” together with opinio
juris”. | 这一点在国际法院判例法等处得到了证实，国际法院判例法提到“必须满足两项条件”，并反复指出“要确定存在一项习惯国际法规则，除法律确信外，还须存在着‘既定惯例’”。 |
| To establish that a claim concerning the
existence and/or the content of a rule of customary international law is well
founded thus entails a search for a practice that has gained such acceptance
among States that it may be considered to be the expression of a legal right
or obligation (namely, that it is required, permitted or prohibited as a
matter of law). | 因此，要证实某项关于习惯国际法规则存在和/或内容的主张具有充分的依据，就需要寻找一项已在各国获得一定接受度乃至可被视为表现了一项法律权利或义务(即被法律所要求、允许或禁止)的惯例。 |
| The test must always be: is there a
general practice that is accepted as law? | 考察的内容必须始终是：是否存在一项被接受为法律的一般惯例？ |
| (3) Where the existence of a general
practice accepted as law cannot be established, the conclusion will be that
the alleged rule of customary international law does not exist. | (3) 若无法证实存在一项被接受为法律的一般惯例，则结论是不存在所称的习惯国际法规则。 |
| In the Colombian-Peruvian asylum case,
for example, the International Court of Justice considered that the facts
relating to the alleged existence of a rule of (particular) customary
international law disclosed: | 例如，在哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案中，国际法院认为，与所称存在的(特别)国际法规则有关的事实显示： |
| “so much uncertainty and contradiction,
so much fluctuation and discrepancy in the exercise of diplomatic asylum and
in the official views expressed on various occasions, there has been so much
inconsistency in the rapid succession of conventions on asylum, ratified by
some States and rejected by others, and the practice has been so much
influenced by considerations of political expediency in the various cases,
that it is not possible to discern in all this any constant and uniform
usage, accepted as law, with regard to the alleged rule of unilateral and
definitive qualification of the offence”. | “纵观外交庇护的使用方式以及多种不同场合表达的官方意见，其中存在太多不确定与矛盾之处，也存在太多变动与差异之处，就被一些国家所批准而被另一些国家所拒绝的各项庇护公约的快速继承而言，存在太多不一致，且所涉惯例过于受到种种案件中政治权宜考虑的影响，因此，无法从中分析出任何与所称的单方面确定犯罪性质的规则有关的恒定、统一、可被接受为法律的做法”。 |
| (4) As draft conclusion 2 makes clear,
the presence of only one constituent element does not suffice for the
identification of a rule of customary international law. | (4) 正如结论草案2所明确指出的，仅具备一个构成要素不足以识别习惯国际法规则。 |
| Practice without acceptance as law
(opinio juris), even if widespread and consistent, can be no more than a
non-binding usage, while a belief that something is (or ought to be) the law
unsupported by practice is mere aspiration; it is the two together that
establish the existence of a rule of customary international law. | 未被接受为法律(没有法律确信)的惯例，即便被广泛和一致地使用，也只能是没有约束力的做法，而在没有惯例支撑的情况下认为某项规定是(或应当是)法律，则仅仅属于愿望；只有二者合一方能证实存在一项习惯国际法的规则。 |
| While writers have from time to time
sought to devise alternative approaches to the identification of customary
international law, emphasizing one constituent element over the other or even
excluding one element altogether, such theories are not supported by States
or in the case law. | 虽然不时有著述者试图设计识别习惯国际法的其他方法，强调其中的某个构成要素比另一个更加重要，乃至完全排除某个要素，但这种理论并未得到各国或判例法的支持。 |
| (5) The two-element approach is often
referred to as “inductive”,
in contrast to possible “deductive” approaches by which rules may be ascertained on account of legal
reasoning rather than empirical evidence of a general practice and its
acceptance as law (opinio juris). | (5) 两要素法经常被称为“归纳”法，与可能的“演绎”法相对，根据演绎法，可根据法律推理确定规则，而不需要有存在一般惯例及其被接受为法律(法律确信)的经验证据。 |
| The two-element approach does not in fact
preclude a measure of deduction, in particular when considering possible
rules of customary international law that operate against the backdrop of
rules framed in more general terms that themselves derive from and reflect a general
practice accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris), or when concluding
that possible rules of international law form part of an “indivisible regime”. | 两要素法事实上并未排除演绎法，特别是在审查以下两种可能的习惯国际法规则时：源自表述更为宽泛的其他规则、以这些规则为背景发挥作用并反映了被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例的规则；或得出结论认为可能的国际法规则构成“不可分割的制度”的一部分。 |
| (6) The two-element approach applies to
the identification of the existence and content of rules of customary
international law in all fields of international law. | (6) 两要素法适用于在国际法的所有领域识别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容。 |
| This is confirmed in the practice of
States and in the case law, and is consistent with the unity and coherence of
international law, which is a single legal system and is not divided into
separate branches, each with its own approach to sources. | 这一点已得到各国惯例以及判例法的证实，也符合国际法的统一性和一贯性，国际法是一个单一的法律系统，并非分为几个独立分支，各有其确定渊源的方法。 |
| While the application in practice of the
basic approach may well take into account the particular circumstances and
context in which an alleged rule has arisen and operates, the essential
nature of customary international law as a general practice accepted as law
(accompanied by opinio juris) must always be respected. | 在实际情况下，适用基本方法时很可能会考虑到所称规则产生和发挥作用的具体情况和背景， 但必须始终尊重习惯国际法作为被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例的基本性质。 |
| Conclusion 3 | 结论3 |
| Assessment of evidence for the two
constituent elements | 评估两个构成要素的证据 |
| 1. In assessing evidence for the purpose
of ascertaining whether there is a general practice and whether that practice
is accepted as law (opinio juris), regard must be had to the overall context,
the nature of the rule, and the particular circumstances in which the
evidence in question is to be found. | 1. 为查明是否存在一项一般惯例及该惯例是否被接受为法律(法律确信)而对证据进行评估时，必须考虑到总体背景、规则的性质以及有关证据所处的具体情况。 |
| 2. Each of the two constituent elements
is to be separately ascertained. | 2. 两个构成要素中的每一要素必须单独予以确定。 |
| This requires an assessment of evidence
for each element. | 这就要求评估每一要素的证据。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 3 concerns the
assessment of evidence for the two constituent elements of customary
international law. | (1) 结论草案3论及如何评估习惯国际法两个构成要素的证据。 |
| The two paragraphs of the draft
conclusion offer general guidance for the process of determining the
existence (or non-existence) and content of a rule of customary international
law from the various pieces of evidence available at the time of the
assessment, which reflects both the rigorous analysis required and the
dynamic nature of customary international law as a source of international
law. | 该结论草案的两个段落就如何根据评估时掌握的各种证据确定习惯国际法规则的存在(或不存在)及内容提供了总体指导，这一评估过程既反映了所要求的严谨分析，也反映了习惯国际法作为国际法渊源的动态本质。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 sets out an overarching
principle that underlies all of the draft conclusions, namely that the
assessment of any and all available evidence must be careful and contextual. | (2) 第1段阐述了所有结论草案所立足的总原则，即评估任何可用证据时都必须认真并考虑背景。 |
| Whether a general practice that is
accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris) exists must be carefully
investigated in each case, in the light of the relevant circumstances. | 调查是否存在被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例时，必须考虑到有关情况，逐案认真调查。 |
| Such analysis not only promotes the
credibility of any particular decision, but also allows the two-element
approach to be applied, with the necessary flexibility, to all fields of
international law. | 这种分析不仅能提高任何具体决定的可信度，还能将两要素方法以具备必要灵活性的方式适用于国际法的所有领域。 |
| (3) The requirement that regard be had to
the overall context reflects the need to apply the two-element approach while
taking into account the subject matter that the rule is said to regulate. | (3) 考虑总体背景这一要求反映出，需要在适用两要素方法的同时考虑所涉规则据称所规范的主体事项。 |
| This implies that in each case any
underlying principles of international law that may be applicable to the
matter ought to be taken into account. | 这意味着，在每种情况下，必须将可适用于所涉事项的任何国际法基本原则均纳入考虑。 |
| Moreover, the type of evidence consulted
(and consideration of its availability or otherwise) is to be adjusted to the
situation, and certain forms of practice and evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris) may be of particular significance, depending on the context. | 此外，所查阅的证据的类型(以及审议是否存在可用证据的工作)需要根据情况作出调整，某些形式的惯例和被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据依具体情况，可能具有尤为重要的意义。 |
| For example, in the Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State case, the International Court of Justice considered
that: | 例如，在国家的管辖豁免案中，国际法院认为： |
| “In the present context, State practice
of particular significance is to be found in the judgments of national courts
faced with the question whether a foreign State is immune, the legislation of
those States which have enacted statutes dealing with immunity, the claims to
immunity advanced by States before foreign courts and the statements made by
States, first in the course of the extensive study of the subject by the
International Law Commission and then in the context of the adoption of the
United Nations Convention [on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their
Property]. | “就本案而言，具有尤为重要意义的国家惯例见于：国内法院在面对他国是否享有豁免的问题时作出的判决、已颁布豁免法规的国家的立法、各国向他国法院提出的豁免主张，以及各国在国际法委员会对该主题进行广泛研究时以及后来在通过《联合国[国家及其财产管辖豁免]公约》时发表的声明。 |
| Opinio juris in this context is reflected
in particular in the assertion by States claiming immunity that international
law accords them a right to such immunity from the jurisdiction of other
States; in the acknowledgment, by States granting immunity, that
international law imposes upon them an obligation to do so; and, conversely,
in the assertion by States in other cases of a right to exercise jurisdiction
over foreign States.” | 本案中，特别能反映法律确信的有：提出豁免主张的国家声称国际法向本国赋予了这种豁免他国管辖的权利的声明；批准豁免的国家承认国际法对其施加了批准豁免的义务的声明；与此相反，还有其他案件中当事国声称本国有权对他国行使管辖的声明。” |
| (4) The nature of the rule in question
may also be of significance when assessing evidence for the purpose of
ascertaining whether there is a general practice that is accepted as law
(accompanied by opinio juris). | (4) 在评估证据以确定是否存在被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例时，所涉规则的性质也可具有重要意义。 |
| In particular, where prohibitive rules
are concerned (such as the prohibition of torture) it may sometimes be
difficult to find positive State practice (as opposed to inaction); cases
involving such rules will most likely turn on evaluating whether the practice
(being deliberate inaction) is accepted as law. | 特别是，在涉及禁止性规则(例如禁止酷刑)时，有时可能难以找到(与不作为相反的)积极的国家惯例；对涉及这种规则的案件，很可能取决于评价(故意不作为的)惯例是否被接受为法律。 |
| (5) Given that conduct may be fraught
with ambiguities, paragraph 1 further indicates that regard must be had to
the particular circumstances in which any evidence is to be found; only then
may proper weight be accorded to it. | (5) 鉴于行为可能充斥着不明晰之处，第1款进一步指出，对任何证据，均必须考虑到其所处的具体情况；只有这样做之后，方能对证据赋予适当的权重。 |
| In the United States Nationals in Morocco
case, for example, the International Court of Justice, in seeking to
ascertain whether a rule of (particular) customary international existed,
said: | 例如，在摩洛哥境内美国国民案中，国际法院在试图确定是否存在一项(特别)习惯国际法规则时表示： |
| “There are isolated expressions to be
found in the diplomatic correspondence which, if considered without regard to
their context, might be regarded as acknowledgments of United States claims
to exercise consular jurisdiction and other capitulatory rights. | “外交信函中有一些零星的表述，如果脱离上下文予以考虑，可能会将之视为对美国行使领事管辖权和其他领事裁判权的主张予以承认。 |
| On the other hand, the Court can not
ignore the general tenor of the correspondence, which indicates that at all
times France and the United States were looking for a solution based upon
mutual agreement and that neither Party intended to concede its legal
position.” | 另一方面，法院[不能]无视信函的主旨，这一主旨表明法国和美国始终试图找到双方同意的解决办法，且双方均无意就自身的法律立场作出让步。
” |
| When considering legislation as practice,
what may sometimes matter more than the actual text is how it has been
interpreted and applied. | 在将法律作为惯例予以考虑时，有时法律被解释和适用的方式可能比实际案文更加重要。 |
| Decisions of national courts will count
less if they are reversed by the legislature or remain unenforced because of
concerns about their compatibility with international law. | 国内法院的判决若被立法机关撤销或因为担心与国际法不一致而未予执行，则重要性会降低。 |
| Statements made casually, or in the heat
of the moment, will usually carry less weight than those that are carefully
considered; those made by junior officials may carry less weight than those
voiced by senior members of the Government. | 就份量而言，即兴或一时激动下作出的声明通常低于认真考虑作出的声明；低级官员的声明可能低于政府高级成员的声明。 |
| The significance of a State’s failure to protest will depend upon all the circumstances, but
may be particularly significant where concrete action has been taken, of
which that State is aware and which has an immediate negative impact on its
interests. | 若当事国不抗议，则不抗议的重要性取决于所有具体情况，若对方已经采取了具体的行动、当事国知晓这种行动且这种行动对其利益有直接不利影响，则该国不抗议的做法可能尤为重要。 |
| And practice of a State that goes against
its clear interests or entails significant costs for it is more likely to
reflect acceptance as law. | 并且，若一国的某项惯例不符合其显然利益，或者会给该国带来不小的代价，则更有可能反映出该项惯例已被接受为法律。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 states that to identify
the existence and content of a rule of customary international law each of
the two constituent elements must be found to be present, and explains that
this calls for an assessment of evidence for each element. | (6) 第2段指出，只有确定两个构成要素均存在，方能识别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，并解释称，这要求对每一要素的证据进行评估。 |
| In other words, practice and acceptance
as law (opinio juris) together supply the information necessary for the
identification of customary international law, but two distinct inquiries are
to be carried out. | 换言之，惯例和被接受为法律(法律确信)一起方能提供识别习惯国际法所必需的信息，但需要开展两项单独的调查。 |
| While the constituent elements may be
intertwined in fact (in the sense that practice may be accompanied by a
certain motivation), each is conceptually distinct for purposes of
identifying a rule of customary international law. | 虽然两个构成要素可能事实上相互交织(惯例背后可能伴随着某种动机)，但就识别习惯国际法规则的目的而言，每一个要素在概念上都是单独的。 |
| (7) Although customary international law
manifests itself in instances of conduct that are accompanied by opinio
juris, acts forming the relevant practice are not as such evidence of
acceptance as law. | (7) 虽然习惯国际法表现在伴有法律确信的行为的具体实例上，但构成有关惯例的行动本身并不是被接受为法律的证据。 |
| Moreover, acceptance as law (opinio
juris) is to be sought with respect not only to those taking part in the
practice but also to those in a position to react to it. | 此外，被接受为法律(法律确信)不仅涉及惯例的参与方，还涉及有能力对惯例作出反应的各方。 |
| No simple inference of acceptance as law
may thus be made from the practice in question; in the words of the
International Court of Justice, “acting, or agreeing
to act in a certain way, does not of itself demonstrate anything of a
juridical nature”. | 因此，仅从所涉惯例并不能推断出被接受为法律；用国际法院的话说，“以某种方式行动或同意以某种方式行动，本身并不能证明任何法律性质的结论”。 |
| (8) Paragraph 2 emphasizes that the
existence of one element may not be deduced merely from the existence of the
other and that a separate inquiry needs to be carried out for each. | (8) 第2段强调，不可仅从一个要素的存在而推断出另一个要素的存在，需要对每个要素开展单独的调查。 |
| Nevertheless, the paragraph does not
exclude that the same material may be used to ascertain practice and
acceptance as law (opinio juris). | 尽管如此，该段并不排除同一材料可既用于查明惯例，又用于查明被接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| A decision by a national court, for
example, could be relevant practice as well as indicate that its outcome is
required under customary international law. | 例如，国内法院的一项判决可能既是有关惯例，又能表明其结果是习惯国际法的要求。 |
| The important point remains, however,
that the material must be examined as part of two distinct inquiries, to
ascertain practice and to ascertain acceptance as law. | 但重点依然是，必须将该材料作为两项单独调查的一部分予以研究，以查明惯例和查明被接受为法律的情况。 |
| (9) While in the identification of a rule
of customary international law the existence of a general practice is often
the initial factor to be considered, and only then an inquiry is made into whether
such general practice is accepted as law, this order of inquiry is not
mandatory. | (9) 在习惯国际法规则的识别过程中，是否存在一般惯例往往是首先考虑的因素，只有确定这个问题之后才开始调查这种一般惯例是否被接受为法律，但这一调查顺序并不是强制的。 |
| The identification of a rule of customary
international law may also begin with appraising a written text or statement
allegedly expressing a certain legal conviction and then seeking to verify
whether there is a general practice corresponding to it. | 识别习惯国际法规则也可先评估据称表达了某种法律确信的书面案文或声明，之后再试图验证是否存在与之相对应的一般惯例。 |
| Part Three | 第三部分 |
| A general practice | 一般惯例 |
| As stated in draft conclusion 2, the
indispensable requirement for the identification of a rule of customary
international law is that both a general practice and acceptance of such
practice as law (opinio juris) be ascertained. | 如结论草案2所述，既确定存在一项一般惯例又确定这一惯例被接受为法律(法律确信)，是识别习惯国际法规则的必不可少的要求。 |
| Part Three offers more detailed guidance
on the first of these two constituent elements of customary international
law, “a general practice”. | 第三部分就习惯国际法两个构成要素中的第一个――“一项一般惯例”提供了更加详细的指导。 |
| Also known as the “material” or “objective” element, it refers to those instances of conduct that (when
accompanied by acceptance as law) are creative, or expressive, of customary
international law. | 该要素又称“实质”或“客观”要素， 指(在被接受为法律的同时)能创立或表述习惯国际法的行为的实例。 |
| A number of factors must be considered in
evaluating whether a general practice does in fact exist. | 在评估一项一般惯例是否实际存在时，必须考虑若干因素。 |
| Conclusion 4 | 结论4 |
| Requirement of practice | 惯例的要求 |
| 1. The requirement, as a constituent
element of customary international law, of a general practice means that it
is primarily the practice of States that contributes to the formation, or
expression, of rules of customary international law. | 1. 关于须有一般惯例的要求作为习惯国际法的构成要素，意味着主要是国家惯例有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述。 |
| 2. In certain cases, the practice of
international organizations also contributes to the formation, or expression,
of rules of customary international law. | 2. 在某些情况下，国际组织的惯例也有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述。 |
| 3. Conduct of other actors is not
practice that contributes to the formation, or expression, of rules of
customary international law, but may be relevant when assessing the practice
referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 3. 其他行为者的行为不是有助于习惯国际法规则形成或表述的惯例，但在评估第1和第2段所指的惯例时可能相关。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 4 specifies whose
practice is to be taken into account when determining the existence of a rule
of customary international law and the role of such practice. | (1) 结论草案4具体说明了在确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及其作用时，应考虑来自哪方的惯例。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 makes clear that it is
principally the practice of States that is to be looked to in determining the
existence and content of rules of customary international law; the material
element of customary international law is indeed often referred to as “State practice”. | (2) 第1段明确指出，在确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容时，原则上应审视国家惯例；确实，习惯国际法的实质要素常常被称为“国家惯例”。 |
| The word “primarily” reflects the primacy of States as subjects of international law
possessing a general competence and emphasizes the pre-eminent role that
their conduct has for the formation and identification of customary
international law. | “主要”一词反映出国家是具有一般性权能的最重要的国际法主体，并强调了国家行为对习惯国际法的形成与识别所起的突出重要作用。 |
| The International Court of Justice held
in Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua that in
order “to consider what are the rules of customary
international law applicable to the present dispute …
it has to direct its attention to the practice and opinio juris of States”. | 国际法院在尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案中认定，要“审议有哪些习惯国际法规则适用于本争端…必须关注各国的惯例和法律确信”。 |
| At the same time, the word “primarily” indicates that it is not
exclusively State practice that is relevant and directs the reader to
paragraph 2. | 与此同时，“主要”一词也显示出国家惯例不是唯一的有关方面，并引导读者阅读第2段。 |
| (3) Paragraph 2 concerns the practice of
international organizations and indicates that “in
certain cases” such practice also contributes to the
identification of rules of customary international law. | (3) 第2段论及国际组织的惯例，并指出“在某些情况下”，这种惯例也有助于识别习惯国际法规则。 |
| References in the draft conclusions and
commentaries to the practice of States should thus be read as including, in
those cases where it is relevant, the practice of international
organizations. | 因此，在解读结论草案及评注中提到国家惯例之处时，应视为在有关情况下也包括国际组织的惯例。 |
| The paragraph deals with practice
attributed to international organizations themselves, not that of their
member States acting within them (which is attributed to the States in
question). | 该段论及属于国际组织本身的惯例，而不是国际组织成员国在组织内行事的惯例(这种惯例属于所涉国家)。 |
| The term “international
organizations” refers, for the purposes of these
draft conclusions and commentaries, to organizations that are established by
instruments governed by international law, usually treaties, and that also
possess their own international legal personality. | 为这些结论草案及评注的目的，“国际组织”这一术语指受国际法规范的文书所设立、通常是条约所设立，并且具有自身国际法律人格的组织。 |
| The term does not include
non-governmental organizations (NGOs). | 该术语不包括非政府组织。 |
| (4) International organizations are not
States. | (4) 国际组织不是国家。 |
| They are entities established and
empowered by States (or by States and/or international organizations) to
carry out certain functions, and to that end have been granted international
legal personality, that is, they may have their own rights and obligations
under international law. | 国际组织是由国家(或由国家和/或国际组织)设立和赋权以履行某些职能并为此获得国际法律人格(即可根据国际法享有自身的权利和义务)的实体。 |
| Their practice in international relations
may also count as practice that, when accompanied by acceptance as law
(opinio juris), gives rise or attests to rules of customary international law
in the fields in which they operate, but only in certain cases, as described
below. | 在伴有被接受为法律(法律确信)时，国际组织在国际关系中的惯例也可算作在其运作的领域
催生或证明习惯国际法规则的惯例，但仅限于下文所述的某些情况。 |
| (5) Most clearly, the practice coming
within the scope of paragraph 2 arises where member States have transferred
exclusive competences to the international organization, so that the latter
exercises some of the public powers of its member States and hence the
practice of the organization may be equated with the practice of those
States. | (5) 显然，若成员国将专属的权能转移给国际组织，以便后者行使其成员国的一部分公共权力，则该组织的惯例可等同于这些国家的惯例，在这种情况下，即产生第2段所指范围内的惯例。 |
| This is the case for certain competences
of the European Union. | 欧洲联盟的某些权能便属于这种情况。 |
| (6) Practice within the scope of
paragraph 2 may also arise, in certain cases, where member States have not
transferred exclusive competences, but have conferred powers upon the
international organization that are functionally equivalent to the powers
exercised by States. | (6) 若成员国并未将专属权能转移，但向国际组织赋予了在职能上与国家权力相等的权力，在这种情况下也可产生第2段所指范围内的惯例。 |
| The practice of secretariats of
international organizations when serving as treaty depositaries, in deploying
military forces (for example, for peacekeeping), or in taking positions on
the scope of privileges and immunities for the organization and its
officials, might contribute to the formation, or expression, of rules of
customary international law in those areas. | 国际组织秘书处在作为条约保存方、部署军队(例如维和部队)或就本组织及其官员的特权和豁免范围发表立场时的惯例可有助于形成或表述这些领域的习惯国际法规则。 |
| The acts of international organizations
that are not functionally equivalent to the acts of States are unlikely to be
relevant practice. | 职能上不等同于国家权力的国际组织行为不太可能属于相关惯例。 |
| (7) The practice of international
organizations may be of particular relevance with respect to rules of
customary international law that are addressed specifically to them, such as
those on their international responsibility or relating to treaties to which
they are parties. | (7) 国际组织的惯例与专门针对国际组织的习惯国际法规则可能尤为相关，例如关于国际组织国际责任的习惯国际法规则，或涉及国际组织所加入的条约的习惯国际法规则。 |
| (8) At the same time, caution is required
in assessing the relevance and weight of such practice. | (8) 与此同时，在评估这种惯例的相关性和权重时需要慎重。 |
| International organizations vary greatly,
not just in their powers, but also in their membership and functions. | 国际组织之间差异很大，不仅权力存在差异，在成员情况和职能方面也存在差异。 |
| As a general rule, the more directly a
practice of an international organization is carried out on behalf of its
member States or endorsed by them, and the larger the number of such member
States, the greater weight it may have in relation to the formation, or
expression, of rules of customary international law. | 一般规则是，越是直接代表成员国实施或越是直接经成员国核可实施的国际组织惯例，且上述成员国数量越多，在习惯国际法规则的形成或表述方面就可能具有更大的权重。 |
| The reaction of member States to such
practice is of importance. | 成员国对这种惯例的反应也具有重要意义。 |
| Among other factors to be considered in
weighing the practice are: the nature of the organization; the nature of the
organ whose conduct is under consideration; the subject matter of the rule in
question and whether the organization itself would be bound by the rule;
whether the conduct is ultra vires the organization or the organ; and whether
the conduct is consonant with that of the member States of the organization. | 除其他外，在衡量惯例的权重时要考虑的因素有：该组织的性质；行为接受审议的机关的性质；所涉规则的主题事项以及该组织本身是否受到该规则约束；该行为是否逾越了该组织或机关的职权；以及该行为是否与该组织成员国的行为一致。 |
| (9) Paragraph 3 makes explicit what may
be implicit in paragraphs 1 and 2, namely that the conduct of entities other
than States and international organizations — for example,
NGOs, non-State armed groups, transnational corporations and private
individuals — is neither creative nor expressive of
customary international law. | (9) 第3段指明了第1和第2段中可能暗含的内容，即非国家和非国际组织的实体的行为，例如非政府组织、非国家武装团体、跨国公司和个人的行为，既不能创立也不能表达习惯国际法。 |
| As such, their conduct does not serve as
direct (primary) evidence of the existence and content of rules of customary
international law. | 如此，这些实体的行为不能作为证明习惯国际法规则存在及内容的直接(主要)证据。 |
| The paragraph recognizes, however, that
such conduct may have an important indirect role in the identification of
customary international law, by stimulating or recording practice and
acceptance as law (opinio juris) by States and international organizations. | 但是，该段承认，这种行为可规定或记录国家和国际组织的惯例及其被接受为法律(法律确信)的情况，从而在识别习惯国际法的工作中发挥重要的间接作用。 |
| Although the conduct of non-State armed
groups is not practice that may be said to be constitutive or expressive of
customary international law, the reaction of States to it may well be. | 尽管非国家武装团体的行为并不属于可称之为能创立或表述习惯国际法的惯例，但各国对这种行为的反应很可能属于惯例。 |
| Likewise, the acts of private individuals
may also sometimes be relevant, but only to the extent that States have
endorsed or reacted to them. | 同理，个人的行为有时也可能是相关的，但仅仅是在国家核可此种个人行为或对之作出反应的意义上相关。 |
| (10) Official statements of the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), such as appeals and
memoranda on respect for international humanitarian law, may likewise play an
important role in shaping the practice of States reacting to such statements;
and publications of ICRC may serve as helpful records of relevant practice. | (10) 红十字国际委员会的正式声明，例如有关尊重国际人道主义法的呼吁和备忘录，在塑造国家应对这种声明的惯例方面可能同样发挥着重要的作用；红十字国际委员会的出版物也可成为相关惯例的有益记录。 |
| Such activities may thus contribute to
the development and determination of customary international law; but they
are not practice as such. | 因此这种活动可能有助于习惯国际法的发展和确定，但本身并不属于惯例。 |
| Conclusion 5 | 结论5 |
| Conduct of the State as State practice | 作为国家惯例的国家行为 |
| State practice consists of conduct of the
State, whether in the exercise of its executive, legislative, judicial or
other functions. | 国家惯例由国家行为构成，不论该行为是行使行政、立法、司法职能，还是行使其他职能。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Although in their international
relations States most frequently act through the executive, draft conclusion
5 explains that State practice consists of any conduct of the State, whatever
the branch concerned and functions at issue. | (1) 国家在国际关系中通过行政机关行事最为常见，但结论草案5说明的是，国家惯例包括国家的任何行为，不论所涉及的是哪个机关，也不论所涉及的是哪种职能。 |
| In accordance with the principle of the
unity of the State, this includes the conduct of any organ of the State
forming part of the State’s organization and acting
in that capacity, whether in exercise of executive, legislative, judicial or “other” functions, such as commercial
activities or the giving of administrative guidance to the private sector. | 按照国家统一原则，这包括构成国家组织的一部分并以此身份行事的任何国家机关的行为，不论该机关是在行使行政、立法、司法职能，还是在行使“其他”职能，例如商业活动或向私营部门提供行政指导。 |
| (2) To qualify as State practice, the
conduct in question must be “of the State”. | (2) 所涉行为必须是“国家的”，方能构成国家惯例。 |
| The conduct of any State organ is to be
considered conduct of that State, whether the organ exercises legislative,
executive, judicial or any other functions, whatever position it holds in the
organization of the State, and whatever its character as an organ of the
central Government or of a territorial unit of the State. | 任何国家机关的行为，都应被视为该国的行为，不论该机关行使的是立法、行政、司法或任何其他职能，不论该机关在国家的组织中具有何种地位，也不论该机关在性质上属于中央政府机关还是国家地方机关。 |
| An organ includes any person or entity
that has that status in accordance with the internal law of the State; the
conduct of a person or entity otherwise empowered by the law of the State to
exercise elements of governmental authority is conduct “of the State”, provided the person or
entity is acting in that capacity in the particular instance. | 机关包括依该国国内法具有此种地位的任何人员或实体；以其他方式经该国法律授权行使政府权力要素的人员或实体，其行为也是“国家行为”，前提是该人或实体在所涉具体实例中是以上述身份行事。 |
| (3) The relevant practice of States is
not limited to conduct vis-à-vis other States or
other subjects of international law; conduct within the State, such as a
State’s treatment of its own nationals, may also
relate to matters of international law. | (3) 国家的有关惯例不限于对其他国家或其他国际法主体的行为；国家内部的行为，例如该国对待本国国民的方式，也可与国际法事项有关。 |
| (4) State practice may be that of a
single State or of two or more States acting together. | (4) 国家惯例可以是单一国家的惯例，也可以是两个或两个以上国家共同行事的惯例。 |
| Examples of practice of the latter kind
may include joint action by several States patrolling the high seas to combat
piracy or cooperating in launching a satellite into orbit. | 后一种惯例的实例可包括若干国家在公海巡逻以打击海盗或合作发射卫星进入轨道的联合行动。 |
| Such joint action is to be distinguished
from action by international organizations. | 应将这种联合行动与国际组织的行为区分开来。 |
| (5) Practice must be publicly available
or at least known to other States in order to contribute to the formation and
identification of rules of customary international law. | (5) 只有公开或至少有其他国家知晓的惯例，方能有助于习惯国际法规则的形成和识别。 |
| Indeed, it is difficult to see how
confidential conduct by a State could serve such a purpose unless and until
it is revealed. | 确实，除非及直至国家的保密行为得到披露，否则难以发现该行为如何能够实现上述目标。 |
| Conclusion 6 | 结论6 |
| Forms of practice | 惯例的形式 |
| 1. Practice may take a wide range of
forms. It includes both physical and verbal acts. | 1. 惯例可有多种形式，既包括实际行为，也包括言语行为。 |
| It may, under certain circumstances,
include inaction. | 在某些情况下，还可包括不作为。 |
| 2. Forms of State practice include, but
are not limited to: diplomatic acts and correspondence; conduct in connection
with resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference; conduct in connection with treaties; executive
conduct, including operational conduct “on the ground”; legislative and administrative acts; and decisions of national
courts. | 2. 国家惯例的形式包括但不限于：外交行为和信函；与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为；与条约有关的行为；执行行为，包括“实地”作业行为；立法和行政行为；各国法院的判决。 |
| 3. There is no predetermined hierarchy
among the various forms of practice. | 3. 各种不同形式的惯例之间没有预先确定的等级。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 6 indicates the
types of conduct that are covered under the term “practice”, providing examples thereof and stating that no type of practice
has a priori primacy over another. | (1) 结论草案6举例说明了“惯例”这一术语所涵盖的行为的种类，并指出没有任何一种惯例相对其他惯例具有先验的优先地位。 |
| It refers to forms of practice as
empirically verifiable facts and avoids, for present purposes, a distinction
between an act and its evidence. | 该条结论草案指出，不同形式的惯例是可以从经验上核实的事实，并且为了当前目的，没有对行为与行为的证据作出区分。 |
| (2) Given that States exercise their
powers in various ways and do not confine themselves only to some types of
acts, paragraph 1 provides that practice may take a wide range of forms. | (2) 各国会采取多种不同的形式行使权力，且不会局限于几种行为，有鉴于此，第1段规定，惯例可采取多种广泛的形式。 |
| While some writers have argued that it is
only what States “do” rather
than what they “say” that may
count as practice for purposes of identifying customary international law, it
is now generally accepted that verbal conduct (whether written or oral) may
count as practice; action may at times consist solely in statements, for
example a protest by one State addressed to another. | 有些撰写者认为，为了识别习惯国际法的目的，能算作惯例的只有国家的“行动”，而不是国家的“言语”，但是，现在人们普遍接受，言语行为(无论书面还是口头)也可算作惯例；有时，行动可能完全由声明组成，例如，一国向另一国提出的抗议。 |
| (3) Paragraph 1 further makes clear that
inaction may count as practice. | (3) 第1段进一步指明，不作为也可算作惯例。 |
| The words “under
certain circumstances” seek to caution, however, that
only deliberate abstention from acting may serve such a role; the State in
question needs to be conscious about refraining from acting in a given
situation. | 但是，“在某些情况下”这几个字旨在警示，只有蓄意不采取行动方可起到这一作用：所涉国家需要有意识地在某给定情况下不采取行动。 |
| Examples of such omissions (sometimes
referred to as “negative practice”) include abstaining from instituting criminal proceedings;
refraining from exercising protection in favour of certain naturalized
persons; and abstaining from the threat or use of force. | 这种不作为(有时称为“消极惯例”)的例子包括：不提起刑事诉讼；不对某些归化入籍人员予以保护；以及不威胁使用或使用武力。 |
| (4) Paragraph 2 provides a list of forms
of practice that are often found to be useful for the identification of
customary international law. | (4) 第二段列出了常见的有益于识别习惯国际法的多种形式的惯例。 |
| As the words “but
are not limited to” emphasize, this is a
non-exhaustive list; in any event, given the inevitability and pace of
change, both political and technological, it would be impractical to draw up
a list of all the numerous forms that practice might take. | “但不限于”这几个字强调，所列形式并非详尽无遗；无论如何，考虑到政治和技术变化的不可避免性和步伐，要拟出涵盖惯例可采取的所有诸多形式的清单是不切实际的。 |
| The forms of practice listed are no more
than examples, which, moreover, may overlap (for example, “diplomatic acts and correspondence” and “executive conduct”). | 所列出的惯例形式只是例子，此外，这些例子也可能出现重叠(例如“外交行为和信函”与“行政行为”)。 |
| (5) The order in which the forms of
practice are listed in paragraph 2 is not intended to be significant. | (5) 第2段列出了各种惯例形式，但对其顺序无意赋予任何重要意义。 |
| Each is to be interpreted broadly to
reflect the multiple and diverse ways in which States act and react; the
expression “executive conduct”, for example, refers comprehensively to: any executive acts,
including executive orders, decrees and other measures; official statements
on the international plane, before a legislature or to the media; and claims
before national or international courts and tribunals. | 对每种形式，都应予以广泛地解释，以反映国家行动和反应的多种不同方式；例如，“行政行为”这一表述指代广泛，指任何行政行动，包括行政命令、法令和其他措施；在国际层面、对立法机关或向媒体作出的正式声明；以及向国家或国际法院和法庭提出的主张。 |
| The expression “legislative
and administrative acts” similarly embraces any form
of regulatory disposition effected by a public authority. | 同样，“立法和管理行为”涵盖由公共主管部门实施的任何形式的规管处置。 |
| “Operational conduct ‘on the ground’” includes law enforcement
and seizure of property, as well as battlefield or other military activity,
such as the movement of troops or vessels, or deployment of certain weapons. | “‘实地’作业行为”包括执法和没收财产，以及战地或其他军事活动，例如调动部队或舰船，或部署某些武器。 |
| The words “conduct
in connection with treaties” cover all acts related
to the negotiation and conclusion of treaties, as well as their
implementation; by concluding a treaty a State may be engaging in practice in
the domain to which the treaty relates, for example maritime delimitation
agreements or host country agreements. | “与条约有关的行为”这几个字涵盖所有与谈判和缔结以及执行条约有关的行动；一国缔结一项条约即可能参与条约相关领域的惯例，例如海洋划界协定或东道国协定。 |
| The reference to “conduct in connection with resolutions adopted by an international
organization or at an intergovernmental conference”
likewise includes all acts by States related to the negotiation, adoption and
implementation of resolutions, decisions and other acts adopted by States
within international organizations or at intergovernmental conferences,
whatever their designation and whether or not they are legally binding. | 同理，“与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为”包括各国在国际组织内或政府间会议上所有与谈判、通过和执行决议、决定和各国通过的其他文件有关的行动，不论其名称为何及是否具有法律约束力。 |
| Whether any of these examples of forms of
practice are in fact relevant in a particular case will depend, inter alia,
on the particular alleged rule being considered. | 在具体情况中，这些惯例形式的任何实例是否确实具有相关性，这尤其取决于正在审议的所称的特定规则。 |
| (6) Decisions of national courts at all
levels may count as State practice (though it is likely that greater weight
will be given to the higher courts); decisions that have been overruled on
the particular point are unlikely to be considered relevant. | (6) 各国各级法院的判决均可算作国家惯例 (对上级法院可能予以更高的权重)；在具体要点上被推翻的判决不太可能被视为具有相关性。 |
| The role of decisions of national courts
as a form of State practice is to be distinguished from their potential role
as a “subsidiary means” for
the determination of rules of customary international law. | 应将各国法院的判决作为一种国家惯例形式的作用与其作为确定习惯国际法规则的“辅助手段”的潜在作用区分开来。 |
| (7) Paragraph 3 clarifies that in
principle no form of practice has a higher probative value than others in the
abstract. | (7) 第3段澄清，原则上，没有任何一种惯例形式可笼统地说比其他形式具有更高的证明价值。 |
| In particular cases, however, as
explained in the commentaries to draft conclusions 3 and 7, it may be that
different forms (or instances) of practice ought to be given different weight
when they are assessed in context. | 但是在具体情况中，如结论草案3和7的评注中所解释的，在结合情境评估不同的惯例形式(或实例)时，应当赋予它们不同的权重。 |
| Conclusion 7 | 结论7 |
| Assessing a State’s practice | 评估国家惯例 |
| 1. Account is to be taken of all
available practice of a particular State, which is to be assessed as a whole. | 1. 应考虑特定国家的所有已知的惯例，作为一个整体进行评估。 |
| 2. Where the practice of a particular
State varies, the weight to be given to that practice may be reduced. | 2. 如果特定国家的惯例不一致，可减少赋予该惯例的权重。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 7 concerns the
assessment of the practice of a particular State in order to determine the
position of that State as part of assessing the existence of a general
practice (which is the subject of draft conclusion 8). | (1) 结论草案7论及评估某具体国家的惯例以确定该国立场的工作，这是评估是否存在一般惯例的工作的一部分(结论草案8的主题)。 |
| As the two paragraphs of draft conclusion
7 make clear, it is necessary to take account of and assess as a whole all
available practice of the State concerned on the matter in question,
including its consistency. | 结论草案7的两个段落明确指出，必须考虑到所涉国家在所涉事项上的所有已知的惯例，作为一个整体进行评估，包括其一致性。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 states, first, that in
seeking to determine the position of a particular State on the matter in
question, account is to be taken of all available practice of that State. | (2) 第1段指出，首先，在试图确定一个具体国家在所涉事项上的立场时，应考虑到该国的所有已知的惯例。 |
| This means that the practice examined
should be exhaustive, within the limits of its availability, that is,
including the relevant practice of all of the State’s
organs and all relevant practice of a particular organ. | 这意味着审视的案例应在已知范围内详尽无遗，即包括该国所有机关的有关惯例和具体机关的所有有关惯例。 |
| The paragraph states, moreover, that such
practice is to be assessed as a whole; only then can the actual position of
the State be determined. | 该段还指出，这种惯例应作为一个整体进行评估；只有这样才能确定该国的实际立场。 |
| (3) The requirement to assess all
available practice “as a whole” is illustrated by the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
case, where the Hellenic Supreme Court had decided in one case that, by
virtue of the “territorial tort principle”, State immunity under customary international law did not extend
to the acts of armed forces during an armed conflict. Yet a different
position was adopted by the Special Supreme Court; by the Greek Government
when refusing to enforce the Hellenic Supreme Court’s
judgment, and in defending this position before the European Court of Human
Rights, and by the Hellenic Supreme Court itself in a later decision. | (3) 国家的管辖豁免案就体现了“作为一个整体”评估所有已知的惯例的要求。
希腊最高法院曾在一宗案件中裁定，依照“属地侵权原则”，习惯国际法规定的国家豁免不涵盖武装部队在武装冲突期间的行动，但特别最高法院采取了不同的立场，希腊政府在拒绝执行希腊最高法院的判决时也采取了上述不同立场并曾在欧洲人权法院为这种立场辩护，希腊最高法院在后来的一项判决中也采取了这种立场。 |
| Assessing such practice “as a whole” led the International Court of
Justice to conclude “that Greek State practice taken
as a whole actually contradicts, rather than supports, Italy’s argument”. | 国际法院将这种惯例“作为一个整体”予以评估，得出结论，“将希腊的国家惯例作为一个整体来看，实际上是反对而非支持意大利的论点”。 |
| (4) Paragraph 2 refers explicitly to
situations where there is or appears to be inconsistent practice of a
particular State. | (4) 第2段明确指出了一个具体国家惯例存在或似乎存在不一致的情况。 |
| As paragraph (3) above demonstrates, this
may be the case where different organs or branches within the State adopt
different courses of conduct on the same matter or the practice of one organ
varies over time. | 如上文第(3)段所述，若一国内部的不同机关或部门就同一事项采取了不同的行政方针，或者同一个机关的惯例随着时间发生变化，就可能出现这种情况。 |
| If in such circumstances a State’s practice as a whole is found to be inconsistent, that State’s contribution to the “general practice” element may be reduced or even nullified. | 如果在这种情况下，认为一国的惯例作为一个整体并不一致，则该国对“一般惯例”要素的贡献可能降低乃至无效。 |
| (5) The use of the word “may” indicates, however, that such
assessment needs to be approached with caution, and the same conclusion would
not necessarily be drawn in all cases. | (5) 然而，该段使用了“可”字，说明这样的评估需要审慎地进行，并且不一定所有情况下都能得出同样的结论。 |
| In the Fisheries case, for example, the
International Court of Justice held that: | 例如，国际法院在渔业案中认定： |
| “too much importance need not be attached
to the few uncertainties or contradictions, real or apparent … in Norwegian practice. | “不必过分重视…在挪威的惯例中发现的少数不确定或矛盾之处。 |
| They may be easily understood in the
light of the variety of facts and conditions prevailing in the long period.” | 这种不确定或矛盾之处很容易理解，毕竟在那么长的时间内，占主导地位的事实情况和条件也发生了多种变化” |
| In this vein, for example, a difference
in the practice of lower and higher organs of the same State is unlikely to
result in less weight being given to the practice of the higher organ. | 在这方面，举例而言，若同一国低级机关与高级机关的惯例存在差异，则高级机关的惯例不太可能因此而权重降低。 |
| For present purposes, practice of organs
of a central government will often be more significant than that of
constituent units of a federal State or political subdivisions of the State;
and the practice of the executive branch is often the most relevant on the
international plane, though account may need to be taken of the
constitutional position of the various organs in question. | 为了当前目的，中央政府机关的惯例往往会比联邦国家组成单位的惯例或国家次级政府机关的惯例具有更加重要的意义；行政机关的惯例往往在国家层面最为相关，但可能也需要考虑到各所涉机关的宪法地位。 |
| Conclusion 8 | 结论8 |
| The practice must be general | 惯例必须具备一般性 |
| 1. The relevant practice must be general,
meaning that it must be sufficiently widespread and representative, as well
as consistent. | 1. 有关惯例必须具备一般性，即必须足够普及和有代表性，还必须是一贯的。 |
| 2. Provided that the practice is general,
no particular duration is required. | 2. 只要惯例具备一般性，就不要求特定存续时间。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 8 concerns the
requirement that the practice must be general; it seeks to capture the
essence of this requirement and the inquiry that is needed in order to verify
whether it has been met in a particular case. | (1) 结论草案8论及惯例必须具备一般性这一要求，力求说明该要求的本质，以及核实某具体案件中该要求是否得到满足所需要开展的调查。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 explains that the notion
of generality, which refers to the aggregate of the instances in which the
alleged rule of customary international law has been followed, embodies two
requirements. | (2) 第1段解释了一般性的概念，即遵循所称的习惯国际法规则的实例的集合，包括了两项要求。 |
| First, the practice must be followed by a
sufficiently large and representative number of States. | 第一，必须有数量上足够多且足够具有代表性的国家遵循该惯例。 |
| Second, such instances must exhibit
consistency. | 第二，这些实例必须表现出一致性。 |
| In the words of the International Court
of Justice in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, the practice in question
must be both “extensive and virtually uniform”: it must be a “settled practice”. | 用国际法院在北海大陆架案中的话说，所涉惯例必须既“广泛并基本上统一”：必须是一项“既定惯例”。 |
| As is explained below, no absolute
standard can be given for either requirement; the threshold that needs to be
attained for each has to be assessed taking account of context. | 如下文所解释的，对这两项要求中的任何一项，都无法提出绝对的标准；每项要求需要达到的标准都必须结合实际情况予以评估。 |
| In each case, however, the practice
should be of such a character as to make it possible to discern a constant
and uniform usage. | 但是，在每一种情况下，惯例必须具有这样一种特质，使人们可以观察出某种一贯和统一的常例。 |
| (3) The requirement that the practice be “widespread and representative” does not
lend itself to exact formulations, as circumstances may vary greatly from one
case to another (for example, the frequency with which circumstances calling
for action arise). | (3) 对惯例“普及和有代表性”的要求，不宜予以精确的公式化定论，因为具体情况可能存在很大差异(例如，出现需要采取行动的情况的频率)。 |
| As regards diplomatic relations, for
example, in which all States regularly engage, a practice would have to be
widely exhibited, while with respect to international canals, of which there
are very few, the amount of practice would necessarily be less. | 举例而言，所有国家都定期参与外交关系，因此在外交关系方面，惯例必须普遍存在方能满足本要求，而国际运河很少，因此在国际运河方面要求的惯例的数量就必然较少。 |
| This is captured by the word “sufficiently”, which implies that the
necessary number and distribution of States taking part in the relevant
practice (like the number of instances of practice) cannot be identified in
the abstract. | “足够”一词体现了这一点，暗指无法(像惯例的实例数量一样)抽象地确定参与有关惯例的国家的必要数量和分布。 |
| It is clear, however, that universal
participation is not required: it is not necessary to show that all States
have participated in the practice in question. | 但是，对普遍参与显然不作要求：没有必要证明所有国家都参与了所涉惯例。 |
| The participating States should include
those that had an opportunity or possibility of applying the alleged rule. | 参与国应包括有机会或有可能适用所称规则的国家。 |
| It is important that such States are
representative of the various geographical regions and/or various interests
at stake. | 这些国家必须能够代表各地理区域和/或各利害关系方。 |
| (4) In assessing generality, an important
factor to be taken into account is the extent to which those States that are
particularly involved in the relevant activity or most likely to be concerned
with the alleged rule have participated in the practice. | (4) 在评估一般性时，需要考虑到的一个重要因素是，特别参与有关活动或最有可能关注所称规则的国家在多大程度上参与了惯例。 |
| It would clearly be impractical to
determine, for example, the existence and content of a rule of customary
international law relating to navigation in maritime zones without taking
into account the practice of coastal States and major shipping States, or the
existence and content of a rule on foreign investment without evaluating the
practice of the capital-exporting States as well as that of the States in
which investment is made. | 举例而言，若不考虑沿海国家和主要航运国的惯例，要确定某项涉及海区航行的习惯国际法规则的存在及内容显然不切实际；若不考虑资本出口国以及投资所在国的惯例，要确定某项关于外国投资的规则的存在及内容显然也不切实际。 |
| In many cases, all or virtually all
States will be equally concerned. | 在许多情况下，所有国家或基本上所有国家都同等相关。 |
| (5) The requirement that the practice be
consistent means that where the relevant acts are divergent to the extent
that no pattern of behaviour can be discerned, no general practice (and thus
no corresponding rule of customary international law) can be said to exist. | (5) 关于惯例必须具有一贯性的要求意味着，若有关行动的差异过大，无法观察到行为模式，则不得认为存在一般惯例(因此也就不存在对应的习惯国际法规则)。 |
| For example, in the Fisheries case, the
International Court of Justice found that: | 例如，国际法院在渔业案中认定： |
| “although the ten-mile rule has been
adopted by certain States … other States have adopted
a different limit. | “尽管某些国家采用了10海里规则…但其他国家采用了不同的限值。 |
| Consequently, the ten-mile rule has not
acquired the authority of a general rule of international law.” | 因此，10海里规则没有获得国际法一般规则的权威。 ” |
| (6) In examining whether the practice is
consistent it is of course important to consider instances of conduct that
are in fact comparable, that is, where the same or similar issues have arisen
so that such instances could indeed constitute reliable guides. | (6) 在审查惯例是否一贯时，当然必须考虑在事实上可比较的行为实例，即考虑在何处曾发生过相同或类似的问题，以便这种实例可以确实构成可靠的指导。 |
| The Permanent Court of International
Justice referred in the Lotus case to: | 常设国际法院在“莲花号”案中提到了： |
| “precedents offering a close analogy to
the case under consideration; for it is only from precedents of this nature
that the existence of a general principle [of customary international law]
applicable to the particular case may appear”. | “与所审案件近似的先例；只有从这一性质的先例中才能发现适用于具体所审案件的[习惯国际法]一般原则的存在”。 |
| (7) At the same time, complete
consistency in the practice of States is not required. | (7) 与此同时，并不要求各国惯例完全一致。 |
| The relevant practice needs to be
virtually or substantially uniform; some inconsistencies and contradictions
are thus not necessarily fatal to a finding of “a
general practice”. | 有关惯例只需要基本上或实质上一致；因此，即便存在一些不一致和矛盾之处，不一定就不能认定存在“一项一般惯例”。 |
| In Military and Paramilitary Activities
in and against Nicaragua, the International Court of Justice held that: | 在尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案中，国际法院认定： |
| “It is not to be expected that in the
practice of States the application of the rules in question should have been
perfect …. The Court does not consider that, for a
rule to be established as customary, the corresponding practice must be in absolutely
rigorous conformity with the rule. | “不应期望所涉规则在各国惯例中的适用情况是完美的…本法院并不认为，要确定某项规则是习惯规则，所对应的惯例必须与该规则绝对严格地保持一致。 |
| In order to deduce the existence of
customary rules, the Court deems it sufficient that the conduct of States
should, in general, be consistent with such rules.” | 本法院认为，各国的行为只要大体上与这种规则一致，就足以推导出习惯规则的存在。 |
| (8) When inconsistency takes the form of
breaches of a rule, this does not necessarily prevent a general practice from
being established. This is particularly so when the State concerned denies the
violation and/or expresses support for the rule. | ”(8) 若不一致是以违反规则的形式出现，则不一定妨碍一般惯例的确定，尤其是在所涉国家不承认违反规则和/或对该规则表示支持的情况下。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
observed: | 正如国际法院所述： |
| “instances of State conduct inconsistent
with a given rule should generally have been treated as breaches of that
rule, not as indications of the recognition of a new rule. | “国家行为与某给定规则不一致的实例，通常应视为对该规则的违反，而非视为承认一项新规则的表现。 |
| If a State acts in a way prima facie
incompatible with a recognized rule, but defends its conduct by appealing to
exceptions or justifications contained within the rule itself, then whether
or not the State’s conduct is in fact justifiable on
that basis, the significance of that attitude is to confirm rather than to
weaken the rule.” | 若某国的行动方式表面上与某项承认的规则不符，但该国援引该规则内规定的例外情况或理由为自己的行为辩护，则不论该国行为据此事实上是否合理，这种态度的意义恰恰是确认该规则，而非削弱该规则。” |
| (9) Paragraph 2 refers to the time
element, making clear that a relatively short period in which a general
practice is followed is not, in and of itself, an obstacle to determining
that a corresponding rule of customary international law exists. | (9) 第2段提到了时间要素，指明若某项一般惯例得到遵循的时间相对较短，这本身并不妨碍确定存在着对应的习惯国际法规则。 |
| While a long duration may result in more
extensive relevant practice, time immemorial or a considerable or fixed
duration of a general practice is not a condition for the existence of a
customary rule. | 虽然较长的存续时间可能产生更加广泛的有关惯例，但习惯规则的存在并不需要一般惯例存续了久远或较长或固定的时间。 |
| The International Court of Justice
confirmed this in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, holding that “the passage of only a short period of time is not necessarily, or
of itself, a bar to the formation of a new rule of customary international
law”. | 国际法院在北海大陆架案中证实了这一点，认定“所过时间较短这一点本身并不妨碍一项习惯国际法新规则的形成”。 |
| As this passage makes clear, however,
some time must elapse for a general practice to emerge; there is no such
thing as “instant custom”. | 但也正如该段所指明的，一项一般惯例的出现必须经过一些时间；不存在“速成习惯”。 |
| Part Four | 第四部分 |
| Accepted as law (opinio juris) | 被接受为法律(法律确信) |
| Establishing that a certain practice is
followed consistently by a sufficiently widespread and representative number
of States does not suffice in order to identify a rule of customary
international law. | 证明某种惯例被足够广泛和有代表性的一些国家一贯遵守并不足以识别习惯国际法规则。 |
| Part Four concerns the second constituent
element of customary international law, sometimes referred to as the “subjective” or “psychological” element: in each case, it is also necessary to be satisfied that
there exists among States an acceptance as law (opinio juris) as to the
binding character of the practice in question. | 第四部分涉及习惯国际法的第二个构成要素，常常被称为“主观”或“心理”要素：在每种情况下，还必须满足这样的条件，即各国接受有关惯例的约束性，将之接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| Conclusion 9 | 结论9 |
| Requirement of acceptance as law (opinio
juris) | 被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求 |
| 1. The requirement, as a constituent
element of customary international law, that the general practice be accepted
as law (opinio juris) means that the practice in question must be undertaken
with a sense of legal right or obligation. | 1. 关于一般惯例须被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求作为习惯国际法的构成要素，意味着有关惯例的采用必须带有一种法律权利或义务感。 |
| 2. A general practice that is accepted as
law (opinio juris) is to be distinguished from mere usage or habit. | 2. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例不同于单纯的常例或习惯。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 9 seeks to
encapsulate the nature and function of the second constituent element of
customary international law, acceptance as law (opinio juris). | (1) 结论草案9试图概括习惯国际法第二个构成要素即被接受为法律(法律确信)的性质和作用。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 explains that acceptance
as law (opinio juris), as a constituent element of customary international
law, refers to the requirement that the relevant practice must be undertaken
with a sense of legal right or obligation, that is, it must be accompanied by
a conviction that it is permitted, required or prohibited by customary
international law. | (2) 第1段解释说，作为习惯国际法的一个构成要素，被接受为法律(法律确信)述及一项要求，有关惯例的采用必须带有一种法律权利或义务感，即它必须伴有关于此种惯例被习惯国际法所允许、要求或禁止的信念。 |
| It is thus crucial to establish, in each
case, that States have acted in a certain way because they felt or believed
themselves legally compelled or entitled to do so by reason of a rule of
customary international law: they must have pursued the practice as a matter
of right, or submitted to it as a matter of obligation. | 因此，必须逐案证明国家以某种方式行事是因为它们感觉或相信，它们因一项习惯国际法规则而在法律上必须或有权利如此行事：它们必须作为一项权利采用这项惯例，或作为一项义务遵守这项惯例。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
stressed in the North Sea Continental Shelf judgment: | 国际法院在北海大陆架案的判决中强调： |
| “Not only must the acts concerned amount
to a settled practice, but they must also be such, or be carried out in such
a way, as to be evidence of a belief that this practice is rendered
obligatory by the existence of a rule of law requiring it. | “有关行为不仅要构成既定惯例，而且其本身或其实施方式须能够佐证一种看法，即有规则要求采用这种惯例，因此该惯例具有强制性。 |
| The need for such a belief, i.e., the
existence of a subjective element, is implicit in the very notion of the
opinio juris sive necessitatis. | 这样一种信念的必要性，即主观因素的存在，包含在‘法律必要确信’的概念中。 |
| The States concerned must therefore feel
that they are conforming to what amounts to a legal obligation.” | 因此，有关国家必须感到它们是在遵守相当于法律义务的东西”。 |
| (3) Acceptance as law (opinio juris) is
to be distinguished from other, extralegal motives for action, such as
comity, political expediency or convenience; if the practice in question is
motivated solely by such other considerations, no rule of customary
international law is to be identified. | (3) 被接受为法律(法律确信)不同于其他法律以外的行动动机，如礼让、政治权宜之计或便利；如果该惯例的动机仅是这类其他考虑因素，将不能识别习惯国际法规则。 |
| Thus in the Colombian-Peruvian asylum
case, the International Court of Justice declined to recognize the existence
of a rule of customary international law where the alleged instances of
practice were not shown to be, inter alia: | 因此，在哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案中，国际法院在所声称的惯例实例未被证明属下列情况时拒绝承认存在习惯国际法规则： |
| “exercised by the States granting asylum
as a right appertaining to them and respected by the territorial States as a
duty incumbent on them and not merely for reasons of political expediency. … considerations of convenience or simple political expediency seem
to have led the territorial State to recognize asylum without that decision
being dictated by any feeling of legal obligation”. | “由给予庇护之国作为属于该国的一项权利行使并由领土所属国作为其有责任履行的义务予以遵守，而非仅出于政治权宜之计。 …便利或简单的政治权宜考虑似乎导致领土所属国承认庇护，而支配该决定的并非任何法律义务感。
” |
| (4) Seeking to comply with a treaty
obligation as a treaty obligation, much like seeking to comply with domestic
law, is not acceptance as law for the purpose of identifying customary
international law, and practice undertaken with such intention does not, by
itself, lead to an inference as to the existence of a rule of customary
international law. | (4) 作为一项条约义务试图遵守一项条约义务与试图遵守国内法很像，就识别习惯国际法目的而言不是被接受为法律，以此种意图采用的惯例本身不能推断存在一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| However, a State may recognize that it is
bound by a certain obligation by force of both customary international law
and treaty; but this would need to be proved. | 然而，一国可承认它同时受到习惯国际法和条约的某种义务的约束；但这种情况需要得到证明。 |
| On the other hand, when States act in
conformity with a treaty by which they are not bound, or apply conventional
obligations in their relations with non-parties to the treaty, this may
evidence the existence of acceptance as law in the absence of any explanation
to the contrary. | 另一方面，当国家遵守一项对其不具约束力的条约行事，或在其与该条约非缔约方的关系中适用公约义务的情况下，在不存在任何相反的解释时，这可证明存在被接受为法律。 |
| (5) Acceptance as law (opinio juris) is
to be sought with respect to both the States engaging in the relevant
practice and those in a position to react to it; they must be shown to have
understood the practice as being in accordance with customary international
law. | (5) 应面向实施有关惯例的国家和能够对惯例做出反应的国家查证被接受为法律(法律确信)；必须证明这些国家知道该惯例符合习惯国际法。 |
| It is not necessary to establish that all
States have recognized (accepted as law) the alleged rule as a rule of
customary international law; it is broad acceptance together with no or
little objection that is required. | 没有必要证明所有国家都承认(被接受为法律)所声称的规则为习惯国际法规则；需要的是广泛接受和没有反对或很少反对。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 emphasizes that, without
acceptance as law (opinio juris), a general practice may not be considered as
creative, or expressive, of customary international law; it is mere usage or
habit. | (6) 第2段强调，在没有被接受为法律(法律确信)的情况下，一般惯例不可被认为创立或表达了习惯国际法；它只是常例或习惯。 |
| In other words, practice that States
consider themselves legally free either to follow or to disregard does not
contribute to or reflect customary international law (unless the rule to be
identified itself provides for such a choice). | 换言之，各国认为它们可依法自由选择遵循或置之不理的惯例不会促进或反映习惯国际法(除非要识别的规则自身提供了此种选择)。 |
| Not all observed regularities of
international conduct bear legal significance; diplomatic courtesies, for
example, such as the provision of red carpets for visiting heads of State,
are not accompanied by any sense of legal obligation and thus could not
generate or attest to any legal duty or right to act accordingly. | 并非所有被观察到的有规律国际行为都具有法律意义；例如，为来访国家元首准备红地毯之类的外交礼仪不伴有法律义务感，因此也不产生或表明任何采取相应行动的法律义务或权利。 |
| Conclusion 10 | 结论10 |
| Forms of evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris) | 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式 |
| 1. Evidence of acceptance as law (opinio
juris) may take a wide range of forms. | 1. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据可有多种形式。 |
| 2. Forms of evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris) include, but are not limited to: public statements made on
behalf of States; official publications; government legal opinions;
diplomatic correspondence; decisions of national courts; treaty provisions;
and conduct in connection with resolutions adopted by an international
organization or at an intergovernmental conference. | 2. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式包括但不限于：以国家名义发表的公开声明；官方出版物；政府的法律意见；外交信函；国内法院的判决；条约规定；与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为。 |
| 3. Failure to react over time to a
practice may serve as evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris), provided
that States were in a position to react and the circumstances called for some
reaction. | 3. 在有关国家有能力做出反应并且有关情况也要求做出某种反应的情况下，对一种惯例经过一定时间而没有做出反应，可用作已接受其为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 10 concerns the
evidence from which acceptance of a given practice as law (opinio juris) may
be deduced. | (1) 结论草案10涉及的是可从中推断出特定惯例被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| It reflects the fact that acceptance as
law may be made known through various manifestations of State behaviour. | 它反映的事实是，被接受为法律这一点可通过国家行为的各种表现形式公布出来。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 states the general
proposition that acceptance as law (opinio juris) may be reflected in a wide
variety of forms. | (2) 第1段陈述了一项一般主张，即被接受为法律(法律确信)可有多种体现形式。 |
| States may express their recognition (or
rejection) of the existence of a rule of customary international law in many
ways. | 国家可以多种方式表示承认(或拒绝)一项习惯国际法规则的存在。 |
| Such conduct indicative of acceptance as
law supporting an alleged rule encompasses, as the subsequent paragraphs make
clear, both pronouncements and physical actions (as well as inaction)
concerning the practice in question. | 随后段落明确说明，支持所声称规则的表明被接受为法律的此种行为包含与该惯例有关的声明和实际行动(以及不作为)。 |
| (3) Paragraph 2 provides a non-exhaustive
list of forms of evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris) including those
most commonly resorted to for such purpose. | (3) 第2段提出了被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式的非详尽清单，包括为此类目的最常采用的形式。 |
| Such evidence may also be useful in
demonstrating a lack of acceptance as law. | 此种证据也可有助于表明不存在被接受为法律。 |
| There is some common ground between the
forms of evidence of acceptance as law and the forms of State practice; in
part, this reflects the fact that the two elements may at times be found in
the same material (but, even then, their identification requires a separate
exercise in each case). | 被接受为法律的证据形式和国家惯例的形式之间存在一些共同点；这部分反映出一个事实，即两个要素有时可能出现于同一材料之中(但是即使在那样的情况下，仍需要逐案对其进行单独识别)。 |
| In any event, statements are more likely
to embody the legal conviction of the State, and may often be more usefully
regarded as expressions of acceptance as law (or otherwise) rather than
instances of practice. | 无论如何，声明更有可能体现国家的法律信念，而且将声明作为接受为法律(或相反)的表示，而不是作为惯例的实例，可能往往更有实际意义。 |
| (4) Among the forms of evidence of
acceptance as law (opinio juris), an express public statement on behalf of a
State that a given practice is permitted, prohibited or mandated under
customary international law provides the clearest indication that it has
avoided or undertaken such practice (or recognized that it was rightfully
undertaken or avoided by others) out of a sense of legal right or obligation. | (4) 在被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式中，以国家名义发表的关于习惯国际法允许、禁止或要求一项特定惯例的明确公开声明最清楚地说明该国出于法律权利或义务感，避免或采用了这种惯例(或承认其他国家正当地采用或避免了该惯例)。 |
| Such statements could be made, for
example: in debates in multilateral settings; in introducing draft
legislation before the legislature; as assertions made in written and oral
pleadings before courts and tribunals; in protests characterizing the conduct
of other States as unlawful; and in response to proposals for codification. | 例如，可在以下场合发表此类声明：在多边场合的辩论中；在向立法机构提出法律草案时；作为向法院和法庭提出的书面和口头陈述中的主张；在宣称其他国家的行为非法的抗议中；作为对编纂法律的提议的响应。 |
| They may be made individually or jointly
with others. | 声明可单独发表，或与其他声明联合发表。 |
| Similarly, the effect of practice in line
with the supposed rule may be nullified by contemporaneous statements that no
such rule exists. | 同样，符合所谓规则的惯例的效力可被不存在此类规则的同时期声明宣布无效。 |
| (5) The other forms of evidence listed in
paragraph 2 may also be of particular assistance in ascertaining the legal
position of States in relation to certain practices. | (5) 第2段中所列其他证据形式也可能特别有助于确定各国对某些惯例的法律立场。 |
| Among these, the term “official publications” covers documents
published in the name of a State, such as military manuals and official maps,
in which acceptance as law (opinio juris) may be revealed. | 其中，“官方出版物”一词涵盖了以国家名义发布的文件，如军事手册和官方地图，其中可显示出被接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| Published opinions of government legal
advisers may likewise shed light on a State’s legal
position, though not if the State declined to follow the advice. | 同样，政府法律顾问公开发布的意见也可说明一国的法律立场，但如果该国拒绝采用其咨询意见则另当别论。 |
| Diplomatic correspondence may include,
for example, circular notes to diplomatic missions, such as those on
privileges and immunities. | 外交信函可包括，例如，向外交使团发出的通知照会，如关于特权和豁免的通知照会。 |
| National legislation, while it is most
often the product of political choices, may be valuable as evidence of
acceptance as law, particularly where it has been specified that it is
mandated under or gives effect to customary international law. | 国家立法虽往往是政治选择的产物，但作为被接受为法律的证据可能是有价值的，特别是在明确说明该立法依据或履行习惯国际法的情况下。 |
| Decisions of national courts may also
contain such statements when pronouncing upon questions of international law. | 国内法院的判决对国际法问题发表意见时，也可能包含此类声明。 |
| (6) Multilateral drafting and diplomatic
processes may afford valuable and accessible evidence as to the legal
convictions of States with respect to the content of customary international
law, when such matters are taken up and debated by States. | (6) 当各国就此类问题进行辩论和讨论时，多边起草和外交进程可提供关于各国在习惯国际法内容方面的法律信念的宝贵和可获得的证据。 |
| Hence the reference to “treaty provisions” and to “conduct in connection with resolutions adopted by an international
organization or at an intergovernmental conference”,
whose potential utility in the identification of rules of customary
international law is explored in greater detail in draft conclusions 11 and
12. | 因此结论草案10提及了“条约规定”和“与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为”。
结论草案11和12对它们在识别习惯国际法规则方面的潜在效用进行了更详细的探讨。 |
| (7) Paragraph 3 provides that, under
certain conditions, failure by States to react, within a reasonable time, may
also, in the words of the International Court of Justice in the Fisheries
case, “[bear] witness to the fact that they did not
consider … [a certain practice undertaken by others]
to be contrary to international law”. | (7) 第3段规定，在某些情况下，国家未能在合理时间内做出反应，也可如国际法院在渔业案中指出的那样，“证明了这样一个事实，即它们不认为…[其他国家采用的某种惯例]与国际法相矛盾”。 |
| Toleration of a certain practice may
indeed serve as evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris) when it
represents concurrence in that practice. | 事实上，如果容忍某种惯例代表着对这种惯例的赞同，这种容忍可能成为被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| For such a lack of open objection or
protest to have this probative value, however, two requirements must be
satisfied in order to ensure that it does not derive from causes unrelated to
the legality of the practice in question. | 然而，为使这种没有公开反对或抗议的情况具有此种证明价值，必须符合两个要求，以确保这一情况并不产生于与该惯例的合法性无关的原因。 |
| First, it is essential that a reaction to
the practice in question would have been called for: this may be the case,
for example, where the practice is one that (directly or indirectly) affects — usually unfavourably — the interests or
rights of the State failing or refusing to act. | 首先，至关重要的是，已有对该惯例做出反应的要求：例如，如果这种惯例(直接或间接)影响――通常是不利地影响――没有或拒绝做出反应的国家的利益或权利，即可能是此种情况。 |
| Second, the reference to a State being “in a position to react” means that the
State concerned must have had knowledge of the practice (which includes
circumstances where, because of the publicity given to the practice, it must
be assumed that the State had such knowledge), and that it must have had
sufficient time and ability to act. | 第二，提及一国“有能力做出反应”意味着，有关国家必须已知悉该惯例(包括由于对该惯例的宣传，必须推定该国已有所知悉)，且该国必须有足够的时间和能力采取行动。 |
| Where a State did not or could not have
been expected to know of a certain practice, or has not yet had a reasonable
time to respond, inaction cannot be attributed to an acknowledgment that such
practice was mandated (or permitted) under customary international law. | 如果一国未知悉或不能认为该国知悉某惯例，或尚未有合理时间做出反应，则不能将不作为归因于承认这种做法是习惯国际法所要求(或允许)的。 |
| Part Five | 第五部分 |
| Significance of certain materials for the
identification of customary international law | 某些材料对于识别习惯国际法的意义 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Various materials other than primary
evidence of alleged instances of practice accepted as law (accompanied by
opinio juris) may be consulted in the process of identifying the existence
and content of rules of customary international law. | (1) 在识别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容时，除了惯例被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的宣称实例这种主要证据以外，还可以参考各种材料。 |
| These commonly include written texts
bearing on legal matters, in particular treaties, resolutions of
international organizations and conferences, judicial decisions (of both
international and national courts) and scholarly works. | 通常包括有关法律问题的书面文本，尤其是条约、国际组织和会议的决议、(国际性法院和各国法院的)司法判决以及学术著作。 |
| Such texts may assist in collecting,
synthesizing or interpreting practice relevant to the identification of
customary international law and may offer precise formulations to frame and
guide an inquiry into its two constituent elements. | 这些文本可协助收集、综合或解释与识别习惯国际法有关的做法，并可提供准确的表述来为针对两个构成要素的调查提供框架和指导。 |
| Part Five seeks to explain the potential
significance of these materials, making clear that it is of critical
importance to study carefully both the content of such materials and the
context at the time when they were prepared. | 第五部分试图解释这些材料的潜在重要性，并说明至关重要的是同时仔细研究这类材料的内容和编写这些材料时的背景。 |
| (2) The Commission decided not to include
at this stage a separate conclusion on the output of the International Law
Commission. Such output does, however, merit special consideration in the
present context. | (2) 委员会决定在目前阶段不针对国际法委员会工作成果单独列出一项结论，但在目前情况下，这种成果确实应得到特殊考虑。 |
| As has been recognized by the
International Court of Justice and other courts and tribunals, a
determination by the Commission affirming the existence and content of a rule
of customary international law may have particular value; as may a conclusion
by it that no such rule exists. | 正如国际法院和其他法院及法庭已经确认的，委员会认定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及其内容具有特别重要的价值；委员会认为不存在这样一项规则的结论同样如此。 |
| This flows from the Commission’s unique mandate from States to promote the progressive
development of international law and its codification, the thoroughness of
its procedures (including the consideration of extensive surveys of State
practice), and its close relationship with States as a subsidiary organ of
the General Assembly (including receiving their oral and written comments as
it proceeds with its work). | 这源自各国赋予委员会的促进国际法的逐渐发展和编纂的独特任务，其程序的充分性(包括对国家惯例广泛调查结果进行审议)，及其作为大会的附属机构与各国的紧密联系(包括在着手开展工作的同时收到各国的口头和书面评论)。 |
| The weight to be given to the Commission’s determinations depends, however, on various factors, including
sources relied upon by the Commission, the stage reached in its work and
above all upon States’ reception of its output. | 不过，委员会作出的认定的权重取决于各种因素，其中包括委员会所依赖的资料来源，其工作所进行到的阶段，最重要的是取决于各国对其工作成果的接受程度。 |
| Conclusion 11 | 结论11 |
| Treaties | 条约 |
| 1. A rule set forth in a treaty may
reflect a rule of customary international law if it is established that the
treaty rule: | 1. 条约所载的规则可反映习惯国际法规则，条件是能够确定该条约规则： |
| (a) codified a rule of customary
international law existing at the time when the treaty was concluded; | (a) 将条约缔结时已经存在的一项习惯国际法规则编纂成法； |
| (b) has led to the crystallization of a
rule of customary international law that had started to emerge prior to the
conclusion of the treaty; or | (b) 将条约缔结之前开始形成的一项习惯国际法规则具体化； |
| (c) has given rise to a general practice
that is accepted as law (opinio juris), thus generating a new rule of
customary international law. | (c) 形成了一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例，从而产生了一项新的习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. The fact that a rule is set forth in a
number of treaties may, but does not necessarily, indicate that the treaty
rule reflects a rule of customary international law. | 2. 一项规则在多项条约中出现，可能但并不一定表明该条约规则反映了一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 11 concerns the
significance of treaties, especially widely ratified multilateral treaties,
for the identification of customary international law. | (1) 结论草案11涉及条约特别是广泛批准的多边条约对于识别习惯国际法的意义。 |
| The draft conclusion does not address
conduct in connection with treaties as a form of practice, a matter covered
in draft conclusion 6; nor does it directly concern the treaty-making process
or draft treaty provisions, which may themselves give rise to State practice
and evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris) as indicated in draft
conclusions 6 and 10. | 该结论草案，没有涉及作为一种惯例形式的与条约有关的行为，此事在结论草案6中已涉及；也没有直接涉及条约制订过程或条约条款草案，它们本身可形成结论草案6和10中所指出的国家惯例和被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| (2) While treaties are, as such, binding
only on the parties thereto, they “may have an
important role to play in recording and defining rules deriving from custom,
or indeed in developing them”. | (2) 尽管条约本身仅对缔约方有约束力，但它们“在记录和界定，甚至发展源于习惯的规则方面可发挥重要作用”。 |
| Their provisions (and the processes of
their adoption and application) may shed light on the content of customary
international law. | 其条款(以及通过和实施这些条款的过程)可有助于阐明习惯国际法的内容。 |
| Clearly expressed treaty provisions may
offer particularly convenient evidence as to the existence or content of
rules of customary international law when they are found to be declaratory of
such rules. | 表述清晰的条约条款，如果宣示了习惯国际法规则，可为这些规则的存在或内容提供特别适当的证据。 |
| The reference to a “rule set forth in a treaty” seeks to
indicate that a rule may not necessarily be contained in a single treaty
provision, but could be reflected by two or more provisions read together. | “条约中提出的规则”这种提法，试图说明一条规则可能未必载于某单一条约条款，而是可能在一并解读的两条或多条条款中得到反映。 |
| Either way, the words “may reflect” caution that, in and of
themselves, treaties cannot create customary international law or
conclusively attest to it. | 无论是哪种情况，“可能反映”这种措辞提请注意，条约本身无法创立习惯国际法或绝对证明其存在。 |
| (3) The extent of participation in a treaty
may be an important factor in determining whether it corresponds to customary
international law; treaties that have obtained near-universal acceptance may
be seen as particularly indicative in this respect. | (3) 对一项条约的参与程度可能是决定其是否相当于习惯国际法的重要因素；在这方面，已经几乎获得普遍接受的条约可被视为特别具有指示性。 |
| But treaties that are not yet in force or
which have not yet attained widespread participation may also be influential
in certain circumstances, particularly where they were adopted without
opposition or by an overwhelming majority of States. | 但尚未生效，或尚未获得普遍参与的条约在特定情况下也可具有重要影响，尤其是当它们获得通过时没有反对意见，或获得绝大多数国家支持而通过时。 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 sets out three
circumstances in which rules set forth in a treaty may be found to reflect
customary international law, distinguished by the time when the rule of
customary international law was (or began to be) formed. | (4) 第1段规定了条约中提出的规则可以被视为反映习惯国际法的三种情况，由习惯国际法规则形成(或开始形成)的时间区分。 |
| The words “if it
is established that” make it clear that establishing
whether a conventional rule does in fact correspond to an alleged rule of
customary international law cannot be done just by looking at the text of the
treaty; in each case the existence of the rule must be confirmed by practice
(and acceptance as law). | “条件是能够确定”这种措辞明确了仅仅靠条约的案文并不能确定条约中的一项规则是否确实与宣称的习惯国际法规则相一致；规则的存在必须逐例由惯例(以及被接受为法律)来印证。 |
| It is important that States can be shown
to engage in the practice not (solely) because of the treaty obligation, but
out of a conviction that the rule embodied in the treaty is or has become
customary international law. | 重要的是可以证明各国对惯例的参与并非(仅)由于条约义务，而是由于确信条约中所载规则是或已成为习惯国际法。 |
| (5) Subparagraph (a) concerns the
situation where it is established that a rule set forth in a treaty is
declaratory of a pre-existing rule of customary international law. | (5) (a)分段涉及能够确定条约中提出的规则宣示了已经存在的一项习惯国际法规则的情况。 |
| In inquiring whether this is the case
with respect to an alleged rule of customary international law, regard should
first be had to the treaty text, which may contain an express statement on
the matter. | 在调查一项宣称的习惯国际法规则是否符合这种情况时，应首先考虑条约案文，因为案文可能包含关于此事的明确声明。 |
| The fact that reservations are expressly
permitted to a treaty provision may be significant, but does not necessarily
indicate whether or not the provision reflects customary international law. | 明文允许对某一条约条款有所保留可能具有重大影响，但不一定说明该条款是否反映习惯国际法。 |
| Such indications within the text are,
however, rare, or tend to refer to the treaty in general rather than to
specific rules contained therein; in such a case, or when the treaty is
silent, resort may be had to the treaty’s preparatory
work (travaux préparatoires), including any
statements by States in the course of the drafting process that may disclose
an intention to codify an existing rule of customary international law. | 然而，这种案文中的说明很罕见，或往往是一般性地提及条约，而不是条约所载的具体规则；在这种情况下，或是当条约中没有说明时，可借助于条约的准备工作(travaux préparatoires)，包括在起草过程中各国作出的可能透露将一项已经存在的习惯国际法规则编纂成法的意愿的任何声明。 |
| If it is found that the negotiating
States had indeed considered that the rule in question was a rule of
customary international law, this would be evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris), which would carry greater weight in the identification of the
customary rule the larger the number of negotiating States. | 如果发现谈判国确实认为所涉规则是一项习惯国际法规则，这将是被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据，从而在识别习惯规则时具有很大份量，谈判国的数量越多，份量就越重。 |
| There would, however, still remain a need
to consider whether sufficiently widespread and representative, as well as
consistent, instances of the relevant practice supported the rule; this is
not only because the fact that the parties assert that the treaty is
declaratory of existing law is (so far it concerns third parties) no more
than one piece of evidence to this effect, but also because the customary
rule underlying a treaty text may have changed or been superseded since the conclusion
of the treaty. | 但是，仍然有必要考虑是否有具备充分普遍性和代表性以及连贯性的相关惯例的实例来支持该规则；不仅因为各方声称该条约宣示了现有法律的事实(在涉及第三方时)只是这方面的单一证据，还因为自条约缔结以来，条约案文所依据的习惯规则可能已经发生变化或被取代。 |
| In other words, relevant practice will
need to confirm, or exist in conjunction with, the opinio juris. | 换言之，相关惯例必须确认法律确信，或与法律确信同时存在。 |
| (6) Subparagraph (b) deals with the case
where it is established that a general practice that is accepted as law
(accompanied by opinio juris) has crystallized around a treaty rule
elaborated on the basis of only a limited amount of State practice. | (6) (b)分段涉及能够确定根据数量有限的国家惯例拟订的条约规则将一项被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例具体化的情况。 |
| In other words, the treaty rule has
consolidated and given further definition to a rule of customary
international law that was only emerging at the time when the treaty was
being drawn up, thereby later becoming reflective of it. | 换言之，该条约规则巩固了一项在条约起草时刚刚开始出现的习惯国际法规则，并给予其进一步的定义，因此之后开始反映这项规则。 |
| Here, too, establishing that this is
indeed the case requires an evaluation of whether the treaty formulation has
been accepted as law and does in fact find support in a general practice. | 在此，确定情况确实如此也需要评估条约表述是否被接受为法律，并确实得到一般惯例的支持。 |
| (7) Subparagraph (c) concerns the case
where it is established that a rule set forth in a treaty has generated a new
rule of customary international law. | (7) (c)分段涉及能够确定条约中提出的规则产生了一项新的习惯国际法规则的情况。 |
| This is a process that is not lightly to
be regarded as having occurred. | 这一过程不能轻率地视为已经发生。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
explained in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, for it to be established
that a rule set forth in a treaty has produced the effect that a rule of
customary international law has come into being: | 正如国际法院在北海大陆架案中所解释的那样，要确定条约中提出的规则产生了习惯国际法规则已经形成的效果： |
| “It would in the first place be necessary
that the provision concerned should, at all events potentially, be of a
fundamentally norm creating character such as could be regarded as forming
the basis of a general rule of law. … [A]n
indispensable requirement would [then] be that within the period in question,
short though it might be, State practice, including that of States whose
interests are specially affected, should have been both extensive and
virtually uniform in the sense of the provision invoked; — and should moreover have occurred in such a way as to show a
general recognition that a rule of law or legal obligation is involved”. | “其必要前提是，相关规定应在任何潜在情况下均具备根本的规范制订性质，能被视为构成一般法律规则的基础；…[下]一个不可或缺的条件是，即便所涉及的期间非常短暂，国家实践，包括那些利益特别受到影响的国家的实践，应与所援引的规定一样，是广泛的且基本上统一的，而且其发生方式也表明，所涉法律规则或法律义务得到普遍承认。
” |
| In other words, a general practice
accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris) “in the
sense of the provision invoked” must be observed. | 换言之，“就所援引的条款而言”被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般规则必须得到遵守。 |
| Given that the concordant behaviour of
parties to the treaty among themselves could presumably be attributed to the
treaty obligation, rather than to acceptance of the rule in question as
binding under customary international law, the practice of such parties in
relation to non-parties to the treaty, and of non-parties in relation to
parties or among themselves, will have particular value. | 鉴于条约缔约方之间的一致行为可以假定为源于条约义务，而不是接受所涉规则根据习惯国际法具有的约束力，此类缔约方与非条约缔约方有关的惯例，以及非缔约方与缔约方有关或非缔约方之间的惯例，都将具有特别的价值。 |
| (8) Paragraph 2 seeks to caution that the
existence of similar provisions in a considerable number of bilateral or
other treaties, thus establishing similar rights and obligations for a broad
array of States, does not necessarily indicate that a rule of customary
international law is reflected in such provisions. | (8) 第2段试图提醒，在许多双边或其他条约中存在类似的条款，从而为范围广泛的国家确定了类似的权利和义务，但并不一定表明这些条款反映了一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| While it may indeed be the case that such
repetition attests to the existence of a corresponding rule of customary
international law (or has given rise to it), it “could
equally show the contrary” in the sense that States
enter into treaties because of the absence of any rule or in order to derogate
from it. | 虽然这种重复确实可能证明存在相应的习惯国际法规则(或形成了这样一项规则)，这“同样可以证明事实正好相反”，因为各国缔结条约是由于不存在任何规则，或是为了减损规则。 |
| Again, an investigation into whether
there are instances of practice accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris)
that support the written rule is required. | 同样，需要调查是否存在某种被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的惯例实例来支持书面规则。 |
| Conclusion 12 | 结论12 |
| Resolutions of international
organizations and intergovernmental conferences | 国际组织和政府间会议的决议 |
| 1. A resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference cannot, of
itself, create a rule of customary international law. | 1. 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议本身并不能创立一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. A resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference may provide
evidence for establishing the existence and content of a rule of customary
international law, or contribute to its development. | 2. 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议可为确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及内容提供证据，或促进其发展。 |
| 3. A provision in a resolution adopted by
an international organization or at an intergovernmental conference may
reflect a rule of customary international law if it is established that the
provision corresponds to a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio
juris). | 3. 如果能够确定国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议中的某项规定与一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例相一致，则该规定可反映一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 12 concerns the role
that resolutions adopted by international organizations or at
intergovernmental conferences may play in the determination of rules of
customary international law. | (1) 结论草案12涉及国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议在确定习惯国际法规则方面扮演的角色。 |
| It provides that, while such resolutions,
of themselves, can neither constitute rules of customary international law
nor serve as conclusive evidence of their existence and content, they may
sometimes have value in providing evidence of existing or emerging law. | 该条规定，尽管这类决议本身既不构成习惯国际法规则，也不能作为习惯国际法规则存在及其内容的确凿证据，但它们有时在提供现有或正在形成的法律的证据方面有其价值。 |
| (2) As in draft conclusion 6, the term “resolutions” refers to all resolutions,
decisions and other acts adopted by international organizations or at
intergovernmental conferences, whatever their designation and whether or not
they are legally binding. | (2) 与结论草案6中一样，“决议”一词指国际组织或政府间会议通过的所有决议、决定和其他文件，而无论其名称如何，也无论它们是否具有法律约束力。 |
| Special attention is paid in the present
context to resolutions of the General Assembly, a plenary organ of near
universal participation that may afford a convenient means to examine the
collective opinions of its members. | 在此，对于大会的决议给予特别关注，因为大会是一个几乎获得普遍参与的全体机构，可提供一种方便的途径来审查其会员的集体意见。 |
| Resolutions adopted by organs or at
conferences with more limited membership may also be relevant, although their
weight in identifying a rule of (general) customary international law is
likely to be less. | 成员较为有限的机构或会议通过的决议也可具有相关性，尽管它们在识别一般习惯国际法规则方面的重要性可能略低。 |
| (3) Although the resolutions of organs of
international organizations are acts of those organs, in the context of the
present draft conclusion what matters is that they may reflect the collective
expression of the views of States members of such organs: when they purport
(explicitly or implicitly) to touch upon legal matters, they may afford an insight
into the attitudes of their members respecting such matters. | (3) 尽管国际组织各机构的决议是这些机构的行为，在本结论草案的范围内，重要的是它们可反映这类机构成员国意见的集体表达：当它们意在(明示或暗示)处理法律问题时，它们可有助于了解其成员在这类问题上的态度。 |
| Much of what has been said of treaties in
draft conclusion 11 applies to resolutions; however, unlike treaties,
resolutions are normally not legally binding documents, for the most part do
not seek to embody legal rights and obligations, and generally receive much
less legal review than proposed treaty texts. | 结论草案11中对条约的大部分说明都适用于决议；但是，与条约不同，决议通常不是具有法律约束力的文件，在大多数情况下没有试图体现法律权利和义务，并且一般得到的法律审查要比拟议的条约案文少得多。 |
| Like treaties, resolutions cannot be a
substitute for the task of ascertaining whether there is in fact a general
practice that is accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris). | 和条约一样，决议不可以替代确定是否确实存在被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例的工作。 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 makes clear that resolutions
adopted by international organizations or at intergovernmental conferences
cannot independently constitute rules of customary international law. | (4) 第1段明确了国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议不可独立构成习惯国际法规则。 |
| In other words, the mere adoption of a
resolution (or a series of resolutions) purporting to lay down a rule of
customary international law does not create such law: it has to be
established that the rule set forth in the resolution does in fact correspond
to a general practice that is accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris). | 换言之，意在制订一项习惯国际法规则的一项决议(或一系列决议)仅仅获得通过并不能创立这类法律：必须能够确定决议中提出的规则确实与被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的某项一般惯例相一致。 |
| There is no “instant
custom” arising out of such resolutions on their own
account. | 这类决议就其本身并不构成“速成习惯”。 |
| (5) Paragraph 2 states, first, that
resolutions may nevertheless assist in the determination of rules of
customary international law by providing evidence of their existence and
content. | (5) 第2段首先指出，决议仍可通过提供习惯国际法规则的存在及其内容的证据来协助确定习惯国际法规则。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
observed in the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Advisory
Opinion, resolutions “even if they are not binding … can, in certain circumstances, provide evidence important for
establishing the existence of a rule or the emergence of an opinio juris”. | 正如国际法院在《以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性咨询意见》中所指出的那样，决议“纵无约束力…在某些情况下，可以作为重要的证据来确定有一个规则存在或有一种法律确信刚刚出现”。 |
| This is particularly so when a resolution
purports to be declaratory of an existing rule of customary international
law, in which case it may serve as evidence of the acceptance as law of such
a rule by those States supporting the resolution. | 当一项决议意在宣示一项现有的习惯国际法规则时尤其如此，这时它可以作为这项规则被支持决议的各国接受为法律的证据。 |
| In other words, “[t]he
effect of consent to the text of such resolutions …
may be understood as an acceptance of the validity of the rule or set of
rules declared by the resolution”. | 换言之，“对这些决议案文予以同意所产生的影响…，可以将其理解为…接受该决议所宣布的规则或一套规则的有效性”。 |
| Conversely, negative votes, abstentions
or disassociations from a consensus, along with general statements and
explanations of positions, may be evidence that there is no acceptance as
law, and thus that there is no rule. | 反过来，否决票、弃权或不赞成共识，连同一般声明和解释立场的发言一起，可用作表明不存在被接受为法律的证据，因此可证明不存在规则。 |
| (6) Because the attitude of States
towards a given resolution (or a particular rule set forth in a resolution),
expressed by vote or otherwise, is often motivated by political or other
non-legal considerations, ascertaining acceptance as law (opinio juris) from
such resolutions must be done “with all due caution”. | (6) 因为各国通过投票或其他方式表达的对于特定决议(或某一决议中提出的特定规则)的态度往往出于政治考虑或其他非法律考虑，通过这类决议确定被接受为法律(法律确信)的工作必须“以应有的谨慎态度”进行。 |
| This is denoted by the word “may”. | 这一点通过“可”字得到体现。 |
| In each case, a careful assessment of
various factors is required in order to verify whether indeed the States
concerned intended to acknowledge the existence of a rule of customary international
law. | 应逐例对各种因素进行仔细的评估，以核实所涉国家是否确实意在确认一项习惯国际法规则的存在。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
indicated in the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons case: | 正如国际法院在以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性案中指出的那样： |
| “it is necessary to look at [the
resolution’s] content and the conditions of its
adoption; it is also necessary to see whether an opinio juris exists as to
its normative character. | “必须审视[决议的]内容和通过[决议]时的状况；还必须审视是否有一种法律确信存在，认为这项决议具有规范的性质。 |
| Or a series of resolutions may show the
gradual evolution of the opinio juris required for the establishment of a new
rule.” | 有时一系列决议可能体现出确立一项新规则所需的法律确信的逐渐演变。” |
| The precise wording used is the starting
point in seeking to evaluate the legal significance of a resolution;
reference to international law, and the choice (or avoidance) of particular
terms in the text, including the preambular as well as the operative
language, may be significant. | 所使用的确切措辞是寻求评价某一决议之法律重要性的出发点；对国际法的提及，以及在案文，包括在序言和执行部分中选择(或避免)特定用语，都可能具有重要意义。 |
| Also relevant are the debates and
negotiations leading up to the adoption of the resolution and especially
explanations of vote, explanations of position and similar statements given
immediately before or after adoption. | 同样相关的还有通过决议前的辩论和谈判，特别是对投票的解释、对立场的解释以及在通过前后立即作出的类似发言。 |
| The degree of support for the resolution
(as may be observed in the size of the majority and number of the negative
votes or abstentions) is critical. | 决议所获支持程度(可通过观察或多数支持的规模以及否决票和弃权票的数量获得)至关重要。 |
| Differences of opinion expressed on
aspects of a resolution may indicate that no general acceptance as law
(opinio juris) exists, at least on those aspects, and resolutions opposed by
a substantial number of States are unlikely to be regarded as reflecting
customary international law. | 就一项决议的不同方面表达的不同意见可表明不存在一般性的被接受为法律(法律确信)，至少在那些方面不存在，而获大量国家反对的决议不太可能被视为反映习惯国际法。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 further acknowledges that
resolutions adopted by international organizations or at intergovernmental
conferences, even when devoid of legal force of their own, may sometimes play
an important role in the development of customary international law. | (7) 第2段进一步确认国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议，即便本身缺乏法律效力，有时仍可在习惯国际法的发展方面发挥重要作用。 |
| This may be the case when, as with treaty
provisions, a resolution (or a series of resolutions) provides inspiration
and impetus for the growth of a general practice accepted as law (accompanied
by opinio juris) conforming to its terms, or when it crystallizes an emerging
rule. | 与条约条款一样，当一项决议(或一系列决议)为一项与其案文相符、被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例的发展提供灵感和推动力时，或当一项决议将某项正在出现的规则具体化时，便可能是这种情况。 |
| (8) Paragraph 3, as a logical consequence
of paragraphs 1 and 2, clarifies that provisions of resolutions adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference cannot in
and of themselves serve as conclusive evidence of the existence and content
of rules of customary international law. | (8) 第3段，作为第1段和第2段的合理推断结果，澄清了国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议规定本身不可用作习惯国际法存在和内容的确凿证据。 |
| This follows from the indication that,
for the existence of a rule the opinio juris of States, as evidenced by a
resolution, must be borne out by practice; other evidence is thus required,
in particular to show whether the alleged rule is in fact observed in the
practice of States. | 这是因为已经指出，要确定一项规则的存在，以一项决议为证据的各国的法律确信必须得到惯例的验证；因此需要其他证据，尤其是表明所宣称的规则确实在各国的惯例中得到遵守。 |
| A provision of a resolution cannot be
evidence of a rule of customary international law if actual practice is
absent, different or inconsistent. | 如果不存在实际的惯例，或实际惯例有所不同或不统一，一项决议规定便不能成为一项习惯国际法规则的证据。 |
| Conclusion 13 | 结论13 |
| Decisions of courts and tribunals | 法院和法庭的判决 |
| 1. Decisions of international courts and
tribunals, in particular of the International Court of Justice, concerning
the existence and content of rules of customary international law are a
subsidiary means for the determination of such rules. | 1. 国际性法院和法庭特别是国际法院涉及习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的判决，是确定此类规则的辅助手段。 |
| 2. Regard may be had, as appropriate, to
decisions of national courts concerning the existence and content of rules of
customary international law, as a subsidiary means for the determination of
such rules. | 2. 也可酌情考虑将各国法院涉及习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的判决用作确定此类规则的辅助手段。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 13 concerns the role
of decisions of courts and tribunals, both international and national, as an
aid in the identification of rules of customary international law. | (1) 结论草案13涉及国际性和各国法院和法庭的判决协助识别习惯国际法规则的作用。 |
| It should be noted that decisions of
national courts may serve a dual role in the identification of customary
international law. | 应该指出，各国法院的判决在识别习惯国际法方面可发挥双重作用。 |
| On the one hand, as draft conclusions 6
and 10 indicate, they may rank as practice and/or evidence of acceptance as
law (opinio juris) of the forum State. | 一方面，正如结论草案6和10所指出的样，它们可列为法院地国的惯例和/或被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| Draft conclusion 13, on the other hand,
indicates that such decisions may also serve as a subsidiary means for the
determination of rules of customary international law when they themselves
investigate the existence and content of such rules. | 另一方面，结论草案13指出，当这类判决本身对这类规则的存在及其内容作了调查时，它们也可用作确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段。 |
| (2) Draft conclusion 13 follows closely
the language of Article 38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the
International Court of Justice, according to which judicial decisions are a “subsidiary means” (moyen auxiliaire) for
the determination of rules of international law, including rules of customary
international law. | (2) 结论草案13完全符合《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项，其中规定司法判例是确定国际法规则，包括习惯国际法规则的“辅助手段”(moyen auxiliaire)。 |
| The term “subsidiary
means” denotes the ancillary role of such decisions
in elucidating the law, rather than being themselves a source of
international law, like treaties, customary international law or general
principles of law. | “辅助手段”的措辞表明了这类判决在阐明法律方面的补充作用，而不是像条约、习惯国际法或一般法律原则那样本身就是国际法的渊源。 |
| The use of the term “subsidiary means” is not intended to
suggest that such decisions are not important in practice. | “辅助手段”一词的使用无意表明这类判决在实践中不重要。 |
| (3) Decisions of courts and tribunals on
questions of international law, in particular those decisions in which the
existence of rules of customary international law is considered and such
rules are identified and applied, may offer valuable guidance for determining
the existence or otherwise of rules of customary international law. | (3) 各法院和法庭关于国际法问题的判决，尤其是考虑了习惯国际法规则的存在，并识别和适用了这类规则的判决，可为确定习惯国际法规则存在与否提供宝贵的指南。 |
| The value of such decisions varies
greatly, however, depending both on the quality of the reasoning of each
decision (including the extent to which it is founded upon a close examination
of evidence of an alleged general practice accepted as law) and on the
reception of the decision by States and by other courts. | 不过，这类判决的价值大不相同，取决于每项判决的推理过程(包括判决在多大程度上是基于对被接受为法律的某项宣称的一般惯例之证据的仔细审查)以及各国及其他法院对判决的接受程度。 |
| Other considerations might, depending on
the circumstances, include the composition of the court or tribunal (and the
particular expertise of its members); the size of the majority by which the
decision was adopted; and the conditions under which the court or tribunal
operates/conducts its work. | 其他考虑因素可酌情包括法院或法庭的组成(及其成员的特殊专长)；判决通过时所获多数赞成的规模；以及法院或法庭据以运作/开展其工作的条件。 |
| It needs to be remembered, moreover, that
judicial pronouncements on the state of customary international law do not
freeze the development of the law; rules of customary international law may
have evolved since the date of a particular decision. | 此外，还必须牢记，关于习惯国际法状况的司法裁决不会冻结法律的发展；习惯国际法规则可能自特定判决发布之日起已经有所演变。 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 refers to “international courts and tribunals”, a
term intended to cover any international body exercising judicial powers that
is called upon to consider rules of customary international law. | (4) 第1段提到“国际性法院和法庭”，这种措辞意在涵盖任何被提请审查习惯国际法规则的行使司法权的国际机构。 |
| Express mention is made of the
International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the United
Nations whose Statute is an integral part of the United Nations Charter and
whose members are elected by the General Assembly and Security Council, in
recognition of the significance of its case law and its particular authority
as the only standing international court of general jurisdiction. | 认识到国际法院案例法的重要性，和其作为具有一般管辖权的唯一常设国际性法院的特殊权威，该法院被明确提及，它是联合国的主要司法机关，其规约是《联合国宪章》的组成部分，其成员由大会和安理会选举产生。 |
| In addition to the International Court of
Justice’s predecessor, the Permanent Court of
International Justice, the term “international courts
and tribunals” includes (but is not limited to)
specialist and regional courts, such as the International Tribunal for the
Law of the Sea, the International Criminal Court and other international
criminal tribunals, regional human rights courts and the World Trade Organization
Appellate Body. | 除了国际法院的前身常设国际法院，“国际性法院和法庭”这一说法还包括(但不限于)专门法院和区域法院，例如，国际海洋法法庭、国际刑事法院和其他国际刑事法庭、区域人权法院和世界贸易组织上诉机构。 |
| It also includes inter-State arbitral
tribunals and other arbitral tribunals applying international law. | 它还包括国家间仲裁法庭和其他适用国际法的仲裁法庭。 |
| The skills and the breadth of evidence
usually at the disposal of international courts and tribunals lend
significant weight to their decisions, subject to the considerations
mentioned in the preceding paragraph. | 国际性法院和法庭的判决需接受上一段所提及的那种考虑，但这些法院和法庭通常可支配的技能和证据的广度使它们的判决具有重要份量。 |
| (5) For the purposes of this draft
conclusion, the term “decisions” includes judgments and advisory opinions, as well as orders on
procedural and interlocutory matters. | (5) 为本结论草案的目的，“判决”一词包括判决和咨询意见以及关于程序和中间事项的指示。 |
| Separate and dissenting opinions may shed
light on the decision and may discuss points not covered in the decision of
the court or tribunal; but they need to be approached with caution since they
may only reflect the viewpoint of the individual judge or set out points not
accepted by the court or tribunal. | 个别意见和不同意见可有助于理解判决，并可能讨论到法院或法庭的判决中没有涵盖的要点；但必须对它们进行谨慎处理，因为它们可能仅反映个别法官的观点，或是列出没有被法院或法庭接受的要点。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 concerns decisions of
national courts (also referred to as domestic or municipal courts). | (6) 第2段涉及各国法院(也被称为国内法院)的判决。 |
| The distinction between international and
national courts is not always clear-cut; as used in these conclusions, the
term “national courts” also
applies to courts with an international composition operating within one or
more domestic legal systems, such as hybrid courts and tribunals involving
mixed national and international composition and jurisdiction. | 国际性法院和各国法院之间的区别并不总是那么明确；用在这些结论中的“各国法院”一词也适用于在一个或多个国内法律体系内运作的具有国际性人员构成的法院，例如具有本国和国际混合人员构成和混合管辖权的混合性法院和法庭。 |
| (7) Some caution is called for when
seeking to rely on decisions of national courts as a subsidiary means for the
determination of rules of customary international law. | (7) 试图依据各国法院的判决作为确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段时需要采取审慎态度。 |
| This is reflected in the different
wording of paragraphs 1 and 2, in particular the use of the words “[r]egard may be had, as appropriate” in
paragraph 2. | 第1段和第2段的不同措辞便体现出这一点，特别是第2段中使用的“可酌情考虑”的说法。 |
| Judgments of international tribunals are
generally accorded more weight than those of national courts for the present
purpose, since the former are likely to have greater expertise in
international law and are less likely to reflect a particular national
perspective. | 为当前的目的，国际性法庭的判决获得的重视通常超过各国法院判决，因为前者有可能在国际法方面具备更多专业知识，反映特定国家观点的可能性也更低。 |
| Also, it has to be borne in mind that
national courts operate within a particular legal system, which may
incorporate international law only in a particular way and to a limited
extent. | 此外，还必须铭记，各国法院是在一个特定的法律体系中运作的，该体系可能仅以特殊和有限的方式反映国际法。 |
| Unlike international courts, national
courts may lack international law expertise and may have reached their
decisions without the benefit of hearing argument by States. | 与国际性法院不同，各国法院可能缺乏国际法方面的专业知识，并可能在作出判决时未能利用听取各国陈述的益处。 |
| Conclusion 14 | 结论14 |
| Teachings | 学说 |
| Teachings of the most highly qualified
publicists of the various nations may serve as a subsidiary means for the
determination of rules of customary international law. | 各国最权威的国际法专家的学说可用作确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 14 concerns the role
of teachings (in French, doctrine) in the identification of rules of
customary international law. | (1) 结论草案14涉及学说(法语为doctrine)在识别习惯国际法规则方面的作用。 |
| Following closely the language of Article
38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, it
provides that such works may be resorted to as a subsidiary means (moyen
auxiliaire) for determining rules of customary international law, that is to
say, when ascertaining whether there is a general practice that is accepted
as law (accompanied by opinio juris). | 该草案严格遵守《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项，规定这类著作可用作确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段(moyen
auxiliaire)，也就是说用来确定是否存在被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| The term “teachings”, often referred to as “writings”, is to be understood in a broad sense; it includes teachings in
non-written form, such as lectures and audiovisual materials. | “学说”一词也常常被称作“论著”，应予以广泛的解读；它包括非书面形式的学说，例如讲座和视听材料。 |
| (2) As with decisions of courts and
tribunals, referred to in draft conclusion 13, writings are not themselves a
source of customary international law, but may offer guidance for the
determination of the existence and content of rules of customary
international law. | (2) 与结论草案13提到的法院和法庭的判决一样，论著本身不是习惯国际法的渊源，但可为确定习惯国际法规则的存在及其内容提供指南。 |
| This auxiliary role recognizes the value
that they may have in collecting and assessing State practice; in identifying
divergences in State practice and the possible absence or development of
rules; and in evaluating the law. | 这种辅助作用认识到了它们在下列领域可能具备的价值：收集并评估国家惯例；识别国家惯例的差异和规则的可能缺失或发展；评估法律。 |
| (3) There is a need for caution when
drawing upon writings, since their value for determining the existence of a
rule of customary international law varies; this is reflected in the words “may serve as”. | (3) 在借鉴论著时必须保持警惕，因为它们在确定某项习惯国际法规则存在方面的价值可能有差异。
“可用作”这一措辞即反映了这种提醒。 |
| First, writers may aim not merely to
record the state of the law as it is (lex lata) but also to advocate its
development (lex ferenda). | 首先，著述者的目的可能并不仅仅在于记录法律的现状(现行法)，还在于支持其发展(拟议法)。 |
| In doing so, they do not always
distinguish clearly between the law as it is and the law as they would like
it to be. | 在这么做时，他们并不总是清楚地区分法律的现状和他们所设想的法律的状况。 |
| Second, writings may reflect the national
or other individual positions of their authors. | 其次，论著可反映著述者的本国立场或其他个人立场。 |
| Third, they differ greatly in quality. | 第三，论著的质量参差不齐。 |
| Assessing the authority of a given work
is thus essential; the United States Supreme Court in the Paquete Habana Case
referred to: | 因此，评估特定著述的权威性至关重要；美国最高法院在Paquete Habana案中提到： |
| “the works of jurists and commentators
who by years of labor, research and experience have made themselves
peculiarly well acquainted with the subjects of which they treat. | “法学家和法律评论家的著作――他们通过多年的劳动、研究和经验，特别熟悉其所研究的主题。 |
| Such works are resorted to by judicial
tribunals, not for the speculations of their authors concerning what the law
ought to be, but for trustworthy evidence of what the law really is.” | 司法法庭求助于这些著作，不是为了了解其著述者关于法律应当是什么的猜测，而是为了求得关于法律实际上是什么的可靠证据。” |
| (4) The term “publicists”, which comes from the Statute of the International Court of
Justice, covers all those whose scholarly work may elucidate questions of
international law. | (4) “国际法专家”一词源自《国际法院规约》，涵盖了其学术著作可阐明国际法问题的所有人。 |
| While most of these will in the nature of
things be specialists in public international law, others are not excluded. | 虽然其中大多数人必然是国际公法专家，但其他人也没有被排除在外。 |
| The reference to “the most highly qualified” publicists
emphasizes that attention ought to be paid to the writings of those who are
eminent in the field. | “最权威的”国际法专家的提法强调应该关注该领域知名者的论著。 |
| In the final analysis, however, it is the
quality of the particular writing that matters rather than the reputation of
the author; among the factors to be considered in this regard are the
approach adopted by the author to the identification of customary
international law and the extent to which his or her text remains loyal to
it. | 但是在最终的分析中，重要的是特定论著的质量，而不是著述者的声望；在这方面应该考虑的因素有，著述者在识别习惯国际法方面采取的方法，以及其文字忠于这种方法的程度。 |
| The reference to publicists “of the various nations” highlights the
importance of having regard, so far as possible, to writings representative
of the principal legal systems and regions of the world and in various
languages. | “各国”国际法专家的提法，着重指出尽可能考虑可代表各主要法律体系和全球各区域以及各种语言的论著的重要性。 |
| (5) The products of international bodies
engaged in the codification and development of international law may provide
a useful resource in this regard. | (5) 在这方面，参与编纂和发展国际法的国际机构的工作成果是有用的资源。 |
| Such collective bodies include the
Institute of International Law (Institut de droit international) and the
International Law Association, as well as international expert bodies in
particular fields. | 这类集体机构包括国际法学会(Institut de droit
international)和国际法协会，以及专门领域的国际专家机构。 |
| The value of each output needs to be
carefully assessed in the light of the mandate and expertise of the body
concerned, the care and objectivity with which it works on a particular
issue, the support a particular output enjoys within the body and the reception
of the output by States. | 必须仔细评估每一项工作成果的价值，参照所涉机构的任务授权和专业知识、其在特定问题上所开展工作的仔细程度和客观性、特定工作成果在机构内部获得的支持以及各国的认可程度。 |
| Part Six | 第六部分 |
| Persistent objector | 一贯反对者 |
| Part Six comprises a single draft
conclusion on the persistent objector. | 第六部分只包含一条关于一贯反对者的结论草案。 |
| Conclusion 15 | 结论15 |
| Persistent objector | 一贯反对者 |
| 1. Where a State has objected to a rule
of customary international law while that rule was in the process of
formation, the rule is not opposable to the State concerned for so long as it
maintains its objection. | 1. 如果一国在一项习惯国际法规则的形成过程中对其表示反对，只要该国坚持其反对立场，则该规则不可施用于该国。 |
| 2. The objection must be clearly
expressed, made known to other States, and maintained persistently. | 2. 反对立场必须明确表示，向其他国家公开，并始终坚持。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Rules of customary international law,
“by their very nature, must have equal force for all
members of the international community, and cannot therefore be the subject
of any right of unilateral exclusion exercisable at will by any one of them
in its own favour”. | (1) 习惯国际法的规则，“就其本质而言，必须对国际社会的全体成员具有平等效力，因而不得受制于其中任何一方出于有利于自身的目的、任意行使的任何单方面排除的权利”。 |
| Nevertheless, when a State that has
persistently objected to an emerging rule of customary international law, and
maintains its objection after the rule has crystallized, that rule is not
opposable to it. | 尽管如此，一国若对一条开始形成的习惯国际法规则持续表示反对并且在该规则具体化以后保持反对，则该规则不可施用于该国。 |
| This is sometimes referred to as the
persistent objector “rule” or
“doctrine” and not
infrequently arises in connection with the identification of rules of
customary international law. (2) The persistent objector is to be
distinguished from a situation where the objection of a substantial number of
States to the formation of a new rule of customary international law prevents
its crystallization altogether (because there is no general practice accepted
as law), and its application is subject to stringent requirements. | 这通常被称为一贯反对者规则。 (2) 要把一贯反对者同为数众多的国家反对制定一条习惯国际法新规则并因而使该规则完全无法具体化(因不存在被接受为法律的一般惯例)的情况区分开来。 此项规则的适用须满足严格的条件。 |
| (3) A State objecting to an emerging rule
of customary international law by arguing against it or engaging in an
alternative practice may adopt one or both of two stances: it may seek to
prevent the rule from coming into being; and/or it may aim to ensure that, if
it does emerge, the rule will not be opposable to it. | (3) 一国通过不认可一条开始形成的习惯国际法规则或采取其他做法，从而对该规则表示反对的，可能采取以下两种姿态中的一种或两种：该国可寻求阻止这条规则的产生；并(或)旨在确保如果这条规则产生，则不可对该国施用。 |
| An example would be the opposition of
certain States to the emerging rule permitting the establishment of a maximum
12-mile territorial sea. | 一个例子是，某些国家反对开始出现的、允许划定最大12海里领海的规则。 |
| Such States may have wished to
consolidate a three-, four- or six-mile territorial sea as a general rule,
but in any event were not prepared to have wider territorial seas enforced
against them. | 这些国家可能希望把三海里、四海里或六海里领海统一成一条一般规则，但无论如何不准备接受其被执行宽度更大的领海。 |
| If a rule of customary international law
is found to have emerged, the onus of establishing the right to benefit from
persistent objector status lies with the objecting State. | 如果一条习惯国际法规则被认定已产生，确立有权从一贯反对者地位获利的责任在于反对国。 |
| (4) The persistent objector rule is quite
frequently invoked and recognized, both in international and domestic case
law as well as in other contexts. | (4) 一贯反对者规则在国际和国内判例法以及在其他情况中得到频繁援引和承认。 |
| While there are differing views, the
persistent objector rule is widely accepted by States and writers as well as
by scientific bodies engaged in international law. | 虽然存在不同观点，但一贯反对者规则受到国家和著述者以及从事国际法工作的科学机构的广泛认可。 |
| (5) Paragraph 1 makes it clear that the
objection must have been made while the rule in question was in the process
of formation. | (5) 第1段明确表示，反对必须是在所涉规则形成过程中提出的。 |
| The timeliness of the objection is
critical: the State must express its opposition before a given practice has
crystallized into a rule of customary international law and its position will
be more assured if it did so at the earliest possible moment. | 及时提出反对至关重要：该国必须在某一特定做法具体化、成为一条习惯国际法规则之前表示其反对；如果该国在尽可能早的时间如此行事，其立场将更有保障。 |
| While the line between objection and
violation may not always be an easy one to draw, there is no such thing as a
subsequent objector rule: once the rule has come into being, an objection
will not avail a State wishing to exempt itself. | 虽然反对同违反的界限不常易于区分，但不存在所谓的嗣后反对者规则：一旦规则形成，反对将无助于希望免受约束的国家。 |
| (6) If a State establishes itself as a
persistent objector, the rule is inapplicable against it for so long as it
maintains the objection; the expression “not
opposable” is used in order to reflect the
exceptional position of the persistent objector. | (6) 如果一国将其确立为持续反对者，只要其坚持反对立场，则该规则对其不适用；使用“不可施用”这一表述是为了反映持续反对者的例外立场。 |
| As the paragraph further indicates, once
an objection is abandoned (as it may be at any time, expressly or otherwise),
the State in question is bound by the rule. | 本段进一步说，一旦放弃反对立场(反对立场可随时明确或以其他方式加以放弃)，当事国就受该规则的约束。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 clarifies the stringent
requirements that must be met for a State to establish and maintain
persistent objector status vis-à-vis a rule of
customary international law. | (7) 第2段明确了一国确立并维持对一条习惯国际法规则的持续反对者地位所必须满足的严格要求。 |
| In addition to being made before the
practice crystallizes into a rule of law, the objection must be clearly
expressed, meaning that non-acceptance of the emerging rule or the intention
not to be bound by it must be unambiguous. | 反对立场除必须在该做法具体化成为法律规则前提出外，还必须明确表示出来，这意味着不接受开始形成的规则或不受其约束的意图必须毫不含糊。 |
| There is, however, no requirement that
the objection be made in a particular form. | 然而，不要求以特定形式提出反对立场。 |
| In particular, a clear verbal objection,
either in written or oral form, as opposed to physical action, will suffice
to preserve the legal position of the objecting State. | 具体而言，以书面或口头形式明确提出的反对言辞(即相对于实际行动)足以维持反对国的法律立场。 |
| (8) The requirement that the objection be
made known to other States means that the objection must be communicated
internationally; it cannot simply be voiced internally. | (8) 必须向其他国家公开反对立场的要求意味着这一反对立场必须向国际社会传达，不能仅在内部发出声音。 |
| The onus is on the objecting State to
ensure that the objection is indeed made known to other States. | 反对国须负责确保该反对立场确实为其他国家所知。 |
| (9) The requirement that the objection be
maintained persistently applies both before and after the rule of customary
international law has emerged. | (9) 必须坚持反对立场的要求适用习惯国际法规则形成前和形成后。 |
| Assessing whether this requirement has
been met needs to be done in a pragmatic manner, bearing in mind the
circumstances of each case. | 需要用现实的方式评估这一要求是否得到满足，并牢记每起案件的实际情况。 |
| The requirement signifies, first, that
the objection should be reiterated when the circumstances are such that a
restatement is called for (that is, in circumstances where silence or
inaction may reasonably lead to the conclusion that the State has given up
its objection). | 这一要求意味着，首先，当情况要求重申反对立场时(也就是说，在沉默或不作为可合理得出该国已放弃其反对立场的结论的情况下)则应重申。 |
| This could be, for example, at a
conference attended by the objecting State at which the rule is reaffirmed. | 例如，反对国可在出席再次肯定该规则的会议时重申其反对立场。 |
| States cannot, however, be expected to
react on every occasion, especially where their position is already well
known. | 然而，不应期待国家在每个场合作出反应，尤其是在其立场已广为知晓的情况下。 |
| Second, such repeated objections must be
consistent overall, that is, without significant contradictions. | 第二，再次重复的反对立场必须总体一致，即无重大矛盾。 |
| (10) The inclusion of draft conclusion 15
in the present draft conclusions is without prejudice to any issues of jus
cogens. | (10) 把结论草案15纳入本结论草案不影响强行法的任何问题。 |
| Part Seven | 第七部分 |
| Particular customary international law | 特别习惯国际法 |
| Part Seven consists of a single draft
conclusion, dealing with particular customary international law (sometimes
referred to as “regional custom” or “special custom”). | 第七部分只包含一条结论草案，处理特别习惯国际法(有时被称为“区域习惯”或“特殊习惯”)的问题。 |
| While rules of general customary
international law are binding on all States, rules of particular customary
international law apply among a limited number of States. | 一般习惯国际法规则对所有国家有约束力，而特别习惯国际法规则在数量有限的国家之间适用。 |
| Even though they are not frequently
encountered, they can play a significant role in inter-State relations,
accommodating differing interests and values peculiar to only some States. | 特别习惯国际法规则虽然并不十分常见，但照顾到了不尽相同的、仅某些国家特有的利益和价值观，因而在国与国关系中发挥着重要作用。 |
| Conclusion 16 | 结论16 |
| Particular customary international law | 特别习惯国际法 |
| 1. A rule of particular customary
international law, whether regional, local or other, is a rule of customary
international law that applies only among a limited number of States. | 1. 特别习惯国际法规则，不论是区域的、地方的还是其他层面的，都是仅在数量有限的国家之间适用的习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. To determine the existence and content
of a rule of particular customary international law, it is necessary to
ascertain whether there is a general practice among the States concerned that
is accepted by them as law (opinio juris). | 2. 要确定一项特别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，必须查明有关国家之间是否存在一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) That rules of customary international
law that are not general in nature may exist is undisputed. | (1) 可能存在着不具一般性的习惯国际法规则，这一点毫无争议。 |
| The jurisprudence of the International
Court of Justice confirms this, having referred to, inter alia, customary
international law “particular to the Inter-American
Legal system” or “limited in
its impact to the African continent as it has previously been to Spanish
America”, “a local custom” and customary international law “of a
regional nature”. | 国际法院的判例确认这一点，曾经提到“特别适用于美洲国家法系的”或“影响仅限于非洲大陆，正如以前仅限于西班牙语美洲的”习惯国际法、“地方习惯”以及“区域性”习惯国际法。 |
| Cases where the identification of such
rules was considered include the Colombian-Peruvian asylum case and the Case
concerning Right of Passage over Indian Territory. | 有的案件审理了明确此类规则的问题，包括：哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案和在印度领土上的通行权案。 |
| The term “particular
customary international law” refers to these rules in
contrast to rules of customary international law of general application. | “特别习惯国际法”这一术语指的是与一般适用的习惯国际法规则相对的规则。 |
| It is used in preference to “particular custom” to emphasize that the
draft conclusion is concerned with rules of law, not mere customs or usages;
there may indeed be “local customs” among States that do not amount to rules of international law. | 选用这一术语而不用“特别习惯”，目的在于强调本结论草案关心的是法律规则，而不单单是习惯或惯例；各国之间可能确实存在不构成国际法规则的“地方习惯”。 |
| (2) Draft conclusion 16 has been placed
at the end of the set of draft conclusions since the preceding draft
conclusions generally apply also in respect of the determination of rules of
particular customary international law, except as otherwise provided in the
present draft conclusion. | (2) 结论草案16被放在整套结论草案的最后，是因为前面的结论草案总体上也适用于特别习惯国际法规则的确定，除本条结论草案另作规定的地方以外。 |
| In particular, the two-element approach
applies, as described in the present commentary. | 尤其是正如本评注描述的那样，两要素法是适用的。 |
| (3) Paragraph 1, definitional in nature,
explains that particular customary international law applies only among a
limited number of States. | (3) 第1段具有定义的性质，解释特别习惯国际法仅在数量有限的国家之间适用。 |
| It is to be distinguished from general
customary international law, that is, customary international law that in
principle applies to all States. | 应该把它同一般习惯国际法区分开来，也就是同原则上适用于所有国家的习惯国际法区分开来。 |
| A rule of particular customary
international law itself thus creates neither obligations nor rights for
third States. | 因此，特别习惯国际法规则本身不为第三国创设义务或权利。 |
| (4) Rules of particular customary
international law may apply among various types of groupings of States. | (4) 特别习惯国际法规则可能适用于不同类型的国家集团形式。 |
| Reference is often made to customary
rules of a regional nature, such as those “peculiar
to Latin-American States” (the institution of
diplomatic asylum being a common example). | 经常提到的是区域性的习惯规则，例如“特别适用于美洲国家法系的”规则(外交庇护制度就是一个常见的例子)。 |
| Particular customary international law
may cover a smaller geographical area, such as a sub-region, or even bind as
few as two States. | 特别习惯国际法可能涵盖一个较小的地域，例如一个次区域，或者甚至约束少至两个国家。 |
| Such a custom was at issue in the Right
of Passage case, where the International Court of Justice held that: | 这一习惯是通行权案中的争议点，国际法院认定： |
| “It is difficult to see why the number of
States between which a local custom may be established on the basis of long
practice must necessarily be larger than two. | “很难理解为什么必须要在两个以上的国家之间才能根据长期实践确立地方惯例。 |
| The Court sees no reason why long
continued practice between two States accepted by them as regulating their
relations should not form the basis of mutual rights and obligations between
the two States.” | 法院认为两国之间长期持续的、被其接受用于规范相互关系的惯例没有理由不应成为这两个国家之间相互权利和义务的根据。” |
| Cases in which assertions of such
particular customary international law have been examined have concerned, for
example, a right of access to enclaves in foreign territory; a co-ownership
(condominium) of historic waters by three coastal States; a right to
subsistence fishing by nationals inhabiting a river bank serving as a border
between two riparian States; a right of cross-border/international transit
free from immigration formalities; and an obligation to reach agreement in
administering the generation of power on a river constituting a border
between two States. | 一些案件审理了对此类特别习惯国际法的主张，例如涉及以下问题：进入外国领土上飞地的权利，由三个沿海国共有(共管)历史水域，居住在两个沿岸国之间界河上的国民出于生计而捕鱼的权利，跨国或国际过境免于移民手续的权利，以及就管理两国界河上的发电问题达成协议的义务。 |
| (5) While a measure of geographical
affinity usually exists between the States among which a rule of particular
customary international law applies, that may not always be necessary. | (5) 虽然适用特别习惯国际法规则的国家之间在地理上往往存在某种程度的密切关系，但这并不总是必需的。 |
| The expression “whether
regional, local or other” is intended to acknowledge
that although particular customary international law is mostly regional,
sub-regional or local, there is no reason in principle why a rule of
particular customary international law should not also develop among States
linked by a common cause, interest or activity other than their geographical
position, or constituting a community of interest, whether established by
treaty or otherwise. | “不论是区域、地方还是其他层面的”这一表述的目的是承认虽然特别习惯国际法大多是区域、次区域或地方性的，但原则上没有理由认为由共同的事业、利益或活动(而非其地理位置)联系起来或构成一个利益共同体的国家间不应发展出一条特别习惯国际法规则，不论是通过条约还是其他方式加以确立的。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 addresses the substantive
requirements for identifying a rule of particular customary international law. | (6) 第2段讨论明确特别习惯国际法规则的实质性要求。 |
| In essence, determining whether such a
rule exists consists of a search for a general practice prevailing among the
States concerned that is accepted by them as governing their relations. | 从根本上说，判断这一规则是否存在，就是要寻找一条当事国之间通行、被其接受、规范其关系的一般惯例。 |
| The International Court of Justice in the
Colombian-Peruvian asylum case provided guidance on this matter, holding with
respect to Colombia’s argument as to the existence of
a “regional or local custom particular to
Latin-American States” that: | 国际法院在哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案中就此事提供了指导意见，对于哥伦比亚关于存在一个“拉丁美洲国家特有的区域或地方习惯”的主张，法院认定： |
| “The Party which relies on a custom of
this kind must prove that this custom is established in such a manner that it
has become binding on the other Party. | “依据此种习惯的当事方必须证明，这一习惯建立的方式使之对另一当事方也已具有约束力。 |
| The Colombian Government must prove that
the rule invoked by it is in accordance with a constant and uniform usage
practised by the States in question, and that this usage is the expression of
a right appertaining to the State granting asylum and a duty incumbent on the
territorial State. | 哥伦比亚政府必须证明其援引的规则符合有关国家采用的恒定、统一的惯例，并且这种惯例体现了属于给予庇护国的一项权利和领土所属国负有的一项义务。 |
| This follows from Article 38 of the
Statute of the Court, which refers to international custom ‘as evidence of a general practice accepted as law’.” | 这源于《国际法院规约》第三十八条，其中称国际习惯为‘作为通例之证明而经接受为法律者’。 ” |
| (7) The two-element approach requiring
both a general practice and its acceptance as law (opinio juris) thus also
applies in the case of identifying rules of particular customary
international law. | (7) 两要素法既要求有一项一般惯例，又要求其被接受为法律(法律确信)，因而也适用于识别特别习惯国际法规则的情况。 |
| In the case of particular customary
international law, however, the practice must be general in the sense that it
is a consistent practice “among the States concerned”, that is, all the States among which the rule in question
applies. Each of these States must have accepted the practice as law among
themselves. | 然而，在特别习惯国际法的情况下，惯例必须具有一般性的意思是，它必须是“各当事国中”(也就是在所涉规则适用的所有国家中)的一个一致惯例，每一国都必须已经接受这个惯例是它们自己之间的法律。 |
| In this respect, the application of the
two-element approach is stricter in the case of rules of particular customary
international law. | 就此而言，两要素法在特别习惯国际法规则的情况中适用得更为严格。 |
| Chapter VI | 第六章 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties | 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 64. 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. | 64. 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、研究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。 |
| 65. From the sixty-second to the sixty-fourth
session (2010-2012), the Study Group was reconstituted under the chairmanship
of Mr. Georg Nolte. | 65. 从第六十二届至第六十四届会议(2010年至2012年)，委员会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 Chairperson, 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 the subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice of States outside judicial and
quasi-judicial proceedings. | 研究组审查了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。 |
| 66. At the sixty-fourth session (2012),
the Commission, on the basis of a recommendation of the Study Group, decided: | 66. 在第六十四届会议上(2012年)，委员会根据研究组的建议决定： |
| (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 | (a) 按照研究组的建议，自第六十五届会议(2013年)起改变此专题的工作方式； |
| (b) to appoint Mr. Georg Nolte as Special
Rapporteur for the topic “Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties”. | (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。 |
| 67. At the sixty-fifth session (2013),
the Commission considered the first report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/660) and provisionally adopted five draft conclusions and the
commentaries thereto. | 67. 在第六十五届会议上(2013年)，委员会审议了特别报告员的第一份报告(A/CN.4/660)并暂时通过了五条结论草案及其评注。 |
| 68. At the sixty-sixth session (2014),
the Commission considered the second report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/671) and provisionally adopted five draft conclusions and the
commentaries thereto. | 68. 在第六十六届会议上(2014年)，委员会审议了特别报告员的第二份报告(A/CN.4/671)并暂时通过了五条结论草案及其评注。 |
| 69. At the sixty-seventh session (2015),
the Commission considered the third report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/683) and provisionally adopted one draft conclusion and the
commentary thereto. | 69. 在第六十七届会议上(2015年)，委员会审议了特别报告员的第三份报告(A/CN.4/683)并暂时通过了一条结论草案及其评注。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 70. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/694), which addressed the legal significance, for the purpose of
interpretation and as forms of practice under a treaty, of pronouncements of
expert treaty bodies (chap. II) and of decisions of domestic courts (chap.
III) and which proposed, respectively, draft conclusions 12 and 13 on those
issues. | 70. 在本届会议上，委员会收到了特别报告员的第四份报告(A/CN.4/694)；报告探讨了出于条约解释的目的，专家条约机构的声明(第二章)和国内法院的裁决(第三章)作为条约下的惯例形式的法律意义，就这些问题分别提出了结论草案12和结论草案13。 |
| It also discussed the structure and scope
of the draft conclusions (chap. IV), proposed the inclusion of a new draft
conclusion 1a, and suggested a revision to draft conclusion 4, paragraph 3
(chap. V). | 报告还讨论了结论草案的结构和范围(第四章)，提议列入一个新的结论草案1a, 并建议修订结论草案4第3段(第五章)。 |
| 71. The Commission considered the report
at its 3303rd to 3307th meetings, from 24 to 31 May 2016. | 71. 委员会在2016年5月24日至31日举行的第3303至3307次会议上审议了该报告。 |
| At its 3307th meeting on 31 May 2016, the
Commission decided to refer draft conclusions 1a and 12, as presented by the
Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 委员会在2016年5月31日举行的第3307次会议上决定将特别报告员提出的第1a和第12条结论草案送交起草委员会。 |
| 72. At its 3313th meeting, on 10 June
2016, the Commission considered the report of the Drafting Committee and
adopted a set of 13 draft conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties on first reading (see
section C.1 below). | 72. 委员会在2016年6月10日举行的第3313次会议上审议了起草委员会的报告，并一读通过了一套关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的13条结论草案(见下文C.1节)。 |
| At its 3335th to 3337th, 3340th and
3341st meetings, on 4, 5, 8 and 9 August 2016, the Commission adopted the
commentaries to the draft conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties (see section C.2
below). | 在2016年8月4、5、8和9日举行的第3335至3337次、3340次和3341次会议上，委员会通过了关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的结论草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。 |
| 73. At its 3341st meeting, on 9 August
2016, the Commission decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its
statute, to transmit the draft conclusions (sect. C below), through the
Secretary-General, to Governments for comments and observations, with the
request that such comments and observations be submitted to the
Secretary-General by 1 January 2018. | 73. 委员会在2016年8月9日举行的第3341次会议上，根据其《章程》第16至第21条，决定通过秘书长将结论草案(见下文C节)转交各国政府征求评论和意见，并请各国政府在2018年1月1日之前向秘书长提交这些评论和意见。 |
| 74. At its 3341st meeting, on 9 August
2016, the Commission expressed its deep appreciation for the outstanding
contribution of the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Georg Nolte, which enabled the
Commission to bring to a successful conclusion its first reading of the draft
conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to
the interpretation of treaties. | 74. 委员会在2016年8月9日举行的第3341次会议上，向特别报告员格奥尔格
•诺尔特先生表示深切感谢，由于他的杰出贡献，委员会得以圆满结束了对关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的结论草案的一读。 |
| C. Text of the draft conclusions on
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties adopted by the Commission | C. 委员会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 |
| 75. The text of the draft conclusions
adopted by the Commission on first reading is reproduced below. | 75. 委员会一读通过的结论草案案文载录如下。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties | 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例 |
| Part One | 第一部分 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| Conclusion 1 [1a] | 结论1[1a] |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
role of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in the interpretation
of treaties. | 本结论草案涉及嗣后协定和嗣后惯例在条约解释中的作用。 |
| Part Two | 第二部分 |
| Basic rules and definitions | 基本规则和定义 |
| Conclusion 2 [1] | 结论2[1] |
| General rule and means of treaty
interpretation | 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, | 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) any subsequent agreement between the
parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its
provisions; and | (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) any subsequent practice in the
application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties
regarding its interpretation. | (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 3 [2] | 结论3[2] |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice as authentic means of interpretation | 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 4 | 结论4 |
| Definition of subsequent agreement and
subsequent practice | 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 | 结论5 |
| Attribution of subsequent practice | 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。 |
| Part Three | 第三部分 |
| General aspects | 一般方面 |
| Conclusion 6 | 结论6 |
| Identification of subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice | 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的识别 |
| 1. The identification of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, requires,
in particular, a determination whether the parties, by an agreement or a
practice, have taken a position regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 1. 为识别第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例，尤其须确定缔约方是否通过协定或惯例就条约的解释采取了立场。 |
| This is not normally the case if the
parties have merely agreed not to apply the treaty temporarily or agreed to
establish a practical arrangement (modus vivendi). | 通常，如果缔约方只是商定暂不适用条约，或商定确立一种实际安排(临时协议)，便不属于这种情况。 |
| 2. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, can take a variety of forms. | 2. 第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能具有各种形式。 |
| 3. The identification of subsequent
practice under article 32 requires, in particular, a determination whether
conduct by one or more parties is in the application of the treaty. | 3. 在根据第三十二条识别嗣后惯例时，尤其须确定一个或多个缔约方的行为是否处在适用条约过程之中。 |
| Conclusion 7 | 结论7 |
| Possible effects of subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice in interpretation | 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能对解释产生的影响 |
| 1. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, contribute, in their interaction with
other means of interpretation, to the clarification of the meaning of a
treaty. | 1. 第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例经与其他解释资料互动，有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| This may result in narrowing, widening,
or otherwise determining the range of possible interpretations, including any
scope for the exercise of discretion which the treaty accords to the parties. | 这可能导致可能的解释范围、包括条约给予缔约方行使自由裁量权的任何范围变窄、变宽或受到另外的影响。 |
| 2. Subsequent practice under article 32
can also contribute to the clarification of the meaning of a treaty. | 2. 根据第三十二条确定的嗣后惯例也能有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| 3. It is presumed that the parties to a
treaty, by an agreement subsequently arrived at or a practice in the
application of the treaty, intend to interpret the treaty, not to amend or to
modify it. | 3. 可以推定，条约缔约方嗣后达成协定或在适用条约方面采用一种惯例，其用意是为了解释条约，而不是修正或修改条约。 |
| The possibility of amending or modifying
a treaty by subsequent practice of the parties has not been generally
recognized. | 缔约方通过嗣后惯例修正或修改条约的可能性尚未得到普遍认可。 |
| The present draft conclusion is without
prejudice to the rules on the amendment or modification of treaties under the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and under customary international
law. | 本条结论草案不影响《维也纳条约法公约》和习惯国际法关于修正或修改条约的规则。 |
| Conclusion 8 [3] | 结论8[3] |
| Interpretation of treaty terms as capable
of evolving over time | 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 9 [8] | 结论9[8] |
| Weight of subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice as a means of interpretation | 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释资料的权重 |
| 1. The weight of a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice as a means of interpretation under article 31,
paragraph 3, depends, inter alia, on its clarity and specificity. | 1. 嗣后协定或嗣后惯例作为第三十一条第三款所称的解释资料的权重，除其他外，取决于其清晰性和特定性。 |
| 2. The weight of subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), depends, in addition, on whether and how
it is repeated. | 2. 第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例的权重还取决于该惯例是否以及如何重复出现。 |
| 3. The weight of subsequent practice as a
supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 may depend on the
criteria referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 3. 嗣后惯例作为第三十二条所称的补充的解释资料的权重可取决于第1和第2段所述标准。 |
| Conclusion 10 [9] | 结论10[9] |
| Agreement of the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty | 与条约解释有关的缔约方协定 |
| 1. An agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b), requires a common understanding regarding the
interpretation of a treaty which the parties are aware of and accept. | 1. 第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所称的协定必须是各缔约方知悉并接受的关于条约解释的共同理解。 |
| Though it shall be taken into account,
such an agreement need not be legally binding. | 这种协定虽然应予以考虑，但不必具有法律约束力。 |
| 2. The number of parties that must
actively engage in subsequent practice in order to establish an agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), may vary. | 2. 为确立第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的协定而必须积极适用嗣后惯例的缔约方数目可能不尽相同。 |
| Silence on the part of one or more
parties can constitute acceptance of the subsequent practice when the
circumstances call for some reaction. | 在有关情况要求作出某种反应时，一个或多个缔约方的沉默可构成对嗣后惯例的接受。 |
| Part Four | 第四部分 |
| Specific aspects | 具体方面 |
| Conclusion 11 [10] | 结论11[10] |
| Decisions adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties | 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定 |
| 1. A Conference of States Parties, under
these draft conclusions, is a meeting of States parties pursuant to a treaty
for the purpose of reviewing or implementing the treaty, except if they act
as members of an organ of an international organization. | 1. 为本结论草案的目的，缔约国大会指缔约国根据条约为了审查或执行条约而举行的会议，但缔约国作为国际组织机关成员行事的情况不在此列。 |
| 2. The legal effect of a decision adopted
within the framework of a Conference of States Parties depends primarily on
the treaty and any applicable rules of procedure. | 2. 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定所具有的法律效力主要取决于条约和可适用的议事规则。 |
| Depending on the circumstances, such a
decision may embody, explicitly or implicitly, a subsequent agreement under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), or give rise to subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), or to subsequent practice under article 32. | 根据情况，这种决定可明确或间接地体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所称的嗣后协定，或产生第三十一条第三款(b)项或第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例。 |
| Decisions adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties often provide a non-exclusive range of
practical options for implementing the treaty. | 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定通常为执行条约提供了非排他性的一系列可行选择。 |
| 3. A decision adopted within the
framework of a Conference of States Parties embodies a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, in so far as it
expresses agreement in substance between the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty, regardless of the form and the procedure by which
the decision was adopted, including by consensus. | 3. 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定只要表达了缔约国之间就条约的解释达成的实质性协议，则不论决定以何种形式和程序通过，包括经协商一致通过，均构成第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例。 |
| Conclusion 12 [11] | 结论12[11] |
| Constituent instruments of international
organizations | 国际组织的组成文书 |
| 1. Articles 31 and 32 apply to a treaty
which is the constituent instrument of an international organization. | 1. 第三十一条和第三十二条适用于作为国际组织组成文书的条约。 |
| Accordingly, subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, are, and other subsequent
practice under article 32 may be, means of interpretation for such treaties. | 因此，第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例是这类条约的解释资料，第三十二条所称的其他嗣后惯例可以作为这类条约的解释资料。 |
| 2. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, or other subsequent practice under
article 32, may arise from, or be expressed in, the practice of an international
organization in the application of its constituent instrument. | 2. 第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例或第三十二条所称的其他嗣后惯例可以出自国际组织适用其组成文书的惯例，或体现在这类惯例中。 |
| 3. Practice of an international
organization in the application of its constituent instrument may contribute
to the interpretation of that instrument when applying articles 31, paragraph
1, and 32. | 3. 在适用第三十一条第一款和第三十二条时，国际组织适用其组成文书的惯例可以有助于解释该文书。 |
| 4. Paragraphs 1 to 3 apply to the
interpretation of any treaty which is the constituent instrument of an
international organization without prejudice to any relevant rules of the
organization. | 4. 第1至3段适用于对作为国际组织组成文书的任何条约的解释，但不妨碍该组织的任何有关规则。 |
| Conclusion 13 [12] | 结论13[12] |
| Pronouncements of expert treaty bodies | 专家条约机构的声明 |
| 1. For the purposes of these draft
conclusions, an expert treaty body is a body consisting of experts serving in
their personal capacity, which is established under a treaty and is not an
organ of an international organization. | 1. 为本结论草案的目的，专家条约机构指根据一项条约设立且不是国际组织机关的、由以个人身份任职的专家组成的机构。 |
| 2. The relevance of a pronouncement of an
expert treaty body for the interpretation of a treaty is subject to the
applicable rules of the treaty. | 2. 专家条约机构的声明对条约解释的意义取决于该条约的适用规则。 |
| 3. A pronouncement of an expert treaty
body may give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or subsequent
practice by parties under article 31, paragraph 3, or other subsequent
practice under article 32. | 3. 专家条约机构的声明可产生或提及第三十一条第三款所称的缔约方嗣后协定或嗣后惯例，或第三十二条所称的其他嗣后惯例。 |
| Silence by a party shall not be presumed
to constitute subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b),
accepting an interpretation of a treaty as expressed in a pronouncement of an
expert treaty body. | 缔约方的沉默不应推定为构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的、接受专家条约机构声明中表达的对相关条约的解释的嗣后惯例。 |
| 4. This draft conclusion is without
prejudice to the contribution that a pronouncement of an expert treaty body
may otherwise make to the interpretation of a treaty. | 4. 本条结论草案不妨碍专家条约机构的声明可能以其他方式有助于条约的解释。 |
| 2. Text of the draft conclusions and
commentaries thereto | 2. 结论草案案文及评注 |
| 76. The text of the draft conclusions and
commentaries thereto adopted by the Commission on first reading is reproduced
below. | 76. 委员会一读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及评注载录如下。 |
| This text comprises a consolidated
version of the commentaries adopted so far by the Commission, including
modifications and additions made to commentaries previously adopted and
commentaries adopted at the sixty-eighth session of the Commission. | 本文综合了委员会迄今为止通过的评注，包括对先前通过的评注作出的修改和增补及委员会第六十八届会议通过的评注。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties | 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例 |
| Part One | 第一部分 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| Conclusion 1 [1a] | 结论1 [1a] |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
role of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in the interpretation
of treaties. | 本结论草案涉及嗣后协定和嗣后惯例在条约解释中的作用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The present draft conclusions aim at
explaining the role that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice play
in the interpretation of treaties. They are based on the Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties of 1969 (hereinafter “1969 Vienna
Convention”). | (1) 本结论草案旨在说明嗣后协定和嗣后惯例在条约解释中发挥的作用，立足于1969年《维也纳条约法公约》(下称“1969年《维也纳公约》”)。 |
| The draft conclusions situate subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice within the framework of the rules of the
Vienna Convention on interpretation by identifying and elucidating relevant
authorities and examples, and by addressing certain questions that may arise
when applying those rules. | 这些结论草案识别并阐明了有关的考虑要素和实例，讨论了在适用《维也纳公约》关于解释的各项规则的过程中可能产生的某些问题，从而将嗣后协定和嗣后惯例置于了上述规则的框架之内。 |
| (2) The draft conclusions do not address
all conceivable circumstances in which subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice may play a role in the interpretation of treaties. | (2) 这些结论草案并未论及嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可在条约解释过程中发挥作用的所有可设想的情况。 |
| For example, one aspect not dealt with
specifically is the relevance of subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to treaties between States and international
organizations or between international organizations. | 例如，以下方面就没有得到具体讨论：嗣后协定和嗣后惯例对国家与国际组织之间或国际组织与国际组织之间所缔结条约的相关性。 |
| The draft conclusions also do not address
the interpretation of rules adopted by an international organization, the
identification of customary international law or general principles of law. | 这些结论草案没有处理国际组织通过的规则的解释问题、习惯国际法的识别或一般法律原则问题。 |
| This is without prejudice to the other
means of interpretation under article 31, including paragraph 3 (c) according
to which the interpretation of a treaty shall take into account any relevant
rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties. | 这不妨碍第三十一条、包括其第三款(c)项所指的其他解释资料。 根据第三款(c)项，对条约的解释应考虑到适用于当事国间关系之任何有关国际法规则。 |
| (3) The draft conclusions aim to
facilitate the work of those who are called on to interpret treaties. Apart
from international courts and tribunals, they offer guidance for States,
including their courts, and international organizations, as well as for
non-State actors and all those called upon to interpret treaties. | (3) 这些结论草案旨在便利受命解释条约者的工作，其提供指导的对象除国际性法院和法庭外，还有各国(包括各国法院)、国际组织，以及非国家行为方和所有受命解释条约者。 |
| Part Two | 第二部分 |
| Basic rules and definitions | 基本规则和定义 |
| Conclusion 2 [1] | 结论2[1] |
| General rule and means of treaty
interpretation | 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, | 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) any subsequent agreement between the
parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its
provisions; | (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； |
| and (b) any subsequent practice in the
application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties
regarding its interpretation. | 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 2 [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 1969 Vienna Convention. | (1) 结论草案2[1]规定，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例为在1969年《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, as a whole, is the “general rule” of treaty interpretation. | 第一，第三十一条整体为解释条约的“通则”。 |
| Second, articles 31 and 32 together list
a number of “means of interpretation”, which shall (article 31) or may (article 32) be taken into
account in the interpretation of treaties. | 第二，第三十一条和第三十二条共同列出了若干“解释的资料”，在解释条约中应(第三十一条)或可(第三十二条)予以考虑。 |
| Paragraph 1, first sentence — relationship between articles 31 and 32 | 第1段第1句――第三十一条和第三十二条之间的相互关系 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 2 [1]
emphasizes the interrelationship between articles 31 and 32, as well as the
fact that these provisions, together, reflect customary international law. | (2) 结论草案2[1]第1段强调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, 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 in order to confirm the meaning resulting from the
application of article 31, or to determine the meaning when the
interpretation according to article 31 leaves the meaning of the treaty or
its terms ambiguous or obscure or leads to a result that is manifestly absurd
or unreasonable. | 第三十二条含有一个分界点，区分出以下两者：一是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，二是用以确定因适用第三十一条而产生的意思或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而用以确定意思的“解释之补充资料”。 |
| Paragraph 1, second sentence — the Vienna Convention rules on interpretation and customary
international law | 第1段第2句――《维也纳公约》解释规则与习惯国际法 |
| (4) The second sentence of paragraph 1 of
draft conclusion 2 [1] confirms that the rules enshrined in articles 31 and
32 reflect customary international law. | (4) 结论草案2[1]第1段第二句确认第三十一条和第三十二条所载规则反映了习惯国际法。 |
| International courts and tribunals have
acknowledged the customary character of these rules. 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(“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《关于解决国家和他国国民之间投资争端公约》之下的解决投资争端国际中心所设各法庭。 |
| Hence, the rules contained in articles 31
and 32 apply as treaty law in relation to those States that are parties to
the 1969 Vienna Convention and the treaties that 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1969年《维也纳公约》的缔约国以及《公约》范围内各条约的缔约国之间作为条约法适用，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 1969 Vienna Convention in draft conclusion 2
[1] and whether this provision also reflected customary international law. | (5) 委员会还审议了在结论草案2[1]中提到1969年《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 the interpretation of treaties”. | 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, paragraph 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. | 尽管如此，委员会决定目前暂不处理这类问题。 |
| (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. | 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。 |
| In LaGrand, the International Court of
Justice recognized that paragraph 4 of article 33 reflects customary
international law. | 在拉格朗案中，国际法院承认第三十三条第四款反映了习惯法。 |
| It is less clear whether the Court 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三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，第三和第四款的规则反映了习惯法。 |
| The Arbitral Tribunal in the Young Loan
Arbitration found that paragraph 1 “incorporated” a “principle”. | 仲裁法庭在Young贷款仲裁案中认定，第一款“纳入”了一项“原则”。 |
| 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，第三十三条确实整条都反映了习惯国际法。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
article 31, paragraph 1 | 第2段――第三十一条第一款 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 2 [1]
reproduces the text of article 31, paragraph 1, of the 1969 Vienna Convention
given its importance for the topic. | (7) 鉴于1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第一款对于本专题的重要性，结论草案2[1]第2段沿用了该款的案文。 |
| Article 31, paragraph 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，第三十一条第一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 present draft conclusions. | 这确实有助于确保在解释过程中平衡以下两方面，一是根据上下文以及结合其目标和宗旨评估条约术语，二是本结论草案中关于嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的考虑。 |
| The reiteration of article 31, paragraph
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，将第三十一条第一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资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资料均为单一的综合规则的一部分。 |
| Paragraph 3 —
article 31, paragraph 3 | 第3段――第三十一条第三款 |
| (8) Paragraph 3 reproduces the language
of article 31, paragraph 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 the interpretation of
treaties. | (8) 第3段沿用了《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项和(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,
paragraph 3, “[t]here shall be taken into account,
together with the context”, is maintained in order to
emphasize 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. | 因此，保留了第三十一条第三款起首部分“应与上下文一并考虑者尚有”的措辞，以突出表明，评估第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述解释资料是第三十一条所述解释通则的组成部分。 |
| Paragraph 4 —
other subsequent practice under article 32 | 第4段――第三十二条所称的其他嗣后惯例 |
| (9) Paragraph 4 clarifies that subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty, which does not meet all criteria
of article 31, paragraph 3 (b), nevertheless falls within the scope of
article 32. | (9) 第4段说明了不符合第三十一条第三款(b)项的所有标准、但是在第三十二条的范围之内的条约适用方面的嗣后惯例。 |
| Article 32 includes a non-exhaustive list
of supplementary means of interpretation. | 第三十二条列入了一个非详尽的补充解释资料清单。 |
| 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，条约适用方面的嗣后惯例，若并非条约所有缔约方、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
literature (see in more detail paragraphs (23) to (37) 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(详见结论草案4的评注第(23)至第(37)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，委员会认为，不应在本结论草案中处理非“条约适用方面”的嗣后惯例作为补充解释资料的问题。 |
| Such practice may, however, under certain
circumstances be a relevant supplementary means of interpretation as well. | 然而，在特定情况下，这种惯例也可作为相关补充解释资料。 |
| 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). | 但除了可能有助于“评估”条约适用方面的相关嗣后惯例之外，此类惯例超出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 2
[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2[1]第4段要求任何嗣后惯例须是“条约适用方面”的，界定“其他‘嗣后惯例’”的结论草案4第3段也是这样要求的。 |
| Paragraph 5 — “a
single combined operation” | 第5段――“单一的综合行动” |
| (12) The Commission considered it
important to complete draft conclusion 2 [1] by emphasizing in paragraph 5
that, notwithstanding the structure of draft conclusion 2 [1], moving from
the general to the more specific, the process of interpretation is a “single combined operation”, which requires
that “appropriate emphasis”
be placed on various means of interpretation. | (12) 委员会认为，结论草案2[1]若要完整，重要的是要在第5段中强调，尽管结论草案2[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。 |
| The expression “single
combined operation” is drawn from the Commission’s commentary to the 1966 draft articles on the law of treaties. | “单一的综合行动”这一表述取自委员会对1966年条约法条款草案的评注。 |
| There the Commission also stated that it
intended “to emphasize that the process of
interpretation is a unity”. | 委员会还在评注中表明，希望“强调解释过程是一个整体”。 |
| (13) Paragraph 5 of draft conclusion 2
[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 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (13) 结论草案2[1]第5段还解释了，在1969年《维也纳公约》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，必须适当强调各种解释资料。 |
| 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 2 [1]. | 但是，委员会认为，在结论草案2[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. | 这就避免了一种可能的误解，即无论相关具体规定或案件情况如何，认为不同的解释资料中有一种优先于其他。 |
| (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. | 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。 |
| 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. | 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, 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，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”，相应地予以适当权衡，以作出适当的解释。 |
| (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，可能因有关条约或条约条款的具体情况，对各种解释资料有不同的强调。 |
| 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，即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 2 [1], to the “nature” of the treaty as a factor that
would typically be relevant in determining whether more or less weight should
be given to certain means of interpretation. | (16) 关于在结论草案2[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的权重时通常应考虑的因素，委员会进行了辩论。 |
| Some members considered that the subject
matter of a treaty (for example, 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 (for example, whether provisions are more
reciprocal in nature or intended more 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；条约规则是偏重技术还是偏重价值取向)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)可能影响对条约的解释。 |
| They indicated that the jurisprudence of
different international courts and tribunals suggested that this is the case. | 他们说，各国际法院和法庭的判例表明，情况就是如此。 |
| It was also mentioned that the concept of
the “nature” of a treaty is
not alien to the 1969 Vienna Convention (see, for example, article 56,
paragraph 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. | 有人还提到，条约“性质”的概念对1969年《维也纳公约》而言并不陌生(例如，见第五十六条第一款(a)项)，条约和/或条约条款“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 2 [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2[1]中提到条约的性质。 |
| Conclusion 3 [2] | 结论3[2] |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice as authentic means of interpretation | 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, paragraph 3 (a) and (b),
of the 1969 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1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项和(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 article 31, paragraph 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)项和(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 the 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；因为它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, paragraph 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)项和(b)项之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例并非唯一“作准的解释资料”。 |
| 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 objects and purposes,
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，…将其用语的通常含义、条约背景、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”一词是指缔约国行为不同形式的“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, paragraph 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)项和(b)项描述为“作准的”解释资料，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 1969 Vienna Convention thereby
accords the parties to a treaty a role that may be uncommon for the
interpretation of legal instruments in some domestic legal systems. | 因此，1969年《维也纳公约》赋予条约缔约国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, paragraph
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)项和(b)项之下的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具有决定性或法律约束力。 |
| According to the chapeau of article 31,
paragraph 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 that 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毕竟只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 the view
of some commentators, subsequent agreements and subsequent practice that
establish the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a
treaty are not necessarily conclusive or legally binding. | 因此，与某些评论者的意见相反，确定缔约国对条约解释一致意思的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例并非必然具有决定性或具有法律约束力。 |
| 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，委员会将“嗣后协定”定性为代表“解释条约时必须考虑的缔约国的作准解释”，这并不是说嗣后协定高于所有其他解释资料，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 that it may be
difficult to distinguish subsequent practice of the parties under what became
article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b) — which is only
to be taken into account, among other means, in the process of interpretation
— and a later agreement that the parties consider to
be binding: | 条约法问题特别报告员汉弗雷 •沃尔多克爵士在其第三次报告中说，在解释过程中，可能难以区分构成第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项的缔约国嗣后惯例――仅应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后来的协定： |
| “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，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.”
(emphasis added) | 在这些情况下，作为条约解释的一个要素，以及作为形成默示同意重叠和源自该惯例的意义的一个要素，嗣后惯例成为一项由协定确立的作准的解释”。 |
| Whereas Waldock’s
original view that (simple) agreed subsequent practice “would appear to be decisive of the meaning” was ultimately not adopted in the 1969 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”. | (强调系本文所加) 1969年《维也纳公约》最终没有采纳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”，但是，在“缔约国认为解释对其有约束力”时，确立缔约国对条约解释的一致意思的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例在此种解释方面必定具有决定性。 |
| 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尤其明显。 |
| Article 1131, paragraph 2, of the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), for example, provides that: “An 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条第2款规定，“[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 that the parties consider binding may or may not preclude additional
recourse to subsequent agreements or subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 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1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项和(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 more or
less authoritative, character of subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | (7) 委员会继续采用“作准的解释资料”一词，以描述第三十一条第三款(a)项和(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 3 [2] since these concepts are often
understood to mean a necessarily conclusive, or binding, agreement between
the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty. | 委员会在结论草案3[2]中没有采用“作准解释”或“权威解释”的说法，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) Domestic courts have sometimes
explicitly recognized that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), are “authentic” means of interpretation. | (8) 国内法院有时明确承认，第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例是“作准的”解释资料。 |
| They have, however, not always been
consistent regarding the legal consequences that this characterization
entails. | 但是，关于这一分类所产生的法律后果，各国内法院的意见并非始终一致。 |
| Whereas some courts have assumed that
subsequent agreements and practice by the parties under the treaty may
produce certain binding effects, others have rightly emphasized that article
31, paragraph 3, only requires that subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice “be taken into account”. | 一些法院认为条约缔约国的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可产生特定的约束效果，另一些法院则强调，第三十一条第三款仅要求“考虑”嗣后协定和嗣后惯例，事实也的确如此。 |
| (9) The term “authentic
means of interpretation” encompasses a factual and a
legal element. | (9) “作准的解释资料”包含事实和法律要素。 |
| The factual element is indicated by the
expression “objective evidence”, whereas the legal element is contained in the concept of “understanding of the parties”. | 事实要素体现在“客观证据”这一表述中，而法律要素则体现在“缔约国的理解”这一概念中。 |
| 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”定性为代表“解释条约时必须考虑的缔约国的作准解释”，并随后说明，嗣后惯例“同样…构成缔约国对条约意思的理解的客观证据”。 |
| 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. | 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。 |
| (10) The distinction between any “subsequent agreement” (article 31,
paragraph 3 (a)) and “subsequent practice … which establishes the agreement of the parties” (article 31, paragraph 3 (b)) does not denote a difference concerning
their authentic character. | (10) “嗣后协定”(第三十一条第三款(a)项)与“确定各当事国对协定…之嗣后惯例”(第三十一条第三款(b)项)之间的区分并不意味着二者权威性的不同。 |
| 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”. | 不过，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”当然具有构成条约作准解释的效力，而“嗣后惯例”仅在其“表明当事国对术语含义的共同理解”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”之间的区别在于确定当事国对条约解释的一致意思的方式，在于确定一致意思的难易程度。 |
| (11) 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 expert
treaty bodies in specific cases. | (11) 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、法庭或专家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, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), are “authentic” means of interpretation because
they are expressions of the understanding of the treaty by the States parties
themselves. | 第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项之下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例是“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 expert treaty bodies rather derives from other sources, most
often from the treaty that is to be interpreted. | 而各国际法院、法庭和专家条约机构的权威有其他来源，最通常是来自所要解释的条约。 |
| Judgments and other pronouncements of
international courts, tribunals and expert treaty bodies, however, may be
indirectly relevant for the identification of subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice as authentic means of interpretation if they refer to, reflect
or trigger such subsequent agreements and practice of the parties themselves. | 但是，各国际法院、法庭和专家条约机构的判决和其他声明如果提到、反映或引起当事国本身的此种嗣后协定和惯例，则可能间接地有助于识别作为作准的解释资料的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例。 |
| (12) Draft conclusions 2 [1] and 4
distinguish between “subsequent practice” establishing the agreement of the parties under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), of the 1969 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 that may be relevant as a supplementary means of interpretation
under article 32. | (12) 结论草案2[1]和4区分了1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项之下确定当事国一致意思的“嗣后惯例”，以及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 that 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. | 此种并不确定所有当事国一致意思的“其他”嗣后解释性惯例不能构成条约所有当事国对条约的“作准”解释，因此，就解释目的而言，不具有相同的权重。 |
| (13) The last part of draft conclusion 3
[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 1969 Vienna Convention. | (13) 结论草案3[2]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1969年《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 4 | 结论4 |
| Definition of subsequent agreement and
subsequent practice | 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。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| General aspects | 一般方面 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 4 defines the three
different “subsequent” means
of treaty interpretation that are mentioned in draft conclusion 2 [1],
paragraphs 3 and 4, namely “subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), “subsequent
practice” under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and
other “subsequent practice”
under article 32. | (1) 结论草案4定义了结论草案2[1]第3和第4段中提到的“嗣后”对条约进行解释的三种不同方法，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”以及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 (article 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 1969 Vienna
Convention (for example, article 18) show that a treaty may be “concluded” before its actual entry into
force. | 1969年《维也纳公约》各项条款(例如第十八条)表明，一项条约可在它实际生效之前“缔结”。 |
| For the purposes of the present topic, “conclusion” is whenever the text of the
treaty has been established as definite. | 为本专题的目的，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 that takes 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. | 的确，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, paragraph 2, of the 1969
Vienna Convention provides that the “context” of the treaty includes certain “agreements” and “instruments”
that “are made in connection with the conclusion of
the treaty”. | (3) 1969年《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 that are made in a
close temporal and contextual relation with the conclusion of the treaty. | “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。 |
| If they are made after this period, then
such “agreements” and agreed
upon “instruments” constitute
“subsequent agreements” or
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3. | 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。 |
| Paragraph 1 —
definition of “subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) | 第1段――对第三十一条第三款(a)项下“嗣后协定”的定义 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 4
provides the definition of “subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | (4) 结论草案4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, paragraph 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”正式。 |
| Whereas a treaty within the meaning of
the 1969 Vienna Convention must be in written form (article 2, paragraph 1
(a)), the customary international law on treaties knows no such requirement. | 虽然1969年《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。 |
| The term “agreement” in the 1969 Vienna Convention and in customary international law
does not imply any particular degree of formality. | 1969年《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 1969 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: “An amending agreement may take whatever form the parties to the
original treaty may choose. ” | 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十九条列出了一般规则：“条约得以当事国之协议修正之”，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”。 |
| In the same way, the Vienna Convention
does not envisage any particular formal requirements for agreements and
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | 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, paragraph 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, is
addressed in draft conclusion 10 [9]. | 至于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，结论草案10[9]作出了说明。 |
| (7) The 1969 Vienna Convention
distinguishes a “subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), from “any
subsequent practice … which establishes the agreement
of the parties regarding its interpretation” under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | (7) 1969年《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“嗣后…确定各当事国对条约解释之协定之任何惯例”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 Territorial Dispute (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
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”. | 在领土争端案(阿拉伯利比亚民众国诉乍得)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”这两重意义。 |
| In the case concerning Sovereignty over
Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan, the International Court of Justice left the
question open whether the use of a particular map could constitute a
subsequent agreement or subsequent practice. | 在利吉丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案中，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, paragraph 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 Tribunal of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in CCFT v. United States, 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 of America
asserted that a number of unilateral actions by the three NAFTA parties
could, if considered together, constitute a subsequent agreement. | 在该案中，美利坚合众国声称，《北美自由贸易协定》的三个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, paragraph 3 (a). | 最初，专家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。 |
| In a second step, however, the Tribunal
concluded that the very same evidence constituted a relevant subsequent
practice that established an agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation: | 但进入第二阶段，法庭认为，同样这些证据构成了确定缔约方就解释达成一致的相关嗣后惯例： |
| “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)? | “问题是：是否有一个“嗣后惯例”，确定《北美自由贸易协定》缔约国在这个问题上存在第三十一条第三款(b)项意义下的一致性？ |
| The Tribunal concludes that there is. | 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，表明存在‘缔约方之间关于条约解释或条约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，在条约适用方面确实存在确定缔约方对条约适用的一致性的‘嗣后惯例’…” |
| (9) This reasoning suggests that one
difference between a “subsequent agreement” and “subsequent practice” under article 31, paragraph 3, lies in different forms that
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, paragraph 3 (a), and “subsequent practice … which establishes the understanding of the parties” under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention,
the Commission did not intend to denote a difference concerning their
possible legal effect. | 实际上，委员会在1969年《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，并不是想表示两者可能存在的法律效果上的区别。 |
| 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”. | 这两个概念的区别在于“缔约方之间的嗣后协定”自动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。 |
| (10) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 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 that in their combination demonstrate a common position. | (10) 因此，区分第三十一条第三款之下的嗣后协定与嗣后惯例的依据是，是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, paragraph 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、表明他们对条约解释或条约规定适用的共同理解。 |
| (11) “Subsequent
practice” under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), on the
other hand, encompasses all (other) relevant forms of subsequent conduct by
the parties to a treaty that contribute to the identification of an
agreement, or “understanding”,
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)形式的相关嗣后行为，这些行为可帮助确定缔约国在条约解释方面的一致性或“谅解”。 |
| It is, however, possible that “practice” and “agreement” coincide in specific cases and cannot be distinguished. | 然而，在特定情况下“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, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | 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。 |
| (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, paragraph 3 (a). | (12) 一系列单独的嗣后协定，每项均在部分缔约方之间缔结，但把这些协定放在一起，便可确定条约所有缔约方对于条约解释的一致意见，这种情况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, paragraph 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 “嗣后协定”的意思，为清楚起见，应仅限于所有缔约方之间一项单一的协定。 |
| Different later agreements between a
limited number of parties that, taken together, establish an agreement between
all the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty constitute
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 少数缔约方之间嗣后签订的不同协定，若综合起来可确定所有缔约方对于条约解释的一致意见，则构成第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后惯例。 |
| Different such agreements between a
limited number of parties that, 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 (23) and (24)). | 少数缔约方之间嗣后签订的不同协定，即使综合起来也不能确定所有缔约方对于条约解释的一致意见，则可以作为第三十二条之下的补充解释资料，具有解释上的价值(见下文第(23)段和(24)段)。 |
| Thus, the use of the term “subsequent agreement” is limited to
agreements among all the parties to a treaty that are manifested in one
single agreement — or in a common act in whatever
form that reflects the agreement of all parties. | 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，或是一个共同的行动，无论形式如何，但反映所有缔约方的一致。 |
| (13) A subsequent agreement under article
31, paragraph 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”条约解释或适用条约规定的协定。 |
| The parties must therefore purport,
possibly among other aims, to clarify the meaning of a treaty or how it is to
be applied. | 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。 |
| (14) Whether an agreement is one “regarding” the interpretation or
application of a treaty can sometimes be determined by some reference that
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将“嗣后协定”与相关条约联系起来的语句来确定。 |
| Such reference may also be comprised in a
later treaty. | 这类语句也可见于之后的条约。 |
| 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，在丹麦与挪威的Jan Mayen案中，国际法院似乎已认可当事国之间“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，法院最终还是拒绝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。 |
| In Dispute Regarding Navigation and
Related Rights between Costa Rica and Nicaragua, Judge ad hoc Guillaume
referred to the actual practice of tourism on the San Juan River in
conformity with a memorandum of understanding between the two States. | 在哥斯达黎加与尼加拉瓜关于航行和相关权利的争端案中，Guillaume专案法官提到了根据两国的一项谅解备忘录在San Juan河开展旅游业的实际做法。 |
| It was not clear, however, whether this
particular memorandum was meant by the parties to serve as an interpretation
of the boundary treaty under examination. | 然而并不清楚两国是否准备将这份备忘录用于解释所审议的边界条约。 |
| (15) The Court of Final Appeal in Hong
Kong, China has provided an example of a rather strict approach when it was
called upon to interpret the Sino-British Joint Declaration in the case of Ng
Ka Ling and Others v. Director of Immigration. | (15) 在吴嘉玲等人诉入境事务处处长案中，中国香港终审法院在解释《中英联合声明》时采用了较为严格的做法。 |
| In this case, one party alleged that the
Sino-British Joint Liaison Group, consisting of representatives of China and
the United Kingdom under article 5 of the Joint Declaration, had come to an
agreement regarding the interpretation of the Joint Declaration. | 当事一方主张，《联合声明》第五条下的中英联合联络小组――由中国和联合王国的代表组成――就《联合声明》的解释达成了一致。 |
| As evidence, the party pointed to a
booklet that stated that it was compiled “on the
basis of the existing immigration regulations and practices and the common
view of the British and Chinese sides in the [Joint Liaison Group]”. | 该当事方提到的依据是一本声称“基于现行移民条例和实践以及[联合联络小组]中英双方的共同意见”编写的小册子。 |
| The Court, however, did not find that the
purpose of the booklet was to “interpret or to apply” the Joint Declaration within the meaning of article 31, paragraph
3 (a). | 但法院不认为小册子的目的是第三十一条第三款(a)项意义下的“解释或适用”《联合声明》。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
definition of subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b) | 第2段――对第三十一条第三款(b)项下“嗣后惯例”的定义 |
| (16) 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. | (16) 结论草案4第2段并不是要对可能用于条约解释目的的任何形式的嗣后惯例作出一般性定义。 |
| Paragraph 2 is limited to subsequent
practice as a means of authentic interpretation that establishes the
agreement of all the parties to the treaty, as formulated in article 31,
paragraph 3 (b). | 第2段只涉及作为作准解释资料的嗣后惯例，即第三十一条第三款(b)项所述、确定各缔约方对条约解释一致性的嗣后惯例。 |
| Such subsequent practice (in a narrow
sense) is distinguishable from other “subsequent
practice” (in a broad sense) by one or more parties
that 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 1969 Vienna Convention. | (狭义上的)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”，后者并未确立缔约方的一致意见，但根据1969年《维也纳公约》第三十二条，可以作为解释的辅助手段。 |
| (17) Subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3 (b), may consist of any “conduct”. | (17) 第三十一条第三款(b)项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，它不仅可以包括有助于确定一致意见的行为，也包括不作为，包括相关沉默。 |
| The question under which circumstances
omissions, or silence, can contribute to an agreement of all the parties
regarding the interpretation of a treaty is addressed in draft conclusion 10
[9], paragraph 2. | 至于在什么情况下不作为或沉默可能促成所有缔约方就条约的解释达成一致，结论草案10[9]第2段作出了说明。 |
| (18) Subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3 (b), must be conduct “in the
application of the treaty”. | (18) 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 that 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. | 这不仅包括在国际上或在国内为适用条约――包括为遵守或确保履行条约义务――采取的官方行为，除其他外，也包括有关条约解释的官方声明，如外交会议上的发言、法律争端过程中的声明，或国内法院的判决；条约产生的官方函件；或颁布国内法，或为执行条约缔结国际协定，即使是在国内或在国际上实际采取任何具体适用条约的行动之前。 |
| (19) It may be recalled that, in one
case, a NAFTA Panel denied that internal legislation can be used as an
interpretative aid: | (19) 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 1969 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1969年《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内法在条约适用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) that
violates treaty obligations and national legislation and other measures that
can serve as a means to interpret the treaty. | 因此，国际裁判机构，特别是世贸组织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)不同于可用来解释条约的国内法和其他措施，并经常对二者作出区分。 |
| It should be noted, however, that an
element of bona fide is implied in any “subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty”. | 然而，应当指出，任何“适用条约方面的嗣后惯例”都暗含了“善意”这个要素。 |
| 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，明显滥用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”。 |
| (20) The requirement that subsequent
practice in the application of a treaty under article 31, paragraph 3 (b),
must be “regarding its interpretation” has the same meaning as the parallel requirement under article
31, paragraph 3 (a) (see paragraphs (13) and (14) above). | (20) 第三十一条第三款(b)项下适用条约方面的嗣后惯例必须是“有关条约解释的”，这一要求与第三十一条第三款(a)项下的平行要求含义相同(见上文第(13)和第(14)段)。 |
| It may often be difficult to distinguish
between subsequent practice that specifically and purposefully relates to a
treaty, that 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。 |
| (21) The question under which
circumstances an “agreement of the parties regarding
the interpretation of a treaty” is actually “established” is addressed in draft
conclusion 10 [9]. | (21) 至于在什么情况下“缔约方对条约解释的一致”实际得到“确定”，结论草案10[9]作出了说明。 |
| (22) Article 31, paragraph 3 (b), does
not explicitly require that the practice must be the conduct of the parties
to the treaty themselves. | (22) 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, or by way of conduct that is attributable to
them, who engage in practice in the application of the treaty that 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，才可能确定它们的一致。 |
| The question of whether other actors can
generate relevant subsequent practice is addressed in draft conclusion 5. | 至于其他行为方是否能够产生相关的嗣后惯例，结论草案5作出了说明。 |
| Paragraph 3 — “other” subsequent practice | 第3段――“其他”嗣后惯例 |
| (23) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 4
addresses “other” subsequent
practice, that is practice other than that referred to in article 31,
paragraph 3 (b). | (23) 结论草案4第3段论及“其他”嗣后惯例，即第三十一条第三款(b)项中没有提到的其他惯例。 |
| 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 2 [1]. | 这一段论及结论草案2[1]第4段中提到的“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，作为解释的一个要素的一个缔约方的惯例或仅仅是部分缔约方的惯例，与所有缔约方都认可、显示他们对条约含义的共同理解的共同惯例，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, paragraph 3, of the 1969 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1969年《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惯例，只能作为第七十条中提到的“进一步的”解释资料之一加以考虑。 ” |
| (24) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 4
does not enunciate a requirement, as it is contained in article 31, paragraph
3 (b), that the relevant practice be “regarding the
interpretation” of the treaty. | (24) 结论草案4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，就第3段而言，在适用条约方面的任何惯例，只要能够表明条约应如何解释，便可作为第三十二条下的相关补充解释资料。 |
| (25) This “other” subsequent practice, since the adoption of the 1969 Vienna
Convention, has been recognized and applied by international courts and other
adjudicatory bodies as a means of interpretation (see paragraphs (26) to (34)
below). | (25) 自1969年《维也纳公约》通过后，这种“其他”嗣后惯例已被各种国际法院和其他裁判机构作为一种解释资料予以承认并适用(见下文第(26)段至(34)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 that 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，世贸组织上诉机构在日本――酒精饮料案(二)中，为条约解释的目的提出了一个嗣后惯例的定义，该定义似乎认为，只有“确定了缔约方对条约解释的一致”的条约适用方面的这种嗣后惯例，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 discernible 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、共同和一致的’系列行为或声明，足以确立一种明确的模式，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
paragraphs (33) and (34) below), demonstrate that subsequent practice that
fulfils all the conditions of article 31, paragraphs 3 (b), of the 1969
Vienna Convention is not the only form of subsequent practice by parties in
the application of a treaty that 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(33)和(34)段)都表明，符合1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所有条件的嗣后惯例，就条约解释目的而言，并不是缔约方在适用条约方面唯一的嗣后惯例的形式。 |
| (26) In the case of Kasikili/Sedudu
Island, for example, the International Court of Justice held that a report by
a technical expert that had been commissioned by one of the parties and that
had “remained at all times an internal document”, while not representing subsequent practice that establishes the
agreement of the parties under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), could “nevertheless support the conclusions” that
the Court had reached by other means of interpretation. | (26) 例如，在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中，国际法院认为，一个缔约方委托一位技术专家编写的报告“始终是一份国内文件”，虽然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，但仍可为国际法院根据其他解释资料得出的结论“提供支持”。 |
| (27) The ICSID Tribunals have also used
subsequent State practice as a means of interpretation in a broad sense. | (27) 解决投资争端国际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
of 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解决投资争端国际中心的程序问题时，审理CMS燃气输送公司诉阿根廷案的法庭认为： |
| “State practice further supports the
meaning of this changing scenario. … | “国家惯例进一步支持了这种物换星移的意义所在。 |
| Minority and non-controlling
participations have thus been included in the protection granted or have been
admitted to claim in their own right. | …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，都证明国际索赔问题的处理日益灵活。” |
| (28) The European Court of Human Rights
held in Loizidou v. Turkey that its interpretation was “confirmed by the subsequent practice of the Contracting Parties”, that is “the evidence of a practice
denoting practically universal agreement amongst Contracting Parties that
[a]rticles 25 and 46 … of the Convention do not
permit territorial or substantive restrictions”. | (28) 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“存在一种惯例，表明缔约方几乎普遍认为《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 European Court of Human
Rights 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行政惯例作为解释资料。 |
| In the case of Demir and Baykara v.
Turkey, for example, the Court held that “[a]s 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 “[t]he 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，它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”。 |
| (29) The Inter-American Court of Human Rights,
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. | (29) 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惯例确定了缔约方一致意见的案例。 |
| Thus, in the case of Hilaire, Constantine
and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights held that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty for every form
of conduct that resulted in the death of another person was incompatible with
article 4, paragraph 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”。 |
| (30) The Human Rights Committee under the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 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. | (30) 《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, paragraph 3, of the Covenant (permissible
restrictions on 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, paragraph 3, of the
Covenant. | 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的，本身并没有超出《公约》第十九条第3款规定的合理目的。 |
| (31) 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. | (31) 国际海洋法法庭几次提到缔约方的嗣后惯例，但并没有核实这些惯例是否实际上确定了缔约方就条约解释的一致意思。 |
| In the M/V “SAIGA” (No. 2) case, for example, the Tribunal reviewed State practice
with regard to the use of force to stop a ship according to the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. | 例如，在M/V“SAIGA”(第2号)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. | 法庭依据了“停止船只航行的通常做法”，但没有具体指明相关的国家惯例，而是假定存在某种一般标准。 |
| (32) The International Criminal Tribunal
for the former Yugoslavia, referring to the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, noted in the Jelisić judgment that: | (32) 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭在Jelisić案判决中提到《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》，指出： |
| “… the Trial Chamber … interprets the Convention’s terms in
accordance with the general rules of interpretation of treaties set out in
[a]rticles 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.” | …各国的惯例，特别是国内法院体现的惯例，以及国际权威部门在这个领域里的工作也得到考虑。 ” |
| (33) The WTO dispute settlement bodies
also occasionally distinguish between “subsequent
practice” that satisfies the conditions of article
31, paragraph (b), and other forms of subsequent practice in the application
of the treaty that they also recognize as being relevant for the purpose of
treaty interpretation. | (33) 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: | 专家组发现有证据表明在几个成员国的国内法中确有这种原则存在，指出： |
| “… we recall that [a]rticle 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，出于解释的目的，应联系上下文考虑(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国际法规则。 |
| 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，表明其国内法基于轻微例外原则的限制。 |
| In our view, [S]tate 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，伯尔尼联盟成员国的版权法在1948、1967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》对它们生效之前和之后，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 [S]tate
practice we do not wish to express a view on whether these are sufficient to
constitute ‘subsequent practice’ within the meaning of [a]rticle 31 (3) (b) of the Vienna
Convention.” | “我们阐述这些国家惯例的例子，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。 |
| (34) In European Communities — Customs Classification of Certain Computer Equipment, the WTO
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: | (34) 在欧洲共同体－某些计算机设备关税分类案中，世贸组织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. | “适当的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. | 欧洲共同体指出，它曾对这些决定提出保留。 |
| … However, we consider that in
interpreting the tariff concessions in Schedule LXXX, decisions of the WCO
may be relevant … .” | …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,
paragraph 3 (b), and a broader concept of subsequent practice that 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”与更广义的嗣后惯例概念之间的区别，即后者并不要求所有条约缔约方之间的一致。 |
| (35) 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”. | (35) 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, paragraph 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给予前者更大的解释权重。 |
| Domestic courts have sometimes not
clearly distinguished between subsequent agreements and subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3, and other subsequent practice under article
32. | 国内法院有时没有明确区分第三十一条第三款下的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例与第三十二条下的其他惯例。 |
| (36) The distinction between subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and subsequent practice under
article 32 also contributes to answering the question of whether subsequent
practice requires repeated action with some frequency or whether a one-time
application of the treaty may be enough. | (36) 区分第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后惯例与第三十二条之下的嗣后惯例，也有助于回答这一问题，即嗣后惯例是否需要一定频率的重复行动，或是否一次适用条约足矣。 |
| In the WTO framework, the Appellate Body
has found: | 世贸组织的上诉机构认为： |
| “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形成嗣后惯例，必须是确定了缔约方之间一致的一系列行动，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一致之间做出区分，频率并不是定义(第三十二条下)广义的“嗣后惯例”概念的必需要素。 |
| (37) Thus, “subsequent
practice” in the broad sense (under article 32)
covers any application of the treaty by one or more parties. | (37) 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 that 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，或默认其他缔约方声明或行为。 |
| Conclusion 5 | 结论5 |
| Attribution of subsequent practice | 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
of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (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, paragraph 3 (b), and to subsequent practice
as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32. | “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1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的作准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第1段以肯定句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段以否定句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。 |
| Paragraph 1 —
conduct constituting subsequent practice | 第1段――构成嗣后惯例的行为 |
| (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 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 that is otherwise attributable, under international law,
to a party to a treaty. | 相应的，“任何行为”包括行动和不行动，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
responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts does not, however,
extend to the requirement that the conduct in question be “internationally wrongful” (see below
paragraph (8)). | 不过，提到国家对国际不法行为的责任条款并不代表相关行为应为“国际不法”行为(见下文第(8)段)。 |
| (3) An example of relevant conduct that
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 Island 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,
paragraph 3 (b), of the Vienna Convention if it: | 法院在该案中认为，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使用可视为《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后惯例，条件是这种使用： |
| “… 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 of and accepted this as a confirmation
of the Treaty boundary.” | “…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 that 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1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 that 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上的巨大差异。 |
| 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复杂多样，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 1969 Vienna Convention. | (6) 国家在适用条约方面的嗣后惯例当然可以由1969年《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在某些情况下也可以构成适用条约方面的嗣后惯例。 |
| Accordingly, the International Court of
Justice recognized in the Case concerning rights of nationals of the United
States in Morocco that article 95 of the General Act of the International
Conference of Algeciras (1906) had to be interpreted flexibly in light of the
inconsistent practice of local customs authorities. | 因此，国际法院在摩洛哥境内美国国民权利案中承认，应根据当地海关当局不一致的惯例灵活解释1906年《阿尔赫西拉斯国际会议总议定书》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 decision, 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. | 在关于居住在法国的教科文组织退休职员所领退休金的征税制度案中，仲裁法庭原则上认可，法国税务部门不对教科文组织退休职员的退休金征税的惯例是相关嗣后惯例，但最终认为上级机关，即法国政府的一些相反的官方声明具有决定作用。 |
| (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，且政府应该知道该做法且没有在合理时间内反对这种做法。 |
| (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增加“出于条约解释的目的”这一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 that may
be attributable to a State but that 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，目的是从“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作用的行为。 |
| 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”的行为这一要求足以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”这一概念要求善意的行为，因而明显的误用公约不在这一范围之内。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
conduct non constituting subsequent practice | 第2段――不构成嗣后惯例的行为 |
| (9) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5
comprises two sentences. | (9) 结论草案5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段所考虑的行为与第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一致。 |
| “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.” | “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，并最终对条约的适用负责。 |
| 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，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 that is not “in the application
of the treaty” or statements by a State that is not
party to a treaty about the latter’s interpretation,
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 that are tasked by Conferences of 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，这些行为可能包括缔约方并非“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、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、受缔约国大会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句中的“评估嗣后惯例”应从广义上理解为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 that 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并入缔约国本身的惯例，包括归属于缔约方的惯例。 |
| Activities of actors that are not State
parties, as such, may only contribute to assessing subsequent practice of the
parties to a treaty. | 因而，非缔约国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 1986 Vienna Convention, which mentions the “established practice of the organization”
as one form of the “rules of the organization”. | 例如，1986年《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 of 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 State practice in a particular field, may
enjoy considerable authority in the assessment of such practice. | (15) 全球性国际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 and Guidelines
on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951
Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees of the
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (hereinafter “UNHCR Handbook”) is an important work that
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》(下称《难民署手册》)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 24 April
2004 on implementation measures taken by Member States. | 同样的还有所谓的1540汇总表，该表是根据2004年4月24日第1540(2004)号决议设立的联合国安全理事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, as well as to the 1993 Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their
Destruction, it constitutes evidence for and an assessment of subsequent
State practice to those treaties. | 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》以及1993年《关于禁止发展、生产、储存和使用化学武器及销毁此种武器的公约》执行的部分，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。 |
| (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). | 红十字国际委员会(红十字委员会)就是一个这样的例子。 |
| Apart from fulfilling a general mandate
conferred on it by the Geneva Conventions for the protection of war victims
and by the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement,
ICRC occasionally provides interpretative guidance on the 1949 Geneva
Conventions and the Additional Protocols on the basis of a mandate from the
Statutes of the Movement. | 除了完成关于保护战争受难者的日内瓦四公约和《国际红十字与红新月运动章程》赋予的一般性任务， 红十字委员会还不时就1949年日内瓦四公约及各项附加议定书的解释提供指导，这是《运动章程》规定的任务。 |
| Article 5, paragraph 2 (g), of the
Statutes provides: | 该章程第5条第2款(7)项规定： |
| “The role of the International Committee,
in accordance with its [s]tatutes, 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.” | “根据委员会章程，该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, 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》。 |
| The Interpretative 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 [international humanitarian law]
should be interpreted”. | 该解释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”。 |
| In this context it is, however, important
to note that States have reaffirmed their primary role in the development of
international humanitarian law. | 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 International
Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (2011), while recalling “the important roles of the [ICRC]”, “emphasiz[es] the primary role of States in the development of
international humanitarian law”. | 2011年第31届红十字与红新月国际大会第1项决议在强调“[红十字委员会]的重要作用”的同时，“强调国家在发展国际人道主义法方面的主要作用”。 |
| (17) Another example of conduct of
non-State actors that 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 for the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling,
Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction
(Ottawa Convention) and the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions (Dublin
Convention). | 监测组织充当了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》)和2008年《集束弹药公约》(《都柏林公约》)事实上的监测机制。 |
| The Monitor lists pertinent statements
and practice by States parties and signatories and identifies, inter alia, interpretative
questions concerning the Dublin Convention. | 监测组织列出了缔约国和签署国的相关声明和惯例，并确认了除其他外、涉及《都柏林公约》的各种解释性问题。 |
| (18) The examples of ICRC and 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 must thus 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”的一个例子。 |
| 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. | 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” and “major social
changes” 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”和“重大社会变革”就条约解释目的而言具有相关性。 |
| 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。 |
| This is true, in particular, for the
important cases of Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom and Christine Goodwin v. the
United Kingdom. | Dudgeon诉联合王国案和Christine
Goodwin诉联合王国案等重要案件尤为如此。 |
| 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”。 |
| The Court further pointed to the fact
that “in Northern Ireland itself, the authorities have
refrained in recent years from enforcing the law”. | 法院还指出，“在北爱尔兰本身，当局近年来也不再执行该法”。 |
| 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”. | 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，在涉及非婚生儿童地位问题的案件以及关于宣称罗姆人(“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) 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。 |
| Part Three | 第三部分 |
| General aspects | 一般方面 |
| Conclusion 6 | 结论6 |
| Identification of subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice | 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的识别 |
| 1. The identification of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, requires,
in particular, a determination whether the parties, by an agreement or a
practice, have taken a position regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 1. 为识别第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例，尤其须确定缔约方是否通过协定或惯例就条约的解释采取了立场。 |
| This is not normally the case if the
parties have merely agreed not to apply the treaty temporarily or agreed to
establish a practical arrangement (modus vivendi). | 通常，如果缔约方只是商定暂不适用条约，或商定确立一种实际安排(临时协议)，便不属于这种情况。 |
| 2. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, can take a variety of forms. | 2. 第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能具有各种形式。 |
| 3. The identification of subsequent
practice under article 32 requires, in particular, a determination whether
conduct by one or more parties is in the application of the treaty. | 3. 在根据第三十二条识别嗣后惯例时，尤其须确定一个或多个缔约方的行为是否处在适用条约过程之中。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The purpose of draft conclusion 6 is
to indicate that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, as means of
interpretation, must be identified. | (1) 结论草案6的目的是要表明，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释手段必须加以识别。 |
| Paragraph 1, first sentence — the term “regarding the interpretation” | 第1段第一句――短语“就条约的解释” |
| (2) The first sentence of paragraph 1
recalls that the identification of subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice for the purposes of article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), requires
particular consideration of the question of whether the parties, by an
agreement or a practice, have taken a position regarding the interpretation
of a treaty or whether they were motivated by other considerations. | (2) 第1段第一句提到，为了第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项的目的而识别嗣后协定和嗣后惯例，就要求特别考虑这样的问题：有关各方是否通过协议或惯例已就条约的解释采取了立场，或者他们是否受其他考虑的驱动。 |
| (3) Subsequent agreements under article
31, paragraph 3 (a), must be “regarding the
interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions” and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), must
be “in the application of the treaty” and thereby establish an agreement “regarding
its interpretation”. | (3) 第三十一条第三款(a)项所称的嗣后协定必须是“关于条约之解释或其规定之适用”的，第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例必须是“在条约适用方面”的，因而“对条约的解释”确立了协定。 |
| The relationship between the terms “interpretation” and “application” in article 31, paragraph 3,
is not clear-cut. | 在第三十一条第三款中，“解释”和“适用”两个术语之间的关系并非一目了然。 |
| “Interpretation”
is the process by which the meaning of a treaty, including of one or more of
its provisions, is clarified. | “解释”是澄清条约含义包括其中一项或多项条款的含义的过程。 |
| “Application”
encompasses conduct by which the rights under a treaty are exercised or its
obligations are complied with, in full or in part. | “适用”包括全部或部分地行使条约规定的权利或履行其义务的行为。 |
| “Interpretation”
refers to a mental process, whereas “application” focuses on actual conduct (acts and omissions). | “解释”是指心理过程，而“适用”侧重于实际的行为(作为或不作为)。 |
| In this sense, the two concepts are
distinguishable, and may serve different purposes under article 31, paragraph
3 (see paragraphs (4) to (6) below) but they are also closely interrelated
and build upon each other. | 从这个意义上说，这两个概念是有区别的，并且可以用于第三十一条第三款之下的不同用途(见下文第(4)至(6)段)，但他们也密切相关，互以对方为基础。 |
| (4) Whereas there may be aspects of “interpretation” that remain unrelated to
the “application” of a
treaty, application of a treaty almost inevitably involves some element of
interpretation — even in cases in which the rule in
question appears to be clear on face value. | (4) 虽然可能有一些“解释”方面会一直与条约的适用无关，但条约的适用几乎必然涉及某种解释因素――即使在有关规则从表面看来是一目了然的情况下。 |
| Therefore, an agreement or conduct “regarding the interpretation” of the
treaty and an agreement or conduct “in the
application” of the treaty both imply that the
parties assume, or are attributed, a position regarding the interpretation of
the treaty. | 因此，“关于条约之解释”的协定或行为以及关于“条约适用方面”的协定或行为都意味着各方就条约的解释采取了立场，或者可将这种立场归于他们。 |
| Whereas in the case of a “subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation of the treaty” under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) (first alternative), the position regarding the interpretation
of a treaty is specifically and purposefully assumed by the parties, this may
be less clearly identifiable in the case of a “subsequent
agreement … regarding … the
application of its provisions” under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) (second alternative). | 在第三十一条第三款(a)项(第一项选择)“关于…条约规定之适用的嗣后协定”的情况下，对条约解释的立场是各方具体并有目的地采取的，而在第三十一条第三款(a)项(第二项选择)“关于条约之适用的嗣后协定”的情况下，这一点不那么容易辨认出来。 |
| Assuming a position regarding
interpretation “by application” is also implied in simple acts of application of the treaty under
articles 31, paragraph 3 (b), that is, in “every
measure taken on the basis of the interpreted treaty”.
The word “or” in article 31,
paragraph 3 (a), thus does not describe a mutually exclusive relationship
between “interpretation” and “application”. | 假设根据第三十一条第三款(b)项进行的一些简单的适用行为即“根据所解释的条约而采取的每一项措施”隐含着“通过适用”进行解释的立场，那么第三十一条第三款(a)项中的“或”字并不是描述“解释”和“适用”之间的互相排斥关系。 |
| (5) The significance of an “application” of a treaty, for the purpose
of its interpretation, is, however, not limited to the identification of the
position that the State party concerned thereby assumes regarding its
interpretation. | (5) 然而，条约的“适用”的意义，就其解释的目的而言，不限于识别有关缔约国围绕条约的解释而采取的立场。 |
| Indeed, the way in which a treaty is
applied not only contributes to determining the meaning of the treaty, but
also to the identification of the degree to which the interpretation that the
States parties have assumed is “grounded” and thus more or less firmly established. | 事实上，适用条约的方式不仅有助于确定条约的意义，而且有助于识别该缔约国所采取的解释在多大程度上是“有根基的”，从而或多或少是稳固确立的。 |
| (6) It should be noted that an “application” of the treaty does not
necessarily reflect the position of a State party that such application is
the only legally possible one under the treaty and under the circumstances. | (6) 应该指出的是，条约的“适用”并不一定反映缔约国有这样的立场，即这种适用是根据条约在当时情况下在法律上唯一可能的适用。 |
| Further, the concept of “application” does not exclude certain
conduct by non-State actors that the treaty recognizes as forms of its
application that are attributable to its parties and hence can constitute
practice establishing the agreement of the parties. | 而且，“适用”的概念并不排除某些非国家行为者的行为，如果条约承认这些行为是适用的形式而且可归于缔约方的话。 这些行为因而可构成确立缔约方之间协定的惯例。 |
| Finally, the legal significance of a
particular conduct in the application of a treaty is not necessarily limited
to its possible contribution to interpretation under article 31, but may also
contribute to meeting the burden of proof or to fulfilling the conditions of
other rules. | 最后，在适用条约时的某一特定行为的法律意义不局限于其可能根据第三十一条对解释作出的贡献，而且可能对履行举证责任或满足其他规则的条件作出贡献。 |
| (7) Subsequent conduct that is not
motivated by a treaty obligation is not “in the
application of the treaty” or “regarding” its interpretation, within the
meaning of article 31, paragraph 3. | (7) 在未受一项条约义务驱动的情况下而在嗣后发生的行为，不是“在适用条约之中”的行为，也不是第三十一条第三款意义上的“关于”条约解释的行为。 |
| In the Certain Expenses of the United
Nations case, for example, some judges doubted whether the continued payment
by the Member States of the United Nations of their membership contributions
signified acceptance of a certain practice of the Organization. | 例如，在关于联合国某些费用的咨询意见中，一些法官怀疑联合国会员国继续支付它们的会费是否等于接受该组织的某些做法。 |
| Judge Fitzmaurice formulated a well-known
warning in this context, according to which “the
argument drawn from practice, if taken too far, can be question-begging”. | 菲茨莫里斯法官在这方面拟订了著名的警告，他说，“从实践中得出的论点，如果走得太远，则会招来问题”。 |
| According to Fitzmaurice, it would be “hardly possible to infer from the mere fact that Member States
pay, that they necessarily admit in all cases a positive legal obligation to
do so”. | 菲茨莫里斯认为，“从会员国付费这个单纯的事实推断出它们必然在所有情况下都承认存在着付费的实在法义务，这几乎是不可能的”。 |
| (8) Similarly, in the Maritime
Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain case, the
International Court of Justice held that an effort by the parties to the
Agreement of 1987 (on the submission of a dispute to the jurisdiction of the
Court) to conclude an additional Special Agreement (which would have specified
the subject matter of the dispute) did not mean that the conclusion of such
an additional agreement was actually considered by the parties to be required
for the establishment of the jurisdiction of the Court. | (8) 同样，国际法院在审理卡塔尔和巴林之间海洋划界和领土问题案时认为，1987年协议(关于将争端提交法院管辖的协议)的当事方努力缔结一项附加的特别协定(该协定将说明争端所涉的事项)并不意味着这样的附加协定的缔结实际上被当事方认为是确立法院管辖权的必要条件。 |
| (9) Another example of a voluntary
practice that is not meant to be “in application of” or “regarding the interpretation” of a treaty concerns “complementary
protection” in the context of refugee law. | (9) 另有一个自愿性惯例的例子，其本意不是“在适用条约”或“关于解释条约”，它涉及难民法方面的“补充保护”问题。 |
| Persons who are denied refugee status
under the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees are nonetheless often
granted “complementary protection”, which is equivalent to that under the Convention. | 依据《关于难民地位的公约》而被剥夺难民地位的人仍然常常获得“补充保护”，这相当于该公约之下的那种保护。 |
| States that grant complementary
protection, however, do not consider themselves as acting “in the application of” the Convention or “regarding its interpretation”. | 然而给予补充保护的国家不认为自己是在“适用”该公约或就公约“解释”而行事。 |
| (10) It is sometimes difficult to
distinguish relevant subsequent agreements or practice regarding the
interpretation or in the application of a treaty under article 31, paragraph
3 (a) and (b), from other conduct or developments in the wider context of the
treaty, including from “contemporaneous developments” in the subject area of the treaty. | (10) 有时很难将第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项涉及条约的解释或适用的有关嗣后协定或惯例与条约更大背景下的其他行为或发展，其中包括在条约主题事项领域的“同时代发展”加以区分。 |
| Such a distinction is, however, important
since only conduct regarding interpretation by the parties introduces their
specific authority into the process of interpretation. | 然而这样的区分是重要的，因为唯有缔约方就解释作出的行为才能将其特定的权威引入到解释的过程中。 |
| The general rule would seem to be that
the more specifically an agreement or a practice is related to a treaty the
more interpretative weight it can acquire under article 31, paragraph 3 (a)
and (b). | 一般的规则似乎是，协定或惯例越是具体关系到一个条约的解释，它就能根据第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项获得越多的解释性权重。 |
| (11) The characterization of a subsequent
agreement or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b),
as assuming a position regarding the interpretation of a treaty often
requires a careful factual and legal analysis. | (11) 根据第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项将嗣后协定或嗣后惯例加以定性，视其就条约的解释采取了立场，往往需要仔细的事实分析和法律分析。 |
| This point can be illustrated by examples
from judicial and State practice. | 从司法实践和国家实践中摘取的例子可以说明这一点。 |
| (12) The jurisprudence of the
International Court of Justice provides a number of examples. | (12) 国际法院的审判实践提供了若干例子。 |
| On the one hand, the Court did not
consider the “joint ministerial communiqués” of two States to “be included in the conventional basis of the right of free
navigation” since the “modalities
for co-operation which they put in place are likely to be revised in order to
suit the Parties”. | 一方面，法院不认为两国“部长级联合公报”包括在“自由航行权传统的基础”之内，因为“他们设立的合作模式很可能得到修改以适合双方。” |
| The Court has also held, however, that
the lack of certain assertions regarding the interpretation of a treaty, or
the absence of certain forms of its application, constituted a practice that
indicated the legal position of the parties according to which nuclear
weapons were not prohibited under various treaties regarding poisonous
weapons. | 但是法院还认为，由于就条约的解释缺乏某些主张，或者在适用方面缺乏某些形式，这就构成一种惯例，表明了缔约方的一种法律立场，根据这种立场，根据关于有毒武器的各项条约，核武器是不受禁止的。 |
| In any case, the exact significance of a
collective expression of views of the parties can only be identified by a
careful consideration as to whether and to what extent such expression is
meant to be “regarding the interpretation” of the treaty. | 在任何情况下，缔约方意见的集体表达的确切意义，只能通过仔细考虑才能查明以下问题：这种表达是否以及在何种程度上是有意“关于条约的解释”的。 |
| Accordingly, the Court held in the
Whaling in the Antarctic case that “relevant
resolutions and Guidelines [of the International Whaling Commission] that
have been approved by consensus call upon States parties to take into account
whether research objectives can practically and scientifically be achieved by
using non-lethal research methods, but they do not establish a requirement
that lethal methods be used only when other methods are not available”. | 因此，法院在南极捕鲸案中认为，缔约国以协商一致方式认可的[国际捕鲸委员会]的有关决议和准则要求缔约国考虑到是否能实际上利用非致命性的研究方法科学地实现研究目标，但它们并不是确立一项要求，即只有当其他方法不可用时才能使用致命的方法。 |
| (13) When the Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal was confronted with the question of whether the Claims Settlement
Declaration obliged the United States to return military property to Iran,
the Tribunal found, referring to the subsequent practice of the parties, that
this treaty contained an implicit obligation of compensation in case of
non-return: | (13) 伊朗－美国索赔法庭曾面对过这样的问题：《索赔解决声明》是否迫使美国将军事财产归还伊朗。
法庭提及缔约方的惯例，认定这一条约隐含着在不归还时存在着赔偿义务： |
| “66. … Although
Paragraph 9 of the General Declaration does not expressly state any
obligation to compensate Iran in the event that certain articles are not
returned because of the provisions of U.S. law applicable prior to 14
November 1979, the Tribunal holds that such an obligation is implicit in that
Paragraph. | “66. …虽然总声明的第9段并没有明确说一旦因1979年11月14日之前适用的美国法律规定而某些物品不能归还时则有补偿伊朗的任何义务，但法庭认为，这样的义务隐含在该段里。 |
| “68. Moreover, the Tribunal notes that
the interpretation set forth in paragraph 66 above is consistent with the
subsequent practice of the Parties in the application of the Algiers Accords
and, particularly, with the conduct of the United States. | “68. 此外，法庭指出，载于上文第66段的解释是与缔约方适用阿尔及尔协定的嗣后惯例，特别是与美国的行为是一致的。 |
| Such a practice, according to article 31
(3) (b) of the Vienna Convention, is also to be taken into account in the
interpretation of a treaty. | 这样的惯例，根据《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项，在解释条约时也应考虑到。 |
| In its communication informing Iran, on
26 March 1981, that the export of defense articles would not be approved, the
United States expressly stated that ‘Iran will be
reimbursed for the cost of equipment in so far as possible’.” | 美国在1981年3月26日致函伊朗，告知它国防物品的出口将不能获批准时，明确表示，“伊朗在设备方面的成本将尽可能报销。 ” |
| This position was criticized by Judge
Holtzmann in his dissenting opinion: | 霍尔茨曼法官在反对意见中批评了这一立场： |
| “Subsequent conduct by a State party is a
proper basis for interpreting a treaty only if it appears that the conduct
was motivated by the treaty. | “一缔约国的嗣后行为，只有当它似乎是由条约引发时，才是解释条约的一个适当基础。 |
| Here there is no evidence, or even any
argument, that the United States’ willingness to pay
Iran for its properties was in response to a perceived obligation imposed by
Paragraph 9. | 在这里，没有任何证据说明，甚至没有可能主张，美国为伊朗的财产予以赔偿的意愿是对人们感知到的第9段规定的义务的回应。 |
| Such conduct would be equally consistent with
a recognition of a contractual obligation to make payment. | 这种行为同样与承认关于付款的合同义务一致。 |
| In the absence of any indication that
conduct was motivated by the treaty, it is incorrect to use that conduct in
interpreting the treaty.” | 在没有任何迹象表明行为是由条约引发的情况下，使用该行为解释条约是不正确的。” |
| Together, the majority opinion and the
dissent clearly identify the need to analyse carefully whether the parties,
by an agreement, or a practice assume a position “regarding
the interpretation” of a treaty. | 多数人意见和反对意见一起表明，必须认真分析缔约方是否通过协定或行为就“关于条约的解释”采取了立场。 |
| (14) The fact that States parties assume
a position regarding the interpretation of a treaty sometimes also may be
inferred from the character of the treaty or of a specific provision. | (14) 有时也可从条约的具体规定的特性推断出缔约国就条约的解释采取了立场这一事实。 |
| Whereas subsequent practice in the
application of a treaty often consists of conduct by different organs of the
State (executive, legislative, judicial or other) in the conscious
application of a treaty at different levels (domestic and international), the
European Court of Human Rights, for example, does not, for the most part,
explicitly address the question of whether a particular practice was
undertaken “regarding the interpretation” of the Convention. | 适用条约方面的嗣后惯例往往包括国家不同机关(行政、立法、司法或其他机关)在不同级别(国内和国际)有意识地适用条约的行为，而欧洲人权法院，举例来说，在大多数情况下不明确处理特定惯例的实施是否涉及“解释”公约这一问题。 |
| Thus, when describing the domestic legal
situation in the member States, the Court rarely asks whether a particular
legal situation results from a legislative process during which the possible
requirements of the Convention were discussed. | 因此，描述在成员国国内法律的情况时，法院很少问某一种特定的法律形势是否是对公约的可能要求进行了讨论的立法程序的结果。 |
| The Court rather presumes that the member
States, when legislating or otherwise acting in a particular way, are
conscious of their obligations under the Convention and that they act in a
way that reflects their understanding of their obligations. | 法院实际上假定，成员国在进行立法或以其他特定方式行事时意识到其在公约下的义务，而且它们的行事方式反映出它们对自己义务的理解。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights
has also on occasion used legislative practice as a means of interpretation. | 美洲人权法院有时也使用立法实践作为一种解释手段。 |
| Like the International Court of Justice,
the European Court of Human Rights has occasionally even considered that the “lack of any apprehension” of the parties regarding
a certain interpretation of the Convention may be indicative of their
assuming a position regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 与国际法院一样，欧洲人权法院甚至偶尔认为，缔约方对公约的某一特定解释“缺乏任何理解”可能表示它们就条约的解释采取了一种立场。 |
| (15) Article 118 of the Geneva Convention
relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War provides that: “Prisoners of war shall be released and repatriated without delay
after the cessation of active hostilities. ” | (15) 《关于战俘待遇的日内瓦公约》第118条规定：“战事停止后，应立即释放或遣返战俘，不得迟延。” |
| The will of a prisoner of war not to be
repatriated was intentionally not declared to be relevant by the States
parties in order to prevent States from abusively invoking the will of
prisoners of war in order to delay repatriation. | 缔约国故意没有宣布战俘不愿被遣返的意愿是相关的，以防止各国胡乱援引战俘的意愿以延缓遣返战俘。 |
| ICRC has, however, always insisted as a
condition for its participation that the will of a prisoner of war not to be
repatriated be respected. | 然而红十字会始终坚持将战俘不被遣返的意愿得到尊重作为其参与的条件。 |
| This approach, as far as it has been
reflected in the practice of States parties, does not necessarily mean,
however, that article 118 should be interpreted as demanding that the
repatriation of a prisoner of war must not happen against his or her will. | 这种做法已经反映在缔约国的惯例之中，然而这并不一定意味着第118条应解释为是要求在进行遣返时不得违反战俘的意愿。 |
| The ICRC Study on customary international
humanitarian law carefully notes in its commentary on rule 128 A: | 红十字会在对习惯国际人道主义法所作的研究中在对第128 A条规则的评注里仔细地指出： |
| “According to the Fourth Geneva
Convention, no protected person may be transferred to a country ‘where he or she may have reason to fear persecution for his or her
political opinions or religious beliefs’ [article 45,
paragraph 4, of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian
Persons in Time of War]. | “根据《日内瓦第四公约》，不得将任何被保护人移送至‘因其政治意见或宗教信仰有恐惧迫害之理由’的国家[《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》第四十五条第四款]。 |
| While the Third Geneva Convention does
not contain a similar clause, practice since 1949 has developed to the effect
that in every repatriation in which the ICRC has played the role of neutral
intermediary, the parties to the conflict, whether international or
non-international, have accepted the ICRC’s
conditions for participation, including that the ICRC be able to check prior
to repatriation (or release in case of a non-international armed conflict),
through an interview in private with the persons involved, whether they wish
to be repatriated (or released).” | 《日内瓦第三公约》不包含类似的条款，但自1949年以来的惯例已发展到这样的程度，即在红十字会发挥中立调解者角色的每一次遣返行动中，无论是国际还是非国际冲突，冲突各方接受了红十字会的参与条件，这包括红十字会能够在遣返(或非国际性武装冲突时则为释放)之前，通过私下与有关人员面谈，检查他们是否希望被遣返(或释放)。” |
| (16) This formulation suggests that the
State practice of respecting the will of the prisoner of war is limited to
cases in which ICRC is involved and in which the organization has formulated
such a condition. | (16) 这一措辞表明，尊重战俘意愿这一国家惯例仅存在于红十字会参与且提出了尊重战俘意愿这一条件的案件中。 |
| States have drawn different conclusions
from this practice. | 各国从这一惯例中得出了不同结论。 |
| The 2004 United Kingdom Manual provides
that: | 2004年《联合王国手册》规定： |
| “A more contentious issue is whether
prisoners of war must be repatriated even against their will. | “较有争议的问题是，是否即便违背战俘本人的意愿，也必须将其遣送回国。 |
| Recent practice of [S]tates indicates
that they should not. | 最近的国家惯例表明，不应这么做。 |
| It is United Kingdom policy that
prisoners of war should not be repatriated against their will.” | 联合王国的政策是，不应违背战俘意愿将其遣送回国。” |
| (17) This particular combination of the
words “must” and “should” indicates that the United Kingdom,
like other States, is not viewing the subsequent practice as demonstrating an
interpretation of the treaty according to which the declared will of the
prisoner of war must always be respected. | (17) 专门将“必须”和“应”二词同时使用，说明联合王国同其他国家一样，并不认为嗣后惯例反映了必须始终尊重战俘公开宣称的意愿这种条约解释。 |
| (18) The preceding examples from the case
law and State practice substantiate the need to identify and interpret
carefully subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, in particular to ask
whether the parties, by an agreement or a practice, assume a position regarding
the interpretation of a treaty or whether they are motivated by other
considerations. | (18) 源自判例法和国家惯例的上述例子证明，有必要仔细识别和解释嗣后协定与嗣后惯例，特别是要问清，缔约方是否通过协定或惯例就条约的解释采取了立场，或者是否有其他考虑。 |
| Paragraph 1, second sentence — temporary non-application of a treaty or modus vivendi | 第1段第2句――暂不适用条约或临时协议 |
| (19) The second sentence of paragraph 1
is merely illustrative. | (19) 第1段第二句只起说明作用。 |
| It refers to two types of cases that need
to be distinguished from practice regarding the interpretation of a treaty. | 该句是指两类需要与关于条约解释的惯例作出区分的情况。 |
| (20) A common subsequent practice does
not necessarily indicate an agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty, but may instead signify their agreement
temporarily not to apply the treaty, or an agreement on a practical
arrangement (modus vivendi). | (20) 缔约方拥有共同嗣后惯例不一定表明缔约方就条约的解释达成了协议，也可能意味着缔约方商定暂不适用条约，或商定确立一种实际安排(临时协议)。 |
| The following example is illustrative. | 以下例子起说明作用： |
| (21) Article 7 of the 1864 Geneva
Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded in Armies in
the Field provides that: “A distinctive and uniform
flag shall be adopted for hospitals, ambulances and evacuation parties. | (21) 1864年《改善战地武装部队伤员境遇日内瓦公约》第七条规定，“医院、救护车和疏散队应采用特殊的统一旗帜。 |
| … [The] flag …
shall bear a red cross on a white ground. ” | …[这一]…旗帜应绘以白底红十字。” |
| During the Russo-Turkish War of
1877-1878, the Ottoman Empire declared that it would in the future use the
red crescent on a white ground to mark its own ambulances, while respecting
the red cross sign protecting enemy ambulances and stated that the
distinctive sign of the Convention “‘had so far
prevented Turkey from exercising its rights under the Convention because it
gave offence to the Muslim soldiers’”. | 1877-1878年俄土战争期间，奥斯曼帝国宣布，未来将以白底红新月作为救护车标志，同时尊重保护敌方救护车的红十字标志，并表示《公约》的特殊标志“‘迄今一直让土耳其无法行使《公约》规定的权利，因为这一标志冒犯了穆斯林士兵’”。 |
| This declaration led to a correspondence
between the Ottoman Empire, Switzerland (as depositary) and the other
parties, which resulted in the acceptance of the red crescent only for the
duration of the conflict. | 因为这一声明，奥斯曼帝国、瑞士(作为保存国)和其他缔约方经通信商定，接受红新月标志，但仅限冲突期间。 |
| At The Hague Peace Conferences of 1899
and 1907 and during the 1906 Conference for the Revision of the Geneva
Convention of 1864, the Ottoman Empire, Persia and Siam unsuccessfully
requested the inclusion of the red crescent, the red lion and sun, and the
red flame in the Convention. | 在1899年和1907年海牙和平会议上以及1906年举行的1984年《日内瓦公约》修约会议期间，奥斯曼帝国、波斯和暹罗要求将红新月、红狮与日以及红焰标志加入《公约》未果。 |
| The Ottoman Empire and Persia, however,
at least gained the acceptance of “reservations” that they formulated to that effect in 1906. | 不过在1906年，奥斯曼帝国和波斯至少让两国为此提出的“保留”得到了接受。 |
| This acceptance of the reservations of
the Ottoman Empire and Persia in 1906 did not mean, however, that the parties
had accepted that the 1864 Geneva Convention had been interpreted in a
particular way prior to 1906 by subsequent unopposed practice. | 但是，1906年奥斯曼帝国和波斯的保留获得接受，并不意味着各缔约方认可，在1906年之前未受异议的嗣后惯例就已经以特定方式解释了1864年《日内瓦公约》。 |
| The practice by the Ottoman Empire and
Persia was seen rather, at least until 1906, as not being covered by the 1864
Geneva Convention, but it was accepted as a temporary and exceptional measure
that left the general treaty obligation unchanged. | 至少到1906年，奥斯曼帝国和波斯的惯例都不被视为1864年《日内瓦公约》的内容，只是将其作为不改变一般条约义务的暂行特例措施予以接受。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
variety of forms | 第2段――各种形式 |
| (22) The purpose of paragraph 2 of draft
conclusion 6 is to acknowledge the variety of forms that subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice can take under article 31, paragraph 3 (a)
and (b). | (22) 结论草案6第2段的目的在于，承认第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能具有各种形式。 |
| The Commission has recognized that
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), consists of any “conduct” in the application of a treaty,
including under certain circumstances, inaction, which may contribute to
establishing an agreement regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 委员会已承认第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例包括适用条约过程中任何可能有助于商定对该条约的解释的“行为”，包括某些情况下的不行为。 |
| Depending on the treaty concerned, this
includes not only externally oriented conduct, such as official acts,
statements and voting at the international level, but also internal
legislative, executive and judicial acts, and may even include conduct by
non-State actors that is attributable to one or more States parties and that
falls within the scope of what the treaty conceives as forms of its
application. | 根据所涉条约的情况，这不仅包括对外行为，例如国际一级的正式行动、声明和投票，还包括国内的立法、行政和司法行为，甚至可能包括可归属于一个或多个缔约方并在该条约认为属于其适用形式范围内的非国家行为者的行为。 |
| Thus, the individual conduct that may
contribute to a subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), need
not meet any particular formal criteria. | 因此，可能催生第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例的个人行为无需满足任何特定正式标准。 |
| (23) Subsequent practice at the
international level need not necessarily be joint conduct. | (23) 国际一级的嗣后惯例不一定是联合行为。 |
| A parallel conduct by parties may
suffice. | 各方有平行的行为即可。 |
| It is a separate question whether parallel
activity actually articulates a sufficient common understanding (agreement)
regarding the interpretation of a treaty in a particular case (see draft
conclusion 10 [9], paragraph 1, below). | 至于并行活动是否在实际上表达了某特定案件中对某项条约解释的共同理解(协定)，则是另一项单独的问题(见下文结论草案10[9]第1段)。 |
| Subsequent agreements can be found in
legally binding treaties as well as in non-binding instruments like
memorandums of understanding. | 嗣后协定既见于有法律约束力的条约，亦见于谅解备忘录等没有约束力的文书。 |
| Subsequent agreements can also be found
in certain decisions of a conference of States parties (see draft conclusion
11 [10], paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, below). | 嗣后协定还见于缔约国大会的某些决定(见下文结论草案11[10]，第1、第2和第3段)。 |
| Paragraph 3 —
identification of subsequent practice under article 32 | 第3段――根据第三十二条识别嗣后惯例 |
| (24) Paragraph 3 of this draft conclusion
provides that in identifying subsequent practice under article 32, the
interpreter is required to determine whether, in particular, conduct by one
or more parties is in the application of the treaty. | (24) 本结论草案第3段规定，根据第三十二条识别嗣后惯例时，解释者尤其须确定一个或多个缔约方的行为是否处在适用条约过程之中。 |
| The Commission decided to treat such “other subsequent practice” (see draft
conclusion 4, paragraph 3) under article 32 in a separate paragraph for the
sake of analytical clarity (see draft conclusion 7, paragraph 2, and draft
conclusion 9 [8], paragraph 3, below), but it does not thereby call into
question the unity of the process of interpretation. | 委员会决定在单独的一段中论述第三十二条之下的“其他嗣后惯例”(见结论草案4, 第3段)，是为了分析上清晰起见(见下文结论草案7第2段和结论草案9[8]第3段)，但并不因此对解释过程的整体性提出质疑。 |
| The considerations that are pertinent for
the identification of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), also apply, mutatis mutandis, to the
identification of “other subsequent practice” under article 32. | 识别第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的有关考虑因素亦比照适用于识别第三十二条之下的“其他嗣后惯例”。 |
| Thus, agreements between less than all
parties to a treaty regarding the interpretation of a treaty or its
application are a form of subsequent practice under article 32. | 因此，某条约非全体缔约方之间就该条约的解释或适用达成的协定是第三十二条之下的嗣后惯例的一种形式。 |
| (25) An example of a practical
arrangement is the memorandum of understanding between the Department of
Transportation of the United States of America and the Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes of the United Mexican States on
International Freight Cross-Border Trucking Services of 6 July 2011. | (25) 一个实际安排的例子是美利坚合众国运输部与墨西哥合众国通信和运输部2011年7月6日签订的关于国际跨境卡车货运服务的谅解备忘录。 |
| The memorandum of understanding does not
refer to Canada, the third party of the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA), and specifies that it “is without prejudice
to the rights and obligations of the United States and Mexico under NAFTA”. | 谅解备忘录并未提及《北美自由贸易协定》(《北美自贸协定》)的第三方加拿大，而是指出，备忘录“不损害美国和墨西哥在《北美自贸协定》下的权利和义务”。 |
| These circumstances suggest that the
memorandum of understanding does not claim to constitute an agreement
regarding the interpretation of NAFTA under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or
(b), but that it rather remains limited to being a practical arrangement
between a limited number of parties that is subject to challenge by other
parties or by a judicial or quasi-judicial institution. | 这些情况表明，该谅解备忘录不声称构成对《北美自贸协定》的第31条第3款(a)或(b)项意义上的解释协议，而是仅限于作为有限数目的当事方之间的实际安排，其他当事方或司法及准司法机构是可以对这一安排提出质疑的。 |
| Conclusion 7 | 结论7 |
| Possible effects of subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice in interpretation | 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能对解释产生的影响 |
| 1. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, contribute, in their interaction with
other means of interpretation, to the clarification of the meaning of a
treaty. | 1. 第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例经与其他解释资料互动，有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| This may result in narrowing, widening,
or otherwise determining the range of possible interpretations, including any
scope for the exercise of discretion which the treaty accords to the parties. | 这可能导致可能的解释范围、包括条约给予缔约方行使自由裁量权的任何范围变窄、变宽或受到另外的影响。 |
| 2. Subsequent practice under article 32
can also contribute to the clarification of the meaning of a treaty. | 2. 根据第三十二条确定的嗣后惯例也能有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| 3. It is presumed that the parties to a
treaty, by an agreement subsequently arrived at or a practice in the
application of the treaty, intend to interpret the treaty, not to amend or to
modify it. | 3. 可以推定，条约缔约方嗣后达成协定或在适用条约方面采用一种惯例，其用意是为了解释条约，而不是修正或修改条约。 |
| The possibility of amending or modifying
a treaty by subsequent practice of the parties has not been generally
recognized. | 缔约方通过嗣后惯例修正或修改条约的可能性尚未得到普遍认可。 |
| The present draft conclusion is without
prejudice to the rules on the amendment or modification of treaties under the
1969 Vienna Convention and under customary international law. | 本条结论草案不影响《维也纳条约法公约》和习惯国际法关于修正或修改条约的规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| Paragraph 1, first sentence — clarification of the meaning of a treaty | 第1段第一句――澄清条约的含义 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 7 deals with the
possible effects of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice on the
interpretation of a treaty. | (1) 结论草案7涉及嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能对条约解释产生的影响。 |
| The purpose is to indicate how subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice may contribute to the clarification of the
meaning of a treaty. | 旨在说明嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可以如何有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| Paragraph 1 emphasizes that subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice must be seen in their interaction with
other means of interpretation (see draft conclusion 2 [1], paragraph 5). | 第1段强调嗣后协定和嗣后惯例必须与其他解释资料互动(见结论草案2[1]，第5段)。 |
| They are therefore not necessarily in
themselves conclusive. | 因此，它们本身未必具有决定性。 |
| (2) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice, like all means of interpretation, may have different effects on the
interactive process of interpretation of a treaty, which consists of placing
appropriate emphasis in any particular case on the various means of
interpretation in a “single combined operation”. | (2) 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例与所有解释资料一样，可能对条约解释这一互动过程产生各种影响，这一过程包括在任何具体案件中，适当强调“单一的综合行动”中的各种解释资料。 |
| The taking into account of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice under articles 31, paragraph 3, and 32 may
thus contribute to a clarification of the meaning of a treaty in the sense of
a narrowing down (specifying) of possible meanings of a particular term or
provision, or of the scope of the treaty as a whole (see paragraphs (4), (6),
(7), (10) and (11) below). | 因此，考虑第三十一条第三款和第三十二条所指的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可以通过缩小(具体说明)某个术语或条款的可能含义，或整个条约的范围(见下文第(4)、第(6)、第(7)、第(10)和第(11)段)，帮助澄清条约的含义。 |
| Alternatively, such taking into account
may contribute to a clarification in the sense of confirming a wider
interpretation. | 另一方面，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例也可以通过证实更广义的解释，帮助澄清条约的含义。 |
| Finally, it may contribute to understanding
the range of possible interpretations available to the parties, including the
scope for the exercise of discretion by the parties under the treaty (see
paragraphs (12) to (15) below). | 最后，它们有助于理解缔约方可作出的可能解释的范围，包括缔约方根据条约行使酌处权的范围(见下文第(12)至(15)段)。 |
| (3) International courts and tribunals
usually begin their reasoning in a given case by determining the “ordinary meaning” of the terms of the
treaty. | (3) 国际法院和仲裁法庭在具体案件中，首先要确定条约术语的“通常含义”。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice mostly enter into their reasoning at a later stage when courts ask
whether such conduct confirms or modifies the result arrived at by the
initial interpretation of the ordinary meaning (or by other means of
interpretation). | 法院大多在审理的稍后阶段，即考虑某项行为是否证实或修改了最初对通常含义的解释(或通过其他解释资料)得出的结果时，才考虑嗣后协定和嗣后惯例。 |
| If the parties do not wish to convey the
ordinary meaning of a term, but rather a special meaning in the sense of
article 31, paragraph 4, subsequent agreements and subsequent practice may
shed light on this special meaning. | 如果缔约方不想表达术语的通常含义，而想表达第三十一条第四款意义下的特殊含义，那么嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能说明该特殊含义。 |
| The following examples illustrate how
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as means of interpretation can
contribute, in their interaction with other means in the process of
interpretation, to the clarification of the meaning of a treaty. | 以下案例显示了嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释资料，可能如何在解释过程中通过与其他资料的互动，有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| (4) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice can help identify the “ordinary meaning” of a particular term by confirming a narrow interpretation of
different possible shades of meaning of the term. | (4) 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可以通过从某个术语的多重含义中确认一个狭义的解释，从而帮助确定该术语的“通常含义”。 |
| This was the case, for example, in the
Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion where the International Court of Justice
determined that the expressions “poison or poisonous
weapons”: | 例如，国际法院在关于核武器的咨询意见中确认，短语“毒药或有毒武器”： |
| “… have been understood, in the practice
of States, in their ordinary sense as covering weapons whose prime, or even
exclusive, effect is to poison or asphyxiate. | “…在国家实践中通常被理解为主要、甚至唯一作用是使人中毒或窒息的武器。 |
| This practice is clear, and the parties
to those instruments have not treated them as referring to nuclear weapons.” | 国家实践十分明确，相关文书的缔约方没有将该词理解为指核武器。 ” |
| (5) On the other hand, subsequent
practice may prevent specifying the meaning of a general term to just one of
different possible meanings. | (5) 另一方面，嗣后惯例也可以防止将一般用语限定为只有某个特定含义，而否认其他可能的含义。 |
| For example, in the Case concerning
rights of nationals of the United States of America in Morocco, the Court
stated: | 例如，法院在摩洛哥境内的美利坚合众国公民权利案中称： |
| “The general impression created by an
examination of the relevant materials is that those responsible for the
administration of the customs … have made use of all
the various elements of valuation available to them, though perhaps not
always in a consistent manner. | “检查相关材料给人的一般印象是，海关工作人员…已利用他们能够获得的一切评估材料，虽然利用方式可能不尽一致。 |
| “In these circumstances, the Court is of
the opinion that Article 95 lays down no strict rule on the point in dispute. | “在这种情况下，法院认为第95条没有就争论点作出严格规定。 |
| It requires an interpretation which is
more flexible than either of those which are respectively contended for by
the Parties in this case.” | 法院要求比当事各方主张的方式更加灵活地解释第95条。 ” |
| (6) Different forms of practice may
contribute to both a narrow and a broad interpretation of different terms in
the same treaty. | (6) 不同形式的惯例可能导致对同一条约中的某些术语作出狭义的解释，而对另一些术语作出宽泛的解释。 |
| (7) A treaty shall be interpreted in
accordance with the ordinary meaning of its terms “in
their context” (article 31, paragraph 1). | (7) 条约应依其用语在“上下文”(第三十一条第一款)中具有的通常含义加以解释。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice, in interaction with this particular means of interpretation, may
also contribute to identifying a narrower or broader interpretation of a term
of a treaty. | 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例通过与这一具体解释资料的互动，也可以有助于对条约中的术语作出较狭义或较广义的解释。 |
| In the Inter-Governmental Maritime
Consultative Organization Advisory Opinion, for example, the International
Court of Justice had to determine the meaning of the expression “eight … largest ship-owning nations” under article 28 (a) of the Convention on the International
Maritime Organization (IMO) since this concept of “largest
ship-owning nations” permitted different
interpretations (such as determination by “registered
tonnage” or by “property of
nationals”), and since there was no pertinent
practice of the organization or its members under article 28 (a) itself, the
Court turned to practice under other provisions in the Convention and held: | 例如，在关于政府间海事协商组织的咨询意见中，国际法院必须确定《国际海事组织(海事组织)公约》第28(a)条下“八个…最大船主国”一词的含义。 鉴于“最大船主国”的概念可以有不同解释(例如按“登记吨位”或“国民财产”计算)，且该组织及其成员没有第28(a)条下的相关实践，法院转而参照公约其他条款下的实践，提出： |
| “This reliance upon registered tonnage in
giving effect to different provisions of the Convention … persuade[s] the Court to view that it is unlikely that when
[article 28 (a)] was drafted and incorporated into the Convention it was
contemplated that any criterion other than registered tonnage should
determine which were the largest shipping owning nations.” | “鉴于执行《公约》的各项条款都是基于登记吨位…委员会因此认为，在起草[第28(a)条]并纳入《公约》时，不太可能考虑以登记吨位以外的其他标准来确定最大船主国。
” |
| (8) Together with the text and the
context, article 31, paragraph 1, accords importance to the “object and purpose” for its
interpretation. | (8) 除用语和上下文外，第三十一条第一款还强调“目的及宗旨”对条约解释的重要性。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice may also contribute to a clarification of the object and purpose of
a treaty or reconcile invocations of the “object and
purpose” of a treaty with other means of
interpretation. | 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例也可有助于澄清条约的目的及宗旨，或协调条约的“目的及宗旨”与其他解释资料的运用。 |
| (9) In the Maritime Delimitation in the
Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen and Oil Platforms cases, for example,
the International Court of Justice clarified the object and purpose of
bilateral treaties by referring to subsequent practice of the parties. | (9) 例如，在格陵兰和扬马延间区域海洋划界案和石油平台案中，国际法院通过提到缔约方的嗣后惯例，澄清了双边条约的目的及宗旨。 |
| And in the Land and Maritime Boundary
between Cameroon and Nigeria case, the Court held: | 在喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案中，法院主张： |
| “From the treaty texts and the practice
analysed at paragraphs 64 and 65 above, it emerges that the Lake Chad Basin
Commission is an international organization exercising its powers within a
specific geographical area; that it does not however have as its purpose the
settlement at a regional level of matters relating to the maintenance of
international peace and security and thus does not fall under Chapter VIII of
the Charter.” | “从条约案文和上文第64和65段分析的实践来看，乍得湖流域委员会是一个在特定地理区域内行使职权的国际组织；但是其宗旨不是在区域一级处理与维持国际和平及安全有关的事务，因此不属于《宪章》第八章规定的情况。” |
| Paragraph 1, second sentence — narrowing or widening or otherwise determining the range of
possible interpretation | 第1段第二句――缩小或扩大或确定可能的解释范围 |
| (10) State practice other than in
judicial or quasi-judicial contexts confirms that subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice only contribute to specifying the meaning of a term in
the sense of narrowing the possible meanings of the rights and obligations
under a treaty, but may also indicate a wider range of acceptable
interpretations or a certain scope for the exercise of discretion that a
treaty grants to States. | (10) 司法环境或准司法环境以外的国家实践证明，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例只是有助于通过缩小条约下权利和义务的可能含义范围，具体说明一个术语的含义，但也可表明一个更大的可接受的解释范围，或表明条约赋予国家的酌处权的某种行使范围。 |
| (11) For example, whereas the ordinary
meaning of the terms of article 5 of the 1944 Convention on International
Civil Aviation do not appear to require a charter flight to obtain permission
to land while en route, long-standing State practice requiring such
permission has led to general acceptance that this provision is to be
interpreted as requiring permission. | (11) 例如，虽然按照1944年《国际民用航空公约》第5条用语的通常含义，似乎没有要求包机在飞行途中获得降落许可，但是长期的国家实践都要求这类许可，以至于该条被普遍理解为需要许可。 |
| Another case is article 22, paragraph 3,
of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which provides that
the means of transport used by a mission shall be immune from search,
requisition, attachment or execution. | 另一个案例是1961年《维也纳外交关系公约》第二十二条第三款，其中规定使馆交通工具免受搜查、征用、扣押或强制执行。 |
| While police enforcement against
diplomatic properties will usually be met with the protests of States, the
towing of diplomatic cars that have violated local traffic and parking laws
generally has been regarded as permissible in practice. | 虽然警方对外交财产采取的强制行为通常会遭到国家的抗议，但是将违反当地交通和停车法规的外交车辆拖走这一做法，在实践中基本上被认为是允许的。 |
| This practice suggests that, while
punitive measures against diplomatic vehicles are forbidden, cars can be
stopped or removed if they prove to be an immediate danger or obstacle for
traffic and/or public safety. | 这种惯例显示，虽然禁止对外交车辆采取处罚措施，但是如果发现外交车辆对交通和/或公共安全构成直接危险或障碍，则可以拦下或拖走。 |
| In that sense, the meaning of the term “execution” — and, thus, the scope of
protection accorded to means of transportation — is
specified by the subsequent practice of parties. | 从这个意义上来看，缔约方的嗣后惯例明确说明了“强制执行”一词的含义，并进而明确了交通工具受保护的范围。 |
| (12) Another possible example concerns
article 12 of Protocol II to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which provides: | (12) 例如，另一个可能的例子是《一九四九年日内瓦四公约第二议定书》第十二条规定： |
| “Under the direction of the competent
authority concerned, the distinctive emblem of the Red Cross, Red Crescent or
Red Lion and Sun on a white ground shall be displayed by medical and
religious personnel and medical units, and on medical transports. | “在有关主管当局指导下，医务和宗教人员以及医疗队和医务运输工具应展示白底红十字、红新月或红狮与太阳的特殊标志。 |
| It shall be respected in all
circumstances. | 在任何情形下，该特殊标志均应受尊重。 |
| It shall not be used improperly.” | 该特殊标志不应用于不正当的用途。” |
| Although the term “shall” suggests that it is obligatory for
States to use the distinctive emblem for marking medical personnel and
transports under all circumstances, subsequent practice suggests that States
may possess some discretion with regard to its application. | 虽然“应”一词表示国家有义务使用特殊标志，在任何情况下都标明医务人员和医务运输工具，但嗣后惯例显示国家在适用该条时可拥有一定的酌处权。 |
| As armed groups have in recent years
specifically attacked medical convoys that were well recognizable due to the
protective emblem, States have in certain situations refrained from marking
such convoys with a distinctive emblem. | 鉴于武装团体近年来专门袭击医疗车队，它们因为有保护标志而特别容易辨认，国家在某些情况下不再让这类车队露出特殊标志。 |
| Responding to a parliamentary question on
its practice in Afghanistan, the Government of Germany has stated that: | 德国政府在回答议会关于其在阿富汗的做法的提问时指出： |
| “As other contributors of ISAF
contingents, the Federal Armed Forces have experienced that marked medical
vehicles have been targeted. | “与国际安全援助部队的其他分队一样，德国联邦国防军也经历过医疗车队遭到袭击的情况。 |
| Occasionally, these medical units and
vehicles, clearly distinguished as such by their protective emblem, have even
been preferred as targets. | 这些医疗单位和车队因其保护标志而容易辨认，甚至成为特定的袭击对象。 |
| The Federal Armed Forces have thus, along
with Belgium, France, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States,
decided within ISAF to cover up the protective emblem on medical vehicles.” | 因此，德国联邦国防军在国际安全援助部队内部与比利时、法国、联合王国、加拿大及美国共同决定遮住医疗车队上的保护标志。” |
| (13) Such practice by States may confirm
an interpretation of article 12 according to which the obligation to use the
protective emblem under exceptional circumstances allows a margin of
discretion for the parties. | (13) 这种国家实践确认了对第十二条的解释，可以看出，使用保护标志的义务在例外情况下容许缔约方有一定的酌处权。 |
| (14) A treaty provision that grants
States an apparently unconditional right may raise the question of whether
this discretion is limited by the purpose of the rule. | (14) 赋予国家明显不带条件的权利的条约规定可能涉及该酌处权是否受到条约目的限制的问题。 |
| For example, according to article 9 of
the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the receiving State may notify
the sending State, without having to give reasons, that a member of the
mission is persona non grata. | 例如，根据《维也纳外交关系公约》第九条，接受国可不具解释通知派遣国某使馆人员为不受欢迎人员。 |
| States mostly issue such notifications in
cases in which members of the mission were found or suspected of having
engaged in espionage activities or having committed other serious violations
of the law of the receiving State or caused significant political irritation. | 国家一般在发现或怀疑使馆人员参与间谍活动，严重违反接受国法律或造成严重政治骚乱的情况下发出这类通知。 |
| However, States have also made such
declarations in other circumstances, such as when envoys caused serious
injury to a third party or committed repeated infringement of the law or even
to enforce their drink-driving laws. | 不过，各国也在其他情况下发出过这类通知，例如外交人员对第三方造成严重伤害，或是屡次违法，甚至为了执行关于酒后驾车的法律发出这类通知。 |
| It is even conceivable that declarations
are made without clear reasons or for purely political motives. | 有些国家甚至没有给出明确理由，纯粹出于政治动机而发出这类通知。 |
| Other States do not seem to have asserted
that such practice constitutes an abuse of the power to declare members of a
mission as personae non gratae. | 其他国家似乎不认为这种做法构成对宣布使馆人员为不受欢迎人员的权力的滥用。 |
| Thus, such practice confirms that article
9 provides an unconditional right. | 因此，这类惯例表明，第九条规定了无条件的权利。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
other subsequent practice under article 32 | 第2段――第三十二条之下其他嗣后惯例 |
| (15) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 7
concerns possible effects of “other subsequent
practice” under article 32 (see draft conclusion 4,
paragraph 3), which does not reflect an agreement of all parties regarding
the interpretation of a treaty. | (15) 结论草案7第2段涉及第三十二条之下的“其他嗣后惯例”的影响(见结论草案4, 第3段)，这类嗣后惯例不反映所有缔约方就条约解释达成的协定。 |
| Such practice, as a supplementary means
of interpretation, can confirm the interpretation that the interpreter has
reached in the application of article 31, or determine the meaning when the
interpretation according to article 31 leaves the meaning ambiguous or
obscure or leads to a result that is manifestly absurd or unreasonable. | 这类惯例，作为解释的补充资料，可证实适用第三十一条所作之解释，或依第三十一条所作解释意义不明或难解，或所获结果显然荒谬或不合理时，确定其含义。 |
| Article 32 thereby makes a distinction
between a use of preparatory work or of “other
subsequent practice” to confirm a meaning arrived at
under article 31 and its use to “determine” the meaning. | 因此，第三十二条区分了利用准备工作或“其他嗣后惯例”证实根据第三十一条得出的含义与利用它们“确定”含义这两种情况。 |
| Hence, recourse may be had to “other subsequent practice” under article
32 not only to determine the meaning of the treaty in certain circumstances,
but also — and always — to
confirm the meaning resulting from the application of article 31. | 因此，可诉诸第三十二条之下的“其他嗣后惯例”，这不仅是为了确定某些情况下条约的含义，而且也用来――并且总是可以用来――证实适用第三十一条得出的含义。 |
| (16) Subsequent practice under article 32
can contribute, for example, to reducing possible conflicts when the “object and purpose” of a treaty appears to
be in tension with specific purposes of certain of its rules. | (16) 当条约的“目的和宗旨”似乎与其某些规定的具体宗旨不符时，第三十二条所指的嗣后惯例有助于减少可能的冲突。 |
| In the Kasikili/Sedudu Island case, for
example, the International Court of Justice emphasized that the “parties sought both to secure for themselves freedom of navigation
on the river and to delimit as precisely as possible their respective spheres
of influence”. | 例如，在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中，国际法院强调，“缔约方既努力确保各自在河上的通航自由，又尽可能精确地划定各自的势力范围。” |
| The parties thereby reconciled a possible
tension by taking into account a certain subsequent practice by only one of
the parties as a supplementary means of interpretation (under article 32). | 缔约方通过适用仅其中一方的某项嗣后惯例作为(第三十二条所指的)解释条约的补充资料，从而化解了可能的紧张局势。 |
| (17) Another example of “other subsequent practice” under article
32 concerns the term “feasible precautions” in article 57, paragraph 2 (ii), of Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva
Conventions. | (17) 第三十二条所指的“其他嗣后惯例”的另一个例子涉及《一九四九年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第57条第2款(二)项下的“可行的预防措施”一词。 |
| This term has been used in effect by
article 3, paragraph 4, of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on
the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices (Protocol II) of 10 October
1980, which provides that: “Feasible precautions are
those precautions which are practicable or practically possible taking into
account all circumstances ruling at the time, including humanitarian and
military considerations. ” | 1980年10月10日《禁止或限制使用地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的议定书》(第二议定书)第3条第4款使用了该术语的含义，其中规定：“可行的预防措施是指顾及当时存在的一切情况，包括人道和军事考虑以后所采取的实际可行或实际可能的预防措施。” |
| This language has come to be accepted by
way of subsequent practice in many military manuals as a general definition
of “feasible precautions” for
the purpose of article 57, paragraph (2) (ii), of Protocol I to the 1949
Geneva Conventions. | 这一定义逐渐通过嗣后惯例被接受，作为《一九四九年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第57条第2款(二)项下“可行的预防措施”的一般定义出现在许多军事手册中。 |
| (18) The identification of subsequent
practice under articles 31, paragraph 3 (b), and 32 has sometimes led
domestic courts to arrive at broad and narrow interpretations. | (18) 对第三十一条第三款(b)项和第三十二条之下的嗣后惯例进行识别，使国内法院有时作出广和狭义的解释。 |
| For example, the United Kingdom House of
Lords interpreted the term “damage” under article 26, paragraph 2, of the Warsaw Convention as more
generally including “loss”,
invoking the subsequent conduct of the parties. | 例如，联合王国上议院援引缔约方嗣后行为，将《华沙公约》第二十六条第(2)款所述“损害”一词解释为亦包含“损失”。 |
| On the other hand, the United States
Supreme Court, having regard to the subsequent practice of the parties,
decided that the term “accident” in article 17 of the 1929 Warsaw Convention should be interpreted
narrowly in the sense that it excluded events that were not caused by an
unexpected or unusual event. | 另一方面，美国最高法院考虑到缔约方的嗣后惯例，决定对1929年《华沙公约》第十七条所述“事故”一词进行狭义解释，即不包括非由意外或异常事件造成的事件。 |
| Another example of a restrictive
interpretation is a decision in which the Federal Court of Australia
interpreted the term “impairment of dignity” under article 22 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations
as only requiring the receiving State to protect against breaches of the
peace or the disruption of essential functions of embassies, and not against
any forms of nuisance or insult. | 另一个限制性解释的例子是澳大利亚联邦法院在裁决中将《维也纳外交关系公约》第二十二条所述“损害尊严”一词解释为仅要求接受国提供保护，防止破坏和平或扰乱使馆基本职能的行为，而不涉及任何形式的骚扰或侮辱。 |
| (19) Domestic courts, in particular,
sometimes refer to decisions from other domestic jurisdictions and thus
engage in a “judicial dialogue” even if no agreement of the parties can thereby be established. | (19) 特别是国内法院，有时会参考其他国内法域的裁决，并从而开展“司法对话”，即使无法由此构成缔约方共识。 |
| Apart from thereby applying article 32,
such references may add to the development of a subsequent practice together
with other domestic courts. | 这种参考除了可根据第三十二条确认解释外，还有助于同其他国内法院一起制定嗣后惯例。 |
| However, the line between an appropriate
use and a selective invocation of decisions of other domestic courts may be
thin. | 然而，适当使用与选择性援引其他国内法院的裁决之间的界限可能比较模糊。 |
| Lord Hope of the United Kingdom House of
Lords, quoting the Vienna rules of interpretation, has provided a general
orientation when he stated: | 上议院Hope勋爵援引维也纳解释规则而提供了一个总方向，他说： |
| “In an ideal world the Convention should
be accorded the same meaning by all who are party to it. | “在理想的世界中，该《公约》的所有缔约方应赋予公约相同的含义。 |
| So case law provides a further potential
source of evidence. | 所以判例法提供了进一步的可能证据来源。 |
| Careful consideration needs to be given
to the reasoning of courts of other jurisdictions which have been called upon
to deal with the point at issue, particularly those which are of high
standing. | 需要认真考虑被要求处理所涉问题的其他法域法院的推理，特别是高级别法院。 |
| Considerable weight should be given to an
interpretation which has received general acceptance in other jurisdictions. | 获得其他法域普遍接受的解释应获得很大的权重。 |
| On the other hand, a discriminating
approach is required if the decisions conflict, or if there is no clear
agreement between them.” | 另一方面，如果裁决相互矛盾，或裁决之间没有达成明确一致，则须采取区别对待的方法。 ” |
| (20) Much depends on how this general
approach is applied. | (20) 上述总方向的适用方式具很大的决定性。 |
| For example, selective invocation of the
decisions of one particular national jurisdiction or the practice of a
particular group of States should be avoided. | 例如，应避免选择性援引某个特定国家法域的裁决或某个特定国家集团的惯例。 |
| On the other hand, it may be appropriate,
in a case in which the practice in different domestic jurisdictions diverges,
to emphasize the practice of a representative group of jurisdictions and to
give more weight to the decisions of higher courts. | 另一方面，当不同国内法域的惯例存在差异时，应着重于更具代表性的法域集团的惯例，并将更大权重赋予更高级法院的裁决。 |
| Paragraph 3 —
interpretation versus modification or amendment | 第3段――解释与修改或修正 |
| (21) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 7
addresses the question of how far the interpretation of a treaty can be
influenced by subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in order to
remain within the realm of what is considered interpretation under article
31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | (21) 结论草案7第3段讨论了嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可以在多大程度上影响条约解释，但又不超出第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项意义下的解释范围。 |
| The paragraph reminds the interpreter
that agreements subsequently arrived at may serve to amend or modify a
treaty, but that such subsequent agreements are subject to article 39 of the
1969 Vienna Convention and should be distinguished from subsequent agreements
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 第3段提醒解释方，嗣后达成的协定可能可以修正或修改条约，但是这类嗣后协定是1969年《维也纳公约》第三十九条所指协定，应当与第三十一条第三款(a)项所指嗣后协定加以区分。 |
| The second sentence, while acknowledging
that there are examples to the contrary in case law and diverging opinions in
the literature, stipulates that the possibility of amending or modifying a
treaty by subsequent practice of the parties has not been generally
recognized. | 第二句承认判例法中可能存在反例，文献中可能有不同意见，但是指出缔约方通过嗣后惯例修正或修改条约的可能性尚未得到普遍认可。 |
| (22) According to article 39 of the 1969
Vienna Convention: “A treaty may be amended by
agreement between the parties. ” | (22) 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十九条规定：“条约得以当事国之协议修正之”。 |
| Article 31, paragraph 3 (a), on the other
hand, refers to subsequent agreements “between the
parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty and the application of its
provisions”, and does not seem to address the
question of amendment or modification. | 另一方面，第三十一条第三款(a)项提到“当事国嗣后所订关于条约之解释或其规定之适用之任何协定”，似乎不涉及修订或修改条约的问题。 |
| As the WTO Appellate Body has held: | 正如世贸组织上诉机构所称： |
| “… the term ‘application’ in Article 31 (3) (a) relates to the situation where an agreement
specifies how existing rules or obligations in force are to be ‘applied’; the term does not connote the
creation of new or the extension of existing obligations that are subject to
a temporal limitation …”. | “…第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“适用”一词涉及协定具体规定如何‘适用’当前规则或义务的情况；该词不包含创造新义务或是延长受时间限制的当前义务的意思…”。 |
| (23) Articles 31, paragraph 3 (a),
and 39, if read together, demonstrate that agreements that the parties reach
subsequently to the conclusion of a treaty can interpret and amend or modify
the treaty. | (23) 第三十一条第三款(a)项和第三十九条一并解读显示，缔约方在条约缔结后达成的协定可解释、修正或修改条约。 |
| An agreement under article 39 need not
display the same form as the treaty that it amends. | 第三十九条所指协定不必采取与其修正的条约同样的形式。 |
| As the International Court of Justice has
held in the Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay case: | 正如国际法院在乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆案中指出的： |
| “Whatever its specific designation and in
whatever instrument it may have been recorded (the [Administrative Commission
of the River Uruguay] minutes), this ‘understanding’ is binding on the Parties, to the extent that they have consented
to it and must be observed by them in good faith. | “不论具体名称是什么，也不论记录在什么文书中([乌拉圭河行政委员会会议]记录)，这种‘谅解’只要是双方同意的，即对缔约方具有约束力，缔约方必须本着诚信遵守。 |
| They are entitled to depart from the
procedures laid down by the 1975 Statute, in respect of a given project
pursuant to an appropriate bilateral agreement.” | 就适当的双方协定确定的具体项目，它们有权不遵守1975年规约规定的程序。
” |
| (24) It is often difficult to draw a
distinction between agreements of the parties under a specific treaty
provision that attributes binding force to subsequent agreements, simple
subsequent agreements under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), which are not
binding as such, and, finally, agreements on the amendment or modification of
a treaty under articles 39 to 41. | (24) 通常很难区分缔约方根据条约具体规定达成的赋予嗣后协定约束力的协定、第三十一条第三款(a)项所指不具有约束力的嗣后协定以及第三十九至四十一条所指修正或修改条约的协定。 |
| International case law and State practice
suggest that informal agreements that are alleged to derogate from treaty
obligations should be narrowly interpreted. | 国际判例法和国家实践表明，对克减条约义务的非正式协定应当作出狭义的解释。 |
| There do not seem to be any formal
criteria other than those set forth in article 39, if applicable, apart from
the ones that may be provided for in the applicable treaty itself, which are
recognized as distinguishing these different forms of subsequent agreements. | 除适用条约本身可能作出的规定外，似乎没有第三十九条(如果适用的话)以外的任何区分不同形式嗣后协定的正式标准。 |
| It is clear, however, that States and
international courts are generally prepared to accord States parties a rather
wide scope for the interpretation of a treaty by way of a subsequent
agreement. | 不过，很明显，国家和国际法庭基本都愿意给予缔约国相当大的通过嗣后协定解释条约的空间。 |
| This scope may even go beyond the
ordinary meaning of the terms of the treaty. | 这种空间甚至可以超出条约术语的通常含义。 |
| The recognition of this scope for the
interpretation of a treaty goes hand in hand with the reluctance by States
and courts to recognize that an agreement actually has the effect of amending
or modifying a treaty. | 国家和法院认可条约的解释空间，却不太愿意认可协定实际具有修正或修改条约的效果。 |
| An agreement to modify a treaty is thus
not excluded, but also not to be presumed. | 因此，不排除协定对条约的修改，但也不假定具有这种效果。 |
| (25) Turning to the question of whether
the parties can amend or modify a treaty by a common subsequent practice, the
Commission originally proposed, in its draft articles on the law of treaties,
to include the following provision in the 1969 Vienna Convention, which would
have explicitly recognized the possibility of a modification of treaties by
subsequent practice: | (25) 关于缔约方是否可以通过共同的嗣后惯例修正或修改条约，委员会最初在条约法条款草案中提议将以下条款纳入1969年《维也纳公约》，这将明确认可通过嗣后惯例修改条约的可能性： |
| “Article 38. Modification of treaties by
subsequent practice | “第三十八条通过嗣后惯例修改条约 |
| A treaty may be modified by subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty establishing the agreement of the
parties to modify its provisions.” | 在条约适用方面确定缔约方对修改其规定达成一致的嗣后惯例可修改条约。 ” |
| (26) This draft article gave rise to an
intense debate at the Vienna Conference. | (26) 该条款草案在维也纳会议上引起了激烈争论。 |
| An amendment to delete draft article 38
was put to a vote and was adopted by 53 votes to 15, with 26 abstentions. | 删除第三十八条草案的修正案付诸表决，以53票赞成、15票反对、26票弃权通过。 |
| After the Vienna Conference, the question
was discussed whether the rejection of draft article 38 meant that the
possibility of a modification of a treaty by subsequent practice of the
parties had thereby been excluded. | 维也纳会议后，讨论了这一问题：否决第三十八条草案是否意味着排除了缔约方通过嗣后惯例修改条约的可能性。 |
| Many writers came to the conclusion that
the negotiating States simply did not wish to address this question in the
1969 Vienna Convention and that treaties can, as a general rule under the
customary law of treaties, indeed be modified by subsequent practice that
establishes the agreement of the parties to that effect. | 许多著述者得出结论称，谈判国只是不想在1969年《公约》中讨论该问题，而按照习惯法的一般规则，确定缔约方对修改条约达成一致的嗣后惯例的确可以修改条约。 |
| International courts and tribunals, on
the other hand, have since the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention mostly
refrained from recognizing this possibility. | 不过，自1969年《维也纳公约》通过以来，国际法院和仲裁法庭通常避免承认这种可能性。 |
| (27) In the case concerning the Dispute
regarding Navigational and Related Rights, the International Court of Justice
has held that “subsequent practice of the parties,
within the meaning of Article 31, paragraph 3 (b), of the Vienna Convention,
can result in a departure from the original intent on the basis of a tacit
agreement”. | (27) 在关于航行权和相关权利的争端案中，国际法院主张：“《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项意义下的缔约国的嗣后惯例可能导致违背基于默认同意的初始意图”。 |
| It is not entirely clear whether the
Court thereby wanted to recognize that subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), may also have the effect of amending or modifying a treaty,
or whether it was merely making a point relating to the interpretation of
treaties as the “original”
intent of the parties is not necessarily conclusive for the interpretation of
a treaty. | 不是很清楚法院这样说是想承认第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后协定也可以具有修正或修改条约的效果，还是只是就条约解释发表意见，因为缔约方的“初始”意图未必就条约解释下了定论。 |
| Indeed, the Commission recognizes in
draft conclusion 8 [3] that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice,
like other means of interpretation, “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”. | 事实上，委员会在暂时结论草案8[3]中确认，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例与其他解释资料一样，“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 scope for “interpretation” is therefore not necessarily determined by a fixed “original intent”, but must rather be
determined by taking into account a broader range of considerations,
including certain later developments. | 因此，“解释”的余地未必由固定的“初始意图”确定，而必须考虑到广泛的因素，包括某些后来的发展。 |
| This somewhat ambiguous dictum of the
Court raises the question of how far subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), can contribute to “interpretation” and whether subsequent practice may have the effect of amending
or modifying a treaty. | 国际法院这一较含糊的判词提出了第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后惯例可以在多大程度上有助于“解释”的问题，以及嗣后惯例可否具有修正或修改条约的效果的问题。 |
| Indeed, the dividing line between the
interpretation and the amendment or modification of a treaty is in practice
sometimes “difficult, if not impossible, to fix”. | 事实上，在实践中，条约的解释与条约的修正或修改之间的界线有时“很难确定，即便有可能确定”。 |
| (28) Apart from the dictum in Dispute
regarding Navigational and Related Rights, the International Court of Justice
has not explicitly recognized that a particular subsequent practice has had
the effect of modifying a treaty. | (28) 除了在关于航行权和相关权利的争端案中的判词外，国际法院再没有明确确认某项嗣后惯例具有修改条约的效果。 |
| This is true, in particular, for the
Namibia Advisory Opinion as well as for the Wall Advisory Opinion, in which
the Court recognized that subsequent practice had an important effect on the
determination of the meaning of the treaty, but stopped short of explicitly
recognizing that such practice had led to an amendment or modification of the
treaty. | 在关于纳米比亚的咨询意见和关于隔离墙的咨询意见中尤为如此，法院在意见中承认嗣后惯例对确定条约的含义有重要影响，但是没有明确承认这类惯例导致了对条约的修正或修改。 |
| Since these opinions concerned treaties
establishing an international organization it seems difficult to derive a
general rule of the law of treaties from them. | 鉴于这些意见涉及设立国际组织的条约，似乎很难从中得出条约法的一般规则。 |
| The questions of subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice relating to constituent instruments of international
organizations are addressed in draft conclusion 12 [11]. | 与国际组织组成文书有关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例问题在结论草案12[11]中阐述。 |
| (29) Other important cases in which the
International Court of Justice has raised the issue of possible modification
by the subsequent practice of the parties concern boundary treaties. | (29) 国际法院遇到缔约方可能通过嗣后惯例修改条约问题的其他重要案件涉及边界条约。 |
| As the Court said in the case concerning
the Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria: | 正如法院在喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案中指出的： |
| “Hence the conduct of Cameroon in that
territory has pertinence only for the question of whether it acquiesced in
the establishment of a change in treaty title, which cannot be wholly
precluded as a possibility in law … .” | “喀麦隆在该领土内的行为只牵涉到它是否默认对条约的修改的问题，法律上不能完全排除修改条约的可能性…” |
| (30) The Court found such acquiescence
in the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear, where it placed decisive
emphasis on the fact that there had been clear assertions of sovereignty by
one side (France), which, according to the Court, required a reaction on the
part of the other side (Thailand). | (30) 法院在柏威夏寺案中认定存在这种默认，法院强调，一方(法国)明确声称主权，因此认为另一方(泰国)需要作出反应。 |
| This judgment, however, was rendered
before the adoption of the Vienna Convention and thus, at least implicitly,
was taken into account by States in their debate at the Vienna Conference. | 不过，该判决是在《维也纳公约》通过前作出的，因此至少可以推测维也纳会议的辩论上考虑过该判决。 |
| The judgment also stops short of
explicitly recognizing the modification of a treaty by subsequent practice as
the Court left open whether the line on the French map was compatible with
the watershed line that had been agreed upon in the original boundary treaty
between the two States — although it is often assumed
that this was not the case. | 该判决也没有明确承认嗣后惯例对条约的修改，关于法国人地图上的分界线与两国最初的边界条约商定的分水岭是否一致这个问题，虽然通常假定不一致，但是法院没有下定论。 |
| (31) Thus, while leaving open the
possibility that a treaty might be modified by the subsequent practice of the
parties, the International Court of Justice has so far not explicitly
recognized that such an effect has actually been produced in a specific case. | (31) 因此，虽然国际法院留下了缔约方通过嗣后惯例修改条约的可能性，但是迄今没有明确确认在具体案例中实际产生过这种效果。 |
| Rather the Court has reached
interpretations that were difficult to reconcile with the ordinary meaning of
the text of the treaty, but which coincided with the identified practice of
the parties. | 确切地说，法院得出了与条约案文的通常含义不太一致，但是与确认的缔约方惯例一致的解释。 |
| Contrary holdings by arbitral tribunals
have been characterized either as an “isolated
exception” or rendered before the Vienna Conference
and critically referred to there. | 仲裁法庭相反的裁决或是被视为“个别特例”，或是在《维也纳公约》之前作出，已作为重要参考。 |
| (32) The WTO Appellate Body has made
clear that it would not accept an interpretation that would result in a
modification of a treaty obligation, as this would not be an “application” of an existing treaty
provision. | (32) 世贸组织上诉机构明确表示，不接受导致修改条约义务的解释，因为这不是“适用”现有的条约规定。 |
| The Appellate Body’s position may be influenced by article 3, paragraph 2, of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes,
according to which: “Recommendations and rulings of
the [Dispute Settlement Body] cannot add to or diminish the rights and
obligations provided in the covered agreements.” | 上诉机构的立场可能受到《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》第3条第2款的影响，其中规定“[争端解决机构]的建议和裁决不得增加或减少所涉协定规定的权利和义务”。 |
| (33) The European Court of Human Rights
has occasionally recognized the subsequent practice of the parties as a
possible source for a modification of the Convention. | (33) 欧洲人权法院偶尔承认缔约方的嗣后惯例是修改公约的可能来源。 |
| In an obiter dictum in the 1989 case of
Soering v. the United Kingdom, the Court held: | 在1989年Soering诉联合王国案的附带意见中，法院主张： |
| “ … that an established practice within
the member States could give rise to an amendment of the Convention. | “…成员国既定的惯例可能导致修正《公约》。 |
| In that case the Court accepted that
subsequent practice in national penal policy, in the form of a generalised
abolition of capital punishment, could be taken as establishing the agreement
of the Contracting States to abrogate the exception provided for under
Article 2 § 1 and hence remove a textual limit on the
scope for evolutive interpretation of Article 3 (ibid., pp. 40-41, § 103).” | 在该案中，法院认为，国家刑法政策中普遍废除死刑的嗣后惯例可以视为确认缔约国就废除第2条第1款规定的例外情况达成了一致，因此取消了案文对第3条的演进式解释的范围限制(同上，第40-41页，第103段)。” |
| (34) Applying this reasoning, the Court
came to the following conclusion in Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United
Kingdom: | (34) 运用这种推理，法院在Al-Saadoon和Mufdhi诉联合王国案中得出以下结论： |
| “All but two of the member States have
now signed Protocol No. 13 and all but three of the States which have signed
have ratified it. | “只有两个成员国尚未签署第13号议定书，所有签署国中只有三个国家尚未批准。 |
| These figures, together with consistent
State practice in observing the moratorium on capital punishment, are
strongly indicative that Article 2 has been amended so as to prohibit the
death penalty in all circumstances. | 这些数字，再加上一贯的暂停执行死刑的国家实践，明确显示第2条已被修正，以禁止在任何情况下执行死刑。 |
| Against this background, the Court does
not consider that the wording of the second sentence of Article 2 § 1 continues to act as a bar to its interpreting the words ‘inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’ in Article 3 as including the death penalty (compare Soering,
cited above, §§ 102-04).” | 在这种背景下，法院认为第2条第1款第二句的措词不再阻碍其将第3条下的“不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚”一词解释为包括死刑(比照Soering, 上文引用，第102-104段)。 ” |
| (35) The case law of international courts
and tribunals allows the following conclusions: the WTO situation suggests
that a treaty may preclude the subsequent practice of the parties from having
a modifying effect. | (35) 从国际法院和法庭的判例法中可以得出以下结论：世贸组织的情况显示，条约本身可阻止缔约方的嗣后惯例具有修改作用。 |
| Thus, the treaty itself governs the
question in the first place. | 因此，条约一开始就可以控制这一问题。 |
| Conversely, the European Court of Human
Rights cases suggest that a treaty may permit the subsequent practice of the
parties to have a modifying effect. | 相反，欧洲人权法院的案件显示，条约可以允许缔约方的嗣后惯例具有修改作用。 |
| Thus, ultimately, much depends on the
treaty or on the treaty provisions concerned. | 因此，最终主要还是取决于条约或相关条约规定。 |
| (36) The situation is more complicated in
the case of treaties for which such indications do not exist. | (36) 如果条约中没有这类表示，则情况更加复杂。 |
| No clear residual rule for such cases can
be discerned from the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice. | 国际法院的判例中不太能找到针对这种情况的明确的补充规则。 |
| The conclusion can be drawn, however,
that the Court, while finding that the possibility of a modification of a
treaty by subsequent practice of the parties “cannot
be wholly precluded as a possibility in law”,
considered that finding such a modification should be avoided, if at all
possible. | 不过，可以得出这一结论：法院虽然认定“法律中不得完全排除”缔约方通过嗣后惯例修改条约的可能性，但是认为只要有可能，就应避免这类修改。 |
| Instead the Court prefers to accept broad
interpretations that may stretch the ordinary meaning of the terms of the
treaty. | 相反，法院倾向于接受可能扩大条约用语的通常含义的宽泛解释。 |
| (37) This conclusion from the jurisprudence
of the International Court of Justice is in line with certain considerations
that were articulated during the debates among States on draft article 38 of
the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (37) 从国际法院的判例中得出的这一结论符合各国在关于1969年《维也纳公约》第三十八条草案的辩论中提出的一些考虑因素。 |
| Today, the consideration that amendment
procedures that are provided for in a treaty are not to be circumvented by
informal means seems to have gained more weight in relation to the equally
true general observation that international law is often not as formalist as
national law. | 如今，虽然普遍认为国际法不像国内法那样死板(的确如此)，但是不应以非正式途径规避条约中规定的修正程序这种观点似乎越来越得到认同。 |
| The concern that was expressed by a
number of States at the Vienna Conference, according to which the possibility
of modifying a treaty by subsequent practice could create difficulties for domestic
constitutional law, has also since gained in relevance. | 许多国家在维也纳会议上提出的关切，即嗣后惯例修改条约的可能性可能给国内宪法造成问题，也越来越受到重视。 |
| And, while the principle pacta sunt
servanda is not formally called into question by an amendment or modification
of a treaty by subsequent practice that establishes the agreement of all the
parties, it is equally true that the stability of treaty relations may be
called into question if an informal means of identifying agreement as
subsequent practice could easily modify a treaty. | 虽然条约必须遵守原则并没有因确立了所有缔约方协定的嗣后惯例对条约的修正或修改而正式受到质疑，但是如果像嗣后惯例这样的非正式方式能够轻易修改一项条约，那么的确可能对条约关系的稳定性造成问题。 |
| (38) In conclusion, while there exists
some support in international case law that, absent indications in the treaty
to the contrary, the agreed subsequent practice of the parties theoretically
may lead to modifications of a treaty, the actual occurrence of that effect
is not to be presumed. | (38) 总之，虽然国际判例法中有人认为只要条约中没有相反的表示，则理论上缔约方达成一致的嗣后惯例就可以修改条约，但是不应假定实际出现这种效果。 |
| Instead, States and courts prefer to make
every effort to conceive of an agreed subsequent practice of the parties as
an effort to interpret the treaty in a particular way. | 相反，国家和法院倾向于尽量将缔约方达成一致的嗣后惯例视为以特定方式解释条约的努力。 |
| Such efforts to interpret a treaty
broadly are possible since article 31 of the 1969 Vienna Convention does not
accord primacy to one particular means of interpretation contained therein,
but rather requires the interpreter to take into account all means of
interpretation as appropriate. | 通过嗣后惯例对条约作出宽泛的解释是有可能的，因为1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条并没有赋予特定的解释资料优先地位，而是要求解释方酌情考虑所有解释资料。 |
| In this context an important
consideration is how far an evolutive interpretation of the treaty provision
concerned is possible. | 有鉴于此，一个重要问题就是可以在多大程度上对所涉条约规定作出演进式解释。 |
| Conclusion 8 [3] | 结论8[3] |
| Interpretation of treaty terms as capable
of evolving over time | 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 8 [3] addresses the
role that 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8[3]涉及在条约术语的含义是否能够随时间演变这个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)，还是应当根据适用之时的情况和法律来解释(“演进性”、“演变性”或“动态性”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 Arbitral Tribunal in
the Iron Rhine case asserted that there was, “general
support among the leading writers today for evolutive interpretation of
treaties”. | 与此同时，仲裁法庭在莱茵铁路公司案中声称，“今天，主流法学家普遍支持对条约的演变性解释”。 |
| (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 that would give preference either to a “principle
of contemporaneous interpretation” or to one that
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”，要么偏向于大体上承认有必要考虑条约“不断演变的含义”的原则。 |
| (4) Draft conclusion 8 [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8[3]不应视为就一般条约解释宜采取当时意义办法还是演进办法这一问题采取了任何立场。 |
| Draft conclusion 8 [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8[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，既可支持当时意义解释，也可支持演进性解释(或通常所称的演变性解释)。 |
| 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”演进性解释对某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 that 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 that are referred to in articles 31
and 32, whether or not a treaty term should be given a meaning capable of
evolving over time. | 采用演进性解释办法――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，国际法院被视为发展出了两套判例，一套偏向于“当时意义”解释，一套偏向于“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 that favour a more
contemporaneous approach mostly concern specific treaty terms (“water-parting”; “main
channel or Thalweg”; names of places; and “mouth” of a river). | 他认为，倾向于当时意义办法的法院裁决大多涉及具体的条约术语(“分水岭”、“主航道或河流最深线”、地名、“河口”)。 |
| On the other hand, the cases that support
an evolutive interpretation seem to relate to more general terms. | 另一方面，支持演进性解释的案件似乎涉及更一般的术语。 |
| This is true, in particular, for terms
that 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. | 对从定义上就具备演变性的用语而言尤为如此，例如《国际联盟盟约》第二十二条中“现代世界的艰难条件”或“这些人民的福祉和发展”。 |
| 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，对这些用语赋予了不断演变的含义。 |
| 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. | 条约某个用语具有“非特定”性质，以及条约旨在“长期有效”， 也可催生不断演变的含义。 |
| (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性解释办法，尽管对此种解释表现出不同的开放程度。 |
| The WTO Appellate Body has only
occasionally resorted to evolutive interpretation. | 世贸组织上诉机构偶尔采用演进性解释。 |
| 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，上诉机构裁定，“第20条(g)项中‘自然资源’这一普通用语在内容和指代范围上并不是‘静止’的，而是‘从定义上就具备演变性’”。 |
| The ITLOS Seabed Disputes Chamber has
held that the meaning of certain obligations to ensure “may change over time”, and has emphasized
that the rules of State liability in the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea are apt to follow developments in the law and are “not considered to be static”. | 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”. | 欧洲人权法院更笼统地指出，“《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. | 美洲人权法院也更常采用演进性解释办法，特别是结合其所谓人道的办法。 |
| In the Iron Rhine case, the continued
viability and effectiveness of a multidimensional cross-border railway
arrangement was an important reason for the Arbitral Tribunal to accept that
even rather technical rules may have to be given an evolutive interpretation. | 在莱茵铁路公司案中，多方面跨境铁路安排的持续存在和效力是一个重要理由，促使仲裁法庭同意，即使对相当技术性的规则，也可以予以演进性的解释。 |
| (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 that are mentioned in articles 31 and 32 of the 1969 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性解释作为一种单独的解释形式，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1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条中所提到的各种解释资料中作出此种演进性解释。 |
| 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性解释，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、其目的和宗旨、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 8 [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 that are recognized in
articles 31 and 32. | 因此，结论草案8[3]通过使用“推定意图”一语，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”并非一个可单独确定的最初意愿，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 that are available at the time of
the act of interpretation and that 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 of whether parties can be presumed to have intended, upon the conclusion
of the treaty, to give a term used a meaning that 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 8 [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8[3]没有就一般条约解释宜采取当时意义办法还是演进性办法这一问题采取任何立场(见上文评注，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 8 [3]
points to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as means of
interpretation that 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. | 为此目的，结论草案8[3]提到嗣后协定和嗣后惯例，认为其作为解释资料，可有助于解释者在条约解释的正常过程中，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及其他国际法院和法庭的判例为基础并为其所确认。 |
| In the Namibia Advisory Opinion, the International
Court of Justice referred to the practice of United Nations organs and of
States in order to specify the conclusions that it derived from the
inherently evolutive nature of the right to self-determination. | 在纳米比亚咨询意见中，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 that had invoked the restrictive
interpretation in a different context. | 在爱琴海案中，国际法院认为“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“一般和通常意义”，尽管当事国在另一处上下文中援用了限制性的解释。 |
| In any case, the decisions in which the
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. | 无论如何，国际法院采取演进性办法的裁定并未偏离案文可能具有的含义，并未偏离――如其嗣后协定和嗣后惯例中也表示的――条约当事国的推定意图。 |
| (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 that is
capable of evolving over time. | (12) 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案的国际法院判决也显示了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”一词时，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，《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项的意义下的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，当事国缔结条约时的意图是…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”一词是一个“普通用语”，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”这一用语“具有不断演变的含义”。 |
| 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”. | 在个别意见中，斯科特尼科夫法官尽管不同意这一推理，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”。 |
| (13) The International Criminal Tribunal
for the former Yugoslavia has sometimes taken more general forms of State
practice into account, including trends in the legislation of States that, in
turn, can give rise to a changed interpretation of the scope of crimes or
their elements. | (13) 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭有时考虑到更普遍的国家惯例形式，包括国家立法趋势，这反过来又可能改变对犯罪范围或犯罪要件的解释。 |
| In Prosecutor v. Furundžija, for example,
the Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia, in search of a definition for the crime of rape as prohibited by
article 27 of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian
Persons in Time of War, article 76, paragraph 1, of the first Additional
Protocol (Protocol I) and article 4, paragraph 2 (e), of the second
Additional Protocol (Protocol II), examined the principles of criminal law
common to the major legal systems of the world and held: | 例如，在检察官诉Furundžija案中，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭的审判分庭为界定《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》第二十七条、《第一附加议定书》(《第一议定书》)第七十六条第一款和《第二附加议定书》(《第二议定书》)第四条第二款(五)项所禁止的强奸罪，检查了世界各主要法律制度通用的刑法原则，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，一些国家的立法工作存在这样一个趋势，即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. | (14) 欧洲人权法院的“活的文书”的办法除其他外，也是基于不同形式的嗣后惯例。 |
| While the Court does not generally
require “the agreement of the parties regarding its
interpretation” in the sense of article 31, paragraph
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. | 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“当事国对其解释的一致意思…”，但其采取演进办法的裁定往往辅之以对嗣后(国家、社会和国际法律)惯例的详细叙述。 |
| (15) The Inter-American Court of Human
Rights, despite its relatively rare mentioning of subsequent practice,
frequently refers to broader international developments, an approach that
falls somewhere between subsequent practice and other “relevant rules” under article 31,
paragraph 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三款(c)项之下其他“相关规则”之间。 |
| In the case of Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni
Community v. Nicaragua, for example, the Court pointed out that: | 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.” | “…人权条约是活的文书[“instrumentos
vivo”]，其解释必须适应时代的演变，具体而言，适应目前的生活条件。” |
| (16) The Human Rights Committee also on
occasion adopts an evolutive approach that is based on developments of State
practice. | (16) 人权事务委员会偶尔也采用基于国家惯例的发展的演进性办法。 |
| 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，自那时起，国际上就废除死刑达成了更广泛的共识，而在保留死刑的国家中，更广泛的共识是不执行死刑。
” |
| In Yoon and Choi, the Committee stressed
that the meaning of any right contained in the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights evolved over time and concluded that article 18,
article 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都随时间演变，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，使人不致被迫违背自己真心持有的宗教信仰而行动。 |
| 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, the tribunals established
under the auspices of the International Centre for the Settlement of
Investment Disputes have emphasized that subsequent practice can be a
particularly important means of interpretation for such provisions that the
parties to the treaty intended to evolve in the light of their subsequent
treaty practice. | (17) 最后，解决投资争端国际中心下设的法庭着重指出，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’. 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.” | “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，而是将此种定义留待国家的嗣后惯例确定，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 and tribunals and the pronouncements of expert treaty bodies thus
confirm 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，各国际法院和法庭的判例以及专家条约机构的声明确认，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
interrelated or cross-cutting concepts (such as “by
law” (article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights) or “necessary” (article 18 of the Covenant), 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”是条约所载规则的要素，因此涵盖相关规则。 |
| (19) In a similar manner, subsequent
practice under articles 31, paragraph 3 (b), and 32 has contributed to
whether domestic courts arrive at a more evolutive or static interpretation
of a treaty. | (19) 同样，第三十一条第三款(b)项和第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例也对国内法院决定采取演进性办法还是当时意义办法解释条约作出了贡献。 |
| For example, in a case concerning the
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, the New
Zealand Court of Appeal interpreted the term “custody
rights” as encompassing not only legal rights but
also “de facto rights”. | 举例而言，在一宗涉及《国际儿童拐骗事件的民事问题公约》的案件中，新西兰上诉法院将“监护权”解释为不仅包括法定权利，也包括“事实权利”。 |
| On the basis of a review of legislative and
judicial practice in different States and referring to article 31, paragraph
3 (b), the Court reasoned that this practice “evidence[d]
a fundamental change in attitudes”, which then led it
to adopt a modern understanding of the term “custody
rights” rather than an understanding “through a 1980 lens”. | 法院回顾不同国家的立法和司法惯例，并提到第三十一条第三款(b)项，分析指出这一惯例“证明态度上发生了根本性改变”，并因此随后对“监护权”采取了现代理解，而非“1980年的理解”。 |
| The German Federal Constitutional Court,
in a series of cases concerning the interpretation of the North Atlantic
Treaty in the light of the changed security context after the end of the Cold
War, also held that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), “could acquire
significance for the meaning of the treaty” and
ultimately held that this had been the case. | 德国联邦宪法法院在一系列涉及在冷战结束后已改变的安全局势下解释《北大西洋公约》的案件中，也认定第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例“可对条约的含义产生重大意义”，并最终裁定，嗣后协定和嗣后惯例在所涉案件中确实对条约含义产生了重大意义。 |
| (20) Other decisions of domestic courts
have confirmed that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under
articles 31, paragraph 3, and 32 do not necessarily support evolutive
interpretations of a treaty. | (20) 国内法院的其他决定证实，第三十一条第三款和第三十二条所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例不一定支持对条约的演进性解释。 |
| In Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd et
al., for example, the United States Supreme Court was confronted with the
question of whether the term “bodily injury” in article 17 of the Warsaw Convention of 1929 covered not only
physical but also purely mental injuries. | 例如，在美国东方航空公司诉Floyd等人案中，美国最高法院面临的问题是，1929年《华沙公约》第17条中“人身伤害”这一术语是否不仅包括身体伤害，也包括纯心理伤害。 |
| The Court, taking account of the “post-1929 conduct” and “interpretations of the signatories”,
emphasized that, despite some initiatives to the contrary, most parties had
always continued to understand that the term covered only bodily injuries. | 该法院考虑到“1929年后做法”和“签字国的解释”，强调尽管有些举措反其道而行之，但大部分缔约国一直将这一术语理解为只包括身体伤害。 |
| Conclusion 9 [8] | 结论9[8] |
| Weight of subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice as a means of interpretation | 嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释资料的权重 |
| 1. The weight of a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice as a means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph
3, depends, inter alia, on its clarity and specificity. | 1. 嗣后协定或嗣后惯例作为第三十一条第三款所称的解释资料的权重，除其他外，取决于其清晰性和特定性。 |
| 2. The weight of subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), depends, in addition, on whether and how
it is repeated. | 2. 第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例的权重还取决于该惯例是否以及如何重复出现。 |
| 3. The weight of subsequent practice as a
supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 may depend on the
criteria referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 3. 嗣后惯例作为第三十二条所称的补充的解释资料的权重可取决于第1和第2段所述标准。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 9 [8] identifies
some criteria that may be helpful in determining the interpretative weight to
be accorded to a specific subsequent agreement or subsequent practice in the
process of interpretation in a particular case. | (1) 结论草案9[8]列出了一些标准，可能有助于确定在具体情况下进行解释时对某一特定嗣后协定或嗣后惯例作为解释资料给予多少权重。 |
| Naturally, the weight accorded to
subsequent agreements or subsequent practice must also be determined in
relation to other means of interpretation (see draft conclusion 2 [1],
paragraph 5). | 当然，对嗣后协定或嗣后惯例给予的权重也必须取决于其他解释资料(见结论草案2[1]，第5段)。 |
| Paragraph 1 —
weight: clarity, specificity and other factors | 第1段――权重：清晰性、特定性和其他因素 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 addresses the weight of a
subsequent agreement or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3,
thus dealing with both subparagraphs (a) and (b) from a general point of
view. | (2) 第1段讨论第三十一条第三款下的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例的权重，因此是从总体上同时涉及(a)项和(b)项。 |
| Paragraph 1 specifies that the weight to
be accorded to a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice as a means of
interpretation depends, inter alia, on its clarity and specificity. | 第1段明确指出，嗣后协定或嗣后惯例作为解释资料的权重，除其他外，取决于其清晰性和特定性。 |
| The use of the term “inter alia” indicates that these criteria
should not be seen as exhaustive. | 使用“除其他外”一语，就表明不应将这些标准视为唯一的。 |
| Other criteria may relate to the time
when the agreement or practice occurred, the emphasis given by the parties to
a particular agreement or practice or the applicable burden of proof. | 其他标准可能涉及到协定或惯例发生的时间、缔约方对特定协定或惯例的重视或者适用的举证责任。 |
| (3) The interpretative weight of
subsequent agreements or practice in relation to other means of
interpretation often depends on their clarity and specificity in relation to
the treaty concerned. | (3) 相对于其他解释资料而言，嗣后协定或惯例作为解释资料的权重常常取决于其清晰性以及对于有关条约的特定性。 |
| This is confirmed, for example, by
decisions of the International Court of Justice, arbitral awards and reports
of the WTO Panels and Appellate Body. | 例如，国际法院的裁决、世贸组织专题小组及其上诉机构的仲裁裁决和报告都表明了这一点。 |
| The award of the ICSID Tribunal in Plama
Consortium Limited v. Republic of Bulgaria is instructive: | 国际投资争端解决中心法庭对Plama联合有限公司诉保加利亚共和国一案的裁决具有启示意义： |
| “It is true that treaties between one of
the Contracting Parties and third States may be taken into account for the
purpose of clarifying the meaning of a treaty’s text
at the time it was entered into. | “确实，为了澄清条约文本生效时的含义，可以考虑一个缔约国与第三国之间的条约。 |
| The Claimant has provided a very clear
and insightful presentation of Bulgaria’s practice in
relation to the conclusion of investment treaties subsequent to the
conclusion of the Bulgaria-Cyprus BIT in 1987. | 原告对于保加利亚在1987年缔结保加利亚――塞浦路斯双边投资条约之后缔结投资条约的实践做了非常清楚和深入的介绍。 |
| In the 1990s, after Bulgaria’s communist regime changed, it began concluding BITs with much
more liberal dispute resolution provisions, including resort to ICSID
arbitration. | 在1990年代保加利亚改变了社会主义制度之后，该国缔结的双边投资条约采用了大为开放的争端解决条款，包括诉诸国际投资争端解决中心进行仲裁。 |
| However, that practice is not
particularly relevant in the present case since subsequent negotiations
between Bulgaria and Cyprus indicate that these Contracting Parties did not
intend the MFN provision to have the meaning that otherwise might be inferred
from Bulgaria’s subsequent treaty practice. | 但是，这一惯例对本案并没有很大的关联，因为保加利亚和塞浦路斯嗣后的谈判表明，缔约国并不想要最惠国待遇条款具有可通过保加利亚嗣后条约实践而引申出来的含义。 |
| Bulgaria and Cyprus negotiated a revision
of their BIT in 1998. | 保加利亚和塞浦路斯于1998年谈判修订双边投资条约。 |
| The negotiations failed but specifically
contemplated a revision of the dispute settlement provisions … It can be inferred from these negotiations that the Contracting
Parties to the BIT themselves did not consider that the MFN provision extends
to dispute settlement provisions in other BITs.” | 谈判没有成功，但专门考虑到了修订争端解决条款…从这些谈判中也可以得出结论，即双边投资条约的缔约国本身并未考虑将最惠国待遇条款扩大至其他双边投资条约中的争端解决条款。
” |
| (4) Whereas the International Court of
Justice and arbitral tribunals tend to accord more interpretative weight to
rather specific subsequent practice by States, the European Court of Human
Rights often relies on broad comparative assessments of the domestic
legislation or international positions adopted by States. | (4) 尽管国际法院和各个仲裁法庭倾向于对更具有特定性的国家嗣后实践作为解释资料给予更多权重，但欧洲人权法院常常依靠对于国内法律或国家采取的国际立场作出广泛有时是粗略的比较性评估。 |
| In this latter context, it should be
borne in mind that the rights and obligations under human rights treaties
must be correctly transformed, within the given margin of appreciation, into
the law, the executive practice and international arrangements of the
respective State party. | 在后一种情况下，应当铭记，人权条约下规定的权利和义务必须在留出一定判断余地的前提下，正确地转化为有关国家的法律、行政机构实践和国际安排。 |
| For this purpose, sufficiently strong
commonalities in the national legislation of States parties can be relevant
for the determination of the scope of a human right or the necessity of its
restriction. | 为此，缔约国国内法律之间较强的共性可有助于确定一项人权的范围或予以限制的必要性。 |
| In addition, the character of certain
rights or obligations sometimes speaks in favour of taking less specific
practice into account. | 此外，鉴于某些权利或义务的特点，有时更宜考虑特定性不那么强的实践。 |
| For example, in the case of Rantsev v.
Cyprus, the Court held that: | 例如，在Rantsev诉塞浦路斯案中，法庭认为： |
| “It is clear from the provisions of these
two [international] instruments that the Contracting States … have formed the view that only a combination of measures
addressing all three aspects can be effective in the fight against trafficking
… Accordingly, the duty to penalise and prosecute
trafficking is only one aspect of member States’
general undertaking to combat trafficking. | “这两份[国际]文书的条款清楚表明，缔约国…形成的观点是，只有将涉及所有三个方面的举措结合起来，才能有效打击贩运人口活动…因此，惩罚和起诉贩运人口活动只是成员国打击贩运人口活动总体事业的一个方面。 |
| The extent of the positive obligations
arising under Article 4 [prohibition of forced labour] must be considered
within this broader context.” | 对第4条[关于禁止强迫劳动]下产生的积极义务的范围必须放到这个广义的背景下加以考虑。” |
| (5) On the other hand, in the case of
Chapman v. the United Kingdom, the Court observed “that
there may be said to be an emerging international consensus amongst the
Contracting States of the Council of Europe recognising the special needs of
minorities and an obligation to protect their security, identity and
lifestyle”, but ultimately said that it was “not persuaded that the consensus is sufficiently concrete for it
to derive any guidance as to the conduct or standards which Contracting
States consider desirable in any particular situation”. | (5) 另一方面，在Chapman诉联合王国案中，法庭指出，“或许可以说，欧洲委员会缔约国之间正在形成国际共识，承认少数群体的特殊需要和保护其安全、特性和生活方式的义务”，但最后又指出“法庭不能够信服地认为，有足够具体的共识，使法庭可就任何特定情况下缔约国视为可取的行为或标准作出任何指导”。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
weight: repetition of a practice | 第2段――权重：惯例的重复出现 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 9 [8]
deals only with subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and
specifies that the weight of subsequent practice also depends on whether and
how it is repeated. | (6) 结论草案9[8]第2段仅涉及第三十一条第三款(b)项称的嗣后惯例，并明确规定，嗣后惯例的权重还取决于该惯例是否以及如何重复出现。 |
| This formula “whether
and how it is repeated” brings in the elements of
time and the character of a repetition. | “是否以及如何重复出现”这一表述引入了时间和重复的性质这两个因素。 |
| It indicates, for example, that,
depending on the treaty concerned, something more than just a technical or
unmindful repetition of a practice may contribute to its interpretative value
in the context of article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 它表明，举例来说，视条约而定，不仅仅是技术性或无意的做法的重复可增加其在第三十一条第三款(b)项范围下的解释性价值。 |
| The element of time and the character of
the repetition also serves to indicate the “grounding” of a particular position of the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty. | 时间因素和重复的性质也有助于表明缔约国对条约解释所持特定立场的“根据”。 |
| Moreover, the non-implementation of a
subsequent agreement may also suggest a lack of its weight as a means of
interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 此外，嗣后协定未得到执行也可能说明其不具备作为第三十一条第三款(a)项下解释资料的权重。 |
| (7) The question of whether “subsequent practice” under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), requires more than a one-off application of the treaty was
addressed by the WTO Appellate Body in Japan —
Alcoholic Beverages II: | (7) 关于第三十一条第三款(b)项中“嗣后惯例”是否要求条约不仅限于一次性适用的问题在世贸组织上诉机构关于日本－酒精饮料案(二)案中进行了讨论： |
| “… 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 discernible 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，足以确立一种明确的模式，表明缔约方对条约解释的一致”。 |
| (8) This definition suggests that
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), requires more than one
“act or pronouncement”
regarding the interpretation of a treaty; rather action of such frequency and
uniformity that it warrants a conclusion that the parties have reached a
settled agreement regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | (8) 这一定义表明，第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后惯例要求不仅是就解释条约的一次“行为或声明”，而是此种行动的次数和统一性使人可以得出结论，即缔约国已就条约的解释达成了稳定的一致。 |
| Such a threshold would imply that
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), requires a
broad-based, settled and qualified form of collective practice in order to
establish agreement among the parties regarding interpretation. | 这一门槛就意味着，第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后惯例要求存在基础广泛、稳定和合格的集体惯例模式，才能确认缔约国就解释达成了一致。 |
| (9) The International Court of Justice,
on the other hand, has applied article 31, paragraph 3 (b), more flexibly,
without adding further conditions. This is true, in particular, for its
judgment in the case of Kasikili/Sedudu Island. | (9) 另一方面，国际法院也较为灵活地采用第三十一条第三款(b)项，而没有增加进一步条件，特别是在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案的判决中。 |
| Other international courts have mostly
followed the approach of the International Court of Justice. | 其他国际性法院大多遵循国际法院的办法。 |
| This is true for the Iran-United States
Claims Tribunal and the European Court of Human Rights. | 伊朗－美国索赔法庭 和欧洲人权法院 都是如此。 |
| (10) The difference between the standard
formulated by the WTO Appellate Body, on the one hand, and the approach of
the International Court of Justice, on the other, is, however, more apparent
than real. | (10) 但实际上，世贸组织上诉机构制订的标准与国际法院采取的办法之间的区别并没有表面看起来那么大。 |
| The WTO Appellate Body seems to have
taken the “concordant, common and consistent” formula from a publication that stated that “the value of subsequent practice will naturally depend on the
extent to which it is concordant, common and consistent”. | 世贸组织上诉机构似乎采用了一份出版物中的“协调、共同和一致”的表述，这本书称，“嗣后惯例的价值自然取决于它协调、共同和一致的程度”。 |
| The formula “concordant,
common and consistent” thus provides an indication as
to the circumstances under which subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), has more or less weight as a means of interpretation in a
process of interpretation, rather than require any particular frequency in
the practice. | 因此，“协调、共同和一致”的表述是指出在哪些情况下，第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例在解释过程中作为解释资料具有较多或较少的权重，而不是提出实践中具体的次数要求。 |
| The WTO Appellate Body itself on occasion
has relied on this nuanced view. | 世贸组织上诉机构自己也曾采取这一有略微差别的态度。 |
| (11) The Commission, while finding that
the formula “concordant, common and consistent” may be useful for determining the weight of subsequent practice
in a particular case, also considers it as not being sufficiently well
established to articulate a minimum threshold for the applicability of
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and as carrying the risk of being misconceived
as overly prescriptive. | (11) 委员会认为“协调、共同和一致”的表述可能有助于确定嗣后惯例在某一具体情况下的权重，同时也认为这一规定并没有充分完善地得到确立，不足以构成适用第三十一条第三款(b)项的一个最低门槛，并有可能被错误地认为规定过细。 |
| Ultimately, the Commission continues to
find that: “The value of subsequent practice varies
according as it shows the common understanding of the parties as to the
meaning of the terms. ” | 最终，委员会仍然认为，“嗣后惯例的价值不同，既取决于其是否体现缔约国的共同理解，也取决于术语的意义。” |
| This implies that a one-off practice of
the parties that establishes their agreement regarding the interpretation
needs to be taken into account under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 这就意味着，缔约国就解释达成一致的一次性实践也需要在第三十一条第三款(b)项下考虑进来。 |
| Paragraph 3 —
weight of other subsequent practice under article 32 | 第3段――第三十二条所称其他嗣后惯例的权重 |
| (12) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 9
[8] addresses the weight that should be accorded to “other
subsequent practice” under article 32 (see draft
conclusion 4, paragraph 3). | (12) 结论草案9[8]第3段针对第三十二条所称的“其他嗣后惯例”的权重(见结论草案4第3段)。 |
| It does not address when and under which
circumstances such practice can be considered. | 它不涉及在什么时候和哪些情况下可考虑这种惯例的问题。 |
| The WTO Appellate Body has emphasized, in
a comparable situation, that those two issues must be distinguished from each
other: | 世贸组织上诉机构在一次与此相似的情况下强调说，对这两个问题必须加以区别： |
| “… we consider that the European
Communities conflates the preliminary question of what may qualify as a ‘circumstance’ of a treaty’s conclusion with the separate question of ascertaining the degree
of relevance that may be ascribed to a given circumstance, for purposes of
interpretation under Article 32.” | “…我们认为，就第三十二条的解释而言，欧洲共同体将什么可界定为缔结条约的“背景”这一初步问题与确定特定情况的相关性这一另外的问题混为一谈。” |
| The Appellate Body also held that: | 上诉机构还认为， |
| “… first, the Panel did not examine the
classification practice in the European Communities during the Uruguay Round
negotiations as a supplementary means of interpretation within the meaning of
Article 32 of the Vienna Convention; and, second, the value of the
classification practice as a supplementary means of interpretation … ”. | “…首先，专题小组并未审查欧洲共同体在乌拉圭回合谈判期间的分类实践作为《维也纳公约》第三十二条意义内的补充解释材料这一问题；分类做法作为补充解释材料的价值…”。 |
| In order to determine the “relevance” of such subsequent practice,
the Appellate Body referred to “objective factors”: | 为了确定这类嗣后惯例的“相关性”，上诉机构援引“客观因素”： |
| “These include the type of event,
document, or instrument and its legal nature; temporal relation of the
circumstance to the conclusion of the treaty; actual knowledge or mere access
to a published act or instrument; subject matter of the document, instrument,
or event in relation to the treaty provision to be interpreted; and whether
or how it was used or influenced the negotiations of the treaty.” | “这些包括会议、文件或文书的类型及其法律性质；背景与缔结条约的时间联系；确实了解还是只是能够查阅出版的法案或文书；涉及需解释条约条款的文件、文书或会议的主题；是否在条约谈判过程中得到使用或施加了影响。
” |
| (13) Whereas the Appellate Body did not
use the term “specificity”,
it referred to the criteria mentioned above. | (13) 尽管上诉机构并未使用“特定性”一词，但它提到上文所述的标准。 |
| Instead of clarity, the Appellate Body
spoke of “consistency” and
stated that consistency should not set a benchmark but rather determine the
degree of relevance. | 上诉机构没有使用“明确性”，而是使用“一致性”的说法，并称，一致性不应作为基准，而只是确定相关的程度。 |
| “Consistent prior classification practice
may often be significant. | “在解释关税减让的含义时，以前一致的分类实践可能比较重要。 |
| Inconsistent classification practice,
however, cannot be relevant in interpreting the meaning of a tariff
concession”. | 但是，不一致的分类实践就不能作为参考”。 |
| (14) A further factor that helps
determine the relevance under article 32 may be the number of affected states
that engage in that practice. | (14) 另一个有助于确定第三十二条下相关性的因素或许是参与这一惯例的受影响国家的数目。 |
| The Appellate Body has stated: | 上诉机构指出： |
| “To establish this intention, the prior
practice of only one of the parties may be relevant, but it is clearly of
more limited value than the practice of all parties. | “为确立这种意向，只有一个缔约国以前的惯例可能也适用，但相对于全体缔约国的惯例而言，其价值显然大打折扣。 |
| In the specific case of the
interpretation of a tariff concession in a Schedule, the classification
practice of the importing Member, in fact, may be of great importance.” | 具体到申根关税减让的解释，事实上，进口成员国的分类实践较为重要。” |
| Conclusion 10 [9] | 结论10[9] |
| Agreement of the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty | 与条约解释有关的缔约方协定 |
| 1. An agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b), requires a common understanding regarding the
interpretation of a treaty which the parties are aware of and accept. | 1. 第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所称的协定必须是各缔约方知悉并接受的关于条约解释的共同理解。 |
| Though it shall be taken into account,
such an agreement need not be legally binding. | 这种协定虽然应予以考虑，但不必具有法律约束力。 |
| 2. The number of parties that must
actively engage in subsequent practice in order to establish an agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), may vary. | 2. 为确立第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的协定而必须积极适用嗣后惯例的缔约方数目可能不尽相同。 |
| Silence on the part of one or more parties
can constitute acceptance of the subsequent practice when the circumstances
call for some reaction. | 在有关情况要求作出某种反应时，一个或多个缔约方的沉默可构成对嗣后惯例的接受。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| Paragraph 1, first sentence — “common understanding” | 第1段第一句――“共同理解” |
| (1) The first sentence of paragraph 1
sets forth the principle that an “agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), requires a common
understanding by the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty. | (1) 第1段第一句提出了一项原则，即第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所称的协定必须是缔约方关于条约解释的共同理解。 |
| In order for that common understanding to
have the effect provided for under article 31, paragraph 3, the parties must
be aware of it and accept the interpretation contained therein. | 要使共同理解具有第三十一条第三款规定的效力，缔约国必须知悉并接受其中包含的解释。 |
| While the difference regarding the form
of an “agreement” under
subparagraph (a) and subparagraph (b) has already been set out in draft
conclusion 4 and its accompanying commentary, paragraph 1 of draft conclusion
10 [9] intends to capture what is common in the two subparagraphs, which is the
agreement between the parties, in substance, regarding the interpretation of
the treaty. | 在结论草案4及其评注中已经说明了(a)项和(b)项所述“协定”形式的不同，而结论草案10[9]第1段旨在找出这两项的共同之处，即缔约方就条约解释在实质上达成的协定。 |
| (2) The element that distinguishes
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as authentic means of
interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), on the one hand,
and other subsequent practice as a supplementary means of interpretation
under article 32, on the other, is the “agreement” of all the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | (2) 区分作为第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述作准解释资料的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例与第三十二条所述作为补充解释资料的嗣后惯例的一个要素是所有缔约方就条约解释达成的“协定”。 |
| It is this agreement of the parties that
provides the means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3, their
specific function and weight for the interactive process of interpretation
under the general rule of interpretation of article 31. | 正是缔约方的这种协定使第三十一条第三款所述的解释资料对于第三十一条下解释通则的互动解释进程具备了特定的功能和权重。 |
| (3) Conflicting positions expressed by
different parties to a treaty preclude the existence of an agreement. | (3) 不同缔约方就条约表达的相互冲突的立场就排除了协定的存在。 |
| This has been confirmed, inter alia, by
the Arbitral Tribunal in the case of German External Debts, which held that a
“tacit subsequent understanding” could not be derived from a number of communications by
administering agencies since one of those agencies, the Bank of England, had
expressed a divergent position. | 包括仲裁法庭在德国外债案中的裁决等都确认了这一点，该裁决称，通过管理机构的一系列函件，无法得出“嗣后默认的理解”，因为其中一家机构即英格兰银行表达了不一样的立场。 |
| (4) However, agreement is only absent to
the extent that the positions of the parties conflict and for as long as
their positions conflict. | (4) 但是，只有在缔约方的立场相冲突的范围内并就缔约方的立场冲突持续的这一时期而言，才不存在协定。 |
| The fact that parties apply a treaty
differently does not, as such, permit a conclusion that there are conflicting
positions regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 缔约方以不同的方式适用条约这一事实本身并不能够使人得出结论，认为就条约解释方面存在相互冲突的立场。 |
| Such a difference may indicate a
disagreement over the one correct interpretation, but it may also simply
reflect a common understanding that the treaty permits a certain scope for
the exercise of discretion in its application. | 这种不同可能说明对一个正确的解释存在不同意见，但也可能仅仅反映出一种共同理解，即条约允许在适用时行使一定范围的自由裁量权。 |
| Treaties that are characterized by
considerations of humanity or other general community interests, such as
treaties relating to human rights or refugees, tend to aim at a uniform
interpretation but also to leave a margin of appreciation for the exercise of
discretion by States. | 以全人类的考虑或其他总体人群利益为特点的条约，如关于人权或难民的条约往往意在有一个统一的解释，但也会为各国行使自由裁量权留出一定的斟酌空间。 |
| (5) Whereas equivocal conduct by one or
more parties will normally prevent the identification of an agreement, not
every element of the conduct of a State that does not fully fit into a
general picture necessarily renders the conduct of that State equivocal. | (5) 一个或多个缔约方模棱两可的行为通常使人无法确认存在协定，但是，并不是一国行为中不符合总体情况的每个要素都必然导致该国行为具有模糊性。 |
| The Court of Arbitration in the Beagle
Channel case, for example, found that although at one point the parties had a
difference of opinion regarding the interpretation of a treaty, that fact did
not necessarily establish that the lack of agreement was permanent: | 例如，仲裁法庭在比格尔海峡案中认为，尽管缔约方在有一点上就条约解释存在不同意见，但这一事实并不必然说明无协定是永久性的： |
| “In the same way, negotiations for a
settlement, that did not result in one, could hardly have any permanent
effect. | “同样，关于解决办法的谈判没有取得一个[解决办法]也很难说就有永久性的效力。 |
| At the most they might temporarily have
deprived the acts of the Parties of probative value in support of their
respective interpretations of the Treaty, insofar as these acts were
performed during the process of the negotiations. | 就谈判过程中发生的行为而言，最多也可能只是临时性地使缔约方的行为失去了支持其对条约各自解释的实证价值。 |
| The matter cannot be put higher than
that.” | 最多也就是这样了。 ” |
| (6) Similarly, in Loizidou v. Turkey, the
European Court of Human Rights held that the scope of the restrictions that
the parties could place on their acceptance of the competence of the
Commission and the Court was “confirmed by the
subsequent practice of the Contracting Parties”, that
is, “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”. | (6) 与此相似，在Loizidou诉土耳其案中，欧洲人权法院认为，缔约方对于其接受委员会和法院职能所规定限制的范围“通过缔约方的嗣后实践得到确认”，即“有证据显示一种惯例，表明缔约方基本普遍同意《公约》第25和第46条不允许作出领土或实质性的限制。” |
| The Court, applying article 31, paragraph
3 (b), described “such a State practice” as being “uniform and consistent”, despite the fact that it simultaneously recognized that two
States possibly constituted exceptions. | 法院在适用第三十一条第三款(b)项时将“这种国家实践”称为“统一和一贯的”，虽然它同时也承认两个国家即有可能构成例外。 |
| The decision suggests that interpreters,
at least under the European Convention, possess some margin when assessing
whether an agreement of the parties regarding a certain interpretation is
established. | 这一裁决表明，解释者(至少在《欧洲公约》下)在评估缔约方就一特定解释是否达成一致时有一定的斟酌余地。 |
| (7) The term “agreement” in the 1969 Vienna Convention does not imply any particular
requirements of form, including for an “agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). The Commission,
however, has noted that, in order to distinguish a subsequent agreement under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), and a subsequent practice that “establishes the agreement” of the parties
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), the former presupposes a “single common act”. | (7) 1969年《维也纳公约》中的“协定”一词并不意味着任何具体的形式要求，包括第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述的“协定”但是，委员会注意到，为了区分第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定和第三十一条第三款(b)项所述“确定协定”的嗣后惯例，前者预先假定有“一次共同的行动”。 |
| There is no requirement that an agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), be published or registered under Article
102 of the Charter of the United Nations. | 没有要求说第三十一条第三款(a)项所述协定要公布或按《联合国宪章》第一百零二条的规定进行登记。 |
| (8) For an agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3, it is not sufficient that the positions of the parties regarding
the interpretation of the treaty happen to overlap, the parties must also be
aware of and accept that these positions are common. | (8) 就第三十一条第三款所述协定而言，缔约方就条约解释的立场恰好重合还不够，缔约方必须知悉并接受这些立场是共同的。 |
| Thus, in the Kasikili/Sedudu Island case,
the International Court of Justice required that, for practice to fall under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), the “authorities were
fully aware of and accepted this as a confirmation of the Treaty boundary”. | 因此，国际法院在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中要求，要使惯例属于第三十一条第三款(b)项所规定的范围，“当局充分意识并接受它，作为对条约边界的认可。” |
| Indeed, only the awareness and acceptance
of the position of the other parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty
justifies the characterization of an agreement under article 31, paragraph 3
(a) or (b), as an “authentic”
means of interpretation. | 事实上，只有对其他缔约方关于条约解释立场的知悉和接受才能作为依据将第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项所述的协定定义为“作准的”解释资料。 |
| In certain circumstances, the awareness
and acceptance of the position of the other party or parties may be assumed,
particularly in the case of treaties that are implemented at the national
level. | 在有些情况下，可以推定对其他缔约方立场的意识和接受，特别是对在国家层面上实施的条约而言。 |
| Paragraph 1, second sentence — possible legal effects of agreement under article 31, paragraph 3
(a) and (b) | 第1段第二句――第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所称协定可能的法律效力 |
| (9) The aim of the second sentence of
paragraph 1 is to reaffirm that “agreement”, for the purpose of article 31, paragraph 3, need not, as such,
be legally binding, in contrast to other provisions of the 1969 Vienna
Convention in which the term “agreement” is used in the sense of a legally binding instrument. | (9) 第1段第二句的目的是重申就第三十一条第三款而言，“协定”本身无需是具有法律约束力的，这与1969年《维也纳公约》其他条款相反，其他条款是在有法律约束力的文书的意义上使用“协定”一语。 |
| (10) This is confirmed by the fact that
the Commission, in its final draft articles on the law of treaties, used the
expression “any subsequent practice which establishes
the understanding [emphasis added] of the parties”. | (10) 这一点也得到委员会的确认，委员会在条约法条款的最后草案中使用了“确立缔约方谅解[着重号]的任何嗣后惯例”这一说法。 |
| The expression “understanding” indicates that the term “agreement” in article 31, paragraph 3, does not require that the parties
thereby undertake or create any legal obligation existing in addition to, or
independently of, the treaty. | “谅解”一词是说，第三十一条第三款所述“协定”并不要求缔约方由此承担或创造任何在条约之上或独立于条约之外的法律义务。 |
| The Vienna Conference replaced the
expression “understanding” by
the word “agreement” not for
any substantive reason but “related to drafting only” in order to emphasize that the understanding of the parties was
to be their “common”
understanding. | 维也纳会议以“协定”一词取代“谅解”，并没有实质性的原因，而“仅仅涉及措辞问题”，用以强调缔约方的谅解是他们的“共同”理解。 |
| An “agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), being distinguished from an
agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), only in form and not in
substance, equally need not be legally binding. | 第三十一条第三款(a)项所述“协定”与第三十一条第三款(b)项所述协定的区别仅仅在于形式而不是内容，同样不需要具有法律约束力。 |
| (11) It is thus sufficient that the
parties, by a subsequent agreement or a subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3, attribute a certain meaning to the treaty or, in other words,
adopt a certain “understanding” of the treaty. | (11) 因此，缔约国通过嗣后协定或第三十一条第三款所述嗣后惯例对条约赋予一定含义，或者换句话说，对条约采取一种特定的“谅解”就足够了。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), even if they are not in
themselves legally binding, can thus nevertheless, as means of
interpretation, give rise to legal consequences as part of the process of
interpretation according to article 31. | 第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述嗣后协定和嗣后惯例即使本身不具有法律约束力，但作为解释资料，它们仍然可以根据第三十一条的规定，作为解释过程的组成部分，产生法律影响。 |
| Accordingly, international courts and
tribunals have not required that an “agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3, reflect the intention of the
parties to create new, or separate, legally binding undertakings. | 据此，国际性的法院和法庭不要求第三十一条第三款所述“协定”反映缔约方有创立新的或另外的具有法律约束力的承诺的意向。 |
| Similarly, memoranda of understanding
have been recognized, on occasion, as “a potentially
important aid to interpretation” — but “not a source of independent legal rights and duties”. | 与此相似，有时谅解备忘录被承认为“有可能非常有助于解释”，但“不是独立的法律权利和义务的来源”。 |
| (12) Some members considered, on the
other hand, that the term “agreement” has the same meaning in all provisions of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | (12) 另一方面，一些委员认为术语“协定”在1969年《维也纳公约》所有条款中具有相同的含义。 |
| According to those members, this term
designates any understanding that has legal effect between the States
concerned and the case law referred to in the present commentary does not
contradict this definition. | 根据这些成员的意见，这个词表示有关国家之间具有法律效力的任何谅解，本评注所提到的判例法与这个定义不矛盾。 |
| Such a definition would not prevent
taking into account, for the purpose of interpretation, a legally non-binding
understanding under article 32. | 这样的定义并不妨碍为了解释的目的而根据第三十二条考虑到不具法律约束力的谅解。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
forms of participation in subsequent practice | 第2段――参与嗣后惯例的形式 |
| (13) The first sentence of paragraph 2
confirms the principle that not all the parties must engage in a particular
practice to constitute agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | (13) 第2段第一句申明了一个原则，即并非所有缔约方都必须参与某一特定惯例，以此构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所述协定。 |
| The second sentence clarifies that
acceptance of such practice by those parties not engaged in the practice can
under certain circumstances be brought about by silence or inaction. | 第二句澄清说明，在特定情况下，未参与这一惯例的缔约方对这一惯例的接受可能经由沉默或不作为来构成。 |
| (14) From the outset, the Commission has
recognized that an “agreement” deriving from subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3
(b), can result, in part, from silence or inaction by one or more parties. | (14) 从一开始，委员会就承认，通过第三十一条第三款(b)项所述嗣后惯例形成的“协定”可部分地源于一个或多个缔约方的沉默或不作为。 |
| Explaining why it used the expression “the understanding of the parties” in draft
article 27, paragraph 3 (b) (which later became “the
agreement” in article 31, paragraph 3 (b) (see
paragraph (10) above)) and not the expression “the understanding
of all the parties”, the Commission stated that: | 委员会为了解释为何在第二十七条第三款(b)项中使用“缔约方的谅解”一语(后来成为第三十一条第三款(b)项中的“协定”)(见上文第(10)段)而没有使用“全体缔约方的谅解”的说法时指出： |
| “It considered that the phrase ‘the understanding of the parties’
necessarily means ‘the parties as a whole’. | “它认为，‘缔约方的谅解’一语自然是指‘全体缔约方’。 |
| It omitted the word ‘all’ merely to avoid any possible
misconception that every party must individually have engaged in the practice
where it suffices that it should have accepted the practice.” | 避免使用‘全体’一词只是为了防止出现可能的误解，即每个缔约方必须作为个体介入这种实践，但只要它接受这一惯例就足够了。” |
| (15) The International Court of Justice
has also recognized the possibility of expressing agreement regarding
interpretation by silence or inaction by stating, in the case concerning the
Temple of Preah Vihear, that “where it is clear that
the circumstances were such as called for some reaction, within a reasonable
period”, the State confronted with a certain
subsequent conduct by another party “must be held to
have acquiesced”. | (15) 国际法院也承认有可能经由沉默或不作为表示对解释的同意，法院在柏威夏寺案中称，一国在面对另一方某种嗣后行为的情况下，“如果显然当时情况要求在合理期限内作出某种反应”，则“必须认定该国已经默认了”。 |
| This general proposition of the Court
regarding the role of silence for the purpose of establishing agreement
regarding the interpretation of a treaty by subsequent practice has been
confirmed by later decisions, and supported generally by writers. | 法院对于就通过嗣后惯例解释条约确立协定的目的而言沉默作用的这一总体立场在后来的裁决中也得到了确认，并得到大多数法学著作的支持。 |
| The “circumstances” that will “call for some reaction” include the particular setting in which the States parties
interact with each other in respect of the treaty. | “要求作出某种反应”的“情况”包括缔约方就条约进行互动的具体背景。 |
| (16) The Court of Arbitration in the
Beagle Channel case dealt with the contention by Argentina that acts of
jurisdiction by Chile over certain islands could not be counted as relevant
subsequent conduct, since Argentina had not reacted to these acts. | (16) 仲裁法院在比格尔海峡案中讨论了阿根廷的主张，即智利对某些岛屿的管辖行为不能作为相关的嗣后行为，因为阿根廷未对这些行为作出反应。 |
| The Court, however, held: | 但法院认为： |
| “The terms of the Vienna Convention do
not specify the ways in which ‘agreement’ may be manifested. | “《维也纳公约》中并未明确‘协定’可以采取的表现形式。 |
| In the context of the present case the
acts of jurisdiction were not intended to establish a source of title
independent of the terms of the treaty; nor could they be considered as being
in contradiction of those terms as understood by Chile. | 在本案中，管辖的行为不是为了确立独立于条约规定之外的所有权来源；也不能象智利的理解，认为其违反了这些规定。 |
| The evidence supports the view that they
were public and well-known to Argentina, and that they could only derive from
the Treaty. | 证据支持的观点是，这些行为是公开的，为阿根廷所熟知，它们只能来自于条约。 |
| Under these circumstances the silence of
Argentina permits the inference that the acts tended to confirm an
interpretation of the meaning of the Treaty independent of the acts of
jurisdiction themselves.” | 在这种情况下，阿根廷的沉默就允许得出结论，认为这些行为旨在确认独立于管辖行为本身之外的对条约含义的解释。” |
| In the same case, the Court of
Arbitration considered that: | 在同一案件中，仲裁法院认为： |
| “The mere publication of a number of maps
of (as the Court has already shown) extremely dubious standing and value
could not — even if they nevertheless represented the
official Argentine view — preclude or foreclose Chile
from engaging in acts that would, correspondingly, demonstrate her own view
of what were her rights under the 1881 Treaty — nor
could such publication of itself absolve Argentina from all further necessity
for reaction in respect of those acts, if she considered them contrary to the
Treaty.” | “(如法院业已表明的那样)，仅仅是印制一些地位和价值极其令人怀疑的地图(尽管其确实代表阿根廷的官方观点)不能够排除或阻止智利采取一些行动，显示该国对自身根据1881年条约所具有权利的观点――如果阿根廷认为这些行动违反条约的话，仅靠出版地图本身也不能免除阿根廷就智利的行动作出反应的必要性。” |
| (17) The significance of silence also
depends on the legal situation to which the subsequent practice by the other
party relates and on the claim thereby expressed. | (17) 沉默的意义取决于另一方的嗣后惯例所涉及的法律情形以及由此表达的主张。 |
| Thus, in the case concerning the Land and
Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, the International Court of
Justice held that: | 因此，在喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案中，国际法院认为： |
| “Some of these activities — the organization of public health and education, policing, the
administration of justice — could normally be
considered to be acts à titre de souverain. | “其中有些活动――开展公共保健和教育、治安、司法――通常可视为“主权”行为。 |
| The Court notes, however, that, as there
was a pre-existing title held by Cameroon in this area, the pertinent legal
test is whether there was thus evidenced acquiescence by Cameroon in the
passing of the title from itself to Nigeria.” | 但是，法院注意到，因喀麦隆在本地区有事先存在的所有权，法律上要作的相关考查是是否有证据显示喀麦隆默认将所有权移交给尼日利亚。” |
| (18) This judgment suggests that in cases
that concern treaties delimiting a boundary the circumstances will only very
exceptionally call for a reaction with respect to conduct that runs counter
to the delimitation. | (18) 这一判决表明，在涉及确立划定边界的条约案中，只有在非常特殊的情况下才要求针对违反条约的行为作出反应。 |
| In such situations, there appears to be a
strong presumption that silence or inaction does not constitute acceptance of
a practice. | 在这种情况下，似乎有一种强有力的推定，即沉默或不作为不构成对惯例的接受。 |
| (19) The relevance of silence or inaction
for the establishment of an agreement regarding interpretation depends to a
large extent on the circumstances of the specific case. | (19) 沉默或不作为对于确立关于解释协定的相关性在很大程度上取决于具体案件的具体情况。 |
| Decisions of international courts and
tribunals demonstrate that acceptance of a practice by one or more parties by
way of silence or inaction is not easily established. | 国际性法院和法庭的裁决显示，通过沉默或不作为来接受一方或多方的惯例并不能很容易地得到确立。 |
| (20) International courts and tribunals,
for example, have been reluctant to accept that parliamentary proceedings or
domestic court judgments are considered as subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3 (b), to which other parties to the treaty would be expected
to react, even if such proceedings or judgments had come to their attention
through other channels, including by their own diplomatic service. | (20) 例如，国际性的法院和法庭不太愿意接受以下观点，即议会程序或国内法庭判决可视为第三十一条第三款(b)项所述的嗣后惯例，对此条约其他缔约方需要作出反应，即使是此类程序或判决是经由其他渠道包括通过本国的外交部门引起其注意的情况。 |
| (21) Further, even where a party, by its
conduct, expresses a certain position towards another party (or parties)
regarding the interpretation of a treaty, this does not necessarily call for
a reaction by the other party or parties. | (21) 此外，即使当一方通过行动就条约解释对另一方(或几方)表达特定立场时，这也不一定要求另外一方或几方作出反应。 |
| In the Kasikili/Sedudu Island case, the
International Court of Justice held that a State that did not react to the
findings of a joint commission of experts, which had been entrusted by the
parties to determine a particular factual situation with respect to a
disputed matter, did not thereby provide a ground for the conclusion that an
agreement had been reached with respect to the dispute. | 在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中，国际法院认为，对于接受各方委任就某一争端事项确定特定事实情况的联合专家委员会的结论，如果一国没有对其作出反应，并不能由此作为依据，得出结论认为有关方面已就争端达成协定。 |
| The Court found that the parties had
considered the work of the experts as being merely a preparatory step for a
separate decision subsequently to be taken at the political level. | 法院认为，当事方认为专家的工作仅仅是一个准备阶段，以便今后在政治层面上作出另外的决定。 |
| At a more general level, the WTO
Appellate Body has held that: | 就更一般的情况而言，世贸组织上诉机构认为： |
| “… in specific situations, the ‘lack of reaction’ or silence by a
particular treaty party may, in the light of attendant circumstances, be
understood as acceptance of the practice of other treaty parties. | “…在特定情况下，根据当时的具体情形，对条约特定缔约方的‘没有反应’或沉默可以理解为接受了条约其他缔约方的惯例。 |
| Such situations may occur when a party
that has not engaged in a practice has become or has been made aware of the
practice of other parties (for example, by means of notification or by virtue
of participation in a forum where it is discussed), but does not react to it.” | 当没有参与一项惯例的缔约方主动或被动地知悉其他缔约方的惯例(如经过通知或参加讨论惯例的一个论坛)而没有对此作出反应时，就可以视为上述的一种情况。” |
| The International Tribunal for the Law of
the Sea has confirmed this approach. | 海洋法国际法庭确认了上述办法。 |
| Taking into account the practice of
States in interpreting articles 56, 58 and 73 of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Tribunal stated: | 法庭考虑到各国在解释《联合国海洋法公约》第五十六、五十八和七十三条的惯例，称： |
| “The Tribunal acknowledges that the
national legislation of several States, not only in the West African region,
but also in some other regions of the world, regulates bunkering of foreign
vessels fishing in their exclusive economic zones in a way comparable to that
of Guinea-Bissau. | “法庭承认，不仅是西非地区，也包括世界其他一些地区，有些国家的国内法对在本国专属经济区捕鱼的外国船只的装载量作出了规定，与几内亚比绍相似。 |
| The Tribunal further notes that there is
no manifest objection to such legislation and that it is, in general,
complied with.” | 法庭进一步注意到，对于此类法律并没有明示的反对意见，而且这些法律一般上都得到遵守。” |
| (22) Decisions by domestic courts have
also recognized that silence on the part of a party to a treaty can only be
taken to mean acceptance “if the circumstances call
for some reaction”. | (22) 国内法院的裁决还确认，只有在“相关情况要求做出某些反应”时，方可将缔约方的沉默理解为接受。 |
| Such circumstances have sometimes been
recognized in certain cooperative contexts, for example under a bilateral
treaty that provides for a particularly close form of cooperation. | 这种情况有时体现在特定的合作环境中，如规定了特别密切的合作形式的双边条约。 |
| This may be different if the cooperation
that is envisaged by the treaty takes place in the context of an
international organization whose rules preclude using the practice of the
parties, and their silence for the purpose of interpretation. | 如果条约设想的合作形式属于国际组织范围之内，而该组织规定为了解释的目的不得使用缔约方的惯例及其沉默，情况则有所不同。 |
| (23) The possible legal significance of
silence or inaction in the face of a subsequent practice of a party to a
treaty is not limited to contributing to a possible underlying common
agreement, but may also play a role for the operation of non-consent-based
rules, such as estoppel, preclusion or prescription. | (23) 面对条约某一缔约方的嗣后惯例，沉默或不作为在法律上的重要性并不限于构成可能的基本共同协定，也可能有助于非基于同意规则的适用，如禁止反言、排除或指示。 |
| (24) Once established, an agreement
between the parties under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), can eventually
be terminated. | (24) 第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述缔约方之间的协定在确立后，将来也可能终止。 |
| The parties may replace it by another
agreement with a different scope or content under article 31, paragraph 3. | 缔约方可以第三十一条第三款下具有不同范围或内容的另外一个协定加以取代。 |
| In this case, the new agreement replaces
the previous one as an authentic means of interpretation from the date of its
existence, at least with effect for the future. | 在这种情况下，新的协定取代以前的协定，成为从生效之日起作准的解释资料，至少效力持续到将来。 |
| Such situations, however, should not be
lightly assumed as States usually do not change their interpretation of a
treaty according to short-term considerations. | 但是，对于这种情况，不能轻易地推定国家通常不会根据短期考虑改变其对条约的解释。 |
| (25) It is also possible for a
disagreement to arise between the parties regarding the interpretation of a
treaty after they had reached a subsequent agreement regarding such
interpretation. | (25) 缔约国就条约解释达成嗣后协定后，也有可能出现不同意见。 |
| Such a disagreement, however, normally
will not replace the prior subsequent agreement, since the principle of good
faith prevents a party from simply disavowing the legitimate expectations
that have been created by a common interpretation. | 但是，这种不同意见通常不能取代前述嗣后协定，因为诚意原则使缔约方不能简单地抵赖通过共同解释所产生的合法预期。 |
| On the other hand, clear expressions of
disavowal by one party of a previous understanding arising from common
practice “do reduce in a major way the significance
of the practice after that date”, without, however,
diminishing the significance of the previous common practice. | 另一方面，一个缔约方对以前通过共同惯例产生的谅解明确拒绝 “确实在很大程度上削弱了惯例此后的重要性”，但没有削弱以前的共同惯例的重要性。 |
| Part Four | 第四部分 |
| Specific aspects | 具体方面 |
| Conclusion 11 [10] | 结论11[10] |
| Decisions adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties | 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定 |
| 1. A Conference of States Parties, under
these draft conclusions, is a meeting of States parties pursuant to a treaty
for the purpose of reviewing or implementing the treaty, except if they act
as members of an organ of an international organization. | 1. 为本结论草案的目的，缔约国大会指缔约国根据条约为了审查或执行条约而举行的会议，但缔约国作为国际组织机关成员行事的情况不在此列。 |
| 2. The legal effect of a decision adopted
within the framework of a Conference of States Parties depends primarily on
the treaty and any applicable rules of procedure. | 2. 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定所具有的法律效力主要取决于条约和可适用的议事规则。 |
| Depending on the circumstances, such a
decision may embody, explicitly or implicitly, a subsequent agreement under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), or give rise to subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), or to subsequent practice under article 32. | 根据情况，这种决定可明确或间接地体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所称的嗣后协定，或产生第三十一条第三款(b)项或第三十二条所称的嗣后惯例。 |
| Decisions adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties often provide a non-exclusive range of
practical options for implementing the treaty. | 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定通常为执行条约提供了非排他性的一系列可行选择。 |
| 3. A decision adopted within the
framework of a Conference of States Parties embodies a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, in so far as it
expresses agreement in substance between the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty, regardless of the form and the procedure by which
the decision was adopted, including by consensus. | 3. 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定只要表达了缔约国之间就条约的解释达成的实质性协议，则不论决定以何种形式和程序通过，包括经协商一致通过，均构成第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 11 [10] addresses a
particular form of action by States that may result in a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, or subsequent practice
under article 32, namely, decisions adopted within the framework of
Conferences of States Parties. | (1) 结论草案11[10]涉及国家达成第三十一条第三款所述嗣后协定或嗣后惯例或第三十二条所述嗣后惯例的一个具体的行动形式，即在缔约国大会框架下作出的决定。 |
| Paragraph 1 —
definition of Conferences of States Parties | 第1段――缔约国大会的定义 |
| (2) States typically use Conferences of
States Parties as a form of action for the continuous process of multilateral
treaty review and implementation. | (2) 各国通常利用缔约国大会作为多边条约的审查和实施持续进程的一种行动方式。 |
| Such Conferences can be roughly divided
into two basic categories. | 这种大会可粗略地分为两个基本类别。 |
| First, some Conferences are actually an
organ of an international organization within which States parties act in
their capacity as members of that organ (for example, meetings of the States
parties of the World Trade Organization, the Organization for the Prohibition
of Chemical Weapons or the International Civil Aviation Organization). | 第一，此类大会事实上是国际组织的一个机关，缔约国在大会中以机关成员的身份采取行动(如世界贸易组织、禁止化学武器组织或国际民用航空组织缔约方会议)。 |
| Such Conferences of States Parties do not
fall within the scope of draft conclusion 11 [10], which does not address the
subsequent practice of and within international organizations. | 此类缔约方大会不属于结论草案11[10]的范畴，结论11[10]不涉及国际组织及其之中的嗣后惯例。 |
| Second, other Conferences of States
Parties are convened pursuant to treaties that do not establish an
international organization; rather, the treaty simply provides for more or
less periodic meetings of the States parties for their review and
implementation. | 第二，其他缔约国大会依照条约召集，条约并未规定设立国际组织；仅规定缔约国举行定期或不定期的会议，以审查和实施条约。 |
| Such review conferences are frameworks
for States parties’ cooperation and subsequent
conduct with respect to the treaty. | 此类审查会议是缔约国就条约进行合作和开展嗣后行动的框架。 |
| Either type of Conference of States
Parties may also have specific powers concerning amendments and/or the
adaptation of treaties. | 这两种缔约国大会都有可能具备有关修正和/或调整条约的特定权力。 |
| Examples include the review conference
process of the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, the Review Conference
under article VIII, paragraph 3, of the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, and
Conferences of States Parties established by international environmental
treaties. | 例如，1972年《生物武器公约》审查会议进程，1968年《不扩散条约》第八条第3款规定的审查会议，和国际环境条约所设立的缔约方大会。 |
| The International Whaling Commission
under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling is a
borderline case between the two basic categories of Conferences of States
Parties and its subsequent practice was considered in the judgment of the
International Court of Justice in the Whaling in the Antarctic case. | 依照《国际捕鲸管制公约》成立的国际捕鲸委员会是界于这两类缔约方会议之间的一个例子，国际法院在南极捕鲸案的判决中考虑了它的嗣后惯例。 |
| (3) Since Conferences of States Parties
are usually established by treaties they are, in a sense, “treaty bodies”. | (3) 由于缔约国大会通常由条约规定设立，因此缔约国大会在一定意义上是“条约机构”。 |
| However, they should not be confused with
bodies that are comprised of independent experts or bodies with a limited
membership. | 但是，不能将其与由独立专家组成的机构或成员人数有限的机构混为一谈。 |
| Conferences of States Parties are more or
less periodical meetings that are open to all of the parties of a treaty. | 缔约国大会是定期或不那么定期的会议，向条约全体缔约方开放。 |
| (4) In order to acknowledge the wide
diversity of Conferences of States Parties and the rules under which they
operate, paragraph 1 provides a broad definition of the term “Conference of States Parties” for the
purpose of these draft conclusions, which only excludes action of States as
members of an organ of an international organization (which will be the
subject of a later draft conclusion). | (4) 为承认缔约国会议及其运作规则的广泛多样性，第1段为就本结论草案而言的“缔约国大会”一语提供了一个宽泛的定义，只是排除了作为国际组织机构成员的缔约国的行动(这是今后另一条结论草案的主题)。 |
| Paragraph 2, first sentence — legal effect of decisions | 第2段第一句――决定所具有的法律效力 |
| (5) The first sentence of paragraph 2
recognizes that the legal significance of any acts undertaken by Conferences
of States Parties depends, in the first instance, on the rules that govern
the Conferences of States Parties, notably the constituent treaty and any
applicable rules of procedure. | (5) 第2段第一句承认，缔约国大会采取的任何行动的法律意义首先取决于规范缔约国大会的规则，最主要的是组织条约和任何适用的程序规则。 |
| Conferences of States Parties perform a
variety of acts, including reviewing the implementation of the treaty,
reviewing the treaty itself and decisions under amendment procedures. | 缔约国大会开展各种行动，包括审查条约实施情况，审查条约本身，并通过修正程序作出决定。 |
| (6) The powers of a Conference of States
Parties can be contained in general clauses or in specific provisions, or
both. | (6) 缔约国大会的权力可以载于通则或具体条款中或两者兼有。 |
| For example, article 7, paragraph 2, of
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change begins with the
following general language, before enumerating 13 specific tasks for the
Conference, one of which concerns examining the obligations of the Parties
under the treaty: | 例如，《联合国气候变化框架公约》第七条第2款首先做了下面的总体论述，然后阐述会议的十三项具体任务，其中一条涉及审查缔约国在条约下的义务： |
| “The Conference of the Parties, as the
supreme body of this Convention, shall keep under regular review the
implementation of the Convention and any related legal instruments that the
Conference of the Parties may adopt, and shall make, within its mandate, the
decisions necessary to promote the effective implementation of the
Convention.” | “缔约方会议作为本公约的最高机构，应定期审评本公约和缔约方会议可能通过的任何相关法律文书的改造情况，并应在其职权范围内作出为促进本公约的有效履行所必要的决定。” |
| (7) Specific provisions contained in
various treaties refer to the Conference of the Parties proposing “guidelines” for the implementation of
particular treaty provisions or defining “the
relevant principles, modalities, rules and guidelines” for a treaty scheme. | (7) 不同条约中所载具体条款请缔约方会议提议实施条约具体条款的“准则”或定义条约机制的“相关的原则、方式、规则和指南”。 |
| (8) Amendment procedures (in a broad
sense of the term) include procedures by which the primary text of the treaty
may be amended (the result of which mostly requires ratification by States
parties according to their constitutional procedures), as well as tacit
acceptance and opt-out procedures that commonly apply to annexes, containing
lists of substances, species or other elements that need to be updated
regularly. | (8) (广义的)修正程序包括条约主要案文的修正程序(修正结果大多要求缔约国按照组织程序加以批准)以及默认接受和选择退出程序，后者通常适用于附件，其中载有需定期更新的物质、物种或其他要素清单。 |
| (9) As a point of departure, paragraph 2
provides that the legal effect of a decision adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties depends primarily on the treaty in question
and any applicable rules of procedure. | (9) 首先，第2段规定，在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定所具有的法律效力主要取决于有关条约和可适用的议事规则。 |
| The word “primarily” leaves room for subsidiary rules “unless
the treaty otherwise provides” (see for example,
articles 16, 20, 22, paragraph 1, 24, 70, paragraph 1, and 72, paragraph 1,
of the 1969 Vienna Convention). | “主要”一词为辅助规则“除条约另有规定外”(例见1969年《维也纳公约》第十六条、第二十条、第二十二条第一款、第二十四条、第七十条第一款和第七十二条第一款)留出了余地。 |
| The word “any” clarifies that rules of procedure of Conferences of States Parties,
if they exist, will apply, given that there may be situations where such
conferences operate with no specifically adopted rules of procedure. | “任何”一词是澄清说明，缔约国大会如有议事规则的话也将适用，因为也有一些情况，即缔约国大会在没有专门通过的议事规则的情况下运作。 |
| Paragraph 2, second sentence — decisions as possibly embodying a subsequent agreement or
subsequent practice | 第2段第二句――决定可能体现嗣后协定或嗣后惯例 |
| (10) The second sentence of paragraph 2
recognizes that decisions of Conferences of States Parties may constitute
subsequent agreement or subsequent practice for treaty interpretation under
articles 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (10) 第2段第二句承认，缔约国大会的决定可构成1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条所述用于条约解释的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例。 |
| Decisions adopted within the framework of
Conferences of States Parties can perform an important function for determining
the Parties’ common understanding of the meaning of
the treaty. | 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定可履行一个重要职能，即确定缔约国对于条约含义的共同理解。 |
| (11) Decisions of Conferences of States
Parties, inter alia, may constitute or reflect subsequent agreements under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), by which the parties interpret the underlying
treaty. | (11) 缔约国大会的决定除其他外，可构成或体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定，缔约国通过这些协定来解释基本的条约。 |
| For example, the Biological Weapons
Convention Review Conference has regularly adopted “understandings
and additional agreements” regarding the
interpretation of the Convention’s provisions. | 例如，《生物武器公约》审查会议就公约条款的解释定期通过了“谅解和补充协定”。 |
| These agreements have been adopted by
States parties within the framework of the review conferences, by consensus,
and they “have evolved across all articles of the
treaty to address specific issues as and when they arose”. | 这些协定由缔约国在审查会议框架内通过协商一致获得通过，协定“从条约的所有条款发展出来，解决可能出现的具体问题”。 |
| Through these understandings, States
parties interpret the provisions of the Convention by defining, specifying or
otherwise elaborating on the meaning and scope of the provisions, as well as
through the adoption of guidelines on their implementation. | 通过这些谅解，缔约国通过界定、明确或阐述条款的含义和范围并通过条款实施指南来解释条约的条款。 |
| The Biological Weapons Convention
Implementation and Support Unit defines an “additional
agreement” as one which: | 《生物武器公约》履约和支助股将“补充协定”定义为： |
| (i) Interprets, defines or elaborates the
meaning or scope of a provision of the Convention; or | (一) 解释、定义或阐述公约某一条款的含义或范围；或 |
| (ii) Provides instructions, guidelines or
recommendations on how a provision should be implemented. | (二) 就某一条款如何实施提供指导、准则或建议。 |
| (12) Similarly, the Conference of States
Parties under the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping
of Wastes and Other Matter (London Dumping Convention) has adopted
resolutions interpreting that Convention. | (12) 与此相似，《防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约》(《伦敦倾倒公约》)缔约国会议通过了解释《公约》的决议。 |
| The IMO Sub-Division for Legal Affairs,
upon a request from the governing bodies, opined as follows in relation to an
“interpretative resolution”
of the Conference of States Parties under the London Dumping Convention: | 海事组织法律事务处应管理机构的请求，就《伦敦倾倒公约》下缔约国会议的“解释性决议”提出了以下意见： |
| “According to article 31 (3) (a) of the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties … subsequent
agreements between the Parties shall be taken into account in the interpretation
of a treaty. | 根据《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项，…缔约方之间的嗣后协定可以在解释条约时加以考虑。 |
| The article does not provide for a
specific form of the subsequent agreement containing such interpretation. | 这一条没有规定载有这种解释的嗣后协定的特定形式。 |
| This seems to indicate that, provided its
intention is clear, the interpretation could take various forms, including a
resolution adopted at a meeting of the Parties, or even a decision recorded
in the summary records of a meeting of the Parties.” | 这似乎是说，只要意向是明确的，解释可采取各种形式，包括在缔约方会议上通过的决议，甚至是在缔约方会议简要记录中记录下来的一项决定。 |
| (13) In a similar vein, the World Health
Organization (WHO) Legal Counsel has stated in general terms that: | (13) 同样，世界卫生组织(卫生组织)法律顾问在更一般的意义上指出： |
| “Decisions of the Conference of the
Parties, as the supreme body comprising all Parties to the FCTC, undoubtedly
represent a ‘subsequent agreement between the Parties
regarding the interpretation of the treaty,’ as
stated in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention.” | “作为由《烟草控制框架公约》全体缔约方组成的最高机构，缔约方会议无疑代表《维也纳公约》第三十一条中所述的‘缔约方就解释条约达成的嗣后协定’。” |
| (14) Commentators have also viewed
decisions of Conferences of States Parties as being capable of embodying
subsequent agreements and have observed that: | (14) 评论者也认为缔约国大会的决定可能体现嗣后协定，并指出： |
| “Such declarations are not legally
binding in and of themselves, but they may have juridical significance,
especially as a source of authoritative interpretations of the treaty.” | “此类声明本身不具有法律约束力，但可以具有法律上的重要意义，特别是作为条约的作准解释资料。” |
| (15) The International Court of Justice
has held with respect to the role of the International Whaling Commission
under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling: | (15) 国际法院就《国际捕鲸管制公约》设立的国际捕鲸委员会的作用指出： |
| “Article VI of the Convention states that
‘[t]he Commission may from time to time make
recommendations to any or all Contracting Governments on any matters which
relate to whales or whaling and to the objectives and purposes of this
Convention’. | “《公约》第六条称，“委员会可不定期地就涉及鲸或捕鲸以及本公约目标和宗旨的任何事项向任何或全体缔约国政府提出建议”。 |
| These recommendations, which take the
form of resolutions, are not binding. | 这些建议可采取决议的形式，没有约束力。 |
| However, when they are adopted by
consensus or by a unanimous vote, they may be relevant for the interpretation
of the Convention or its Schedule.” | 但是，如果它们经由协商一致或一致投票而获得通过，则对于解释公约或其时间表具有意义。” |
| (16) The following examples from the
practice of Conferences of States Parties support the proposition that
decisions by such Conferences may embody subsequent agreements under article
31, paragraph 3 (a). | (16) 来自缔约国大会实践的以下例子支持如下主张，即此类会议的决定可以体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定： |
| (17) Article I, paragraph 1, of the
Biological Weapons Convention provides that States parties undertake never in
any circumstances to develop, produce, stockpile or otherwise acquire or
retain: | (17) “《生物武器公约》第一条第一款规定，缔约国承诺在任何情况下决不发展、生产、储存或以其他方法取得或保有： |
| “microbial or other biological agents, or
toxins whatever their origin or method of production, of types and in
quantities that have no justification for prophylactic, protective or other
peaceful purposes.” | “凡类型和数量不属于预防、保护或其他和平用途所正当需要的微生物剂或其他生物剂或毒素，不论其来源或生产方法如何”。 |
| (18) At the third Review Conference
(1991), States parties specified that the prohibitions established in this
provision relate to “microbial or other biological
agents or toxins harmful to plants and animals, as well as humans”. | (18) 在第三次审查会议(1991年)上，缔约国明确规定：“本条规定的禁止涉及“对植物和动物以及人有害的(…)”微生物剂或其他生物剂或毒素”； |
| (19) Article 4, paragraph 9, of the
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer has given rise
to a debate about the definition of its term “State
not party to this Protocol”. | (19) 《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书》第四条第9款引发了关于“非本议定书缔约国的国家”定义的一场辩论。 |
| According to Article 4, paragraph 9: | 根据第四条第9款： |
| “For the purposes of this Article, the
term ‘State not party to this Protocol’ shall include, with respect to a particular controlled substance,
a State or regional economic integration organization that has not agreed to
be bound by the control measures in effect for that substance.” | “为本条的目的，“非本议定书缔约国的国家”一词，以任何特定的控制物质而言，应包括尚未同意受当时对该物质生效的控制措施约束的每一国家或区域经济一体化组织。
” |
| (20) In the case of hydro
chlorofluorocarbons, two relevant amendments to the Montreal Protocol impose
obligations that raised the question of whether a State, in order to be “not party to this Protocol”, has to be a
non-party with respect to both amendments. | (20) 关于氢氟碳化合物，《蒙特利尔议定书》两项相关的修正案规定了义务，从而引发对一国为成为“非本议定书缔约国的国家”是否必须没有加入这两项修正案的问题。 |
| The Meeting of the Parties decided that: | 缔约国会议决定： |
| “The term ‘State
not party to this Protocol’ includes all other States
and regional economic integration organizations that have not agreed to be
bound by the Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments.” | “非本议定书缔约国的国家”包括所有尚未同意受《哥本哈根修正案》和《北京修正案》约束的其他国家和区域经济一体化组织。” |
| (21) Whereas the acts that are the result
of a tacit acceptance procedure are not, as such, subsequent agreements by
the parties under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), they can, in addition to their
primary effect under the treaty, under certain circumstances imply such a
subsequent agreement. | (21) 默认接受程序导致的行为本身虽然不是第三十一条第三款(a)项所述缔约方的嗣后协定，但它们除了条约规定的主要效力外，在有些情况下可以暗示存在这样一种嗣后协定。 |
| One example concerns certain decisions of
the Conference of the Parties to the London Dumping Convention. | 有一个例子涉及《伦敦倾倒公约》缔约方会议的某些决定。 |
| At its sixteenth meeting, held in 1993,
the Consultative Meeting of Contracting Parties adopted three amendments to
annex I by way of the tacit acceptance procedure provided for in the
Convention. | 在1993年举行的第十六次会议上，缔约方磋商会议以《公约》规定的默认接受程序通过了对附件一的三项修正。 |
| As such, these amendments were not
subsequent agreements. | 这样的话，这些修正并非嗣后协定。 |
| They did, however, also imply a
wide-ranging interpretation of the underlying treaty itself. | 但是，它们确实暗示对基本条约本身的广泛的解释。 |
| The amendment refers to and builds on a
resolution that was adopted by the Consultative Meeting held three years
earlier, which had established the agreement of the parties that: “The London Dumping Convention is the appropriate body to address
the issue of low-level radioactive waste disposal into sub-sea-bed
repositories accessed from the sea. ” | 这些修正所指及其依据是三年前举行的磋商会议通过的一项决议，其中确立了缔约方的协定，即“《伦敦倾倒公约》是处理向通过海洋进入的海床下处置库倾倒低放射性废物问题的适当机构。” |
| The resolution has been described as “effectively expand[ing] the definition of ‘dumping’ under the Convention by deciding
that this term covers the disposal of waste into or under the seabed from the
sea but not from land by tunnelling”. | 该决议被称为“实际扩展了《公约》下‘倾倒’的定义，决定该词包括从海上向海床中或海床下而不仅是通过管道从陆地上倾倒废物的作法”。 |
| Thus, the amendment confirmed that the
interpretative resolution contained a subsequent agreement regarding the
interpretation of the treaty. | 这样一来，修正案确认，解释性声明包括了有关条约解释的一个嗣后协定。 |
| (22) The Basel Convention on the Control
of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal provides in
Article 17, paragraph 5, that: “Amendments … shall enter into force between Parties having accepted them on
the ninetieth day after the receipt by the Depositary of their instrument of
ratification, approval, formal confirmation or acceptance by at least
three-fourths of the Parties who accepted [them] …”. | (22) 《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置的巴塞尔公约》第17条第5款规定，“修正案…将自保存人收到至少四分之三的接受[修正案]的缔约方的批准、核准、正式确认或接受文书之日后第九十天起生效…”。 |
| Led by an Indonesian-Swiss initiative,
the Conference of the Parties decided to clarify the requirement of the
acceptance by three fourths of the Parties, by agreeing: | 按照印度尼西亚－瑞士牵头的一项提议，缔约方会议决定澄清关于四分之三的缔约方接受的规定，同意： |
| “… without prejudice to any other
multilateral environmental agreement, that the meaning of paragraph 5 of
Article 17 of the Basel Convention should be interpreted to mean that the
acceptance of three-fourths of those parties that were parties at the time of
the adoption of the amendment is required for the entry into force of such
amendment, noting that such an interpretation of paragraph 5 of Article 17
does not compel any party to ratify the Ban Amendment.” | “…在不影响任何多边环境协定的前提下，《巴塞尔公约》第17条第5款的含义应解释为意指该修正案生效所要求的是得到在通过修正案之时缔约方总数的四分之三国家的接受，同时指出对第17条第5款的这一解释不要求任何缔约方批准《禁止议定书》。 ” |
| The parties adopted this decision on the
interpretation of article 17, paragraph 5, by consensus, with many States
Parties underlining that the Conferences of States Parties to any convention
are “the ultimate authority as to its interpretation”. | 缔约方以协商一致方式通过了关于第17条第5款解释的这个决定，当时许多缔约国强调指出，任何公约的缔约方会议是“关于公约解释的最高机构”。 |
| While this suggests that the decision
embodies a subsequent agreement of the parties under article 31, paragraph 3
(a), the decision was taken after a debate about whether a formal amendment
of the Convention was necessary to achieve this result. | 虽然这样说是意味着，决定体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的缔约方的一个嗣后协定，但在作出这一决定前也进行了辩论，即是否必须对公约作出正式修正案才能达成这一结果。 |
| It should also be noted that the
delegation of Japan, requesting that this position be reflected in the
Conference’s Report, stated that it “supported the current-time approach to the interpretation of the
provision of the Convention regarding entry into force of amendments, as described
in a legal advice provided by the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs as
the Depositary, and had accepted the fixed-time approach enunciated in the
decision on the Indonesian-Swiss country-led initiative only in this
particular instance.” | 还应当指出，日本代表团要求在会议报告中写入本国立场，称其“支持对于解释条约有关修正案生效条款的当前时段的办法，也就是联合国法律事务厅作为保存人提供的咨询意见中叙述的办法，并且只是在这一具体情况下接受印度尼西亚－瑞士牵头倡议的决定中阐述的固定时段的办法。
” |
| (23) The preceding examples demonstrate
that decisions of Conferences of States Parties may embody under certain
circumstances subsequent agreements under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), and
give rise to subsequent practice under articles 31, paragraph 3 (b), or to
other subsequent practice under article 32 if they do not reflect agreement
of the parties. | (23) 前述例子表明，缔约国大会的决定可能在特定情形下体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定，也可能引起第三十一条第三款(b)项下所述的嗣后惯例，如果不反映缔约方的协定，也可能引起第三十二条所述其他的嗣后惯例。 |
| The respective character of a decision of
a Conference of States Parties, however, must always be carefully identified. | 但是，对缔约国大会一项决定的特点必须始终仔细地加以确定。 |
| For this purpose, the specificity and the
clarity of the terms chosen in the light of the text of the Conference of
States Parties’ decision as a whole, its object and
purpose, and the way in which it is applied, need to be taken into account. | 为此目的，应结合缔约国大会决定的总体文字、其目的和宗旨以及适用的方式对所选择术语的特定性和明确性予以考虑。 |
| The parties often do not intend that such
a decision has any particular legal significance. | 缔约方通常不希望此类决定具有任何特定的法律意义。 |
| Paragraph 2, third sentence — decisions as possibly providing a range of practical options | 第2段第三句――决定可能提供一系列可行的选择 |
| (24) The last sentence of paragraph 2 of
draft conclusion 11 [10] reminds the interpreter that decisions of
Conferences of States Parties often provide a range of practical options for
implementing the treaty. | (24) 结论草案11[10]第2段最后一句提醒解释者，缔约国大会通过的决定通常为执行条约提供一系列可行的选择。 |
| Those decisions may not necessarily
embody a subsequent agreement and subsequent practice for the purpose of
treaty interpretation, even if the decision is by consensus. | 这些决定不一定体现为满足条约解释目的的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例，即使决定是协商一致作出的。 |
| Indeed, Conferences of States Parties
often do not explicitly seek to resolve or address questions of
interpretation of a treaty. | 事实上，缔约国大会常常不是明确地以解决或处理条约解释问题为目的。 |
| (25) A decision by the Conference of
States Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control provides an
example. | (25) 卫生组织《烟草管制框架公约》缔约方会议的决定提供了一个例子。 |
| Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention deal,
respectively, with the regulation of the contents of tobacco products, and
with the regulation of the disclosure of information regarding the contents
of such products. | 该公约第9条和第10条分别涉及烟草制品成分的管制和对于披露此类制品成分信息的管制。 |
| Acknowledging that such measures require
the allocation of significant financial resources, the States Parties agreed,
under the title of “practical considerations” for the implementation of articles 9 and 10, on “some options that Parties could consider using”, such as: | 缔约国承认此类措施需要分配大量的财政资源，故而在实施第9条和第10条的“实际考虑”的标题下商定了“缔约国可考虑使用的一些选择”，如： |
| “(a) | “(a) |
| designated tobacco taxes; | 指定的烟草税； |
| (b) tobacco manufacturing and/or
importing licensing fees; | (b) 烟草生产和/或进口许可费； |
| (c) tobacco product registration fees; | (c) 烟草产品登记费； |
| (d) licensing of tobacco distributors
and/or retailers; | (d) 烟草批发商和/或零售商许可证制度； |
| (e) non-compliance fees levied on the
tobacco industry and retailers; and | (e) 对烟草行业和零售商征收的违规罚款；和 |
| (f) annual tobacco surveillance fees (tobacco
industry and retailers).” | (f) 每年的烟草业管理费(烟草业和零售商)。” |
| This decision provides a non-exhaustive
range of practical options for implementing articles 9 and 10 of the
Convention. | 该决定提供了执行《公约》第9条和第10条的一系列可行选择，但并非详尽无遗。 |
| The parties have thereby, however, implicitly
agreed that the stated “options” would, as such, be compatible with the Convention. | 但是，缔约方据此默示商定，所述的“选择”与《公约》是相称的。 |
| Paragraph 2 as a whole | 整个第2段 |
| (26) It follows that decisions of
Conferences of States Parties may have different legal effects. | (26) 这样一来，缔约国大会的决定可以具有不同的法律效力。 |
| Such decisions are often not intended to
embody a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), by
themselves because they are not meant to be a statement regarding the
interpretation of the treaty. | 此类决定往往并不是为了本身体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定，因为它们不是作为关于解释条约的一种陈述。 |
| In other cases, the parties have made it
sufficiently clear that the Conference of State Parties decision embodies
their agreement regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 在另外一些案例中，缔约方充分明确地指出，缔约国大会的决定体现缔约方就解释条约达成的协定。 |
| They may also produce an effect in
combination with a legal duty to cooperate under the treaty, “and the parties thus should give due regard” to such a decision. | 此类决定可能产生一种法律效力，与在条约下合作的一般性义务结合到一起，“因而缔约方有义务”对此类决定“给予应有的注意”。 |
| In any case, it cannot simply be said
that because the treaty does not accord the Conference of States Parties a
competence to take legally binding decisions, their decisions are necessarily
legally irrelevant and constitute only political commitments. | 在任何情况下，都不能简单地说，由于条约没有赋予缔约国大会作出有法律约束力决定的职能，因此它们的决定必须在法律上没有什么意义，只能构成政治承诺。 |
| (27) Ultimately, the effect of a decision
of a Conference of States Parties depends on the circumstances of each
particular case and such decisions need to be properly interpreted. | (27) 归根结底，缔约国大会决定的效力取决于每个具体案件的具体情况，对这些决定也需要加以正确的解释。 |
| A relevant consideration may be whether
States parties uniformly or without challenge apply the treaty as interpreted
by the Conference of States Parties’ decision. | 一个适用的考虑可能是，缔约国是一致或在没有质疑的情况下适用缔约国大会决定所解释的条约。 |
| Discordant practice following a decision
of the Conference of States Parties may be an indication that States did not
assume that the decision would be a subsequent agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a). | 在缔约国大会后出现不一致的惯例可能就表明各国并没有推定这一决定系第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定。 |
| Conference of States Parties’ decisions that do not qualify as subsequent agreements under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), or as subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), may nevertheless be a subsidiary means of interpretation
under article 32. | 但是，不能作为第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定或第三十一条第三款(b)项所述嗣后惯例的那些缔约国大会的决定仍有可能构成第三十二条所述补充的解释资料。 |
| Paragraph 3 — an
agreement regarding the interpretation of the treaty | 第3段――关于条约解释的协定 |
| (28) Paragraph 3 sets forth the principle
that agreements regarding the interpretation of a treaty under article 31,
paragraph 3, must relate to the content of the treaty. | (28) 第3段列出了以下原则，即第三十一条第三款所述关于条约解释的协定必须涉及到条约的内容。 |
| Thus, what is important is the substance
of the agreement embodied in the decision of the Conference of States Parties
and not the form or procedure by which that decision is reached. | 因此，重要的是缔约国大会决定所体现的协定的内容，而不是达成这一决定的形式或程序。 |
| Acts that originate from Conferences of
States Parties may have different forms and designations and they may be the
result of different procedures. | 缔约国大会的行为可能具有不同的形式和特点，并可能是源于不同的程序。 |
| Conferences of States Parties may even
operate without formally adopted rules of procedure. | 缔约国大会有可能甚至在没有正式通过的议事规则的情况下举行。 |
| If the decision of the Conference of
States Parties is based on a unanimous vote in which all parties participate,
it may clearly embody a “subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), provided that it is “regarding the interpretation of the treaty”. | 如果缔约国大会的决定是基于全体缔约方都参加的一致投票，则其有可能明确体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的“嗣后协定”，只要该协定是“关于条约之解释”的。 |
| (29) Conference of States Parties’ decisions regarding review and implementation functions, however,
are normally adopted by consensus. | (29) 但是，缔约国大会有关审查和实施职能的决定通常以协商一致的方式通过。 |
| This practice derives from rules of
procedure that usually require States parties to make every effort to achieve
consensus on substantive matters. | 这种做法源于通常要求缔约国尽一切努力就实质性事项达成协商一致的议事规则。 |
| An early example can be found in the
Provisional Rules of Procedure for the Review Conference of the Parties to
the Biological Weapons Convention. | 早期的一个例子见《生物武器公约》缔约方会议审查会议的议事规则。 |
| According to rule 28, paragraph 2: | 按照规则28的第2段： |
| “The task of the Review Conference being
to review the operation of the Convention with a view to assuring that the
purposes of the preamble and the provisions of the Convention are being
realized, and thus to strengthen its effectiveness, every effort should be
made to reach agreement on substantive matters by means of consensus. | “审查会议的任务是审查公约实施情况，以期确保公约序言和条款的宗旨得到实现。 因此，为加强公约的效力，应当尽一切努力以协商一致的办法就实质性事项达成一致意见。 |
| There should be no voting on such matters
until all efforts to achieve consensus have been exhausted.” | 除非为取得协商一致已经用尽一切努力，否则不应在这种事项上采取投票的办法。” |
| This formula, with only minor variations,
has become the standard with regard to substantive decision-making procedures
at Conferences of States Parties. | 这种表述业已成为关于缔约国大会实质性决策程序的标准表述，只有细微的差异。 |
| (30) In order to address concerns
relating to decisions adopted by consensus, the phrase “including by consensus” was introduced at
the end of paragraph 3 in order to dispel the notion that a decision by
consensus would necessarily be equated with agreement in substance. | (30) 为解决对于以协商一致方式通过决定的关切，在第3段的中间包括了“包括经协商一致通过”一语，以消除一种观念，即通过协商一致作出的决定必然等同于实质性的一致意见。 |
| Indeed, consensus is not a concept that
necessarily indicates any particular degree of agreement on substance. | 事实上，协商一致这一概念并不必然表明就实质事项达成任何程度上的协定。 |
| According to the Comments on Some
Procedural Questions issued by the Office of Legal Affairs of the United
Nations Secretariat in accordance with General Assembly resolution 60/286 of
8 September 2006: | 按照联合国秘书处法律事务厅依照联合国大会2006年9月8日第60/286号决议发布的“关于某些程序性问题的评论”： |
| “Consensus is generally understood as a
decision-taking process consisting in arriving at a decision without formal
objections and vote. | “协商一致通常被解释为一个作出决定的进程，以没有正式反对意见也不通过正式投票的方式作出决定。 |
| It may however not necessarily reflect ‘unanimity’ of opinion on the substantive
matter. | 但是，协商一致并不一定体现说，在实质性事项上意见“完全统一”。 |
| It is used to describe the practice under
which every effort is made to achieve general agreement and no delegation
objects explicitly to a consensus being recorded.” | 协商一致是用来说明一种做法，即为取得总体一致意见而尽一切努力，没有代表团明确反对所记录下来的协商一致意见。” |
| (31) It follows that adoption by
consensus is not a sufficient condition for an agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b). | (31) 这样一来，以协商一致通过并非第三十一条第三款(b)项所述协定的充分条件。 |
| The rules of procedure of Conferences of
States Parties do not usually give an indication of the possible legal effect
of a resolution as a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a),
or a subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 缔约国大会议事规则通常并不表明决议作为第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定或第三十一条第三款(b)项所述嗣后惯例的可能的法律效力。 |
| Such rules of procedure only determine
how the Conference of States Parties shall adopt its decisions, not their
possible legal effect as a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph
3. | 这种议事规则只能决定缔约国大会如何通过其决定，而不能确定其作为第三十一条第三款所述嗣后协定的可能的法律效力。 |
| Although subsequent agreements under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), need not be binding as such, the 1969 Vienna
Convention attributes them a legal effect under article 31 only if there
exists agreement in substance among the parties concerning the interpretation
of a treaty. | 尽管第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定不必有这样的约束力，1969年《维也纳公约》只在缔约方就条约解释存在实质性协定的情况下才赋予这种协商一致以第三十一条下的法律效力。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
confirmed that the distinction between the form of a collective decision and
the agreement in substance is pertinent in such a context. | 国际法院已经确认，在这种情况下，集体性决定的形式与对于实质的一致意见之间的区别是有关系的。 |
| (32) That certain decisions, despite
having been declared as being adopted by consensus, cannot represent a
subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is especially true
when there exists an objection by one or more States parties to that
consensus. | (32) 有些决定尽管被宣布为经协商一致通过，也不能作为第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定，在有一个或多个缔约方反对这种协商一致的情况下尤其如此。 |
| (33) For example, at its Sixth Meeting in
2002, the Conference of States Parties to the Convention on Biological
Diversity worked on formulating guiding principles for the prevention,
introduction and mitigation of impacts of alien species that threaten
ecosystems, habitats or species. | (33) 例如，在2002年举行的《生物多样性公约》缔约方会议第六次会议上，缔约方会议着手拟订防止、引入和减轻威胁生态系统、栖息地和物种的侵入性物种的指导原则。 |
| After several efforts to reach an
agreement had failed, the President of the Conference of States Parties
proposed that the decision be adopted and the reservations that Australia had
raised be recorded in the final report of the meeting. | 在几次争取达成一致意见的努力失败后，缔约方会议主席建议通过决定，在会议最后报告中记录澳大利亚提出的保留。 |
| The representative of Australia, however,
reiterated that the guiding principles could not be accepted and that “his formal objection therefore stood”. | 但是，澳大利亚的代表重申，不能接受指导原则，“因此他的正式反对意见仍然存在”。 |
| The President declared the debate closed
and, “following established practice”, declared the decision adopted without a vote, clarifying that
the objections of the dissenting States would be reflected in the final
report of the meeting. | 主席宣布结束辩论，并“遵照已有惯例”，宣布决定未经投票获得通过，并澄清说反对国家的反对意见将反映在会议最后报告中。 |
| Following the adoption, Australia
reiterated its view that consensus is adoption without formal objection and
expressed concerns about the legality of the adoption of the draft decision. | 在通过决定之后，澳大利亚重申其观点，即协商一致是指在没有正式反对意见的情况下获得通过，并对决定草案通过的合法性表示关切。 |
| As a result, a footnote to decision VI/23
indicates that “one representative entered a formal
objection during the process leading to the adoption of this decision and
underlined that he did not believe that the Conference of the Parties could
legitimately adopt a motion or a text with a formal objection in place”. | 因此，第VI/23号决定的一个脚注指出“有一名代表在本决定通过过程中提出了正式反对意见，并强调指出，他不认为缔约方会议可在有正式反对意见的情况下合法地通过一项动议或案文”。 |
| (34) In this situation, the Executive
Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity requested a legal opinion
from the United Nations Legal Counsel. | (34) 在这种情况下，《生物多样性公约》执行秘书请联合国法律顾问提供法律意见。 |
| The opinion by the Legal Counsel
expressed the view that a party could “disassociate
itself from the substance or text … of the document
[,] indicate that its joining in the consensus does not constitute acceptance
of the substance or text of parts of the document[,] and/or present any other
restrictions on its Government’s position on
substance or text of … the document”. | 法律顾问的意见表达了这样一种观点，即一个缔约方可以“不参与文件的实质或案文[，]表示加入协商一致并不构成对文件实质或案文或其中一部分的接受[，]并且/或者就本国政府对于文件…实质或案文的立场提出任何其他的限制”。 |
| Thus, it is clear that a decision by
consensus can occur in the face of rejection of the substance of the decision
by one or more of the States parties. | 因此，显然通过协商一致取得决定可以在一个或多个缔约方反对决定实质内容的情况下发生。 |
| (35) The decision under the Convention on
Biological Diversity, as well as a similar decision reached in Cancún in 2010 by the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol to
the Climate Change Convention (Bolivia’s objection
notwithstanding), raise the important question of what “consensus” means. | (35) 在《生物多样性公约》下作出的决定和2010年《气候变化公约京都议定书》缔约方会议在坎昆达成的一项类似决定(尽管有玻利维亚的反对意见)，提出了“协商一致”是指什么的重要问题。 |
| However, this question, which does not
fall within the scope of the present topic, must be distinguished from the
question of whether all the parties to a treaty have arrived at an agreement
in substance on matters of interpretation of that treaty under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | 但是，对于不属于本专题讨论范围的这个问题，必须与是否条约全体缔约方就第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述条约解释的事项达成实质性一致意见的问题区分。 |
| Decisions by Conferences of States
Parties that do not reflect agreement in substance among all the parties do
not qualify as agreements under article 31, paragraph 3, although they may be
a form of “other subsequent practice” under article 32 (see draft conclusion 4, paragraph 3). | 缔约方大会不能体现全体缔约方就实质问题达成一致意见的决定不能作为第三十一条第三款所述的协定，尽管可能作为第三十二条所述“其他嗣后惯例”的一种形式(见结论草案4第3段)。 |
| (36) A different issue concerns the legal
effect of a decision of a Conference of States Parties once it qualifies as
an agreement under article 31, paragraph (3). | (36) 另一个问题涉及当缔约国大会的决定符合第三十一条第三款下所述协定的情况时其法律效力的问题。 |
| In 2011, the IMO Sub-Division for Legal
Affairs was asked to “advise the governing bodies […] about the procedural requirements in relation to a decision on
an interpretative resolution and, in particular, whether or not consensus
would be needed for such a decision”. | 2011年，海事组织法律事务处收到要求，要“向理事机构[…]就关于解释性决议作出决定的程序性要求提供咨询意见，具体说来，此类决定是否需要协商一致。” |
| In its response, while confirming that a
resolution by the Conference of States Parties can constitute, in principle,
a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), the IMO
Sub-Division for Legal Affairs advised the governing bodies that even if the
Conference were to adopt a decision based on consensus, that would not mean
that the decision would be binding on all the parties. | 法律处在答复中申明，缔约方会议的决议原则上可以构成第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定，同时向理事机构建议，即使会议基于协商一致通过一项决定，这也不能意味着这一决定对全体缔约方有约束力。 |
| (37) Although the opinion of the IMO
Sub-Division for Legal Affairs proceeded from the erroneous assumption that a
“subsequent agreement” under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), would only be binding “as
a treaty, or an amendment thereto”, it came to the
correct conclusion that even if the consensus decision by a Conference of
States Parties embodies an agreement regarding interpretation in substance it
is not (necessarily) binding upon the parties. | (37) 尽管海事组织法律处的意见是来自一个错误的假定，即第三十一条第三款(a)项所述“嗣后协定”只能“作为一项条约或其修正案”有约束力，但它得出的是一个正确的结论，即即使缔约国大会的协商一致决定体现关于解释的一项协定，但在实质上，它并不(必然)对全体缔约方有约束力。 |
| Rather, as the Commission has indicated,
a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is only one of
different means of interpretation to be taken into account in the process of
interpretation. | 相反，正如委员会指出的那样，第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定只是在解释过程中予以考虑的不同的解释资料中的一项。 |
| (38) Thus, interpretative resolutions by
Conferences of States Parties that are adopted by consensus, even if they are
not binding as such, can nevertheless be subsequent agreements under article
31, paragraph 3 (a), or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3
(b), if there are sufficient indications that that was the intention of the
parties at the time of the adoption of the decision or if the subsequent
practice of the parties establishes an agreement on the interpretation of the
treaty. | (38) 因此，缔约国大会以协商一致方式通过的解释性决议即使本身不具有约束力，也仍然可以成为第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定或第三十一条第三款(b)项所述的嗣后惯例，条件是有充分的情况表明这是缔约方在通过决定时的意向，或缔约方的嗣后惯例确立了对于解释条约的一个协定。 |
| The interpreter must give appropriate
weight to such an interpretative resolution under article 31, paragraph 3
(a), but not necessarily treat it as legally binding. | 解释者在第三十一条第三款(a)项下对这种解释性决议给予应有的权重，但不一定视其为有法律约束力。 |
| Conclusion 12 [11] | 结论12[11] |
| Constituent instruments of international
organizations | 国际组织的组成文书 |
| 1. Articles 31 and 32 apply to a treaty
which is the constituent instrument of an international organization. | 1. 第三十一条和第三十二条适用于作为国际组织组成文书的条约。 |
| Accordingly, subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, are, and other subsequent
practice under article 32 may be, means of interpretation for such treaties. | 因此，第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例是这类条约的解释资料，第三十二条所称的其他嗣后惯例可以作为这类条约的解释资料。 |
| 2. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, or other subsequent practice under
article 32, may arise from, or be expressed in, the practice of an
international organization in the application of its constituent instrument. | 2. 第三十一条第三款所称的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例或第三十二条所称的其他嗣后惯例可以出自国际组织适用其组成文书的惯例，或体现在这类惯例中。 |
| 3. Practice of an international
organization in the application of its constituent instrument may contribute
to the interpretation of that instrument when applying articles 31, paragraph
1, and 32. | 3. 在适用第三十一条第一款和第三十二条时，国际组织适用其组成文书的惯例可以有助于解释该文书。 |
| 4. Paragraphs 1 to 3 apply to the
interpretation of any treaty which is the constituent instrument of an
international organization without prejudice to any relevant rules of the
organization. | 4. 第1至3段适用于对作为国际组织组成文书的任何条约的解释，但不妨碍该组织的任何有关规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| General aspects | 一般方面 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 12 [11] refers to a
particular type of treaty, namely constituent instruments of international
organizations, and the way in which subsequent agreements or subsequent
practice shall or may be taken into account in their interpretation under
articles 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (1) 结论草案12[11]涉及一种特定的条约，即国际组织的组成文书，以及根据1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条解释此类条约时应该或可以考虑嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的方式。 |
| (2) Constituent instruments of
international organizations are specifically addressed in article 5 of the
1969 Vienna Convention, which provides: | (2) 1969年《维也纳公约》第五条专门针对国际组织的组成文书，该条规定： |
| “The present Convention applies to any
treaty which is the constituent instrument of an international organization
and to any treaty adopted within an international organization without
prejudice to any relevant rules of the organization.” | “本公约适用于为一国际组织组织约章之任何条约及在一国际组织内议定之任何条约，但对该组织任何有关规则并无妨碍。 ” |
| (3) A constituent instrument of an
international organization under article 5, like any treaty, is an
international agreement “whether embodied in a single
instrument or in two or more related instruments”
(article 2, paragraph 1 (a)). | (3) 第五条所述国际组织的组成文书和其他条约一样，是“载于一项单独文书或两项以上相互有关之文书内”(第二条第一款(a)项)的国际协定。 |
| The provisions that are contained in such
a treaty are part of the constituent instrument. | 此类条约所包含的规定是组成文书的一部分。 |
| (4) As a general matter, article 5, by
stating that the 1969 Vienna Convention applies to constituent instruments of
international organizations without prejudice to any relevant rules of the
organization, follows the general approach of the Convention according to
which treaties between States are subject to the rules set forth in the
Convention “unless the treaty otherwise provides.” | (4) 一般来说，第五条通过规定1969年《维也纳公约》适用于国际组织组成文书而不妨碍该组织相关规则，遵循了《公约》的一般原则，即“除条约另有规定外”，缔约国间的条约应遵循《公约》所载的规则。 |
| (5) Draft conclusion 12 [11] only refers
to the interpretation of constituent instruments of international
organizations. | (5) 结论草案12[11]仅涉及国际组织组成文书的解释。 |
| It therefore does not address every
aspect of the role of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in
relation to the interpretation of treaties involving international
organizations. | 因此该草案不完全涵盖嗣后协定和嗣后惯例对国际组织条约解释作用的所有方面。 |
| In particular, it does not apply to the
interpretation of treaties adopted within an international organization or to
treaties concluded by international organizations that are not themselves
constituent instruments of international organizations. | 特别是，该草案不适用于解释国际组织内部通过的条约或国际组织缔结的非组成文书类条约。 |
| In addition, draft conclusion 12 [11]
does not apply to the interpretation of decisions by organs of international
organizations as such, including to the interpretation of decisions by
international courts or to the effect of a “clear and
constant jurisprudence” (“jurisprudence
constante”) of courts or tribunals. | 此外，结论草案12[11]不适用于解释国际组织机关的决定本身，包括不适用于解释各国际法院的裁决，或解释法院或法庭“明确一贯的判例”(“一贯判例”)的效果。 |
| Finally, the conclusion does not
specifically address questions relating to pronouncements by a treaty
monitoring body consisting of independent experts, as well as to the weight
of particular forms of practice more generally, matters which may be dealt
with at a later stage. | 最后，该结论并非特别针对由独立专家组成的条约监测机构的声明涉及的问题，也非特别针对更一般意义上特定形式惯例的权重问题，这些问题可在后期阶段解决。 |
| Paragraph 1 —
applicability of articles 31 and 32 | 第1段――第三十一条和第三十二条的适用性 |
| (6) The first sentence of paragraph 1 of
draft conclusion 12 [11] recognizes the applicability of articles 31 and 32
of the 1969 Vienna Convention to treaties that are constituent instruments of
international organizations. | (6) 结论草案12[11]第1段第1句确认1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条适用于作为国际组织组成文书的条约。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
confirmed this point in its advisory opinion on the Legality of the Use by a
State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict: | 国际法院在其关于“国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性”的咨询意见中已确认这一点： |
| “From a formal standpoint, the constituent
instruments of international organizations are multilateral treaties, to
which the well-established rules of treaty interpretation apply.” | “从形式上看，国际组织组成文书是多边条约，而公认的条约解释规则适用于多边条约。” |
| (7) The Court has held with respect to
the Charter of the United Nations: | (7) 关于《联合国宪章》，法院认为： |
| “On the previous occasions when the Court
has had to interpret the Charter of the United Nations, it has followed the
principles and rules applicable in general to the interpretation of treaties,
since it has recognized that the Charter is a multilateral treaty, albeit a
treaty having certain special characteristics.” | “法院曾多次不得不解释《联合国宪章》，这时法院一直遵循一般适用于条约解释的原则和规则，因为法院确认《宪章》是一项多边条约，尽管是一项具有某些特殊特征的条约。” |
| (8) At the same time, article 5 suggests,
and decisions by international courts confirm, that constituent instruments
of international organizations are also treaties of a particular type that
may need to be interpreted in a specific way. | (8) 同时，第五条表明，国际法院判决也确认，国际组织组成文书也是一种特别类型的条约，可能需要以特别的方式加以解释。 |
| Accordingly, the International Court of
Justice has stated: | 因此，国际法院表示： |
| “But the constituent instruments of
international organizations are also treaties of a particular type; their
object is to create new subjects of law endowed with a certain autonomy, to
which the parties entrust the task of realizing common goals. | “但国际组织的组成文书也是特定类型的条约；其目的是组建具有一定自主权的新的法律主体，该法律主体受各缔约方的委托负责实现共同的目标。 |
| Such treaties can raise specific problems
of interpretation owing, inter alia, to their character which is conventional
and at the same time institutional; the very nature of the organization
created, the objectives which have been assigned to it by its founders, the
imperatives associated with the effective performance of its functions, as
well as its own practice, are all elements which may deserve special attention
when the time comes to interpret these constituent treaties.” | 此类条约由于除其他外同时具有公约性和创设性特征，会引起具体的解释问题；所设组织的性质、创设者赋予的目标、与有效行使其职能相关的规则、以及其自身惯例，这些都是在需要解释组成条约时值得特别重视的要素。
” |
| (9) The second sentence of paragraph 1 of
draft conclusion 12 [11] more specifically refers to elements of articles 31
and 32 that deal with subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as a
means of interpretation and confirms that subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, are, and other subsequent
practice under article 32 may be, means of interpretation for constituent
instruments of international organizations. | (9) 结论草案12[11]第1段第2句更具体地说明了第三十一条和第三十二条涉及用嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释手段的一些要素，并确认第三十一条第三款规定的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例属于国际组织组成文书的解释手段，第三十二条规定的其他嗣后惯例可以作为国际组织组成文书的解释手段。 |
| (10) The International Court of Justice
has recognized that article 31, paragraph 3 (b), is applicable to constituent
instruments of international organizations. | (10) 国际法院确认第三十一条第三款(b)项适用于国际组织组成文书。 |
| In its Advisory Opinion on the Legality
of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, after describing
constituent instruments of international organizations as being treaties of a
particular type, the Court introduced its interpretation of the Constitution
of WHO by stating: | 法院在关于“国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性”的咨询意见中，首先表示国际组织组成文书是一类特殊的条约，然后谈到对世卫组织《组织法》的解释： |
| “According to the customary rule of
interpretation as expressed in Article 31 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, the terms of a treaty must be interpreted ‘in their context and in the light of its object and purpose’ and there shall be ‘taken into account,
together with the context: | “按照1969年《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条表述的习惯解释规则，条约的条款必须‘按其上下文并参照条约之目的及宗旨’来解释，而且应‘与上下文一并考虑者尚有： |
| “‘(b) any subsequent practice in the
application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties
regarding its interpretation’.” | “‘(b)嗣后在条约适用方面确定各当事国对条约解释之协定之任何惯例’。
” |
| Referring to different precedents from
its own case law in which it had, inter alia, employed subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), as a means of interpretation, the Court
announced that it would apply article 31, paragraph 3 (b): | 法院援引其自身判例法中把第三十一条第三款(b)项所述嗣后惯例作为解释资料的各种先例，然后宣布第三十一条第三款(b)项： |
| “… in this case for the purpose of
determining whether, according to the WHO Constitution, the question to which
it has been asked to reply arises ‘within the scope
of [the] activities’ of that Organization.” | “…将在本案中同样适用，以便法院裁定根据世卫组织《组织法》，法院要作出答复的问题是否该组织‘活动范畴内’产生的问题。” |
| (11) The Land and Maritime Boundary
between Cameroon and Nigeria case is another decision in which the Court has
emphasized, in a case involving the interpretation of a constituent
instrument of an international organization, the subsequent practice of the
parties. | (11) 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案作为一个涉及国际组织组成文书解释的案件，法院在对该案的裁决中再次强调缔约方的嗣后惯例。 |
| Proceeding from the observation that “Member States have also entrusted to the Commission certain tasks
that had not originally been provided for in the treaty texts”, the Court concluded that: | 法院基于“成员国还将条约原始文本中没有规定的某些任务委托给该委员会”的观察，得出结论认为： |
| “From the treaty texts and the practice
[of the parties] analysed at paragraphs 64 and 65 above, it emerges that the
Lake Chad Basin Commission is an international organization exercising its
powers within a specific geographical area; that it does not however have as
its purpose the settlement at a regional level of matters relating to the
maintenance of international peace and security and thus does not fall under
Chapter VIII of the Charter.” | “从上文第64段和第65段所分析的条约文本和[缔约方]惯例看，乍得湖盆地委员会是一个在特定地域范围内行使权力的国际组织；然而，该委员会的宗旨不包括在区域一级解决维护国际和平与安全方面的问题，因此不属于《宪章》第八章适用的范畴。” |
| (12) Article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is also
applicable to constituent treaties of international organizations. | (12) 第三十一条第三款(a)项也适用于国际组织组成条约。 |
| Self-standing subsequent agreements
between the member States regarding the interpretation of constituent
instruments of international organizations, however, are not common. | 但是，成员国之间关于国际组织组成文书解释问题的单独嗣后协定很少见。 |
| When questions of interpretation arise
with respect to such an instrument, the parties mostly act as members within
the framework of the plenary organ of the organization. | 此类文书产生解释问题时，缔约方通常在该组织的全体机关框架内以成员身份行事。 |
| If there is a need to modify, to amend,
or to supplement the treaty, the member States either use the amendment
procedure that is provided for in the treaty or they conclude a further
treaty, usually a protocol. | 如果需要对条约进行修改、修订或补充，成员国或者使用条约中规定的修订程序进行修订，或者另外订立一个条约，通常是议定书。 |
| It is, however, also possible that the
parties act as such when they meet within a plenary organ of the respective
organization. | 但是，缔约方在相关组织的全体机关内开会时也有可能以缔约方身份行事。 |
| In 1995: | 1995年： |
| “The Governments of the 15 Member States
have achieved the common agreement that this decision is the agreed and
definitive interpretation of the relevant Treaty provisions”. | “15个成员国的政府已经达成共同协定，认为这项决定是对《条约》有关条款一致认同的最终解释。” |
| That is to say that: | 也就是说： |
| “… the name given to the European
currency shall be Euro. | “…欧洲货币的名称定为欧元。 |
| … The specific name Euro will be used
instead of the generic term ‘ecu’ used by the Treaty to refer to the European currency unit.” | …将使用欧元这个具体名称，而不是《条约》中用来指称欧洲货币单位的通用术语‘ecu’。
” |
| This decision of the “Member States meeting within” the European
Union has been regarded, in the literature, as a subsequent agreement under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 欧洲联盟“在联盟内开会的成员国”作出的决定在文献里被视为第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定。 |
| (13) It is sometimes difficult to
determine whether “Member States meeting within” a plenary organ of an international organization intend to act in
their capacity as members of that organ, as they usually do, or whether they
intend to act in their independent capacity as States parties to the
constituent instrument of the organization. | (13) 有时很难确定在国际组织全体机关“内开会的成员国”是打算像通常那样以该机关成员的身份行事，还是以该组织组成文书缔约国的身份行事。 |
| The Court of Justice of the European Union,
when confronted with this question, initially proceeded from the wording of
the act in question: | 欧洲联盟法院在面对这个问题时首先从考虑对所涉行动的语言描述： |
| “It is clear from the wording of that
provision that acts adopted by representatives of the Member States acting,
not in their capacity as members of the Council, but as representatives of
their governments, and thus collectively exercising the powers of the Member
States, are not subject to judicial review by the Court.” | “该条款的措辞明确规定，如果成员国的代表不是以理事会成员的身份而是以其政府代表的身份行事，以此方式集体行使成员国的权力，则此等行动不受法院的司法审查。” |
| Later, however, the Court accorded
decisive importance to the “content and all the
circumstances in which [the decision] was adopted” in
order to determine whether the decision was that of the organ or of the
member States themselves as parties to the treaty: | 但是，法院后来还是认为“[决定]的内容及其通过时的全部情形”，在确定该决定是机关的决定还是缔约国自己的决定方面具有决定性意义： |
| “Consequently, it is not enough that an
act should be described as a ‘decision of the Member
States’ for it to be excluded from review under
Article 173 of the Treaty. | “因此，将一项行动说成是‘成员国的决定’，不足以将其排除在《条约》第173条所规定的审查之外。 |
| In order for such an act to be excluded
from review, it must still be determined whether, having regard to its
content and all the circumstances in which it was adopted, the act in
question is not in reality a decision of the Council.” | 为将一项决定排除在审查范围外，必须从该决定的内容及其通过时的全部情形来确定所涉行动实际上不是理事会的决定。 ” |
| (14) Apart from subsequent agreements or
subsequent practice that establish the agreement of all the parties under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), other subsequent practice by one or more
parties in the application of the constituent instrument of an international
organization may also be relevant for the interpretation of that treaty. | (14) 除了确立第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述所有缔约方协定的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例以外，一个或多个缔约方在适用国际组织组成文书时的其他嗣后惯例也可能对条约的解释具有意义。 |
| Constituent instruments of international
organizations, like other multilateral treaties, are, for example, sometimes
implemented by subsequent bilateral or regional agreements or practice. | 例如，国际组织组成文书有时像其他多边条约一样，是通过嗣后双边或区域协定或惯例实施的。 |
| Such bilateral treaties are not, as such,
subsequent agreements under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), if only because they
are concluded between a limited number of the parties to the multilateral
constituent instrument. | 此类双边条约本身不是第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定，至少是因为条约是在多边组织文书缔约方中数量有限的国家间缔结的。 |
| They may, however, imply assertions
concerning the interpretation of the constituent instrument itself and may
serve as supplementary means of interpretation under article 32. | 但是，这些条约可能暗示人们可以据此提出关于恰当解释组成文书本身的主张，可能作为第三十二条所指的补充解释资料。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as “arising
from” or “being expressed in” the reaction of member States | 第2段――嗣后协定和嗣后惯例“出自”或“体现在”会员国的反应中 |
| (15) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 12
[11] highlights a particular way in which subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice under articles 31, paragraph 3, and 32 may arise or be
expressed. | (15) 结论草案12[11]第2段强调第三十一条第三款和第三十二条所述嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能产生或被体现的具体方式。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice of States parties may “arise from” their reactions to the practice of an international organization
in the application of a constituent instrument. | 缔约国的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可“出自”其对国际组织适用组成文书惯例的反应。 |
| Alternatively, subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice of States parties to a constituent agreement may be “expressed in” the practice of an
international organization in the application of a constituent instrument. | 或者，缔约国对组成协定的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可被“体现在”国际组织适用组成文书的惯例中。 |
| “Arise from” is
intended to encompass the generation and development of subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice, while “expressed in” is used in the sense of reflecting and articulating such
agreements and practice. | “出自”用意是包括嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的产生和发展，而“体现在”是为了反映和表达这种协定和惯例。 |
| Either variant of the practice in an
international organization may reflect subsequent agreements or subsequent
practice by the States parties to the constituent instrument of the
organization (see draft conclusion 4). | 国际组织这两种惯例都反映该组织组成文书的缔约国的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例(见结论草案4)。 |
| (16) In its Advisory Opinion on the
Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, the
International Court of Justice recognized the possibility that the practice
of an organization may reflect an agreement or the practice of the Member
States as parties to the treaty themselves, but found that the practice in
that case did not “express or amount to” a subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b): | (16) 国际法院在其关于“国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性”的咨询意见中确认，国际组织的惯例有可能反映成员国作为条约缔约国本身的共识或惯例，但认为该案中的惯例并不“体现或等同于”第三十一条第三款(b)项所述嗣后惯例： |
| “Resolution WHA46.40 itself, adopted, not
without opposition, as soon as the question of the legality of the use of
nuclear weapons was raised at the WHO, could not be taken to express or to
amount on its own to a practice establishing an agreement between the members
of the Organization to interpret its Constitution as empowering it to address
the question of the legality of the use of nuclear weapons.” | “使用核武器的合法性问题在世卫组织一被提出来，就在不无反对的情况下通过了第WHA46.40号决议。
该决议独立来看，不能被认为体现或等同于下述惯例――该惯例在该组织各成员之间确立了解释《组织法》的协定，即赋予该组织处理使用核武器合法性问题的权力。 ” |
| (17) In this case, when considering the
relevance of a resolution of an international organization for the
interpretation of its constituent instrument the Court considered, in the
first place, whether the resolution expressed or amounted to “a practice establishing agreement between the members of the
Organization” under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | (17) 在本案中，法院在考虑国际组织决议对解释其组成文书的意义时，首先考虑该决议是否体现或等同于第三十一条第三款(b)项所述“确立该组织成员间协定的惯例”。 |
| (18) In a similar way, the WTO Appellate
Body has stated in general terms: | (18) 同样，世贸组织上诉机构也概括指出： |
| “Based on the text of Article 31 (3) (a)
of the Vienna Convention, we consider that a decision adopted by Members may
qualify as a ‘subsequent agreement between the
parties’ regarding the interpretation of a covered
agreement or the application of its provisions if: (i) the decision is, in a
temporal sense, adopted subsequent to the relevant covered agreement; and
(ii) the terms and content of the decision express an agreement between
Members on the interpretation or application of a provision of WTO law.” | “根据《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项文本，我们认为，成员国通过的决定可能有资格成为用于解释相关协定或适用协定条款的‘当事国之间的嗣后协定’，条件是：(一) 在时间上，该决定是在相关协定之后通过的；和(二) 该决定的规定和内容体现了成员国之间对解释或适用世贸组织法律条款达成的协定。
” |
| (19) Regarding the conditions under which
a decision of a plenary organ may be considered to be a subsequent agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), the WTO Appellate Body held: | (19) 关于在什么条件下全体机关的决定才可被视为第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定，世贸组织上诉机构认为： |
| “263. With regard to the first element,
we note that the Doha Ministerial Decision was adopted by consensus on 14
November 2001 on the occasion of the Fourth Ministerial Conference of the
WTO. … | “263. 关于第一项要素，我们注意到《多哈部长级会议决定》是2001年11月14日在世贸组织第四次部长级会议上以协商一致方式通过的。 |
| With regard to the second element, the
key question to be answered is whether paragraph 5.2 of the Doha Ministerial
Decision expresses an agreement between Members on the interpretation or
application of the term ‘reasonable interval’ in Article 2.12 of the TBT Agreement. | …关于第二项要素，所须回答的关键问题是：《多哈部长级会议决定》第5.2段是否表明成员国之间对解释或适用《技术性贸易壁垒协议》第2.12条中的‘合理间隔’达成了协定？ |
| “264. We recall that paragraph 5.2 of the
Doha Ministerial Decision provides: | “264. 我们回顾《多哈部长级会议决定》第5.2段规定： |
| Subject to the conditions specified in
paragraph 12 of Article 2 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade,
the phrase ‘reasonable interval’ shall be understood to mean normally a period of not less than 6
months, except when this would be ineffective in fulfilling the legitimate
objectives pursued. | 在符合《技术性贸易壁垒协议》第2条第12款所述条件的前提下，‘合理间隔’一词应当理解为通常不少于6个月的期间，但不能有效实现所争取之合法目标的情形除外。 |
| “265. In addressing the question of
whether paragraph 5.2 of the Doha Ministerial Decision expresses an agreement
between Members on the interpretation or application of the term ‘reasonable interval’ in Article 2.12 of
the TBT Agreement, we find useful guidance in the Appellate Body reports in
EC — Bananas III (Article 21.5 — Ecuador II)/EC — Bananas III (Article
21.5 — US). | “265. 至于《多哈部长级会议决定》第5.2段是否体现了成员国之间对解释和适用《技术性贸易壁垒协议》第2.12条的‘合理间隔’达成的协定，我们在上诉机构关于‘欧共体－香蕉(三)(第21.5条－厄瓜多尔(二))/欧共体－香蕉(三)(第21.5条－美国)’等案的报告中找到了有益的指引。 |
| The Appellate Body observed that the
International Law Commission (the ‘ILC’) describes a subsequent agreement within the meaning of Article
31 (3) (a) of the Vienna Convention as ‘a further
authentic element of interpretation to be taken into account together with
the context’. | 上诉机构指出，国际法委员会把《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定称为‘需要与上下文一并考虑的另一项权威解释要素’。 |
| According to the Appellate Body, ‘by referring to “authentic interpretation”, the ILC reads Article 31 (3) (a) as referring to agreements
bearing specifically upon the interpretation of the treaty. ’ | 上诉机构指出，‘国际法委员会通过使用“权威解释”一词，把第三十一条第三款(a)项解读为是指对条约解释产生具体影响的各项协定。’ |
| Thus, we will consider whether paragraph
5.2 bears specifically upon the interpretation of Article 2.12 of the TBT
Agreement. | 因此，我们将考虑第5.2段是否对《技术性贸易壁垒协议》第2.12条的解释产生具体影响。 |
| “268. For the foregoing reasons, we
uphold the Panel’s finding …
that paragraph 5.2 of the Doha Ministerial Decision constitutes a subsequent
agreement between the parties, within the meaning of Article 31 (3) (a) of
the Vienna Convention, on the interpretation of the term ‘reasonable interval’ in Article 2.12 of
the TBT Agreement.” | “268. 综上所述，我们支持小组的结论…即：《多哈部长级会议决定》第5.2段表明，在《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项含义范畴内，缔约方之间就《技术性贸易壁垒协议》第2.12条‘合理间隔’一词的解释嗣后达成了协定。” |
| (20) The International Court of Justice,
although it did not expressly mention article 31, paragraph 3 (a), when
relying on the General Assembly Declaration on Friendly Relations between
States for the interpretation of Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter,
emphasized the “attitude of the Parties and the
attitude of States towards certain General Assembly resolutions” and their consent thereto. | (20) 国际法院在依据大会关于各国友好关系的宣言来解释《宪章》第二条第四款时虽然未明确提及第三十一条第三款(a)项，但强调了“各方及各国对大会某些决议的态度”及对这些决议表示的同意。 |
| In this context, a number of writers have
concluded that subsequent agreements within the meaning of article 31,
paragraph 3 (a), may, under certain circumstances, arise from or be expressed
in acts of plenary organs of international organizations, such as the General
Assembly of the United Nations. | 在这方面，若干著述者得出的结论是，在某些情形下，第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定可出自或体现在国际组织全体机关的行动中，例如联合国大会的行动。 |
| Indeed, as the WTO Appellate Body has
indicated with reference to the Commission, the characterization of a
collective decision as an “authentic element of
interpretation” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is
only justified if the parties of the constituent instrument of an
international organization acted as such and not, as they usually do,
institutionally as members of the respective plenary organ. | 事实上，正如世贸组织上诉机构针对国际法委员会所表示的，只有在国际组织组成文书缔约方以缔约方身份行事，而非像通常那样在体制上仅以各全体机关成员的身份行事时，才可根据第三十一条第三款(a)项将集体决定定为“权威解释要素”。 |
| (21) Paragraph 2 refers to the practice
of an international organization, rather than to the practice of an organ of
an international organization. | (21) 第2段针对国际组织的惯例，而非国际组织某一机关的惯例。 |
| Although the practice of an international
organization can arise from the conduct of an organ, it can also be generated
by the conduct of two or more organs. | 虽然国际组织的惯例可出自某一机关的惯例，但也可能产生于两个或多个机关的行为。 |
| (22) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice of the parties, which may “arise from, or be
expressed in” the practice of an international
organization, may sometimes be very closely interrelated with the practice of
the organization as such. | (22) 缔约方的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能“出自或体现在”国际组织的惯例中，有时可能与该组织的此类惯例存在密切联系。 |
| For example, in its Namibia Advisory
Opinion, the International Court of Justice arrived at its interpretation of
the term “concurring votes”
in Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations as including
abstentions primarily by relying on the practice of the competent organ of
the organization in combination with the fact that this practice was then “generally accepted” by Member States: | 例如，在“纳米比亚案”的咨询意见中，国际法院对《联合国宪章》第二十七条第三项中“同意票”用语所作的解释包括弃权，这主要是依据了该组织有关机关的惯例，同时考虑到当时该惯例被会员国“普遍接受”： |
| “… the proceedings of the Security
Council extending over a long period supply abundant evidence that
presidential rulings and the positions taken by members of the Council, in
particular its permanent members, have consistently and uniformly interpreted
the practice of voluntary abstention by a permanent member as not
constituting a bar to the adoption of resolutions. | “…安全理事会长期以来的议事录提供了大量证据，表明主席的裁决以及安理会理事国、特别是常任理事国采取的立场，已经连贯一致地将一个常任理事国采取的自愿弃权做法解释为并不阻碍决议的通过。 |
| This procedure followed by the Security
Council, which has continued unchanged after the amendment in 1965 of Article
27 of the Charter, has been generally accepted by Members of the United
Nations and evidences a general practice of that Organization.” | 安全理事会采用的这一程序自1965年修订《宪章》第二十七条以来一直未变，已为联合国会员国普遍接受，并表明了该组织的一种一般惯例。 |
| In this case, the Court emphasized both
the practice of one or more organs of the international organization and the “general acceptance” of that practice by
the Member States and characterized the combination of those two elements as
being a “general practice of the organization”. | 法院在该案中既强调了国际组织一个或多个机关的惯例，又强调了会员国对该惯例的“普遍接受”，并将这两种因素的结合称为“该组织的一般惯例”。 |
| The Court followed this approach in its
Advisory Opinion regarding Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory by stating that: | 法院在关于“在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果”的咨询意见中沿用了这种做法，指出： |
| “The Court considers that the accepted
practice of the General Assembly, as it has evolved, is consistent with
Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Charter.” | “法院认为大会被接受的惯例(有发展)符合《宪章》第十二条第一项。
” |
| By speaking of the “accepted practice of the General Assembly”,
the Court implicitly affirmed that acquiescence on behalf of the Member
States regarding the practice followed by the organization in the application
of the treaty permits to establish the agreement regarding the interpretation
of the relevant treaty provision. | 通过使用“大会被接受的惯例”这一说法，法院即默示确认，代表成员国对一个组织在适用条约时遵循的惯例作出默许，也就是允许确立就相关条约规定的解释达成的协定。 |
| (23) On this basis it is reasonable to
consider “that relevant practice will usually be that
of those on whom the obligation of performance falls”,
in the sense that “where [S]tates by treaty entrust
the performance of activities to an organization, how those activities are
conducted can constitute practice under the treaty; but whether such practice
establishes agreement of the parties regarding the treaty’s interpretation may require account to be taken of further
factors”. | (23) 因此，可以合理地认为，“相关惯例通常是指承担执行义务的那一方的惯例”，这意味着“如果国家依照条约规定委托一个组织执行某些活动，则执行这些活动的方式可以构成条约所称的惯例；但这种惯例是否确立了缔约方关于条约解释的协定，可能需要考虑到其他因素”。 |
| (24) Accordingly, in the Whaling in the
Antarctic case, the International Court of Justice referred to (non-binding)
recommendations of the International Whaling Commission (which is both the
name of an international organization established by the Convention for the
Regulation of Whaling and that of an organ thereof), and clarified that when
such recommendations are “adopted by consensus or by
a unanimous vote, they may be relevant for the interpretation of the
Convention or its Schedule”. | (24) 同样，在“南极捕鲸案”中，国际法院提到国际捕鲸委员会(既是《国际捕鲸管制公约》设立的国际组织名称，也是该组织一个机关的名称)(无约束力)的建议，澄清说这些建议如果经“协商一致或一致表决获得通过，则可能对《公约》或其附表的解释有意义”。 |
| At the same time, however, the Court also
expressed a cautionary note according to which: | 然而，法院同时也作出了谨慎的表示： |
| “… Australia and New Zealand overstate
the legal significance of the recommendatory resolutions and Guidelines on
which they rely. | “…澳大利亚和新西兰夸大了其所依据的建议性决议和导则的法律意义。 |
| First, many IWC resolutions were adopted
without the support of all States parties to the Convention and, in particular,
without the concurrence of Japan. | 首先，国际捕鲸委员会的许多决议都是在未得到《公约》全体缔约国支持，尤其是未得到日本同意的情况下通过的。 |
| Thus, such instruments cannot be regarded
as subsequent agreement to an interpretation of Article VIII, nor as
subsequent practice establishing an agreement of the parties regarding the
interpretation of the treaty within the meaning of subparagraphs (a) and (b),
respectively, of paragraph (3) of Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the
Law of Treaties.” | 因此，这些文书既不能被视为第八条解释方面的嗣后协定，也不构成《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项分别所指的确定缔约方关于条约解释的协定的嗣后惯例。 ” |
| (25) This cautionary note does not,
however, exclude that a resolution that has been adopted without the support
of all member States may give rise to, or express, the position or the
practice of individual member States in the application of the treaty that
may be taken into account under article 32. | (25) 然而，这一谨慎表示并不排除一个未获全体一致通过的决议可能会产生或表明单个成员国在解释条约时的立场或惯例，而这一立场或惯例可依据第三十二条予以考虑。 |
| The practice of an international
organization itself | 国际组织自身惯例 |
| (26) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 12
[11] refers to another form of practice that may be relevant for the
interpretation of a constituent instrument of an international organization:
the practice of the organization as such, meaning its “own practice”, as distinguished from the
practice of the member States. | (26) 结论草案12[11]第3段提及可能对解释国际组织的组成文书有意义的另一个惯例形式：组织自身形成的惯例，即“自身惯例”，有别于成员国的惯例。 |
| The International Court of Justice has in
some cases taken the practice of an international organization into account
in its interpretation of constituent instruments without referring to the
practice or acceptance of the member States of the organization. | 在一些案例中，国际法院在解释国际组织的组成文书时就考虑了其自身惯例，而没有提及该组织成员国的惯例或成员国是否接受。 |
| In particular, the Court has stated that
the international organization’s “own practice … may deserve special
attention” in the process of interpretation. | 法院特别指出该国际组织“自己的惯例”…在解释过程中“可能值得特别关注”。 |
| (27) For example, in its Advisory Opinion
on the Competence of the General Assembly regarding Admission to the United
Nations, the Court stated that: | (27) 例如，国际法院在关于“联合国大会接纳国家加入联合国的权限”的咨询意见中指出： |
| “The organs to which Article 4 entrusts
the judgment of the Organization in matters of admission have consistently
interpreted the text in the sense that the General Assembly can decide to
admit only on the basis of the recommendation of the Security Council.” | “根据第四条的委托负责决定本组织准入事项的各机关对该文本的一贯解释是，大会只有根据安全理事会的建议才能决定接纳。 ” |
| (28) Similarly, in Applicability of
Article VI, Section 22, of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of
the United Nations, the Court referred to acts of organs of the organization
when it referred to the practice of “the United
Nations”: | (28) 同样，在“《联合国特权和豁免公约》第六条第二十二节的适用”案中，法院在提到“联合国”的惯例时，是在指该组织各机关的行动： |
| “In practice, according to the
information supplied by the Secretary-General, the United Nations has had
occasion to entrust missions — increasingly varied in
nature — to persons not having the status of United
Nations officials. | “实践中，根据秘书长提供的信息，联合国确曾在特定情况下把性质越来越多样化的特派任务托付给不具备联合国官员身份的个人。 |
| … In all these cases, the practice of the
United Nations shows that the persons so appointed, and in particular the
members of these committees and commissions, have been regarded as experts on
missions within the meaning of Section 22.” | …在所有这些情况下，联合国的惯例表明，得到此类任命的人，尤其是此类委员会的成员，都被视第二十二节所指的特派专家。 ” |
| (29) In its Inter-Governmental Maritime
Consultative Organization Advisory Opinion, the International Court of
Justice referred to “the practice followed by the
Organization itself in carrying out the Convention”
as a means of interpretation. | (29) 在关于“政府间海事协商组织”的咨询意见中，国际法院提到“该组织本身在履行《公约》过程中遵循的惯例”可以作为解释资料。 |
| (30) In its advisory opinion on Certain
Expenses of the United Nations, the Court explained why the practice of an
international organization, as such, including that of a particular organ,
may be relevant for the interpretation of its constituent instrument: | (30) 在关于“联合国的某些经费”的咨询意见中，法院解释了为什么国际机构包括其下属机关的惯例本身，对国际组织组成文书的解释可能有意义： |
| “Proposals made during the drafting of
the Charter to place the ultimate authority to interpret the Charter in the
International Court of Justice were not accepted; the opinion which the Court
is in course of rendering is an advisory opinion. | “在起草《宪章》过程中提出的将《宪章》的最终解释权授予国际法院的建议未被接受；因此法院现在提供的意见是咨询意见。 |
| As anticipated in 1945, therefore, each
organ must, in the first place at least, determine its own jurisdiction. | 于是，正如1945年预见的那样，各机关必须至少先行确定自身的管辖范围。 |
| If the Security Council, for example,
adopts a resolution purportedly for the maintenance of international peace
and security and if, in accordance with a mandate or authorization in such
resolution, the Secretary-General incurs financial obligations, these amounts
must be presumed to constitute ‘expenses of the
Organization’.” | 例如，如果安全理事会通过一项旨在维护国际和平与安全的决议，而根据该决议规定的任务或授权，秘书长发生了债务，则必须推定这些债务构成‘本组织的开支’”。 |
| (31) Many international organizations
share the same characteristic of not providing for an “ultimate authority to interpret” their
constituent instrument. | (31) 许多国际组织都有相同的特点，即没有规定由一个“最终权威来解释”其组成文书。 |
| The conclusion that the Court has drawn
from this circumstance is therefore now generally accepted as being
applicable to international organizations. | 因此，法院由这一情况得出的结论目前一般被认为适用于国际组织。 |
| The identification of a presumption, in
the Certain Expenses advisory opinion, which arises from the practice of an
international organization, including by one or more of its organs, is a way
of recognizing such practice as a means of interpretation. | 在“某些经费”咨询意见中，基于国际组织包括其一个或多个机关的某项惯例发现一种前提假定，是确认这种惯例可作为解释手段的方法之一。 |
| (32) Whereas it is generally agreed that
the interpretation of the constituent instruments of international
organizations by the practice of their organs constitutes a relevant means of
interpretation, certain differences exist among writers about how to explain
the relevance, for the purpose of interpretation, of an international
organization’s “own practice” in terms of the Vienna rules of interpretation. | (32) 虽然目前公认，按照国际组织机关的惯例来解释该组织的组成文书是有意义的解释方式，但许多著述者对于如何按维也纳解释规则来说明国际组织“自身惯例”对解释的意义，有不同的理解。 |
| Such practice can, at a minimum, be
conceived as a supplementary means of interpretation under article 32. | 这种惯例至少可以被理解为第三十二条规定的补充解释方式。 |
| The Court, by referring to acts of
international organizations that were adopted against the opposition of
certain member states, has recognized that such acts may constitute practice
for the purposes of interpretation, but generally not a (more weighty)
practice that establishes agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation and that would fall under article 31, paragraph 3. | 法院通过援引国际组织在一些成员国反对的情况下通过的一些行动，确认这类行动可能构成以解释为目的的惯例，但通常不构成各方就解释达成协定且属于第三十一条第三款规定的(更有份量的)惯例。 |
| Writers largely agree, however, that the
practice of an international organization, as such, will often also be
relevant for clarifying the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the
treaty in their context and in light of its object and purpose. | 然而，各著述者基本认可国际组织自身形成的惯例也有助于依上下文并参照条约的目标和宗旨澄清条约术语中的一般含义。 |
| (33) The Commission has confirmed, in its
commentary to draft conclusion 2 [1], that given instances of subsequent
practice and subsequent agreements contribute, or not, to the determination
of the ordinary meaning of the terms in their context and in the light of the
object and purpose of the treaty. | (33) 委员会在对结论草案2[1]的评注中确认，“具体的嗣后惯例和嗣后协定有的能够，有的则不能够帮助确定有关术语在其上下文中以及根据条约的目标和宗旨而具有的通常含义”。 |
| These considerations are also relevant
with regard to the practice of an international organization itself. | 就国际组织本身的惯例而言，这些考虑也是相关的。 |
| (34) The possible relevance of an
international organization’s “own practice” can thus be derived from
articles 31, paragraph 1, and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (34) 因此，国际组织“自身惯例”可能具有的意义可以出自1969年《维也纳公约》第三条第一款和第三十二条。 |
| Those rules permit, in particular, taking
into account practice of an organization itself, including by one or more of
its organs, as being relevant for the determination of the object and purpose
of the treaty, including the function of the international organization
concerned, under article 31, paragraph 1. | 根据这些规定，尤其可以考虑到一个组织本身的惯例包括一个或多个机关的惯例对于按照第三十一条第一款适当确定条约的目的和宗旨(包括有关国际组织的职能)而言具有的意义。 |
| (35) Thus, article 5 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention allows for the application of the rules of interpretation in
articles 31 and 32 in a way that takes account of the practice of an
international organization, in the interpretation of its constituent instrument,
including taking into account its institutional character. | (35) 因此，根据1969年《维也纳公约》第五条，可以在适用第三十一和第三十二条解释规则解释国际组织组成文书时考虑到该组织的惯例，包括考虑到其组成特性。 |
| Such elements may thereby also contribute
to identifying whether, and if so how, the meaning of a provision of a
constituent instrument of an international organization is capable of
evolving over time. | 因此此类要素有助于查明：国际组织组成文书某一项规定的含义能否与时俱进？ 若能，又是如何与时俱进的？ |
| (36) Paragraph 3, like paragraph 2,
refers to the practice of an international organization as a whole, rather than
to the practice of an organ of an international organization. | (36) 像第2段一样，第3段针对国际组织作为一个整体的惯例，而非国际组织内某一机关的惯例。 |
| The practice of an international
organization in question can arise from the conduct of an organ, but can also
be generated by the conduct of two or more organs. | 国际组织的有关惯例可出自一个机关的行为，但也可能产生于两个或多个机关的行为。 |
| It is understood that the practice of an
international organization can only be relevant for the interpretation of its
constituent instrument if that organization is competent, since it is a general
requirement that international organizations do not act ultra vires. | 由于目前普遍要求国际组织不得越权，有一种理解是只有在国际组织具备职权的情况下，其惯例才对组成文书的解释有意义。 |
| (37) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 12
[11] builds on draft conclusion 5, which addresses “subsequent
practice” by parties to a treaty in the application
of that treaty, as defined in draft conclusion 4. | (37) 结论草案12[11]第3段基于结论草案5, 其中论及结论草案4中定义的条约缔约方适用条约时的“嗣后惯例”。 |
| Draft conclusion 5 does not imply that
the practice of an international organization, as such, in the application of
its constituent instrument cannot be relevant practice under articles 31 and
32. | 结论草案5并不意味着国际组织的自身惯例不能基于第三十一和第三十二条对条约的适用产生意义。 |
| Paragraph 4 —
without prejudice to the “rules of the organization” | 第4段――不妨碍“组织规则” |
| (38) Paragraph 4 of draft conclusion 12
[11] reflects article 5 of the Vienna Convention and its formulation borrows
from that article. | (38) 结论草案12[11]第4段体现了《维也纳公约》第五条且在拟定过程中借鉴了该条。 |
| The paragraph applies to the situations
covered under paragraphs 1 to 3 and ensures that the rules referred to
therein are applicable, interpreted and applied “without
prejudice to any relevant rules of the organization”. | 该段适用于第1至3段所述情形并确保第1至3段的规则可以适用而且进行解释和适用时“对该组织任何有关规则并无妨碍”。 |
| The term “rules
of the organization” is to be understood in the same
way as in article 2, paragraph 1 (j), of the 1986 Vienna Convention, as well
as in article 2 (b) of the articles on responsibility of international
organizations of 2011. | “该组织的规则”一词应按照1986年《维也纳公约》第二条第一款(j)项和2011年《关于国际组织的责任条款》第二条(b)项作相同理解。 |
| (39) The Commission has stated in its
general commentary to the 2011 draft articles on the responsibility of
international organizations: | (39) 委员会在其2011年关于国际组织的责任的条款草案总评注中表示： |
| “There are very significant differences
among international organizations with regard to their powers and functions,
size of membership, relations between the organization and its members,
procedures for deliberation, structure and facilities, as well as the primary
rules including treaty obligations by which they are bound.” | “各国际组织之间在以下方面有很大的不同：权力和职能、成员国数目、组织与成员的关系、辩论程序、结构和设施以及约束国际组织的主要规则包括条约义务。” |
| (40) Paragraph 4 implies, inter alia,
that more specific “relevant rules” of interpretation that may be contained in a constituent
instrument of an international organization may take precedence over the
general rules of interpretation under the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (40) 第4段暗示，除其他外，国际组织组成文书或更具体的“有关(解释)规则”可能优先于1969年《维也纳公约》所规定的一般解释规则。 |
| If, for example, the constituent
instrument contains a clause according to which the interpretation of the
instrument is subject to a special procedure, it is to be presumed that the
parties, by reaching an agreement after the conclusion of the treaty, do not
wish to circumvent such a procedure by reaching a subsequent agreement under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 例如，如果组成文件所含条款规定组成文书的解释需要遵循特别程序，则应推定缔约方在订立条约之后达成第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定无意规避该程序。 |
| The special procedure under the treaty
and a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), may, however,
be compatible if they “serve different functions and
have different legal effects”. | 但是，如果条约规定的特别程序和第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定“服务于不同的功能且具有不同的法律效力”，它们则可能相互兼容。 |
| Few constituent instruments contain
explicit procedural or substantive rules regarding their interpretation. | 组成文书很少含有关于其解释的明确程序性或实体性规则。 |
| Specific “relevant
rules” of interpretation need not be formulated
explicitly in the constituent instrument; they may also be implied therein,
or derive from the “established practice of the
organization”. | 具体的“有关(解释)规则”无需在组成文书中写明；这些规则也可以隐含在组成文书中，或出自“该组织既定惯例”。 |
| The “established
practice of the organisation” is a term that is narrower
in scope than the term “practice of the organization” as such. | “该组织既定惯例”从含义范围上说比“该组织的惯例”要窄。 |
| (41) The Commission has noted in its
commentary to article 2 (j) of the 1986 Vienna Convention that the
significance of a particular practice of an organization may depend on the
specific rules and characteristics of the respective organization, as
expressed in its constituent instrument: | (41) 委员会在对《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》第二条(j)项的评注中指出，一个组织的某项惯例的重要性可能取决于相关组织组成文书所表述的该组织的特定规则和特征： |
| “It is true that most international
organizations have, after a number of years, a body of practice which forms
an integral part of their rules. | “确实，大多数国际组织若干年后会形成一套惯例，作为其规则的组成部分。 |
| However, the reference in question is in
no way intended to suggest that practice has the same standing in all
organizations; on the contrary, each organization has its own characteristics
in that respect.” | 但是，这里提到惯例，绝不表示惯例在所有组织中享有相同的地位；相反，每个组织在这方面各有其特点。” |
| (42) In this sense, the “established practice of the organization”
may also be a means for the interpretation of constituent instruments of
international organizations. | (42) 在此意义上，“组织的既定惯例”也可能成为国际组织组成文书的一种解释手段。 |
| Article 2, paragraph 1 (j), of the 1986
Vienna Convention and article 2 (b) of the draft articles on the
responsibility of international organizations recognize the “established practice of the organization”
as a “rule of the organization”. | 1986年《维也纳公约》第二条第一款(j)项和关于国际组织的责任的条款草案第二条(b)项，都将“组织的既定惯例”认定为“该组织的规则”。 |
| Such practice may produce different legal
effects in different organizations and it is not always clear whether those
effects should be explained primarily in terms of traditional sources of
international law (treaty or custom) or of institutional law. | 这种做法会在不同组织中产生不同的法律效力。 主要应该按国际法传统渊源(条约或习惯)还是组织法的渊源来解释这种效力，这一点并不总是很清楚。 |
| But even if it is difficult to make
general statements, the “established practice of the
organization” usually encompasses a specific form of
practice, one which has generally been accepted by the members of the
organization, albeit sometimes tacitly. | 虽然很难作出概括，但“组织的既定惯例”通常包含一种具体形式的惯例，这种做法得到该组织成员的普遍接受，尽管有时是默示接受。 |
| Conclusion 13 [12] | 结论13 [12] |
| Pronouncements of expert treaty bodies | 专家条约机构的声明 |
| 1. For the purposes of these draft
conclusions, an expert treaty body is a body consisting of experts serving in
their personal capacity, which is established under a treaty and is not an
organ of an international organization. | 1. 为本结论草案的目的，专家条约机构指根据一项条约设立且不是国际组织机关的、由以个人身份任职的专家组成的机构。 |
| 2. The relevance of a pronouncement of an
expert treaty body for the interpretation of a treaty is subject to the
applicable rules of the treaty. | 2. 专家条约机构的声明对条约解释的意义取决于该条约的适用规则。 |
| 3. A pronouncement of an expert treaty
body may give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or subsequent
practice by parties under article 31, paragraph 3, or other subsequent practice
under article 32. | 3. 专家条约机构的声明可产生或提及第三十一条第三款所称的缔约方嗣后协定或嗣后惯例，或第三十二条所称的其他嗣后惯例。 |
| Silence by a party shall not be presumed
to constitute subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b),
accepting an interpretation of a treaty as expressed in a pronouncement of an
expert treaty body. | 缔约方的沉默不应推定为构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的、接受专家条约机构声明中表达的对相关条约的解释的嗣后惯例。 |
| 4. This draft conclusion is without
prejudice to the contribution that a pronouncement of an expert treaty body
may otherwise make to the interpretation of a treaty. | 4. 本条结论草案不妨碍专家条约机构的声明可能以其他方式有助于条约的解释。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| Paragraph 1 —
definition of the term “expert treaty body” | 第1段――“专家条约机构”这一术语的定义 |
| (1) Some treaties establish bodies,
consisting of experts who serve in their personal capacity, which have the
task of monitoring or contributing in other ways to the application of those
treaties. | (1) 一些条约会设立机构，由以个人身份任职的专家组成，负责监测这些条约的适用情况，或以其它方式为适用这些条约作出贡献。 |
| Examples of such expert treaty bodies are
the committees established under various human rights treaties at the universal
level, for example, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination, the Human Rights Committee, the Committee on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, Committee on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, the Committee on the Rights of the Child and the
Committee against Torture. | 在各项全球性人权条约之下设立的委员会就是这种专家条约机构的例子， 例如消除种族歧视委员会、人权事务委员会、消除对妇女歧视委员会、残疾人权利委员会、儿童权利委员会和禁止酷刑委员会。 |
| Other expert treaty bodies include the
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf under the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Compliance Committee under the
Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making
and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention), and the
International Narcotics Control Board under the Single Convention on Narcotic
Drugs. | 其他专家条约机构包括：《联合国海洋法公约》之下的大陆架界限委员会、《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》(《奥胡斯公约》)遵约委员会和《麻醉品单一公约》之下的国际麻醉品管制局。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 defines the term “expert treaty body” only “for the purposes of these draft conclusions”. | (2) 第1段对“专家条约机构”这一术语的定义仅仅是“为本结论草案的目的”。 |
| The draft conclusion does not claim
otherwise to pronounce on the status of such bodies and the possible legal
effect of their acts for other purposes. | 本条结论草案并未以其他方式声称本条为其他目的对这种机构的地位及其行动可能产生的法律效果作出了声明。 |
| (3) The term “serving
in their personal capacity” means that the members of
an expert treaty body are free from governmental instructions when they act
in that capacity. | (3) “以个人身份任职”这一术语意味着专家条约机构的成员履职行事时不接受政府指示。 |
| Draft conclusion 13 [12] is not concerned
with bodies that consist of State representatives. | 结论草案13 [12]不涉及由政府代表组成的机构。 |
| The output of a body that is composed of
State representatives, and that is not an organ of an international
organization, is a form of practice by those States that thereby act
collectively within its framework. | 由各国代表组成、不属于国际组织机关的机构的产出，是由此在其框架内集体行动的这些国家的一种形式的惯例。 |
| (4) Draft conclusion 13 [12] also does
not apply in similar terms to bodies that are organs of an international
organization. | (4) 结论草案13 [12]也不适用于属于国际组织机关的机构。 |
| The output of a body that is an organ of
an international organization is, in the first place, attributed to the
organization. | 属于国际组织机关的机构的产出首先归于该组织。 |
| The exclusion of bodies that are organs
of international organizations from the scope of draft conclusion 13 [12] has
been made for formal reasons, since the present draft conclusions are not
focused on the relevance of the rules of interpretation of the Vienna
Convention. | 将属于国际组织机关的机构排除在结论草案13 [12]的范围之外是出于形式上的考虑，因为本结论草案不是侧重于阐明《维也纳公约》的解释规则的相关性。 |
| This does not exclude that the substance
of the present draft conclusion may apply, mutatis mutandis, to
pronouncements of independent expert bodies that are organs of international
organizations. | 这不排除本结论草案的实质性内容比照适用于属于国际组织机关的独立专家机构的声明。 |
| (5) The expression “established under a treaty” means that the
establishment or a competence of a particular expert body is provided under a
treaty. | (5) “根据一项条约设立”这一表述指某具体的条约专家机构的设立或职权是由一项条约规定的。 |
| In most cases it is clear whether these
conditions are satisfied, but there may also be borderline cases. | 大多数情况下，可以清楚地看出这些条件是否满足，但也可能存在模棱两可的情况。 |
| The Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, for example, is a body that was established by a resolution
of an international organization, but which was later given the competence to
“consider” certain “communications” by the Optional Protocol
to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. | 例如，经济、社会及文化委员会是由国际组织决议设立的机构， 但随后被《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约任择议定书》赋予了“审议”某些“来文”的职权。 |
| Such a body is an expert treaty body
within the meaning of draft conclusion 13 [12] as a treaty provides for the
exercise of certain competences by the Committee. | 这一机构属于结论草案13 [12]意义内的专家条约机构，因为该委员会行使某些职权是依照一项条约的规定。 |
| Another borderline case is the Compliance
Committee under the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change, the establishment of which — by a
decision of the Conference of the Parties — is implicitly
envisaged in article 18 of the Protocol. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约京都议定书》遵约委员会是另一个模棱两可的例子。 该机构是由缔约方会议的一项决定设立的，但《议定书》第十八条也暗示了要设立该机构。 |
| Paragraph 2 —
primacy of the rules of the treaty | 第2段――条约规则的优先地位 |
| (6) Treaties use various terms for
designating the forms of action of expert treaty bodies, for example, “views”, “recommendations”, “comments”, “measures” and “consequences”. | (6) 各项条约采用不同的术语来指称专家条约机构不同形式的行动，例如，“意见”、“建议”、“评论”、“措施”和“后果”。 |
| Draft conclusion 13 [12] employs, for the
purpose of the present draft conclusion, the general term “pronouncements”. | 为本结论草案的目的，结论草案13 [12] 采用了“声明”这一一般性术语。 |
| This term covers all relevant forms of
action by expert treaty bodies. | 该术语涵盖了专家条约机构所有有关的行动形式。 |
| Other general terms that are in use for
certain bodies include “jurisprudence” and “output”. | 对某些机构使用的其他一般性术语包括“判例”和“产出”。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 serves to emphasize that
any possible legal effect of a pronouncement by an expert treaty body
depends, first and foremost, on the specific rules of the applicable treaty
itself. | (7) 第2段强调，凡是专家条约机构的声明，其所具备的任何可能的法律效果均首先取决于适用的条约本身的具体规则。 |
| Such possible legal effects may therefore
be very different. | 因此，这种可能的法律效果可能非常不同。 |
| They must be determined by way of
applying the rules on treaty interpretation set forth in the Vienna
Convention. | 必须通过适用《维也纳公约》所载的条约解释规则来确定法律效果。 |
| The ordinary meaning of the term by which
a treaty designates a particular form of pronouncement, or its context,
usually gives a clear indication that such pronouncements are not legally
binding. | 一项条约用来指称某具体形式的声明的术语的一般意义或其上下文通常会明确显示，这种声明并不具备法律约束力。 |
| This is true, for example, for the terms “views” (article 5, paragraph 4, of the
Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights), “suggestions and recommendations” (article 14, paragraph 8, of the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) and “recommendations” (article 76, paragraph 8,
of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea). | 例如，“意见”(《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》第五条第4款)、“意见与建议”(《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》第十四条第八款)和“建议”(《联合国海洋法公约》第七十六条第8款)等术语就属于这种情况。 |
| (8) It is not necessary, for present
purposes, to describe the competences of different expert treaty bodies in
detail. | (8) 为当前目的，没有必要对不同专家条约机构的职权作出详细描述。 |
| Pronouncements of expert treaty bodies
under human rights treaties, for example, are usually either adopted in
reaction to State reports (for example, “concluding
observations”), or in response to individual
communications (for example, “views”), or regarding the implementation or interpretation of the
respective treaties generally (for example, “general
comments”). | 例如，各人权条约之下的专家条约机构的声明往往是针对国家报告通过的(例如“结论性意见”)，或针对个人来文通过的(例如，“意见”)，或者涉及各自条约的一般性执行或解释(例如，“一般性意见”)。 |
| Whereas such pronouncements are governed
by different specific provisions of the treaty that primarily determine their
legal effect, they often, explicitly or implicitly, interpret the treaty in a
way that raises some general issues that draft conclusion 13 [12] seeks to
address. | 条约的不同具体条款对这种声明予以规范，主要是确定其法律效果，但这种声明也往往会明确或隐晦地对条约进行解释，提出一些一般性问题，而这些问题是结论草案13 [12]试图解决的。 |
| Paragraph 3, first sentence — “may give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or a
subsequent practice” | 第3段第一句――“可产生或提及…嗣后协定或嗣后惯例” |
| (9) A pronouncement of an expert treaty
body cannot as such constitute subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), since this provision requires a subsequent practice of the
parties that establishes their agreement regarding the interpretation of the
treaty. | (9) 专家条约机构的声明本身不能构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例，因为该条款规定，必须有一项确定各缔约方对条约解释之协定的嗣后惯例。 |
| This has been confirmed, for example, by
the reaction to a draft proposition of the Human Rights Committee according
to which its own “general body of jurisprudence”, or the acquiescence by States to that jurisprudence, would
constitute subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 这一点已得到证实，人权事务委员会一项提案草稿引发的反响就是一例佐证。 人权事务委员会在提案中表示，其自身的“全体判例”或各国对这些判例的默认，可构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例。 |
| The proposition of the Human Rights
Committee was: | 人权事务委员会的提案内容是： |
| “In relation to the general body of
jurisprudence generated by the Committee, it may be considered that it
constitutes ‘subsequent practice in the application
of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its
interpretation’ within the sense of article 31(3)(b)
of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, or, alternatively, the
acquiescence of States parties in those determinations constitutes such
practice.” | “就本委员会产生的全体判例而言，可认为这些判例构成在《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项意义内的‘嗣后在条约适用方面确定各缔约方对条约解释之协定之惯例’，或可认为缔约国对这些裁定的默认亦构成这种惯例。
” |
| (10) When this proposition was criticized
by some States, the Committee did not pursue its proposal and adopted its
general comment No. 33 without a reference to article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | (10) 这一提法受到了一些国家的批评， 委员会便没有继续推动这一提议，通过的第33号一般性意见没有提及第三十一条第三款(b)项。 |
| This confirms that pronouncements of
expert treaty bodies cannot as such constitute subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 这件事证明，专家条约机构的声明本身并不能构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所称的嗣后惯例。 |
| (11) Pronouncements of expert treaty
bodies may, however, give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or a
subsequent practice by the parties which establish their agreement regarding
the interpretation of the treaty under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b). | (11) 但是，专家条约机构的声明可能会引起或提及缔约国某项嗣后协定或依第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项就条约的解释确立协定的某项实践。 |
| This possibility has been recognized by
States, by the Commission and also by the International Law Association and
by a significant number of authors. | 各国、委员会、国际法协会和许多著述者都承认了这种可能性。 |
| There is indeed no reason why a
subsequent agreement between the parties or subsequent practice that
establishes the agreement of the parties themselves regarding the
interpretation of a treaty could not arise from, or be referred to by, a
pronouncement of an expert treaty body. | 的确，一个专家条约机构的声明不能引起或提及缔约国之间嗣后的某项协定或缔约国嗣后就条约解释确立的协定的某项实践，是没有理由的。 |
| (12) Whereas a pronouncement of an expert
treaty body can, in principle, give rise to a subsequent agreement or a
subsequent practice by the parties themselves under article 31, paragraph 3
(a) and (b), this result is not easily achieved in practice. | (12) 虽然一个专家条约机构的声明在原则上可引起嗣后的某项协定或缔约国本身嗣后在第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项下的某种实践，但在实际中这种结果的取得并不容易。 |
| Most treaties that establish expert
treaty bodies at the universal level have many parties. | 在国际层面设立了专家条约机构的大多数条约具有很多缔约方。 |
| It will often be difficult to establish
that all parties have accepted, explicitly or implicitly, that a particular
pronouncement of an expert treaty body expresses a particular interpretation
of the treaty. | 要想确定所有缔约方是否都明确或含蓄接受一个专家条约机构的某项特定声明表示对条约的一种特定解释，经常是困难的。 |
| (13) One possible way of identifying an
agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty that is
reflected in a pronouncement of an expert treaty body is to look at
resolutions of organs of international organizations as well as of
Conferences of States Parties. | (13) 辨认反映在专家条约机构的声明中的缔约方之间就条约解释达成的协议的一种可能办法是，审视国际组织以及缔约方大会的决议。 |
| General Assembly resolutions may, in
particular, explicitly or implicitly refer to pronouncements of expert treaty
bodies. | 特别是联合国大会决议，可能明确或含蓄地提到专家条约机构的声明。 |
| This is true, for example, for two
resolutions of the General Assembly on the “protection
of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism”, which expressly refer to general comment No. 29 (2001) of the
Human Rights Committee on derogations from provisions of the Covenant during
a state of emergency. | 例如，联大关于“反恐活动中保护人权和基本自由”的两项决议就是这种情况，其中明确提到了人权事务委员会关于紧急状态期间《公约》条款减损的第29(2001)号一般性意见。 |
| Both resolutions reaffirm the obligation
of States to respect certain rights under the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights as non-derogable in any circumstances and underline the “exceptional and temporary nature” of
derogations by way of using the terms used in general comment No. 29 when
interpreting and thereby specifying the obligation of States under article 4
of the Covenant. | 的两项决议都重申各国有义务在任何情况下尊重《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》下的某些权利，不得减损，并以第29号一般性意见解释和具体说明缔约国在《公约》第四条之下的义务时使用的措辞强调了减损的“例外和临时性质”。 |
| These resolutions were adopted without a
vote by the General Assembly, and hence would reflect a subsequent agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b), if the consensus constituted the
acceptance by all the parties of the interpretation that is contained in the
pronouncement. | 这两项决议未经表决获得通过；如果协商一致意见体现出所有缔约国接受上述声明所载的解释，则这些决议反映了第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项所称的嗣后协定。 |
| (14) The pronouncement of the Committee
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in its general comment No. 15
(2002), according to which articles 11 and 12 of that Covenant imply a human
right to water, offers another illustration of the way in which an agreement
of the parties may come about. | (14) 经济、社会、文化权利委员会第15(2002)号一般性意见中的声明指出，《公约》第十一条和第十二条隐指与水有关的人权， 这是反映缔约方可能借以达成协议的方式的另一个例子。 |
| After a debate over a number of years,
the General Assembly on 17 December 2015 adopted a resolution, without a
vote, that defines the human right to safe drinking water by using the
language that the Committee employed in its general comment No. 15 in order
to interpret the right. | 在经过数年辩论之后，联大2015年12月17日未经表决通过了一项决议，使用经济、社会、文化权利委员会第15号一般性意见中为了解释获得安全饮用水的人权而采用的措辞界定了这项权利。 |
| That resolution may refer to an agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b), depending on whether the consensus
constituted the acceptance by all parties of the interpretation that is
contained in the pronouncement. | 该项决议可能指向第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项所称的协定，取决于协商一致意见是否体现出所有缔约方都接受该项声明中的解释。 |
| (15) Other General Assembly resolutions
explicitly refer to pronouncements of expert treaty bodies or call upon
States to take into account the recommendations, observations and general
comments of relevant treaty bodies to the topic on the implementation of the
related treaties. | (15) 大会其他决议明文提及专家条约机构的声明 或呼吁国家考虑有关条约机构对相关条约执行情况的建议、评论和一般性意见。 |
| Resolutions of Conferences of States
Parties may do the same, as with regard to recommendations of the Compliance
Committee under the Aarhus Convention. | 缔约国会议的决议，以及《奥胡斯公约》遵约委员会的建议也可以这样做。 |
| Such resolutions should, however, be
approached with caution before reaching any conclusion as to whether they
imply a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice of the parties under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b). | 不过，在断定这类决议是否意味着第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项下的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例之前，必须谨慎对待这类决议。 |
| (16) Even if a pronouncement of an expert
treaty body does not give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or a
subsequent practice that establishes the agreement of all parties to a
treaty, it may be relevant for the identification of other subsequent
practice under article 32 that does not establish such agreement. | (16) 即使专家条约机构的声明不产生或提及确立条约所有缔约方一致意思的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例，也可以有助于识别第三十二条意义下、不确立这类一致意思的其他嗣后惯例。 |
| There are, for example, resolutions of
the Human Rights Council that refer to general comments of the Human Rights
Committee or of the Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. | 例如，人权理事会的一些决议提到了人权事务委员会或经济、社会及文化权利委员会的一般性意见。 |
| Even if the membership of the Council is
limited, such resolutions may be relevant for the interpretation of a treaty
as expressing other subsequent practice under article 32. | 即使人权理事会成员数目有限，这些决议也可以通过表明第三十二条意义下的其他嗣后惯例，有助于条约的解释。 |
| Another example concerns the
International Narcotics Control Board. | 另一个例子涉及国际麻醉品管制局。 |
| A number of States have engaged in
subsequent practice under article 32 by disagreeing with the proposals of the
Board regarding the establishment of so-called safe injection rooms and other
harm reduction measures, criticizing the Board for following too rigid an
interpretation of the drug conventions and as acting beyond its mandate. | 一些国家通过反对麻管局关于设立所谓安全注射室以及其他减少危害措施的建议， 批评麻管局过于死板地解释禁毒公约并越权行事，
参与了第三十二条意义下的嗣后惯例。 |
| (17) Paragraph 3, first sentence,
circumscribes the ways in which a pronouncement by an expert treaty body may
be relevant for subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of parties to a
treaty by using the terms “may give rise to” and “or refer to”. | (17) 第3段第1句通过“可产生”和“或提及”这两个词限定了专家条约机构的声明可以如何与条约缔约方的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例相关。 |
| The expression “may
give rise to” addresses situations in which a
pronouncement comes first and the practice and the possible agreement of the
parties occur thereafter. | “可产生”这一表述涉及先有声明、而后出现惯例和可能的协定的情况。 |
| In this situation, the pronouncement may
serve as a catalyst for the subsequent practice of States parties. | 在这种情况下，声明可以作为缔约国嗣后惯例的催化剂。 |
| The term “refer
to”, on the other hand, covers situations in which
the subsequent practice and a possible agreement of the parties have
developed before the pronouncement, and where the pronouncement is only an
indication of such an agreement or practice. | “提及”一词则涵盖先有缔约方的嗣后惯例和可能的嗣后协定、后有声明的情况，在这种情况下，声明只是指向这类协议或惯例。 |
| Paragraph 3 uses the term “refer to” rather than “reflect” in order to make clear that any
subsequent practice or agreement of the parties is not comprised in the
pronouncement itself. | 第3段用了“提及”而不是“反映”，是为了明确表示缔约方的任何嗣后惯例或协定并非包含于声明本身之中。 |
| This term does not, however, require that
the pronouncement refer to such subsequent practice or agreement explicitly. | 不过，“提及”一词并不要求声明明文提及这类嗣后惯例或协定。 |
| Paragraph 3, second sentence — presumption against silence as constituting acceptance | 第3段第二句――沉默不应推定为接受 |
| (18) An agreement of all the parties to a
treaty, or even only a large part of them, regarding the interpretation that
is articulated in a pronouncement is often only conceivable if the absence of
objections could be taken as agreement by State parties that have remained
silent. | (18) 通常，只有当没有异议可以视为保持沉默的缔约国的同意时，才能认为条约所有缔约方，甚至只是大部分缔约方对声明中表述的解释达成一致意见。 |
| Draft conclusion 10 [9], paragraph 2,
provides, as a general rule: “Silence on the part of
one or more parties can constitute acceptance of the subsequent practice when
the circumstances call for some reaction. ” | 结论草案10 [9]第2段作为一般规则规定：“在有关情况要求作出某种反应时，一个或多个缔约方的沉默可构成对嗣后惯例的接受。” |
| Paragraph 3, second sentence, does not
purport to recognize an exception to this general rule, but rather intends to
specify and apply this rule to the typical cases of pronouncements of expert
bodies. | 第3段第2句不是要确认上述一般规则的例外情况，而是为了对典型的专家机构声明阐明和适用该一般规则。 |
| (19) This means, in particular, that it
cannot usually be expected that States parties take a position with respect
to every pronouncement by an expert treaty body, be it addressed to another
State or to all States generally. | (19) 这尤其意味着，通常不能指望缔约国就专家条约机构的每一项声明表明立场，不论是针对另一个国家的声明，还是针对所有国家的普遍声明。 |
| On the other hand, State parties may have
an obligation, under a duty to cooperate under certain treaties, to take into
account and to react to a pronouncement of an expert treaty body that is
specifically addressed to them, or to individual communications regarding
their own conduct. | 另一方面，根据某些条约规定的合作义务，缔约国可能有义务对专家条约机构专门针对它们的声明 或关于其行为的单独来文加以考虑并作出反应。 |
| Paragraph 4 —
without prejudice to other contribution | 第4段――不妨碍其他贡献 |
| (20) Apart from possibly giving rise to,
or referring to, subsequent agreements or subsequent practice of the parties
themselves under articles 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), and 32, pronouncements
by expert treaty bodies may also otherwise contribute to, and thus be
relevant for, the interpretation of a treaty. | (20) 除了可能产生或提及第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项及第三十二条所称的缔约方本身的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例，专家条约机构的声明还可能以其他方式有助于条约的解释，从而对条约的解释具有意义。 |
| Paragraph 4 addresses this possibility by
way of a without prejudice clause. | 第4段以“不妨碍”条款处理了这种可能。 |
| The term “otherwise” is, however, not used because the Commission attaches less
importance to contributions by expert treaty bodies to the interpretation of
a treaty other than those that are described in paragraph 3. | 然而，使用“以其他方式”一词，并不是因为委员会认为专家条约机构对条约解释的帮助不及第3段所述其他资料重要。 |
| (21) The International Court of Justice
has confirmed, in particular in the Ahmadou Sadio Diallo case, that
pronouncements of the Human Rights Committee are relevant for the purpose of
the interpreting of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
irrespective of whether such pronouncements give rise to, or refer to, an
agreement of the parties under article 31, paragraph 3: | (21) 国际法院已经确认，尤其是在艾哈迈杜 •萨迪奥 •迪亚洛案中确认，人权事务委员会的声明对于解释《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》具有意义，无论此类声明是否产生或提及第三十一条第三款所称的缔约方协定： |
| “Since it was created, the Human Rights
Committee has built up a considerable body of interpretative case law, in
particular through its findings in response to the individual communications
which may be submitted to it in respect of States parties to the first
Optional Protocol, and in the form of ‘General
Comments’. | “自设立以来，人权事务委员会已积累了大量解释性案例法，主要是就其收到的针对《第一任择议定书》缔约国的个人来文做出的调查结果，以及以“一般性意见”的形式。 |
| “Although the Court is in no way obliged,
in the exercise of its judicial functions, to model its own interpretation of
the Covenant on that of the Committee, it believes that it should ascribe
great weight to the interpretation adopted by this independent body that was
established specifically to supervise the application of that treaty.” | “虽然本院在行使其司法职能时绝无义务以委员会的解释作为自己对《公约》的解释的模式，但本院认为，应极为重视为监督该条约的适用而专门设立的这一独立机构所做的解释。” |
| (22) Regional human rights courts have
also used pronouncements of expert treaty bodies as an aid for the
interpretation of treaties that they are called on to apply. | (22) 区域人权法院也曾使用专家条约机构的声明，帮助解释其被要求适用的条约。 |
| Many domestic courts consider that
pronouncements of expert treaty bodies under human rights treaties, while not
being legally binding on them as such, nevertheless “deserve
to be given considerable weight in determining the meaning of a relevant
right and the determination of a violation”. | 许多国内法院认为，人权条约所设专家条约机构的声明，虽然本身不具法律约束力， 但是“在确定相关权利的含义和确定违约行为时，值得给予相当的重视”。 |
| (23) The Commission itself, in its
commentary to the Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, addressed
the question of the relevance of pronouncements of expert treaty bodies under
human rights treaties with respect to reservations. | (23) 国际法委员会本身在《对条约的保留实践指南》 的评注中论述了人权条约所设专家条约机构的声明对于保留所具有的意义问题。 |
| (24) Court decisions have not always
fully explained the relevance of pronouncements by expert treaty bodies for
the purpose of the interpretation of a treaty, be it in terms of the rules of
interpretation under the Vienna Convention or otherwise. | (24) 各个法院的判决并没有总是充分解释专家条约机构的声明对于条约解释的意义，无论是按照《维也纳公约》的解释规则，还是以其他方式解释。 |
| The Commission has considered the
following alternatives (paragraphs (25) and (26) below). | 委员会考虑了以下备选办法(下文第(25)和第(26)段)。 |
| (25) Some members consider that
pronouncements of expert treaty bodies are a form of practice that may
contribute to the interpretation of a treaty, relying, inter alia, on the
Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory, where the International Court of Justice
referred to the “constant practice of the Human
Rights Committee” in order to support its own
interpretation of a provision of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. | (25) 一些委员认为，专家条约机构的声明是一种可能有助于条约解释的惯例，他们依据的是，除其他外，关于“在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果”的咨询意见。
国际法院在这份咨询意见中提及“人权事务委员会的一贯做法”，以支持法院对《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》一项条款的解释。 |
| Those members consider that international
and domestic courts mostly use pronouncements of expert treaty bodies in the
discretionary way in which article 32 describes supplementary means of
interpretation. | 这些委员认为，国际法院和国内法院使用专家条约机构的声明，主要是以第三十二条在描述补充的解释资料时所采取的酌情处理的方式。 |
| In addition, pronouncements of expert
treaty bodies could, as practice under the treaty, also “contribute to the determination of the ordinary meaning of the
terms in their context and in light of the object and purpose of the treaty”. | 此外，专家条约机构的声明作为条约下的惯例，还能“有助于确定术语在其上下文并参照条约目的和宗旨的一般含义”。 |
| These members consider also that draft
conclusion 12 [11], paragraph 3, could help to resolve the question, as the
practice of both an international organization in the application of its own
instrument and a pronouncement of an expert treaty body have in common that,
while they are both not practice of a party to the treaty, they are
nevertheless conduct mandated by the treaty the purpose of which is to
contribute to the treaty’s proper application. | 这些委员还认为，结论草案12 [11]第3段可有助于解决这一问题， 因为国际组织适用其组成文书的惯例和专家条约机构的声明具有以下共同点：虽然它们都不是条约缔约方的实践，但它们是由条约授权的行为，其目的在于促进对条约的正确适用。 |
| (26) Other members consider that
pronouncements of expert treaty bodies are not, as such, a form of practice
in the sense of the present topic. | (26) 其他委员认为，就本专题的含义而言，专家条约机构的声明本身不属于一种形式的惯例。 |
| It was pointed out that draft conclusion
4, paragraph 3, provides that “other subsequent
practice consists of conduct by one or more parties in the application of the
treaty, after its conclusion”, and that the topic was
therefore restricted to practice by the parties themselves. | 他们指出，结论草案4第3段规定，“其他嗣后惯例是指条约缔结后一个或多个缔约方适用条约的行为”，
因此，本专题仅限于缔约方本身的实践。 |
| It was also suggested that pronouncements
of expert treaty bodies could not simultaneously be a form of application of
the treaty and perform a monitoring function. | 他们还提出，专家条约机构的声明不可能同时既作为适用条约的形式，又行使监测职能。 |
| According to those members, the Diallo
judgment of the International Court of Justice suggested that the mandate and
the function of expert treaty bodies, like that of courts, was to supervise
the application of the treaty, not to serve themselves as a means of
interpretation. | 这些委员认为，国际法院对迪亚洛案的判决表明，专家条约机构的任务和职能类似于法院，是监督条约的适用，而不是本身作为一种解释条约的手段。 |
| (27) Ultimately, the Commission decided
to limit itself, for the time being, to formulating, in paragraph 4 of draft
conclusion 13 [12], a without prejudice clause. | (27) 委员会最终决定，目前仅在结论草案13[12]第4段中制订一项“不妨碍”条款。 |
| The matter may be taken up again on
second reading, in light of the views expressed by States. | 二读时可以参考各国表达的意见，再次讨论这一事项。 |
| Chapter VII | 第七章 |
| Crimes against humanity | 危害人类罪 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 77. At its sixty-sixth session (2014),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Crimes
against humanity” in its programme of work and
appointed Mr. Sean D. Murphy as Special Rapporteur for the topic. | 77. 委员会第六十六届会议(2014年)决定将“危害人类罪”专题列入工作方案，并任命肖恩 •墨菲先生为该专题特别报告员。 |
| The General Assembly, in paragraph 7 of
its resolution 69/118 of 10 December 2014, subsequently took note of the
decision of the Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会随后在2014年12月10日第69/118号决议第7段中注意到，委员会决定将此专题列入其工作方案。 |
| 78. At its sixty-seventh session (2015),
the Commission considered the first report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/680) and provisionally adopted four draft articles and commentaries
thereto. | 78. 在第六十七届会议(2015年)上，委员会审议了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/680)，并暂时通过了四条条款草案及其评注。 |
| It also requested the Secretariat to
prepare a memorandum providing information on existing treaty-based
monitoring mechanisms that may be of relevance to its future work on the present
topic. | 委员会还请秘书处编写一份备忘录，提供可能与此专题今后工作有关的现有条约监督机制的资料。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 79. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the second report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/690), as well as the memorandum by the Secretariat providing
information on existing treaty-based monitoring mechanisms that may be of
relevance to the future work of the International Law Commission
(A/CN.4/698), which were considered at its 3296th to 3301st meetings, from 11
to 19 May 2016. | 79. 在本届会议上，委员会收到特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/690)以及提供可能与国际法委员会今后工作有关的现有条约监督机制方面资料的秘书处备忘录(A/CN.4/698)，在2016年5月11日至19日举行的第3296至第3301次会议上审议了该报告和备忘录。 |
| 80. In his second report, the Special
Rapporteur addressed criminalization under national law (chap.I);
establishment of national jurisdiction (chap. II); general investigation and
cooperation for identifying alleged offenders (chap. III); exercise of
national jurisdiction when an alleged offender is present (chap. IV); aut
dedere aut judicare (chap. V); fair treatment of an alleged offender (chap.
VI); and the future programme of work on the topic (chap. VII). | 80. 特别报告员在第二次报告中阐述了：在国内法中定为犯罪(第一章)；确定国家管辖权(第二章)；开展一般性调查与合作以查明被指控罪犯(第三章)；被指控罪犯所在地行使国家管辖权(第四章)；引渡或审判(第五章)；公平对待被指控罪犯(第六章)；今后工作方案(第七章)。 |
| The Special Rapporteur proposed six draft
articles corresponding to the issues addressed in chapters I to VI,
respectively. | 特别报告员分别针对第一章至第六章所述问题，相应地提出了六项条款草案。 |
| 81. At its 3301st meeting, on 19 May
2016, the Commission referred draft articles 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, as
contained in the Special Rapporteur’s second report,
to the Drafting Committee. | 81. 委员会在2016年5月19日举行的第3301次会议上，将特别报告员第二次报告所载第5、第6、第7、第8、第9和第10条草案转交起草委员会。 |
| It also requested the Drafting Committee
to consider the question of the criminal responsibility of legal persons on
the basis of a concept paper to be prepared by the Special Rapporteur. | 委员会还请起草委员会根据特别报告员将编写的概念文件审议法人刑事责任问题。 |
| 82. At its 3312th and 3325th meetings, on
9 June and 21 July 2016 respectively, the Commission considered two reports
of the Drafting Committee and provisionally adopted draft articles 5 to 10
(see section C.1 below). | 82. 委员会在分别于2016年6月9日和7月21日举行的第3312次和第3325次会议上，审议了起草委员会的两份报告，并暂时通过了第5至第10条草案(见下文C.1节)。 |
| 83. At its 3341st meeting, on 9 August
2016, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft articles
provisionally adopted at the current session (see section C.2 below). | 83. 委员会在2016年8月9日举行的第3341次会议上，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 crimes
against humanity provisionally adopted so far by the Commission | C. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的关于危害人类罪的条款草案案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft articles | 1. 条款草案案文 |
| 84. The text of the draft articles provisionally
adopted so far by the Commission is reproduced below. | 84. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的条款草案案文载录如下。 |
| Article 1 | 第1条 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| The present draft articles apply to the
prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. | 本条款草案适用于防止和惩治危害人类罪。 |
| Article 2 | 第2条 |
| General obligation | 一般义务 |
| Crimes against humanity, whether or not
committed in time of armed conflict, are crimes under international law,
which States undertake to prevent and punish. | 危害人类罪，不论是否发生于武装冲突之时，均系国际法上的罪行，各国承允防止并惩治之。 |
| Article 3 | 第3条 |
| Definition of crimes against humanity | 危害人类罪的定义 |
| 1. For the purpose of the present draft
articles, “crime against humanity” means any of the following acts when committed as part of a
widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population,
with knowledge of the attack: | 1. 为了本条款草案的目的，“危害人类罪”是指在广泛或有系统地针对任何平民人口进行的攻击中，在明知这一攻击的情况下，作为攻击的一部分而实施的下列任何一种行为： |
| (a) Murder; | (a) 谋杀； |
| (b) Extermination; | (b) 灭绝； |
| (c) Enslavement; | (c) 奴役； |
| (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of
population; | (d) 驱逐出境或强行迁移人口； |
| (e) Imprisonment or other severe
deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of
international law; | (e) 违反国际法基本规则，监禁或以其他方式严重剥夺人身自由； |
| (f) Torture; | (f) 酷刑； |
| (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced
prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of
sexual violence of comparable gravity; | (g) 强奸、性奴役、强迫卖淫、强迫怀孕、强迫绝育或严重程度相当的任何其他形式的性暴力； |
| (h) Persecution against any identifiable
group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural,
religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are
universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in
connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or in connection with
the crime of genocide or war crimes; | (h) 基于政治、种族、民族、族裔、文化、宗教、第3款所界定的性别或公认为国际法不容的其他理由，对任何可以识别的群体或集体进行的迫害，且与本款提及的任何一种行为有关，或与灭绝种族罪行或战争罪行有关； |
| (i) Enforced disappearance of persons; | (i) 强迫人员失踪； |
| (j) The crime of apartheid; | (j) 种族隔离罪； |
| (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar
character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or
to mental or physical health. | (k) 故意造成重大痛苦，或对人体或身心健康造成严重伤害的其他性质相同的不人道行为。 |
| 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: | 2. 为了第1款的目的： |
| (a) “Attack
directed against any civilian population” means a
course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in
paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of
a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; | (a) “针对任何平民人口进行的攻击”是指根据国家或组织攻击平民人口的政策，或为了推行这种政策，针对任何平民人口多次实施第1款所述行为的行为过程； |
| (b) “Extermination” includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter
alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring
about the destruction of part of a population; | (b) “灭绝”包括故意施加某种生活状况，如断绝粮食和药品来源，目的是毁灭部分的人口； |
| (c) “Enslavement” means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the
right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in
the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; | (c) “奴役”是指对人行使附属于所有权的任何或一切权力，包括在贩卖人口，特别是贩卖妇女和儿童的过程中行使这种权力； |
| (d) “Deportation
or forcible transfer of population” means forced
displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts
from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted
under international law; | (d) “驱逐出境或强行迁移人口”是指在缺乏国际法容许的理由的情况下，以驱逐或其他胁迫行为，强迫有关的人迁离其合法留在的地区； |
| (e) “Torture” means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering,
whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control
of the accused, except that torture shall not include pain or suffering
arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; | (e) “酷刑”是指故意致使在被告人羁押或控制下的人的身体或精神遭受重大痛苦；但酷刑不应包括纯因合法制裁而引起的，或这种制裁所固有或附带的痛苦； |
| (f) “Forced
pregnancy” means the unlawful confinement of a woman
forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition
of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international
law. | (f) “强迫怀孕”是指以影响任何人口的族裔构成的目的，或以进行其他严重违反国际法的行为的目的，非法禁闭被强迫怀孕的妇女。 |
| This definition shall not in any way be
interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy; | 本定义不得以任何方式解释为影响国内关于妊娠的法律； |
| (g) “Persecution” means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental
rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group
or collectivity; | (g) “迫害”是指违反国际法规定，针对某一群体或集体的特性，故意和严重地剥夺基本权利； |
| (h) “The crime of
apartheid” means inhumane acts of a character similar
to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an
institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one
racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the
intention of maintaining that regime; | (h) “种族隔离罪”是指一个种族群体对任何其他一个或多个种族群体，在一个有计划地实行压迫和统治的体制化制度下，实施性质与第1款所述行为相同的不人道行为，目的是维持该制度的存在； |
| (i) “Enforced
disappearance of persons” means the arrest, detention
or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or
acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal
to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate
or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the
protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. | (i) “强迫人员失踪”是指国家或政治组织直接地，或在其同意、支持或默许下，逮捕、羁押或绑架人员，继而拒绝承认这种剥夺自由的行为，或拒绝透露有关人员的命运或下落，目的是将其长期置于法律保护之外。 |
| 3. For the purpose of the present draft
articles, it is understood that the term “gender” refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of
society. | 3. 为了本条款草案目的，“性别”一词应被理解为是指社会上的男女两性。 |
| The term “gender” does not indicate any meaning different from the above. | “性别”一词仅反映上述意思。 |
| 4. This draft article is without
prejudice to any broader definition provided for in any international
instrument or national law. | 4. 本条草案不妨碍任何国际文书或国内法规定的任何更为宽泛的定义。 |
| Article 4 | 第4条 |
| Obligation of prevention | 预防义务 |
| 1. Each State undertakes to prevent
crimes against humanity, in conformity with international law, including
through: | 1. 每一国家承诺按照国际法防止危害人类罪，办法包括： |
| (a) effective legislative,
administrative, judicial or other preventive measures in any territory under
its jurisdiction or control; and | (a) 在其管辖或控制的任何领土内采取有效的立法、行政、司法或其他预防措施； |
| (b) cooperation with other States,
relevant intergovernmental organizations, and, as appropriate, other
organizations. | (b) 与其他国家和有关政府间组织合作，并酌情与其他组织合作。 |
| 2. No exceptional circumstances
whatsoever, such as armed conflict, internal political instability or other
public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of crimes against
humanity. | 2. 任何特殊情况，诸如武装冲突、国内政局动荡、任何其他公共紧急状态等，均不得援引为施行危害人类罪的理由。 |
| Article 5 | 第5条 |
| Criminalization under national law | 在国内法中定为刑事犯罪 |
| 1. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that crimes against humanity constitute offences under its
criminal law. | 1. 各国应采取必要措施，确保国家刑法规定危害人类罪构成犯罪。 |
| 2. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that the following acts are offences under its criminal
law: | 2. 各国应采取必要措施，确保国家刑法把下列行为定为犯罪： |
| (a) committing a crime against humanity; | (a) 实施危害人类罪行； |
| (b) attempting to commit such a crime; and | (b) 企图实施这种罪行； |
| (c) ordering, soliciting, inducing,
aiding, abetting or otherwise assisting in or contributing to the commission
or attempted commission of such a crime. | (c) 命令、怂恿、引诱、协助、教唆或以其他方式帮助或促成实施或企图实施这种罪行。 |
| 3. Each State shall also take the necessary
measures to ensure that the following are offences under its criminal law: | 3. 各国还应采取必要措施，确保国家刑法将下列行为定为犯罪： |
| (a) a military commander or person
effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible
for crimes against humanity committed by forces under his or her effective
command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be,
as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such
forces, where: | (a) 军事指挥官或实际上以军事指挥官身份行事的人，如果未对在其实际上指挥和控制下的部队，或在其实际上管辖和控制下的部队适当行使控制，在下列情况下，应对这些部队实施的危害人类罪行负刑事责任： |
| (i) that military commander or person
either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known
that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and | (一) 该军事指挥官或该人知道，或者由于当时的情况理应知道，部队正在实施或即将实施这些犯罪； |
| (ii) that military commander or person
failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power
to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the
competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. | (二) 该军事指挥官或该人未采取在其权力范围内的一切必要而合理的措施，防止或制止这些犯罪的实施，或报请主管当局就此事进行调查和起诉。 |
| (b) With respect to superior and
subordinate relationships not described in subparagraph (a), a superior shall
be criminally responsible for crimes against humanity committed by subordinates
under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her
failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: | (b) 对于(a)项未述及的上下级关系，上级人员如果未对在其实际上管辖或控制下的下级人员适当行使控制，在下列情况下，应对这些下级人员实施的危害人类罪负刑事责任： |
| (i) the superior either knew, or
consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the
subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; | (一) 该上级人员知道下级人员正在实施或即将实施这些犯罪，或故意不理会明确反映这一情况的情报； |
| (ii) the crimes concerned activities that
were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and | (二) 犯罪涉及该上级人员实际上负责和控制的活动； |
| (iii) the superior failed to take all
necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or
repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities
for investigation and prosecution. | (三) 该上级人员未采取在其权力范围内的一切必要而合理的措施，防止或制止这些犯罪的实施，或报请主管当局就此事进行调查和起诉。 |
| 4. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that, under its criminal law, the fact that an offence
referred to in this draft article was committed pursuant to an order of a
Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, is not a ground
for excluding criminal responsibility of a subordinate. | 4. 各国应采取必要措施确保国家刑法规定，依照政府或者军事或文职上级的命令实施本条款草案所述罪行的事实不成为免除下级刑事责任的理由。 |
| 5. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that, under its criminal law, the offences referred to in
this draft article shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. | 5. 各国应采取必要措施确保国家刑法规定，本条款草案所述罪行不应受到任何时效限制。 |
| 6. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that, under its criminal law, the offences referred to in
this draft article shall be punishable by appropriate penalties that take
into account their grave nature. | 6. 各国应采取必要措施确保国家刑法规定，对本条款草案所述罪行，应考虑到罪行的严重性，处以适当的惩罚。 |
| 7. Subject to the provisions of its
national law, each State shall take measures, where appropriate, to establish
the liability of legal persons for the offences referred to in this draft
article. | 7. 在不违反本国法律规定的情况下，每个国家应酌情采取适当措施确定法人对本条草案所指罪行的责任。 |
| Subject to the legal principles of the
State, such liability of legal persons may be criminal, civil or
administrative. | 在不违反本国法律原则的情况下，可将法人的这一责任定为刑事、民事或行政责任。 |
| Article 6 | 第6条 |
| Establishment of national jurisdiction | 确立国家管辖权 |
| 1. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in draft
article 5 in the following cases: | 1. 各国应采取必要措施，确立在下列情况下对第5条草案所述罪行的管辖权： |
| (a) when the offence is committed in any
territory under its jurisdiction or on board a ship or aircraft registered in
that State; | (a) 罪行发生在该国管辖的任何领土内，或发生在该国注册的船只或飞机上； |
| (b) when the alleged offender is a
national of that State or, if that State considers it appropriate, a
stateless person who is habitually resident in that State’s territory; | (b) 被控罪犯为该国国民，或该国认为应予管辖的、惯常在该国领土内居住的无国籍人； |
| (c) when the victim is a national of that
State if that State considers it appropriate. | (c) 受害人为该国国民，而该国认为应予管辖。 |
| 2. Each State shall also take the
necessary measures to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred
to in draft article 5 in cases where the alleged offender is present in any
territory under its jurisdiction and it does not extradite or surrender the
person in accordance with the present draft articles. | 2. 各国还应采取必要措施，在被指控罪犯处于其管辖的任何领土内，而且本国不按照本条款草案予以引渡或移交的情况下，确立对第5条草案所述罪行的管辖权。 |
| 3. The present draft articles do not
exclude the exercise of any criminal jurisdiction established by a State in
accordance with its national law. | 3. 本条款草案不排除一国行使根据其国内法确立的任何刑事管辖权。 |
| Article 7 | 第7条 |
| Investigation | 调查 |
| Each State shall ensure that its
competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation
whenever there is reasonable ground to believe that acts constituting crimes
against humanity have been or are being committed in any territory under its
jurisdiction. | 各国应确保在有合理依据认为在其管辖的任何领土内已经或正在发生构成危害人类罪行的行为时，其主管当局立即进行公正的调查。 |
| Article 8 | 第8条 |
| Preliminary measures when an alleged
offender is present | 当被指控罪犯在境内时的初步措施 |
| 1. Upon being satisfied, after an
examination of information available to it, that the circumstances so
warrant, any State in the territory under whose jurisdiction a person alleged
to have committed any offence referred to in draft article 5 is present shall
take the person into custody or take other legal measures to ensure his or
her presence. | 1. 任何国家，如果被指控犯有第5条草案所述任何罪行的人在其管辖下的领土之内，经审查所获情报后认为根据情况有此必要，应将该人拘押或采取其他法律措施确保该人留在境内。 |
| The custody and other legal measures
shall be as provided in the law of that State, but may be continued only for
such time as is necessary to enable any criminal, extradition or surrender
proceedings to be instituted. | 拘押和其他法律措施应符合该国法律的规定，但延续时间只限于提起任何刑事、引渡或移交程序所需的时间。 |
| 2. Such State shall immediately make a
preliminary inquiry into the facts. | 2. 该国应立即对事实进行初步调查。 |
| 3. When a State, pursuant to this draft
article, has taken a person into custody, it shall immediately notify the States
referred to in draft article 6, paragraph 1, of the fact that such person is
in custody and of the circumstances which warrant his or her detention. | 3. 如一国根据本条草案将某人拘押，则应立即向第6条草案第1款所述各国通知该人受到拘押的事实和拘留该人之所以必要的情况。 |
| The State which makes the preliminary inquiry
contemplated in paragraph 2 of this draft article shall promptly report its
findings to the said States and shall indicate whether it intends to exercise
jurisdiction. | 本条草案第2款所述进行初步调查的国家应立即向所述有关各国通报调查结果，并表明是否有意行使管辖权。 |
| Article 9 | 第9条 |
| Aut dedere aut judicare | 引渡或审判 |
| The State in the territory under whose
jurisdiction the alleged offender is present shall submit the case to its
competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, unless it extradites or
surrenders the person to another State or competent international criminal
tribunal. | 被指控罪犯在其管辖下的领土之内的国家，应将该案提交主管当局以便起诉，除非该国将犯罪人引渡或移交另一国家或主管国际刑事法庭。 |
| Those authorities shall take their
decision in the same manner as in the case of any other offence of a grave
nature under the law of that State. | 这些当局应以处理该国法律定为性质严重的任何其他罪行的相同方式作出决定。 |
| Article 10 | 第10条 |
| Fair treatment of the alleged offender | 公平对待被指控罪犯 |
| 1. Any person against whom measures are
being taken in connection with an offence referred to in draft article 5
shall be guaranteed at all stages of the proceedings fair treatment,
including a fair trial, and full protection of his or her rights under
applicable national and international law, including human rights law. | 1. 任何因第5条草案所述罪行而被采取法律措施的人，在诉讼的所有阶段应保障其公平待遇，包括公平审判，并应充分保护该人按照适用的国内法和国际法、包括人权法所具有的各项权利。 |
| 2. Any such person who is in prison,
custody or detention in a State that is not of his or her nationality shall
be entitled: | 2. 在非本人国籍国的监狱、扣押或拘留中的任何此类人员应有权： |
| (a) to communicate without delay with the
nearest appropriate representative of the State or States of which such
person is a national or which is otherwise entitled to protect that person’s rights or, if such person is a stateless person, of the State
which, at that person’s request, is willing to
protect that person’s rights; | (a) 立即联络下述国家的距离最近的适当代表：其国籍国或有权保护其权利的其他国家，如此人为无国籍人员，则为经其请求而愿意保护其权利的国家； |
| (b) to be visited by a representative of
that State or those States; and | (b) 接受此类国家代表的探视； |
| (c) to be informed without delay of his
or her rights under this paragraph. | (c) 立即被告知其根据本款所享有的权利。 |
| 3. The rights referred to in paragraph 2
shall be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the State
in the territory under whose jurisdiction the person is present, subject to
the proviso that the said laws and regulations must enable full effect to be
given to the purpose for which the rights accorded under paragraph 2 are
intended. | 3. 第2款所述各项权利的行使应符合该人所在领土管辖国的法律和规章，但所述法律和规章必须能使第2款所规定权利的预期目的得到充分落实。 |
| 2. Text of the draft articles and
commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its
sixty-eighth session | 2. 委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的条款草案案文及其评注 |
| 85. The text of the draft articles and
commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its
sixty-eighth session is reproduced below. | 85. 委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的条款草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Crimes against humanity | 危害人类罪 |
| Article 5 | 第5条 |
| Criminalization under national law | 在国内法中定为刑事犯罪 |
| 1. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that crimes against humanity constitute offences under its
criminal law. | 1. 各国应采取必要措施，确保国家刑法规定危害人类罪构成犯罪。 |
| 2. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that the following acts are offences under its criminal
law: | 2. 各国应采取必要措施，确保国家刑法把下列行为定为犯罪： |
| (a) committing a crime against humanity; | (a) 实施危害人类罪行； |
| (b) attempting to commit such a crime;
and | (b) 企图实施这种罪行； |
| (c) ordering, soliciting, inducing,
aiding, abetting or otherwise assisting in or contributing to the commission
or attempted commission of such a crime. | (c) 命令、怂恿、引诱、协助、教唆或以其他方式帮助或促成实施或企图实施这种罪行。 |
| 3. Each State shall also take the
necessary measures to ensure that the following are offences under its
criminal law: | 3. 各国还应采取必要措施，确保国家刑法将下列行为定为犯罪： |
| (a) a military commander or person
effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible
for crimes against humanity committed by forces under his or her effective
command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be,
as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such
forces, where: | (a) 军事指挥官或实际上以军事指挥官身份行事的人，如果未对在其实际上指挥和控制下的部队，或在其实际上管辖和控制下的部队适当行使控制，在下列情况下，应对这些部队实施的危害人类罪行负刑事责任： |
| (i) that military commander or person
either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known
that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and | (一) 该军事指挥官或该人知道，或者由于当时的情况理应知道，部队正在实施或即将实施这些犯罪； |
| (ii) that military commander or person
failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power
to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent
authorities for investigation and prosecution. | (二) 该军事指挥官或该人未采取在其权力范围内的一切必要而合理的措施，防止或制止这些犯罪的实施，或报请主管当局就此事进行调查和起诉。 |
| (b) With respect to superior and
subordinate relationships not described in subparagraph (a), a superior shall
be criminally responsible for crimes against humanity committed by
subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of
his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates,
where: | (b) 对于(a)项未述及的上下级关系，上级人员如果未对在其实际上管辖或控制下的下级人员适当行使控制，在下列情况下，应对这些下级人员实施的危害人类罪负刑事责任： |
| (i) the superior either knew, or
consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the
subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; | (一) 该上级人员知道下级人员正在实施或即将实施这些犯罪，或故意不理会明确反映这一情况的情报； |
| (ii) the crimes concerned activities that
were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and | (二) 犯罪涉及该上级人员实际上负责和控制的活动； |
| (iii) the superior failed to take all
necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or
repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities
for investigation and prosecution. | (三) 该上级人员未采取在其权力范围内的一切必要而合理的措施，防止或制止这些犯罪的实施，或报请主管当局就此事进行调查和起诉。 |
| 4. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that, under its criminal law, the fact that an offence
referred to in this draft article was committed pursuant to an order of a
Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, is not a ground
for excluding criminal responsibility of a subordinate. | 4. 各国应采取必要措施确保国家刑法规定，依照政府或者军事或文职上级的命令实施本条款草案所述罪行的事实不成为免除下级刑事责任的理由。 |
| 5. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that, under its criminal law, the offences referred to in
this draft article shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. | 5. 各国应采取必要措施确保国家刑法规定，本条款草案所述罪行不应受到任何时效限制。 |
| 6. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to ensure that, under its criminal law, the offences referred to in
this draft article shall be punishable by appropriate penalties that take
into account their grave nature. | 6. 各国应采取必要措施确保国家刑法规定，对本条款草案所述罪行，应考虑到罪行的严重性，处以适当的惩罚。 |
| 7. Subject to the provisions of its
national law, each State shall take measures, where appropriate, to establish
the liability of legal persons for the offences referred to in this draft
article. | 7. 在不违反本国法律规定的情况下，每个国家应酌情采取适当措施确定法人对本条草案所指罪行的责任。 |
| Subject to the legal principles of the
State, such liability of legal persons may be criminal, civil or
administrative. | 在不违反本国法律原则的情况下，可将法人的这一责任定为刑事、民事或行政责任。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 5 sets forth various
measures that each State must take under its criminal law to ensure that
crimes against humanity constitute offences, to preclude any superior orders
defence or any statute of limitation, and to provide for appropriate
penalties commensurate with the grave nature of such crimes. | (1) 第5条草案规定了各国为确保危害人类罪构成犯罪，排除以任何上级命令为借口或任何法定时效，实行与此类罪行严重性质相称的惩治而必须在国家刑法之下采取的各种措施。 |
| Measures of this kind are essential for
the proper functioning of the subsequent draft articles relating to the
establishment and exercise of jurisdiction over alleged offenders. | 对以下就被指控罪犯建立和行使管辖的相关条款草案的妥善运作而言，这类措施是至关重要的。 |
| Ensuring that “crimes
against humanity” are offences in national criminal
law | 确保国家刑法规定“危害人类罪”构成犯罪 |
| (2) The International Military Tribunal
at Nürnberg recognized the importance of punishing
individuals, inter alia, for crimes against humanity when it stated that: “Crimes against international law are committed by men, not by
abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit such crimes
can the provisions of international law be enforced. ” | (2) 纽伦堡国际军事法庭确认必须惩治犯有危害人类罪等罪行的个人，宣布：“犯下违反国际法罪行的是人，而不是抽象的实体，只有通过惩治犯有此种罪行的人才能够执行国际法的规定”。 |
| The Commission’s
1950 Principles of International Law recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal provided that:
“Any person who commits an act which constitutes a
crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to
punishment. ” | 委员会1950年“纽伦堡法庭宪章及法庭判决中所确认之原则”规定：“任何人所犯行为如构成国际法规定之罪行，则须为其承担责任并受到处罚”。 |
| The 1968 Convention on the
Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against
Humanity provided in its preamble that “the effective
punishment of … crimes against humanity is an
important element in the prevention of such crimes, the protection of human
rights and fundamental freedoms, the encouragement of confidence, the
furtherance of co-operation among peoples and the promotion of international
peace and security”. | 1968年《战争罪及危害人类罪不适用法定时效公约》序言部分宣布，“有效惩治…危害人类罪为防止此种罪行、保障人权与基本自由、鼓励信心、促进民族间合作、及增进国际和平与安全的一个重要因素”。 |
| The preamble to the Rome Statute affirms “that the most serious crimes of concern to the international
community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective
prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by
enhancing international cooperation”. | 《罗马规约》的序言申明，“对整个国际社会关注的最严重犯罪，绝不能听之任之不予处罚，为有效惩治罪犯，必须通过国家一级采取措施并加强国际合作”。 |
| (3) Many States have adopted laws on
crimes against humanity that provide for the prosecution of such crimes in
their national system. | (3) 很多国家通过了关于危害人类罪的法律，规定了国家制度中对此类罪行的惩治。 |
| The Rome Statute, in particular, has
inspired the enactment or revision of a number of national laws on crimes
against humanity that define such crimes in terms identical to or very
similar to the offence as defined in article 7 of that Statute. | 特别是在《罗马规约》的影响下，一些国家颁布或修订了关于危害人类罪的国家法律，以与《规约》第七条所述相同或非常相似的措辞界定了此种罪行。 |
| At the same time, many States have
adopted national laws that differ, sometimes significantly, from the
definition set forth in article 7. | 同时，也有很多国家通过了与《规约》第七条不同的本国法律，有些还有重大差异。 |
| Moreover, still other States have not
adopted any national law on crimes against humanity. | 另外，还有一些国家尚未就危害人类罪通过本国法律。 |
| Those States typically do have national criminal
laws that provide for punishment in some fashion of many of the individual
acts that, under certain circumstances, may constitute crimes against
humanity, such as murder, torture or rape. | 这些国家的刑法一般都对谋杀、酷刑、强奸等多种行为确实有某种形式的惩治规定，而此类行为在某些情况下可能构成危害人类罪。 |
| Yet those States have not criminalized
crimes against humanity as such and this lacuna may preclude prosecution and
punishment of the conduct, including in terms commensurate with the gravity
of the offence. | 然而，由于这些国家尚未将危害人类罪本身定为犯罪，这种空白可能会妨碍对犯罪行为进行起诉和惩治，包括与其严重性相称的起诉和惩治。 |
| (4) The 1984 Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention
against Torture) provides in article 4, paragraph 1, that: “Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences
under its criminal law. ” | (4) 1984年《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》(《禁止酷刑公约》)第4条第1款规定：“每一缔约国应保证将一切酷刑行为定为刑事罪行”。 |
| The Committee against Torture has
stressed the importance of fulfilling such an obligation so as to avoid
possible discrepancies between the crime as defined in the Convention and the
crime as it is addressed in national law: | 禁止酷刑委员会强调必须履行此项义务以避免《公约》中的定义与国内法中纳入的定义有重大差距： |
| “Serious discrepancies between the
Convention’s definition and that incorporated into
domestic law create actual or potential loopholes for impunity. | “《公约》中的定义如与国内法中纳入的定义有重大差距，就会出现实际或可能的漏洞，从而导致有罪不罚现象。 |
| In some cases, although similar language
may be used, its meaning may be qualified by domestic law or by judicial
interpretation and thus the Committee calls upon each State party to ensure
that all parts of its Government adhere to the definition set forth in the
Convention for the purpose of defining the obligations of the State.” | 在某些情况下，尽管用语也许相近，但国内法或司法解释可能对其含义做了限定，因此委员会要求每一缔约国确保政府所有部门都根据《公约》中的定义来界定国家义务”。 |
| (5) To help avoid such loopholes with
respect to crimes against humanity, draft article 5, paragraph 1, provides
that each State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that crimes
against humanity, as such, constitute offences under its criminal law. | (5) 为了帮助避免在危害人类罪问题上出现此类漏洞，第5条草案第1款规定各国应采取必要措施确保国家刑法规定危害人类罪本身构成犯罪。 |
| Draft article 5, paragraphs 2 and 3
(discussed below), then further obligate the State to criminalize certain
ways by which natural persons might engage in such crimes. | 第5条草案第2和3款(讨论如下)则进一步规定了国家在此类罪行为自然人以某些方式实施时将这些方式定为犯罪的义务。 |
| (6) Since the term “crimes against humanity” is defined in
draft article 3, paragraphs 1 to 3, the obligation set forth in draft article
5, paragraph 1, requires that the crimes so defined are made offences under
the State’s national criminal laws. | (6) 由于第3条草案第1至第3款界定了“危害人类罪”一词，第5条草案第1款规定的义务要求符合此种定义的罪行在国家的国内法中被定为犯罪。 |
| While there might be some deviations from
the exact language of draft article 3, paragraphs 1 to 3, so as to take
account of terminological or other issues specific to any given State, such
deviations should not result in qualifications or alterations that
significantly depart from the meaning of crimes against humanity as defined
in draft article 3, paragraphs 1 to 3. | 虽然为了照顾任何具体国家可能有特定的术语或其他问题，措辞上可能与第3条草案第1至第3款的确切用语有所偏离，但这种偏离不应当造成严重脱离第3条草案第1至第3款所界定的危害人类罪含义的限定或改变。 |
| The term “crimes
against humanity” used in draft article 5 (and in
subsequent draft articles), however, does not include the “without prejudice” clause contained in
draft article 3, paragraph 4. | 但是，第5条草案(及随后的各条款草案)中使用的“危害人类罪”一词并不包括第3条草案第4款具有的“不妨碍”条款。 |
| While that clause recognizes the
possibility of a broader definition of “crimes
against humanity” in any international instrument or
national law, for purposes of these draft articles the definition of “crimes against humanity” is limited to
draft article 3, paragraphs 1 to 3. | 该款承认在任何国际文书或国内法中“危害人类罪”可能具有更广泛的定义，但就本条款草案而言，“危害人类罪”的定义限于第3条草案第1至第3款的范围。 |
| (7) Like the Convention against Torture,
many treaties in the areas of international humanitarian law, human rights
and international criminal law require that a State party ensure that the
prohibited conduct is an “offence” or “punishable”
under its national law, though the exact wording of the obligation varies. | (7) 与《禁止酷刑公约》一样，国际人道主义法、人权和国际刑法领域中的很多条约都要求缔约各国确保被禁止的行为在国内法中被定为“犯罪”或“处以惩罚”的行为，尽管关于这方面义务的措辞有所不同。 |
| Some treaties, such as the 1948
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the
1949 Geneva Conventions, contain an obligation to enact “legislation”, but the Commission viewed it
appropriate to model draft article 5, paragraph 1, on more recent treaties,
such as the Convention against Torture. | 有些条约，如1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》 和1949年《日内瓦四公约》 载有颁布“立法”的义务，但委员会认为，以较为近期的条约如《禁止酷刑公约》作为第5条草案第1款的模板是恰当的。 |
| Committing, attempting to commit,
assisting in or contributing to a crime against humanity | 实施、企图实施、协助或促成危害人类罪 |
| (8) Draft article 5, paragraph 2,
provides that each State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that
certain ways by which natural persons might engage in crimes against humanity
are criminalized under national law, specifically: committing a crime against
humanity; attempting to commit such a crime; and ordering, soliciting,
inducing, aiding, abetting or otherwise assisting in or contributing to the
commission or attempted commission of such a crime. | (8) 第5条草案第2款规定，各国应采取必要措施确保自然人借以犯下危害人类罪的某些方式在国家法律中被定为犯罪，具体为：实施危害人类罪行，企图实施这种罪行，命令、怂恿、引诱、协助、教唆或以其他方式帮助或促成实施或企图实施这种罪行。 |
| (9) In the context of crimes against
humanity, a survey of both international instruments and national laws
suggests that various types (or modes) of individual criminal responsibility
are addressed. | (9) 考察表明，国际文书和国内法均就危害人类罪的各类(或各种形式)个人刑事责任作出了规定。 |
| First, all jurisdictions that have
criminalized “crimes against humanity” impose criminal responsibility upon a person who “commits” the offence (sometimes referred
to in national law as “direct” commission, as “perpetration” of the act or as being a “principal” in the commission of the act). | 首先，将“危害人类罪”定为犯罪的所有辖域，都规定“实施”罪行者(有的国内法称之为“直接”实施罪行者，有的称之为“犯下”罪行者，有的称之为实施罪行的“主犯”)。 |
| For example, the Nürnberg Charter provided jurisdiction for the International
Military Tribunal over “persons who, acting in the
interests of the European Axis countries, whether as individuals or as
members of organizations, committed any of the following crimes”. | 例如，《纽伦堡宪章》规定，国际军事法庭对“无论作为个人还是组织成员、为欧洲轴心国之利益行事而犯有任何下列罪行之人”具有管辖权。 |
| Likewise, the statutes of both the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda provide that a person who “committed” crimes against humanity “shall be individually responsible for the crime”. | 同样，《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》 和《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》 也规定，凡“实施”危害人类罪的人“应当为该项犯罪负个人责任”。 |
| The Rome Statute provides that: “A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court
shall be individually responsible and liable for punishment” and “a person shall be criminally
responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of
the Court if that person: (a) [c]ommits such a crime, whether as an
individual [or] jointly with another”. | 《罗马规约》规定，“实施本法院管辖权内的犯罪的人，应依照本规约的规定负个人责任，并受到处罚”，而且“有下列情形之一的人，应依照本规约的规定，对一项本法院管辖权内的犯罪负刑事责任，并受到处罚：(a) 单独[或]伙同他人，实施这一犯罪。 |
| Similarly, the instruments regulating the
Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East
Timor, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, the Supreme
Iraqi Criminal Tribunal and the Extraordinary African Chambers within the
Senegalese Judicial System all provide for the criminal responsibility of a
person who “commits” crimes
against humanity. National laws that address crimes against humanity
invariably criminalize the “commission” of such crimes. | 同样，塞拉利昂问题特别法庭、 东帝汶重罪特别审判分庭、 柬埔寨法院特别法庭、 伊拉克最高刑事法庭、 塞内加尔司法系统内的非洲特别法庭
的规约文书均规定，“实施”危害人类罪的人负有刑事责任。 |
| Treaties addressing other types of crimes
also invariably call upon States parties to adopt national laws proscribing “commission” of the offence. | 针对其他类型罪行的条约也一概要求缔约国通过禁止直接犯下相关罪行的国内法。 |
| For example, the 1948 Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide provides for individual
criminal responsibility for the “commission” of genocide. | 例如，1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》规定“实施”灭绝种族罪的须负个人刑事责任。 |
| (10) Second, all such national or
international jurisdictions, to one degree or another, also impose criminal
responsibility upon a person who participates in the offence in some way
other than “commission” of
the offence. | (10) 第二，所有这些国内或国际司法管辖机构在某种程度上也规定以“实施”罪行以外的方式参与罪行的人承担刑事责任。 |
| Such conduct may take the form of an “attempt” to commit the offence, or acting
as an “accessory” or “accomplice” to the offence or an attempted
offence. | 这种行为可能采取“企图”实施犯罪的形式，或作为犯罪行为或未遂犯罪行为的“从犯”或“共犯”。 |
| With respect to an “attempt” to commit the crime, the statutes
of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the Special Court for Sierra
Leone contain no provision for such responsibility. | 关于“企图”实施犯罪，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭、卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭和塞拉利昂问题特别法庭规约均没有对这类责任做出规定。 |
| In contrast, the Rome Statute provides
for the criminal responsibility of a person who attempts to commit the crime,
unless he or she abandons the effort or otherwise prevents completion of the
crime. | 相比之下，《国际刑事法院罗马规约》规定了企图实施犯罪者的刑事责任，除非此人放弃实施犯罪或以其他方式防止完成犯罪。 |
| In the Banda and Jerbo case, a pre-trial
chamber asserted that criminal responsibility for attempt “requires that, in the ordinary course of events, the perpetrator’s conduct [would] have resulted in the crime being completed, had
circumstances outside the perpetrator’s control not
intervened”. | 在班达和杰宝案中，预审分庭指出，对未遂罪承担刑事责任“的前提是：若非不受犯罪人控制的外部环境干预，则犯罪人的行为在正常情况下本来会导致完成犯罪。” |
| (11) Third, with respect to “accessorial” responsibility, such a
concept is addressed in international instruments through various terms, such
as “ordering”, “soliciting”, “inducing”, “instigating”, “inciting”, “aiding
and abetting”, “conspiracy to
commit”, “being an accomplice
to”, “participating in” or “joint criminal enterprise”. | (11) 第三，关于“从犯”的责任，国际文书通过各种不同的术语界定这一概念，如“命令”、“唆使”、“引诱”、“煽动”、“鼓动”、“伙同作案”、“进行共谋”、“作为共犯”、“参与”或“共同犯罪活动”。 |
| Thus, the statute of the International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia provides: “A person who planned, instigated, ordered, committed or otherwise
aided and abetted in the planning, preparation or execution of a crime
referred to in articles 2 to 5 of the present Statute, shall be individually
responsible for the crime. ” The statute of the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda uses virtually identical language. | 因此，《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》规定，“凡计划、教唆、命令、犯下或协助或煽动他人计划、准备或进行本规约第2至5条所指罪行的人应当为该项犯罪负个人责任”，《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》使用的措词几乎如出一辙。 |
| Both tribunals have convicted defendants
for participation in such offences within their respective jurisdictions. | 两个法庭均已就被告参与其各自管辖范围内的罪行将被告定罪。 |
| Similarly, the instruments regulating the
Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East
Timor, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, the Supreme
Iraqi Criminal Tribunal and the Extraordinary African Chambers within the Senegalese
Judicial System all provide for the criminal responsibility of a person who,
in one form or another, participates in the commission of crimes against
humanity. | 同样，塞拉利昂问题特别法庭、 东帝汶重罪特别审判分庭、 柬埔寨法院特别法庭、 伊拉克最高刑事法庭 和塞内加尔司法系统内的非洲特别法庭
的文书均规定，以任何形式参与实施危害人类罪的人负有刑事责任。 |
| (12) The Rome Statute provides for
criminal responsibility if the person commits “such a
crime … through another person”, if the person “[o]rders, solicits or
induces the commission of the crime which in fact occurs or is attempted”, if the person for “the purpose of
facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists
in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means
for its commission” or if the person in “any other way contributes to the commission or attempted
commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with common purpose”, subject to certain conditions. | (12) 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》规定，如果某人“通过…另一人实施这一犯罪”，如果此人“命令、唆使、引诱实施这一犯罪，而该犯罪事实上是既遂或未遂的”，如果此人“为了便利实施这一犯罪，帮助、教唆或以其他方式协助实施或企图实施这一犯罪，包括提供犯罪手段”，或如果此人在符合某些条件的情况下“以任何其他方式支助以共同目的行事的团伙实施或企图实施这一犯罪”，则应负刑事责任。 |
| The Commission decided to use the various
terms set forth in the Rome Statute as the basis for the terms used in draft
article 5, paragraph 2. | 委员会决定采用《罗马规约》中的各条措辞作为第5条草案第2款的基础。 |
| (13) In these various international
instruments, the related concepts of “soliciting”, “inducing” and “aiding and abetting” the crime are
generally regarded as including planning, instigating, conspiring and,
importantly, directly inciting another person to engage in the action that
constitutes the offence. | (13) 在这些不同的国际文书中，“唆使”、“引诱”、“协助和教唆”犯罪的相关概念一般被视为包括策划、怂恿、图谋和重要的是直接煽动他人从事构成犯罪的行为。 |
| Indeed, the Convention on the Prevention
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide addresses not just the commission of
genocide, but also “[c]onspiracy to commit genocide”, “[d]irect and public incitement to
commit genocide”, an “[a]ttempt
to commit genocide” and “[c]omplicity
in genocide”. | 事实上，《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》不仅处理了灭绝种族罪的实施，而且还有“预谋灭绝种族”、“直接公然煽动灭绝种族”、“意图灭绝种族”和“共谋灭绝种族”。 |
| The Convention on the Non-Applicability
of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity broadly
provides that: “If any of the crimes mentioned in
article I is committed, the provisions of this Convention shall apply to
representatives of the State authority and private individuals who, as
principals or accomplices, participate in or who directly incite others to
the commission of any of those crimes, or who conspire to commit them,
irrespective of the degree of completion, and to representatives of the State
authority who tolerate their commission.” | 《战争罪及危害人类罪不适用法定时效公约》的概括规定是：“遇犯有第一条所称各罪情事，本公约的规定适用于以正犯或从犯身份参加或直接煽动他人犯各该罪，或阴谋伙党犯各该罪的国家当局代表及私人，不问既遂的程度如何，并适用于容许犯此种罪的国家当局代表”。 |
| (14) Further, the concept in these
various instruments of “ordering” the crime differs from (and complements) the concept of “command” or other superior responsibility. | (14) 另外，这些不同文书中的“命令”犯罪这一概念不同于“指挥”或其他上级责任的概念，并补充了后者。 |
| Here, “ordering” concerns the criminal responsibility of the superior for
affirmatively instructing that action be committed that constitutes an
offence. | 在这里，“命令”涉及上级明确指示实施构成犯罪的行为的刑事责任。 |
| In contrast, command or other superior
responsibility concerns the criminal responsibility of the superior for a
failure to act; specifically, in situations where the superior knew or had
reason to know that subordinates were about to commit such acts or had done
so, and the superior failed to take necessary and reasonable measures to
prevent such acts or to punish the perpetrators. | 相比之下，指挥或其他上级责任涉及上级未采取行动的刑事责任；具体而言，是上级知道或应当知道部下将有这种犯罪行为或者已经犯罪而上级没有采取合理的必要措施予以阻止或处罚犯罪者的情况。 |
| (15) Treaties addressing crimes other
than crimes against humanity typically provide for criminal responsibility of
persons who participate in the commission of the offence, using broad
terminology that does not seek to require States to alter the preferred
terminology or modalities that are well settled in national law. | (15) 针对危害人类罪以外罪行的条约通常规定参与实施罪行者承担刑事责任，其使用的宽泛术语并不试图要求各国改变国内法中已牢固确立的首选术语或方式。 |
| In other words, such treaties use general
terms rather than detailed language, allowing States to spell out the precise
details of the criminal responsibility through existing national statutes,
jurisprudence and legal tradition. | 换言之，这些条约使用通用术语而不是具体用语，使各国能够通过现有国家法规、判例或法律传统规定刑事责任的确切详情。 |
| For example, the 2006 International
Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
broadly provides: “Each State Party shall take the
necessary measures to hold criminally responsible at least … [a]ny person who commits, orders, solicits or induces the
commission of, attempts to commit, is an accomplice to or participates in an
enforced disappearance. ” | 例如，2006年《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》一般性地规定：“各缔约国应采取必要措施，至少追究下列人员的刑事责任：…所有制造、指令、唆使或诱导制造或企图制造强迫失踪的人，以及同谋或参与制造强迫失踪的人”。 |
| The language of draft article 5,
paragraph 2, takes the same approach. | 第5条草案第2款采取了同样的办法。 |
| Command or other superior responsibility | 指挥责任或其他上级责任 |
| (16) Draft article 5, paragraph 3,
addresses the issue of command or other superior responsibility. | (16) 第5条草案第3款处理的是指挥官或其他上级人员的责任问题。 |
| In general, this paragraph provides that
superiors are criminally responsible for crimes against humanity committed by
subordinates, in circumstances where the superior has engaged in a
dereliction of duty with respect to the subordinates’
conduct. | 该款一般性地规定，如果上级人员对下属的行为失职，则应对下属实施的危害人类罪负刑事责任。 |
| (17) International jurisdictions that
have addressed crimes against humanity impute criminal responsibility to a military
commander or other superior for an offence committed by subordinates in
certain circumstances. | (17) 处理了危害人类罪的国际司法管辖机构将下级在某些情况下实施罪行的刑事责任归咎于其军事指挥官或其他上级。 |
| Notably, the Nürnberg
and Tokyo tribunals used command responsibility with respect to both military
and civilian commanders, an approach that influenced later tribunals. | 值得注意的是，纽伦堡和东京法庭针对军事和文职指挥官均运用了指挥责任概念，这一做法影响到后来的法庭。 |
| As indicated by a trial chamber of the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in The Prosecutor v. Alfred
Musema: “As to whether the form of individual
criminal responsibility referred to under Article 6(3) of the [International
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda] Statute also applies to persons in both
military and civilian authority, it is important to note that during the
Tokyo Trials, civilian authorities were convicted of war crimes under this
principle.” | 正如卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭审判分庭在检察官诉Alfred Musema案中所述，“对于《[卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭]规约》第6(3)条中所述个人刑事责任的形式是否也适用于军事和文职当局人员，必须注意的是，在东京审判期间，根据这项原则宣判民政当局犯有战争罪行”。 |
| (18) The statute of the International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia provides that: “The fact that any of the acts referred to in articles 2 to 5 of
the present Statute was committed by a subordinate does not relieve his
superior of criminal responsibility if he knew or had reason to know that the
subordinate was about to commit such acts or had done so and the superior
failed to take the necessary and reasonable measures to prevent such acts or
to punish the perpetrators thereof. ” | (18) 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》规定：“如果一个部下犯下本《规约》第2至5条所指的任何行为，而他的上级知道或应当知道部下将有这种犯罪行为或者已经犯罪而上级没有采取合理的必要措施予以阻止或处罚犯罪者，则不能免除该上级的刑事责任”。 |
| Several defendants were convicted by the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia on such a basis. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭以此为依据将若干名被告定罪。 |
| The same language appears in the statute
of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, which also convicted
several defendants on such a basis. | 同样的措辞出现在卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约中， 该法庭也以同样依据将几名被告定罪。 |
| Similar language appears in the
instruments regulating the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Special
Tribunal for Lebanon, the Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East Timor,
the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, the Supreme Iraqi
Criminal Tribunal and the Extraordinary African Chambers within the
Senegalese Judicial System. | 类似的措词出现在塞拉利昂问题特别法庭 、黎巴嫩问题特别法庭、东帝汶重罪特别审判分庭、柬埔寨法院特别法庭 、伊拉克最高刑事法庭
和塞内加尔司法系统内的非洲特别法庭 的规范文书中。 |
| (19) Article 28 of the Rome Statute
contains a detailed standard by which criminal responsibility applies to a
military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander with
regard to the acts of others. | (19) 《罗马规约》第二十八条载有将对他人行为的刑事责任适用于军事指挥官或以军事指挥官身份有效行事的人的详细标准。 |
| As a general matter, criminal
responsibility arises when: | 一般而言，在下列情况下会发生刑事责任： |
| (a) there is a relationship of
subordination; | (a) 有从属关系； |
| (b) the commander knew or should have
known that his or her subordinates were committing or about to commit the
offence; | (b) 指挥官知道或本应知道他的部下正在实施或即将实施罪行； |
| and (c) the commander failed to take all
necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or
repress their commission or to submit the matter for investigation and
prosecution. | (c) 指挥官未采取在其权力范围内的一切必要而合理的措施，防止或制止这些犯罪的实施，或报请就此事进行调查和起诉。 |
| This standard has begun influencing the
development of “command responsibility” in national legal systems, both in the criminal and civil
contexts. | 这一标准已经开始在刑事和民事两方面对“指挥责任”在国内法律体系中的发展产生影响。 |
| Article 28 also addresses the issue of
other “superior and subordinate relationships” arising in a non-military or civilian context. | 第二十八条还论及非军事或文职方面出现的“上下级关系”问题。 |
| Such superiors include civilians that “lead” but are not “embedded” in military activities. | 这种上级包括“担任领导”但不“参与”军事活动的文官。 |
| Here, criminal responsibility arises
when: | 在这里，在下列情况下会发生刑事责任： |
| (a) there is a relationship of
subordination; | (a) 有从属关系； |
| (b) the civilian superior knew or
consciously disregarded information regarding the offences; | (b) 文职上级知道或有意忽视关于罪行的信息； |
| (c) the offences concerned activities
that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; | (c) 罪行涉及该上级人员有效负责和控制的活动； |
| and (d) the superior failed to take all
necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or
repress commission of all the offences or to submit the matter for
investigation and prosecution. | (d) 上级未采取在其权力范围内的一切必要而合理的措施，防止或制止所有这些罪行的实施，或报请就此事进行调查和起诉。 |
| (20) A trial chamber of the International
Criminal Court applied this standard when convicting Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo
in March 2016 of crimes against humanity. | (20) 国际刑事法院的一个审判庭于2016年3月判定Jean-Pierre
Bemba Gombo有罪时适用了这一标准。 |
| Among other things, the trial chamber found
that Mr. Bemba was a person effectively acting as a military commander who
knew that the Mouvement de Libération du Congo forces
under his effective authority and control were committing or about to commit
the crimes charged. | 除其他外，审判庭认定，Bemba先生实际上是以军事指挥官身份行事的人，他当时知道在他有效领导和控制之下的刚果解放运动武装正在或将要实施所控告的罪行。 |
| Additionally, the trial chamber found
that Mr. Bemba failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures to
prevent or repress the commission of crimes by his subordinates during
military operations in 2002 and 2003 in the Central African Republic or to
submit the matter to the competent authorities after crimes were committed. | 另外，审判庭认定，Bemba先生未采取一切必要和合理的措施防止或压制部下2002和2003年在中非共和国的军事行动中实施犯罪，或在罪行实施之后将此事报告主管当局。 |
| (21) National laws also often contain
this type of criminal responsibility for war crimes, genocide and crimes
against humanity, but differing standards are used. | (21) 国内法也经常载有关于战争罪、灭绝种族罪和危害人类罪的这类刑事责任规定，但使用的标准有所不同。 |
| Moreover, some States have not developed
such a standard in the context of crimes against humanity. | 另外，有些国家没有就危害人类罪制订出此种标准。 |
| For these reasons, the Commission viewed
it appropriate to elaborate a clear standard so as to encourage harmonization
of national laws on this issue. | 出于这些原因，委员会认为，为了鼓励有关这一问题的国内法取得一致，拟订一条清楚的标准是恰当的。 |
| To that end, draft article 5, paragraph
3, is modelled on the standard set forth in the Rome Statute. | 为此目的，第5条草案第3款是以《罗马规约》规定的标准为模板起草的。 |
| (22) Treaties addressing offences other
than crimes against humanity also often acknowledge an offence in the form of
command or other superior responsibility. | (22) 针对危害人类罪之外的其他罪行的条约也经常确认以指挥官或其他上级人员责任为形式的犯罪。 |
| Superior orders | 上级命令 |
| (23) Draft article 5, paragraph 4,
provides that each State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the
fact that an offence referred to in the article was committed pursuant to an
order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, is not
a ground for excluding the criminal responsibility of a subordinate. | (23) 第5条草案第4款规定，各国应采取必要措施确保国家刑法规定，依照政府或者军事或文职上级的命令实施本条所述罪行的事实不成为免除下级刑事责任的理由。 |
| (24) All jurisdictions that address
crimes against humanity provide grounds for excluding criminal responsibility
to one degree or another. | (24) 所有处理危害人类罪的司法管辖机构均在一定程度上允许依据某些理由免除刑事责任。 |
| For example, most jurisdictions preclude
criminal responsibility if the alleged perpetrator suffered from a mental
disease that prevented the person from appreciating the unlawfulness of his
or her conduct. | 例如，如果被指控施害者患有精神疾病，无法认识到其行为是非法的，则大多数司法管辖机构会免除其刑事责任。 |
| Some jurisdictions provide that a state
of intoxication also precludes criminal responsibility, at least in some
circumstances. | 有些司法管辖机构规定，至少在某些情况下，也免除处于醉酒或药物麻醉状态者的刑事责任。 |
| The fact that the person acted in
self-defence may also preclude responsibility, as may duress resulting from a
threat of imminent harm or death. | 为自卫采取的行动以及因直接伤害或死亡的威胁带来的胁迫所采取的行动也可以免负责任。 |
| In some instances, the person must have
achieved a certain age to be criminally responsible. | 在有些情况下，当事人必须达到一定的年龄，才须负刑事责任。 |
| The exact grounds vary by jurisdiction
and, with respect to national systems, are usually embedded in that
jurisdiction’s approach to criminal responsibility
generally, not just in the context of crimes against humanity. | 各司法管辖机构允许提出的确切理由各不相同。 就国内制度而言，这些理由通常适用于该司法管辖机构处理刑事责任的一般做法，而并不单单针对危害人类罪。 |
| (25) At the same time, most jurisdictions
that address crimes against humanity provide that perpetrators of such crimes
cannot invoke as a defence to criminal responsibility that they were ordered
by a superior to commit the offence. | (25) 与此同时，大多数处理危害人类罪的司法管辖机构规定，犯下这类罪行的人不能以上级命令他们犯下该罪行作为辩护理由。 |
| Article 8 of the Nürnberg Charter provides: “The fact that
the Defendant acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior
shall not free him from responsibility, but may be considered in mitigation
of punishment if the Tribunal determines that justice so requires. ” | 《纽伦堡宪章》第八条规定：“被告不得因按照政府或上级命令犯罪而免除刑事责任，但如法庭认为符合公正审判之需要时，此种情况于刑罚之减轻上得加以考虑”。 |
| Consistent with article 8, the
International Military Tribunal found that the fact that “a soldier was ordered to kill or torture in violation of the
international law of war has never been recognized as a defense to such acts
of brutality”. | 因此，国际军事法庭按照第八条认定：“士兵按照命令违反国际战争法而杀人或实施酷刑，从未被承认是实施此种暴行的理由”。 |
| Likewise, article 6 of the Tokyo Tribunal
provided: “Neither the official position, at any
time, of an accused, nor the fact that an accused acted pursuant to order of
his government or of a superior shall, of itself, be sufficient to free such
accused from responsibility for any crime with which he is charged, but such
circumstances may be considered in mitigation of punishment if the Tribunal determines
that justice so requires.” | 与此相似，《东京法庭宪章》第六条规定：“被告在任何时期所曾任之官职，以及被告系遵从其政府或上级长官之命令而行动之事实，均不足以免除其被控所犯任何罪行之责任。
但如法庭认为符合公正审判之需要时，此种情况于刑罚之减轻上得加以考虑”。 |
| (26) While article 33 of the Rome Statute
allows for a limited superior orders defence, it does so exclusively with
respect to war crimes; orders to commit acts of genocide or crimes against
humanity do not fall within the scope of the defence. | (26) 虽然《罗马规约》第三十三条允许以上级命令为由作出有限辩护，但仅针对战争罪；实施种族灭绝行为或危害人类罪的命令不属于该辩护规定的范围。 |
| The instruments regulating the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the International
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Special
Tribunal for Lebanon, the Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East Timor,
the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, the Supreme Iraqi Criminal
Tribunal and the Extraordinary African Chambers within the Senegalese
Judicial System all similarly exclude superior orders as a defence. | 规范前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭、卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭、塞拉利昂问题特别法庭、黎巴嫩问题特别法庭、东帝汶重罪特别审判分庭、柬埔寨法院特别法庭、伊拉克最高刑事法庭
和塞内加尔司法系统内的非洲特别法庭 的文书中均同样不允许将上级命令作为辩护理由。 |
| While superior orders are not permitted
as a defence to prosecution for an offence, some of the international and
national jurisdictions mentioned above allow orders from a superior to serve
as a mitigating factor at the sentencing stage. | 虽然不允许将上级命令作为犯罪诉讼的辩护理由，但上述一些国际和国家司法管辖机构允许在量刑阶段将上级命令作为一种减刑因素。 |
| (27) Such exclusion of superior orders as
a defence exists in a range of treaties addressing crimes, such as: the 1984
Convention against Torture; the 1985 Inter-American Convention to Prevent and
Punish Torture; the 1994 Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of
Persons; and the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All
Persons from Enforced Disappearance. | (27) 一系列针对犯罪的条约中均做出了此类不允许将上级命令作为辩护理由的规定，例如：1984年《禁止酷刑公约》、1985年《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》、1994年《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》 和2006年《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》。 |
| In the context of the Convention against
Torture, the Committee against Torture has criticized national legislation
that permits such a defence or is ambiguous on the issue. | 关于《禁止酷刑公约》，禁止酷刑委员会批评了允许以此作为辩护理由的国家立法或在此问题上暧昧不清的国家立法。 |
| In some instances, the problem arises
from the presence in a State’s national law of what
is referred to as a “due obedience” defence. | 在某些情况下，问题源于一国的国内法允许以所谓“正当服从”作为辩护理由。 |
| Statutes of limitations | 时效 |
| (28) One possible restriction on the
prosecution of a person for crimes against humanity in national law concerns
the application of a “statute of limitations” (or “period of prescription”), meaning a rule that forbids prosecution of an alleged offender
for a crime that was committed more than a specified number of years prior to
the initiation of the prosecution. | (28) 国内法中就危害人类罪起诉个人可能受到的一种限制是适用“时效”(“时效期限”)，即禁止就早于开始起诉前特定年数的犯罪对被指控罪犯提出起诉。 |
| Draft article 5, paragraph 5, provides
that each State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the offences
referred to in the draft article shall not be subject to any statute of
limitations. | 第5条草案第5款规定，各国应采取必要措施确保该条草案所述罪行不应受到任何时效限制。 |
| (29) No rule on statute of limitations
with respect to international crimes, including crimes against humanity, was
established in the Nürnberg or Tokyo charters, or in
the constituent instruments of the International Criminal Tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda or the
Special Court for Sierra Leone. | (29) 《纽伦堡宪章》或《东京宪章》或前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭、卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭或塞拉利昂问题特别法庭的组成文书都没有就国际罪行(包括危害人类罪)规定时效规则。 |
| In contrast, Control Council Law No. 10,
adopted in December 1945 by the Allied Control Council for Germany to ensure
the continued prosecution of alleged offenders, provided that in any trial or
prosecution for crimes against humanity (as well as war crimes and crimes
against the peace) “the accused shall not be entitled
to the benefits of any statute of limitation in respect to the period from 30
January 1933 to 1 July 1945”. | 相形之下，占领德国的盟国在1945年12月为确保继续起诉被指控罪犯通过了管制委员会第10号法令，规定在任何关于危害人类罪(以及战争罪和危害和平罪)的审判或起诉中，“被告无权获益于任何有关1933年1月30日至1945年7月1日期间的时效限制”。 |
| Likewise, the Rome Statute expressly
addresses the matter, providing that: “The crimes
within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be subject to any statute of
limitations. ” | 与此相似，《罗马规约》明确处理了这一问题，规定“本法院管辖权内的犯罪不适用任何时效”。 |
| The drafters of the Rome Statute strongly
supported this provision as applied to crimes against humanity. | 《罗马规约》的起草人坚决支持对危害人类罪适用这一规定。 |
| Similarly, the Law on the Establishment
of Extraordinary Chambers in Cambodia, the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal
and the East Timor Tribunal Charter all explicitly defined crimes against
humanity as offences for which there is no statute of limitations. | 同样，《设立柬埔寨法院特别法庭法》以及伊拉克最高刑事法庭和东帝汶重罪特别审判分庭的规范文书都明确界定危害人类罪是不适用时效的罪行。 |
| (30) With respect to whether a statute of
limitations may apply to the prosecution of an alleged offender in national
courts, in 1967 the General Assembly noted that “the
application to war crimes and crimes against humanity of the rule of
municipal law relating to the period of limitation for ordinary crimes is a
serious concern to world public opinion, since it prevents the prosecution
and punishment of persons responsible for those crimes”. | (30) 关于时效是否可在国内法院适用于对被指控罪犯的起诉，联合国大会1967年指出，“国内法关于普通罪行之时效规则适用于战争罪及危害人类罪，为世界舆论极感忧虑之事，因其足以防止诉究与惩治犯该罪之人”。 |
| The following year, States adopted the
Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes
and Crimes Against Humanity, which requires State parties to adopt “any legislative or other measures necessary to ensure that
statutory or other limitations shall not apply to the prosecution and
punishment” of these two types of crimes. | 次年，各国通过了《战争罪及危害人类罪不适用法定时效公约》，规定缔约方采取“必要立法或其他措施，以确保法定或他种时效不适用于(这两类罪行)之追诉权及行刑权”(第四条)。 |
| Similarly, in 1974, the Council of Europe
adopted the European Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory
Limitation to Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes, which uses
substantially the same language. | 同样，欧洲委员会1974年通过了《危害人类罪和战争罪不适用法定时效欧洲公约》，采用的措辞大体相同。 |
| At present, there appears to be no State
with a law on crimes against humanity that also bars prosecution after a
period of time has elapsed. | 目前看来，没有一个国家有禁止在一段时间后提出起诉的危害人类罪相关法律。 |
| Rather, numerous States have specifically
legislated against any such limitation. | 相反，众多国家还专门立法反对此类限制。 |
| (31) Many treaties addressing crimes in
national law other than crimes against humanity have not contained a
prohibition on a statute of limitations. | (31) 许多处理国内法其他罪行的条约没有载列禁止时效的规定。 |
| For example, the Convention against Torture
contains no prohibition on the application of a statute of limitations to
torture-related offences. | 例如，《禁止酷刑公约》就没有载列禁止对酷刑相关罪行适用时效的规定。 |
| Even so, the Committee against Torture
has stated that, taking into account their grave nature, such offences should
not be subject to any statute of limitations. | 即使如此，禁止酷刑委员会声明，考虑到此类罪行的严重性质，这些罪行不应受到任何时效限制。 |
| Similarly, while the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights does not directly address the issue,
the Human Rights Committee has called for the abolition of statutes of
limitations in relation to serious violations of the Covenant. | 与此相似，虽然《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》 没有直接论及这一问题，但人权事务委员会呼吁对严重违反该《公约》的罪行取消时效限制。 |
| In contrast, the International Convention
for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance does address
the issue of statutes of limitations, providing that: “A State Party which applies a statute of limitations in respect of
enforced disappearance shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the
term of limitation for criminal proceedings: (a) Is of long duration and is
proportionate to the extreme seriousness of this offence. ” | 与此不同的是，《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》确实谈到时效问题，规定：“对强迫失踪案件实行诉讼时效的缔约国，应采取必要措施，确保对刑事诉讼的时效…有较长的时段，并与此种犯罪的极端严重性相称”。 |
| The travaux préparatoires
of the Convention indicate that this provision was intended to distinguish
between those offences that might constitute a crime against humanity — for which there should be no statute of limitations — and all other offences under the Convention. | 《公约》的准备工作材料表明，这一条款旨在区分两类罪行，一是可能构成危害人类罪的罪行，此类罪行不应有时效限制，二是《公约》规定的所有其他罪行。 |
| Appropriate penalties | 适当惩罚 |
| (32) Draft article 5, paragraph 6, provides
that each State shall ensure that the offences referred to in the article
shall be punishable by appropriate penalties that take into account the grave
nature of the offences. | (32) 第5条草案第6款规定，各国应确保对该条草案所述罪行应考虑到罪行的严重性处以适当的惩罚。 |
| (33) The Commission provided in its
1996 draft code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind that: “An individual who is responsible for a crime against the peace and
security of mankind shall be liable to punishment. The punishment shall be
commensurate with the character and gravity of the crime. ” | (33) 国际法委员会在1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》中规定，“应对危害人类和平及安全罪行负责的个人应该受到与该罪行的性质和严重性相称的惩罚”。 |
| The commentary further explained that the
“character of a crime is what distinguishes that
crime from another crime … The gravity of a crime is
inferred from the circumstances in which it is committed and the feelings
which impelled the author. ” | 评注进一步解释说，“某一罪行的特性是它有别于另一罪行的性质…，某一罪行的严重性是从实行该罪行的情况和促使案犯犯罪的意图加以推论的。” |
| Thus, “while the
criminal act is legally the same, the means and methods used differ,
depending on varying degrees of depravity and cruelty. All of these factors
should guide the court in applying the penalty.” | 因此，“虽然从法律上说同样是罪行，所使用的手段和方法却因堕落和残忍的程度不同而有所不同。 ” |
| (34) To the extent that an international
court or tribunal has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, the penalties
attached to such an offence may vary, but are expected to be appropriate
given the gravity of the offence. | (34) 在国际法院或法庭对危害人类罪有管辖权的情形下，对此类罪行适用的惩罚可能是不同的，但要求其与罪行的严重性相称。 |
| The statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia provides that: “The
penalty imposed by the Trial Chamber shall be limited to imprisonment. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》规定，“审判分庭判处的刑罚只限于监禁。 |
| In determining the terms of imprisonment,
the Trial Chambers shall have recourse to the general practice regarding
prison sentences in the courts of the former Yugoslavia. ” | 审判分庭在决定监禁期限时应诉诸前南斯拉夫法庭适用的徒刑惯例”。 |
| Furthermore, the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia is to “take into
account such factors as the gravity of the offence and the individual
circumstances of the convicted person”. | 此外，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭应“考虑到像罪行的严重性和被定罪者的个人情况这样的因素”。 |
| The statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda includes identical language, except that recourse is to
be had to “the general practice regarding prison
sentences in the courts of Rwanda”. | 《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》有相同的措辞，区别是应诉诸“卢旺达问题法庭适用的徒刑惯例”。 |
| Even for convictions for the most serious
crimes of international concern, this can result in a wide range of
sentences. | 即便是对国际社会关注的最严重国际罪行的定罪，这也可能导致各种量刑结果。 |
| Article 77 of the Rome Statute also allows
for flexibility of this kind, by providing for a term of imprisonment of up
to 30 years or life imprisonment “when justified by
the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the
convicted person”. | 《罗马规约》第七十七条也考虑到这种灵活性，规定最高不超过三十年的有期徒刑或无期徒刑，“以犯罪极为严重和被定罪人的个人情况而证明有此必要的情形为限”。 |
| Similar formulations may be found in the
instruments regulating the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Special
Tribunal for Lebanon, the Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East Timor,
the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, the Supreme Iraqi
Criminal Tribunal, and the Extraordinary African Chambers within the
Senegalese Judicial System. | 在塞拉利昂问题特别法庭、黎巴嫩问题特别法庭、东帝汶重罪特别审判分庭、柬埔寨法院特别法庭、伊拉克最高刑事法庭 和塞内加尔司法系统内的非洲特别法庭
的规范文书中，都可发现类似的表述。 |
| Likewise, to the extent that a national
jurisdiction has criminalized crimes against humanity, the penalties attached
to such an offence may vary, but are expected to be commensurate with the
gravity of the offence. | 同样，在国家司法管辖机构把危害人类罪定为刑事犯罪的情形下，对此类罪行适用的惩罚也可能是不同的，但要求其与罪行的严重性相称。 |
| (35) International treaties addressing
crimes do not dictate to States parties the penalties to be imposed (or not
to be imposed) but, rather, allow them the discretion to determine the
punishment, based on the circumstances of the particular offender and
offence. | (35) 针对犯罪的国际条约没有规定缔约国应施加(或不施加)什么惩罚，而是由缔约国自由裁量，依据特定犯罪者和罪行的情况，决定施加的惩罚。 |
| The Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide simply calls for “effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or any of the
other acts enumerated …”. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》仅规定，“对于犯灭绝种族罪或有[…]所列其他行为之一者尤应规定有效的惩治”。 |
| The 1949 Geneva Conventions also provide
a general standard and leave to individual States the discretion to set the
appropriate punishment, by simply requiring: “The
High Contracting Parties [to] undertake to enact any legislation necessary to
provide effective penal sanctions for … any of the
grave breaches of the present Convention …. ” | 1949年日内瓦四公约也规定了一条普遍性标准，但赋予各国制订恰当处罚的自由裁量权，仅规定“各缔约国担任制定必要之立法，俾对于[本身犯有或令人犯有下条所列之]严重破坏本公约之行为之人，处以有效之刑事制裁”。 |
| More recent treaties addressing crimes in
national legal systems typically indicate that the penalty should be “appropriate”. | 较近期的有关国家法律制度所定罪行的条约通常规定，惩罚应是“适当的”。 |
| Although the Commission initially
proposed the term “severe penalties” for use in its draft articles on diplomatic agents and other
protected persons, the term “appropriate penalties” was instead used by States in the 1973 Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected
Persons, including Diplomatic Agents. | 虽然委员会最初提议在其关于外交代表和其他应受保护人员的条款草案中使用“严厉惩罚”一词，但实际上各国在1973年《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》中使用了“适当的惩罚”。 |
| That term has served as a model for
subsequent treaties. | 这一术语成为后续各项条约的模板。 |
| At the same time, the provision on “appropriate” penalties in the 1973
Convention was accompanied by language calling for the penalty to take into
account the “grave nature” of
the offence. | 同时，在1973年《公约》中，除规定“适当的惩罚”外，还呼吁在确定如何惩罚时考虑到罪行的“严重性”。 |
| The Commission commented that such a
reference was intended to emphasize that the penalty should take into account
the important “world interests” at stake in punishing such an offence. | 委员会评论说，这样的提法意在强调在惩治此类犯罪时，处罚措施应考虑到其中所涉的重要“全球利益”。 |
| Since 1973, this approach — that each “State Party shall make these
offences punishable by the appropriate penalties which take into account
their grave nature” — has been adopted for numerous
treaties, including the Convention against Torture. | 自1973年以来，每一“缔约国应按照这类罪行的严重性处以适当的惩罚”这一办法已被众多条约采纳，其中包括《禁止酷刑公约》。 |
| In some treaties, the issue of gravity is
expressed using terms such as “extreme seriousness”, “serious nature”
or “extreme gravity” of the
offences. | 一些条约使用罪行的“极端严峻性”、“严重性”或“极端严重性”等词语来表述严重性问题。 |
| Legal persons | 法人 |
| (36) Paragraphs 1 to 6 of draft article 5
are directed at criminal liability of offenders who are natural persons,
although the term “natural”
is not used, which is consistent with the approach taken in treaties
addressing crimes. | (36) 第5条草案1至6款涉及自然人的刑事责任，虽然按照关于罪行的条约的一贯做法，没有使用“自然人”一词。 |
| Paragraph 7, in contrast, addresses the
liability of “legal persons”
for the offences referred to in draft article 5. | 第7段则涉及“法人”对第5条草案所指罪行的责任。 |
| (37) Criminal liability of legal persons
has become a feature of the national laws of many States in recent years, but
it is still unknown in many other States. | (37) 近年来，法人的刑事责任已成为许多国家国内法的一个重点，但在许多其他国家仍然很陌生。 |
| In States where the concept is known,
such liability sometimes exists with respect to international crimes. | 存在这一概念的国家中，在国际罪行方面有时存在这种责任。 |
| Acts that can lead to such liability are,
of course, committed by natural persons, who act as officials, directors,
officers, or through some other position or agency of the legal person. | 可导致这种责任的行为当然是自然人以公务员、指挥官、军官身份所为，或通过其他一些法人职位或机构犯下的。 |
| Such liability, in States where the
concept exists, is typically imposed when the offence at issue was committed
by a natural person on behalf of or for the benefit of the legal person. | 存在这一概念的国家中，通常是在自然人代表法人或为了法人的利益犯下相关罪行时，加诸此种责任。 |
| (38) Criminal liability of legal persons
has not featured significantly to date in the international criminal courts
or tribunals. | (38) 迄今为止，国际刑事法院或法庭尚未太多地涉及法人的刑事责任。 |
| The Nürnberg
Charter, in articles 9 and 10, authorized the International Military Tribunal
to declare any group or organization as a criminal organization during the
trial of an individual, which could lead to the trial of other individuals
for membership in the organization. | 《纽伦堡宪章》第9条和第10条授权国际军事法庭在审判个人期间宣布任何团体或组织为犯罪组织，这可能导致对作为该组织成员的其他个人的审判。 |
| In the course of the Tribunal’s proceedings, as well as subsequent proceedings under Control
Council Law No. 10, a number of such organizations were so designated, but
only natural persons were tried and punished. | 在纽伦堡军事法庭的诉讼中，以及根据管制委员会第10号法令进行的后续诉讼中，认定了许多这类组织，但只有自然人受到审判和惩罚。 |
| The International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda did not
have criminal jurisdiction over legal persons, nor does the Special Court for
Sierra Leone, the Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East Timor, the
Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, the Supreme Iraqi Criminal
Tribunal, or the Extraordinary African Chambers within the Senegalese
Judicial System. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭和卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭对法人没有刑事管辖权，塞拉利昂问题特别法庭、东帝汶重罪特别审判分庭、柬埔寨法院特别法庭、伊拉克最高刑事法庭以及塞内加尔司法系统内的非洲特别法庭对法人也没有刑事管辖权。 |
| The drafters of the Rome Statute noted
that “[t]here is a deep divergence of views as to the
advisability of including criminal responsibility of legal persons in the
Statute” and, although proposals for inclusion of a
provision on such responsibility were made, the Rome Statute ultimately did
not contain such a provision. | 《罗马规约》的起草者指出，“对于规约是否应包括法人刑事责任的问题存在重大分歧”， 虽然有人提议列入一项关于法人刑事责任的规定，但《规约》最终并未载入此类规定。 |
| (39) Liability of legal persons also has
not been included in many treaties addressing crimes at the national level,
including: the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide; the 1949 Geneva Conventions; the 1970 Convention for the
Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft; the 1973 Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected
Persons, including Diplomatic Agents; the 1984 Convention against Torture;
the 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings;
and the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from
Enforced Disappearance. | (39) 许多关于国家一级罪行的条约也没有列入法人的责任，包括：1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》、1949年日内瓦四公约、1970年《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》、1973年《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》、1984年《禁止酷刑公约》、1997年《制止恐怖主义爆炸的国际公约》、2006年《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》。 |
| The Commission’s
1996 draft code of crimes only addressed the criminal responsibility of “an individual”. | 委员会1996年的治罪法草案仅涉及“个人”的刑事责任。 |
| (40) On the other hand, the 2014 African
Union protocol amending the statute of the African Court of Justice and Human
Rights, though not yet in force, provides jurisdiction to the reconstituted
African Court over legal persons for international crimes, including crimes
against humanity. | (40) 另一方面，修正《非洲司法和人权法院章程》的2014年非洲联盟议定书虽然尚未生效，但是授予了新设立的非洲法院对法人的国际罪行、包括危害人类罪的管辖权。 |
| Further, although criminal jurisdiction
over legal persons (as well as over crimes against humanity) is not expressly
provided for in the statute of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, the Tribunal’s Appeals Panel concluded in 2014 that the Tribunal had
jurisdiction to prosecute a legal person for contempt of court. | 此外，《黎巴嫩问题特别法庭规约》虽然没有明文规定对法人(以及对危害人类罪)的刑事管辖权，但是该法庭的上诉分庭2014年断定，该法庭有权以藐视法庭罪名起诉法人。 |
| (41) Moreover, there are several treaties
that address the liability of legal persons for criminal offences, notably:
the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime
of Apartheid; the 1989 Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary
Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal; the 1999 International
Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism; the 2000 United
Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime; the 2000 Optional
Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of
Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography; the 2003 United Nations
Convention against Corruption; the Protocol of 2005 to the Protocol for the
Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on
the Continental Shelf; and a series of treaties concluded within the Council
of Europe. | (41) 此外，有一些条约涉及法人对刑事犯罪的责任，特别是：1973年《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》、1989年《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置巴塞尔公约》、1999年《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》、2000年《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》、2000年《儿童权利公约关于买卖儿童、儿童卖淫和儿童色情制品问题的任择议定书》、2003年《联合国反腐败公约》、《制止危及大陆架固定平台安全非法行为议定书的2005年议定书》，以及欧洲委员会内缔结的一系列条约。 |
| Other regional instruments address the
issue as well, mostly in the context of corruption. | 还有一些区域文书也涉及法人的刑事责任，主要是在腐败方面。 |
| Such treaties typically do not define the
term “legal person”, leaving
it to national legal systems to apply whatever definition would normally
operate therein. | 这些条约通常不对“法人”一词下定义，留给国内法律体系适用国内通常适用的定义。 |
| (42) The Commission decided to include a
provision on liability of legal persons for crimes against humanity, given
the potential involvement of legal persons in acts committed as part of a
widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population. | (42) 委员会考虑到法人可能卷入在广泛或系统地针对平民人口的攻击中实施的行为，决定加上一项关于法人对危害人类罪的责任的条款。 |
| In doing so, it has focused on language
that has been widely accepted by States in the context of other crimes and
that contains considerable flexibility for States in the implementation of
their obligation. | 委员会特别采用了在其他罪行背景下已被各国广泛接受、并且让各国在履行义务方面有较大灵活性的措辞。 |
| (43) Paragraph 7 of draft article 5 is
modelled on the 2000 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the
Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. | (43) 第5条草案第7款以2000年《儿童权利公约关于买卖儿童、儿童卖淫和儿童色情制品问题的任择议定书》为范本。 |
| The Optional Protocol was adopted by the
General Assembly in 2000 and entered into force in 2002. | 《任择议定书》于2000年经大会通过，自2002年起生效。 |
| As of August 2016, 173 States are party
to the Optional Protocol and another 9 States have signed but not yet
ratified it. | 截至2016年8月，有173个国家加入了《任择议定书》，另有9个国家已签署但尚未批准该议定书。 |
| Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Optional
Protocol obligates States parties to ensure that certain acts are covered
under its criminal or penal law, such as the sale of children for sexual
exploitation or the offering of a child for prostitution. | 《任择议定书》第3条第1款要求每一缔约国确保本国刑法涵盖特定行为，例如出于性剥削目的出售儿童或提供儿童卖淫。 |
| Article 3, paragraph 4, then reads: “Subject to the provisions of its national law, each State Party
shall take measures, where appropriate, to establish the liability of legal
persons for offences established in paragraph 1 of the present article. | 第3条第4款规定：“在不违反本国法律规定的情况下，每一缔约国应酌情采取适当措施确定法人对本条第1款规定的罪行的责任。 |
| Subject to the legal principles of the
State Party, such liability of legal persons may be criminal, civil or
administrative.” | 在不违反缔约国的法律原则的情况下，可将法人的这一责任定为刑事、民事或行政责任”。 |
| (44) Paragraph 7 of draft article 5 uses
the same language, but replaces “State Party” with “State” and
replaces “for offences established in paragraph 1 of
the present article” with “for
the offences referred to in this draft article”. | (44) 第5条草案第7款使用同样的措辞，但是将“缔约国”改为“国家”，将“本条第1款规定的罪行”改为“本条草案所指罪行”。 |
| As such, paragraph 7 imposes an
obligation upon the State that it “shall take
measures”, meaning that it is required to pursue such
measures in good faith. | 第7款从而规定了国家“应采取措施”的义务，意味着国家必须本着诚意采取这类措施。 |
| At the same time, paragraph 7 provides
the State with considerable flexibility to shape those measures in accordance
with its national law. | 与此同时，第7款在根据国内法来确定这些措施方面，赋予了国家相当大的灵活性。 |
| First, the clause “[s]ubject to the provisions of its national law” should be understood as according to the State considerable
discretion as to the measures that will be adopted; the obligation is “subject to” the State’s existing approach to liability of legal persons for criminal
offences under its national law. | 首先，“在不违反本国法律规定的情况下”应理解为在将采取的措施方面，赋予国家相当大的酌处权；这一义务“不违反”国内法规定的国家关于法人刑事责任的现有做法。 |
| For example, in most States, liability of
legal persons for criminal offences will only apply under national law with
respect to certain types of legal persons and not to others. | 例如，在大多数国家，法人对刑事犯罪的责任只根据国内法对特定类型的法人适用。 |
| Indeed, under most national laws, “legal persons” in this context likely
excludes States, Governments, other public bodies in the exercise of State
authority, and public international organizations. | 实际上，按照大多数国家的法律，这种情况下的“法人”可能排除了国家、政府、行使国家权力的其他公共机构，以及公共国际组织。 |
| Likewise, the liability of legal persons
under national laws can vary based on: the range of natural persons whose
conduct can be attributed to the legal person; which modes of liability of
natural persons can result in liability of the legal person; whether it is
necessary to prove the mens rea of a natural person to establish liability of
the legal person; or whether it is necessary to prove that a specific natural
person committed the offence. | 同样，国内法规定的法人责任可能存在差异，取决于：其行为可归咎于法人的自然人的范围；自然人哪些形式的责任可导致法人责任；确定法人责任是否需要证明自然人的犯罪意图；或是否需要证明某个自然人犯下了有关罪行。 |
| (45) Second, each State is obliged to
take measures to establish the legal liability of legal persons “where appropriate”. | (45) 第二，每个国家有“酌情”采取措施确定法人法律责任的义务。 |
| Even if the State, under its national
law, is in general able to impose liability upon legal persons for criminal
offences, the State may conclude that such a measure is inappropriate in the
specific context of crimes against humanity. | 即使国家依据其国内法，一般能够要求法人对刑事犯罪承担责任，国家也可以得出结论称，在危害人类罪的具体背景下，这一措施是不适当的。 |
| (46) For measures that are adopted, the
second sentence of paragraph 7 provides that: “Subject
to the legal principles of the State, such liability of legal persons may be
criminal, civil or administrative. ” | (46) 对于已采取的措施，第7款第二句规定：“在不违反本国法律原则的情况下，可将法人的这一责任定为刑事、民事或行政责任”。 |
| Such a sentence appears not just in the
2000 Optional Protocol, as discussed above, but also in other widely
adhered-to treaties, such as the 2000 United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organized Crime and the 2003 United Nations Convention against
Corruption. | 这样的句子似乎不仅见于上文讨论过的2000年《任择议定书》，而且出现在其他广泛遵行的条约中，如2000年《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》 和2003年《联合国反腐败公约》。 |
| The flexibility indicated in such
language again acknowledges and accommodates the diversity of approaches
adopted within national legal systems. | 这种措辞体现的灵活性再次确认并顾及不同国家的法律体系做法的多样性。 |
| As such, there is no obligation to
establish criminal liability if doing so is inconsistent with a State’s national legal principles; in those cases, a form of civil or
administrative liability may be used as an alternative. | 因此，如果确立法人刑事责任不符合本国的法律原则，国家就没有义务那样做；而是可以取而代之以民事或行政责任。 |
| In any event, whether criminal, civil or
administrative, such liability is without prejudice to the criminal liability
of natural persons provided for in draft article 5. | 无论如何，不论定为刑事、民事还是行政责任，该责任都不影响第5条草案规定的自然人的刑事责任。 |
| Article 6 | 第6条 |
| Establishment of national jurisdiction | 确立国家管辖权 |
| 1. Each State shall take the necessary
measures to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in draft
article 5 in the following cases: | 1. 各国应采取必要措施，确立在下列情况下对第5条草案所述罪行的管辖权： |
| (a) when the offence is committed in any
territory under its jurisdiction or on board a ship or aircraft registered in
that State; | (a) 罪行发生在该国管辖的任何领土内，或发生在该国注册的船只或飞机上； |
| (b) when the alleged offender is a
national of that State or, if that State considers it appropriate, a
stateless person who is habitually resident in that State’s territory; | (b) 被控罪犯为该国国民，或该国认为应予管辖的、惯常在该国领土内居住的无国籍人； |
| (c) when the victim is a national of that
State if that State considers it appropriate. | (c) 受害人为该国国民，而该国认为应予管辖。 |
| 2. Each State shall also take the
necessary measures to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred
to in draft article 5 in cases where the alleged offender is present in any
territory under its jurisdiction and it does not extradite or surrender the
person in accordance with the present draft articles. | 2. 各国还应采取必要措施，在被指控罪犯处于其管辖的任何领土内，而且本国不按照本条款草案予以引渡或移交的情况下，确立对第5条草案所述罪行的管辖权。 |
| 3. The present draft articles do not
exclude the exercise of any criminal jurisdiction established by a State in
accordance with its national law. | 3. 本条款草案不排除一国行使根据其国内法确立的任何刑事管辖权。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 6 provides that each
State must establish jurisdiction over the offences referred to in draft
article 5 in certain cases, such as when the crime occurs in territory under
its jurisdiction, has been committed by one of its nationals or when the
offender is present in territory under its jurisdiction. | (1) 第6条草案规定，各国必须确立在某些情况下，如罪行发生在其管辖的领土内、由其国民实施、或罪犯处于其管辖的领土内时，对第5条草案所述罪行的管辖权。 |
| (2) As a general matter, international
instruments have sought to encourage States to establish a relatively wide
range of jurisdictional bases under national law to address the most serious
crimes of international concern, so that there is no safe haven for those who
commit the offence. | (2) 一般说来，国际文书力求鼓励各国根据国内法确立相对广泛的各种管辖权依据，以处理国际社会关注的最严重犯罪，使实施犯罪者没有庇护所。 |
| Thus, according to the Commission’s 1996 draft code of crimes against the peace and security of
mankind, “each State Party shall take such measures
as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the crimes” set out in the draft code, other than the crime of aggression, “irrespective of where or by whom those crimes were committed”. | 因此，依照委员会1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》，“每一缔约国应采取必要措施确定其对(治罪法草案)所载罪行(侵略罪除外)的管辖权”，“而不论这些罪行的实施地点或实施者为何”。 |
| The breadth of such jurisdiction was
necessary because: “The Commission considered that
the effective implementation of the Code required a combined approach to
jurisdiction based on the broadest jurisdiction of national courts together
with the possible jurisdiction of an international criminal court. ” | 这样的管辖权范围是必要的，因为“委员会认为，为了有效实施本治罪法，应以尽量宽广的国家法院管辖权加上可能的国际刑事法院管辖权为基础综合处理管辖权问题”。 |
| The preamble to the Rome Statute provides
“that the most serious crimes of concern to the
international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their
effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national
level”, and further “that it
is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those
responsible for international crimes”. | 《罗马规约》序言规定，“对于整个国际社会关注的最严重犯罪，绝不能听之任之不予处罚，为有效惩治罪犯，必须通过国家一级采取措施”，以及“各国有义务对犯有国际罪行的人行使刑事管辖权”。 |
| (3) As such, when treaties concerning
crimes address national law implementation, they typically include a
provision on the establishment of national jurisdiction. | (3) 因此，涉及犯罪行为的条约在处理国内法实施的问题时，通常会纳入一项确立国家管辖权的条款。 |
| For example, discussions within a working
group of the Human Rights Commission convened to draft an international
instrument on enforced disappearance concluded that: “The establishment of the broadest possible jurisdiction for
domestic criminal courts in respect of enforced disappearance appeared to be
essential if the future instrument was to be effective. ” | 例如，人权委员会起草强迫失踪问题国际文书工作组的讨论决定，“为了使今后文书行之有效，看来必须为国内刑事法庭确立强迫失踪方面尽可能广泛的管辖权。
”。 |
| At the same time, such treaties typically
only obligate a State party to exercise its jurisdiction when an alleged
offender is present in the State party’s territory
(see draft article 8 below), leading either to a submission of the matter to
the prosecuting authorities within that State party or to extradition or
surrender of the alleged offender to another State party or competent
international tribunal (see draft article 9 below). | 与此同时，此类条约通常只规定缔约国必须在被指控罪犯处于其境内时行使管辖权(见下文第8条草案)，结果可能是把事项提交该缔约国的起诉机关，或者是把被指控罪犯引渡或移交给另一缔约国或主管国际法庭(见下文第9条草案)。 |
| (4) Reflecting on the acceptance of such
an obligation in treaties, and in particular within the Convention against
Torture, the International Court of Justice, in the case concerning Questions
relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal),
stated: | (4) 考虑到各种条约、特别是《禁止酷刑公约》均接受此类义务，国际法院在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(比利时诉塞内加尔)中指出： |
| “The obligation for the State to
criminalize torture and to establish its jurisdiction over it finds its
equivalent in the provisions of many international conventions for the
combating of international crimes. | “许多旨在打击国际犯罪的国际公约均规定，国家有义务将酷刑定为刑事罪，并有义务确定国家有权管辖此类罪行。 |
| This obligation, which has to be
implemented by the State concerned as soon as it is bound by the Convention,
has in particular a preventive and deterrent character, since by equipping
themselves with the necessary legal tools to prosecute this type of offence,
the States parties ensure that their legal systems will operate to that
effect and commit themselves to coordinating their efforts to eliminate any
risk of impunity. | 有关国家在接受该《公约》的约束后，必须立即履行此义务，而该义务尤其具有预防和威慑性质，因为缔约国一旦为起诉这类罪行确立必要的法律工具，便确保其法律制度可为此开展活动，而且也承诺协同消除任何发生有罪不罚现象的风险。 |
| This preventive character is all the more
pronounced as the number of States parties increases.” | 随着缔约国数目不断增加，这种预防性质也日益明显。 ” |
| (5) Provisions comparable to those
appearing in draft article 6 exist in many treaties addressing crimes. | (5) 许多处理犯罪问题的条约中都有与第6条草案中出现的条款类似的规定。 |
| While no treaty yet exists relating to
crimes against humanity, Judges Higgins, Kooijmans and Buergenthal indicated
in their separate opinion that: | 虽然还没有关于危害人类罪的条约，但希金斯、科艾曼斯和比尔根塔尔法官在其个别意见中指出： |
| “The series of multilateral treaties with
their special jurisdictional provisions reflect a determination by the
international community that those engaged in war crimes, hijacking, hostage
taking [and] torture should not go unpunished. | “一系列带有特别管辖权条款的多边条约反映了国际社会的决心，即实施战争罪、劫持、劫持人质[和]酷刑者不能逍遥法外。 |
| Although crimes against humanity are not
yet the object of a distinct convention, a comparable international
indignation at such acts is not to be doubted.” | 虽然危害人类罪尚不是一项明确的公约的客体，但国际社会对此类行为同样愤慨是不容置疑的。” |
| (6) Draft article 6, paragraph 1 (a),
requires that jurisdiction be established when the offence occurs in the
State’s territory, a type of jurisdiction often
referred to as “territorial jurisdiction”. | (6) 第6条草案第1款(a)项规定在罪行发生在一国领土内的情况下应确立管辖权，此类管辖权通常称为“属地管辖权”。 |
| Rather than refer solely to a State’s “territory”, the
Commission considered it appropriate to refer to territory “under [the State’s] jurisdiction”, which is intended to encapsulate the territory de jure of the
State, as well as territory under its jurisdiction or de facto control. | 相对于一国的“领土”，委员会认为宜表述为“[该国]管辖的领土”，以便涵盖该国的合法领土及其管辖或实际控制的领土。 |
| Such terminology aligns with the
formulations used by relevant treaties in the field. | 这一术语符合本领域相关条约中采用的表述方式。 |
| The text of draft article 4 will need to
be revisited in the future to ensure consistency in terminology. | 今后需要重新讨论第4条草案案文，以确保术语一致。 |
| Further, territorial jurisdiction often
encompasses jurisdiction over crimes committed on board a vessel or aircraft
registered to the State; indeed, States that have adopted national laws on
crimes against humanity typically establish jurisdiction over acts occurring
on such a vessel or aircraft. | 此外，属地管辖权往往包含对发生在某国注册的船只或飞机上的罪行的管辖权；事实上，已通过关于危害人类罪的国内法律的国家通常确立对发生在此类船只或飞机上的行为的管辖权。 |
| (7) Draft article 6, paragraph 1 (b),
calls for jurisdiction when the alleged offender is a national of the State,
a type of jurisdiction at times referred to as “nationality
jurisdiction” or “active
personality jurisdiction”. | (7) 第6条草案第1款(b)项要求在被指控罪犯为该国国民时应确立管辖权，此类管辖权有时称为“国籍管辖权”或“主动属人管辖权”。 |
| Paragraph 1 (b) also indicates that the
State may, on an optional basis, establish jurisdiction where the offender is
“a stateless person who is habitually resident in the
territory of that State”. | 第1款(b)项还指出，若罪犯为“惯常在该国领土内居住的无国籍人”，该国可以有选择地确立管辖权。 |
| This formulation is based on the language
of certain existing conventions, such as article 5, paragraph 1 (b), of the
International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages. | 这种表述是基于一些现行公约的用语，例如《反对劫持人质国际公约》第5条第1款(b)项。 |
| (8) Draft article 6, paragraph 1 (c),
concerns jurisdiction when the victim of the offence is a national of the
State, a type of jurisdiction at times referred to as “passive personality jurisdiction”. | (8) 第6条草案第1款(c)项涉及犯罪受害人为该国国民时的管辖权，此类管辖权有时称为“被动属人管辖权”。 |
| Given that many States prefer not to
exercise this type of jurisdiction, this jurisdiction is optional; a State
may establish such jurisdiction “if that State
considers it appropriate”, but the State is not
obliged to do so. | 鉴于许多国家更倾向于不行使此类管辖权，这种管辖权是选择性的；“若一国认为应予管辖”便可以确立管辖权，但该国没有义务这样做。 |
| This formulation is also based on the
language of a wide variety of existing conventions. | 这种表述也是基于大量现行公约的用语。 |
| (9) Draft article 6, paragraph 2,
addresses a situation where the other types of jurisdiction may not exist,
but the alleged offender “is present” in the territory under the State’s
jurisdiction and the State does not extradite or surrender the person in
accordance with the present draft articles. | (9) 第6条草案第2款处理可能不存在其他类型的管辖权，但被指控罪犯“处于”一国管辖的领土内，而且该国不按照本条款草案予以引渡或移交的情况。 |
| In such a situation, even if the crime
was not committed in its territory, the alleged offender is not its national
and the victims of the crime are not its nationals, the State nevertheless is
obligated to establish jurisdiction given the presence of the alleged offender
in territory under its jurisdiction. | 此类情况下，即使罪行不是在该国领土内发生，被指控罪犯不是其国民，犯罪受害人也不是其国民，但鉴于被指控罪犯处于该国管辖的领土内，因此该国仍有义务确立管辖权。 |
| This obligation helps to prevent an
alleged offender from seeking refuge in a State that otherwise has no
connection with the offence. | 此项义务有助于防止被指控罪犯在本来与罪行没有任何关联的国家寻求庇护。 |
| (10) Draft article 6, paragraph 3, makes
clear that, while each State is obligated to enact these types of
jurisdiction, it does not exclude any other jurisdiction that is available
under the national law of that State. | (10) 第6条草案第3款明确指出，虽然各国有义务行使以上类型的管辖权，但不排除根据该国国内法可以确立的任何其他管辖权。 |
| Indeed, to preserve the right of States
parties to establish national jurisdiction beyond the scope of the treaty,
and without prejudice to any applicable rules of international law, treaties
addressing crimes typically leave open the possibility that a State party may
have established other jurisdictional grounds upon which to hold an alleged
offender accountable. | 事实上，为维护缔约国在条约范围之外确立国家管辖权的权利，同时不妨碍任何适用的国际法规则，处理犯罪行为的条约通常留有余地，让缔约国可以确立其他管辖权依据，据以追究被指控罪犯的责任。 |
| In their joint separate opinion in the
Arrest Warrant case, Judges Higgins, Kooijmans and Buergenthal cited, inter
alia, such a provision in the Convention against Torture, and stated: | 希金斯、科艾曼斯和比尔根塔尔法官在逮捕令案的联合个别意见中特别引用了《禁止酷刑公约》的这一条款，指出： |
| “We reject the suggestion that the battle
against impunity is ‘made over’ to international treaties and tribunals, with national courts
having no competence in such matters. | “我们反对这一建议，即打击有罪不罚现象的斗争已“移交”给国际条约和法庭，而国家法院在此类事项上没有权限。 |
| Great care has been taken when
formulating the relevant treaty provisions not to exclude other grounds of
jurisdiction that may be exercised on a voluntary basis.” | 在制定相关条约规定时开展了极为细致的工作，力求不排除其他可以在自愿的基础上行使管辖权的理由。” |
| (11) Establishment of the various types
of national jurisdiction set out in draft article 6 are important for
supporting an aut dedere aut judicare obligation, as set forth in draft
article 9 below. | (11) 确立第6条草案所列的各类国家管辖权，对于支持下文第9条草案所述“引渡或审判”义务也十分重要。 |
| In his separate opinion in the Arrest
Warrant case, Judge Guillaume remarked on the “system” set up under treaties of this sort: | 纪尧姆法官在逮捕令案的个别意见中谈及这类条约建立的“制度”： |
| “Whenever the perpetrator of any of the
offences covered by these conventions is found in the territory of a State,
that State is under an obligation to arrest him, and then extradite or
prosecute. | “一经发现这些公约所述罪行的犯罪人在一国领土内，该国就有义务将其逮捕，然后引渡或起诉。 |
| It must have first conferred jurisdiction
on its courts to try him if he is not extradited. | 该国首先必定已授予法院管辖权，若不引渡就对其进行审判。 |
| Thus, universal punishment of all the
offences in question is assured, as the perpetrators are denied refuge in all
States.” | 这样便可保证所有相关罪行均受到惩罚，因为所有国家都拒绝庇护犯罪人。 ” |
| Article 7 | 第7条 |
| Investigation | 调查 |
| Each State shall ensure that its
competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation
whenever there is reasonable ground to believe that acts constituting crimes
against humanity have been or are being committed in any territory under its
jurisdiction. | 各国应确保在有合理依据认为在其管辖的任何领土内已经或正在发生构成危害人类罪行的行为时，其主管当局立即进行公正的调查。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 7 addresses situations
where there is reasonable ground to believe that acts constituting crimes
against humanity have been or are being committed in territory under a State’s jurisdiction. | (1) 第7条草案处理有合理依据认为在一国管辖的任何领土内已经或正在发生构成危害人类罪行的行为的情况。 |
| That State is best situated to conduct
such an investigation, so as to determine whether crimes in fact have
occurred or are occurring and, if so, whether governmental forces under its
control committed the crimes, whether forces under the control of another
State did so or whether they were committed by members of a non-State organization. | 该国最适合开展这一调查，以便确定罪行是否确已发生或正在发生，如果是，则确定犯罪者是该国控制的政府军队、另一国控制的军队还是非国家组织。 |
| Such an investigation can lay the
foundation not only for identifying alleged offenders and their location, but
also for helping to prevent the continuance of ongoing crimes or their recurrence
by identifying their source. | 这样的调查不仅可以为查明被指控罪犯及其方位奠定基础，还有助于追本溯源以防止罪行延续或再度发生。 |
| Such an investigation should be
contrasted with a preliminary inquiry into the facts concerning a particular
alleged offender who is present in a State, which is addressed below in draft
article 8, paragraph 2. | 应将这一调查与下文第8条草案第2款所述对一国境内被指控罪犯的相关事实开展的初步调查加以对照。 |
| (2) A comparable obligation has featured
in some treaties addressing other crimes. | (2) 处理其他罪行的一些条约也载有类似义务。 |
| For example, article 12 of the Convention
against Torture provides: “Each State Party shall
ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial
investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of
torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction. ” | 例如，《禁止酷刑公约》第12条规定：“每一缔约国应确保在有适当理由认为在其管辖的任何领土内已发生酷刑行为时，其主管当局立即进行公正的调查。” |
| That obligation is different from the
State party’s obligation under article 6, paragraph
2, of the Convention against Torture to undertake an inquiry into the facts
concerning a particular alleged offender. | 此项义务有别于缔约国根据《禁止酷刑公约》第6条第2款承担的对某被指控罪犯的有关事实进行调查的义务。 |
| As indicated, article 12 of the
Convention against Torture requires that the investigation be carried out
whenever there is “reasonable ground to believe” that the offence has been committed, regardless of whether
victims have formally filed complaints with the State’s authorities. | 《禁止酷刑公约》第12条要求在有“适当理由认为”已发生犯罪行为时开展调查，无论受害人是否已向该国主管当局正式提出申诉。 |
| Indeed, since it is likely that the more
systematic the practice of torture is in a given country, the fewer the
number of official torture complaints that will be made, a violation of
article 12 of the Convention against Torture is possible even if the State
has received no such complaints. | 事实上，由于酷刑做法越普遍的国家，正式提出酷刑申诉的数目很可能越少，所以即使一国没有接到任何申诉，也可能发生违反《禁止酷刑公约》第12条的行为。 |
| The Committee against Torture has
indicated that State authorities must “proceed
automatically” to an investigation whenever there are
reasonable grounds to believe that an act of torture or ill-treatment has
been committed, with “no special importance being
attached to the grounds for the suspicion”. | 禁止酷刑委员会已经指出，凡有适当理由认为发生了酷刑或虐待，国家当局就必须“自动进行”调查，而“无需特别注重怀疑的依据”。 |
| (3) The Committee against Torture has
also found violations of article 12 if the State’s
investigation is not “prompt and impartial”. | (3) 禁止酷刑委员会还认为，如果国家调查做不到“及时而公正”，就违反了第12条。 |
| The requirement of promptness means that
as soon as there is suspicion of a crime having been committed,
investigations should be initiated immediately or without any delay. | 要求及时调查意味着一旦怀疑发生了犯罪行为，就应立即或毫不拖延地启动调查。 |
| In most cases where the Committee found a
lack of promptness, no investigation had been carried out at all or had only
been commenced after a long period of time had passed. | 在委员会认为调查不够及时的大多数案件中，或是根本没有进行任何调查，或是过了很长时间才开始调查。 |
| For example, the Committee considered “that a delay of 15 months before an investigation of allegations
of torture is initiated, is unreasonably long and not in compliance with the
requirement of article 12 of the Convention”. | 例如，委员会认为“对酷刑指控的调查如耽搁15个月才启动，属于时间过长，违反了《公约》第12条的规定。” |
| The rationale underlying the promptness
requirement is that physical traces that may prove torture can quickly
disappear and that victims may be in danger of further torture, which a
prompt investigation may be able to prevent. | 要求及时调查所依据的理由是，可证明酷刑的物质痕迹可能会很快消失，提出申诉的受害人也有再次遭受酷刑的危险，而及时调查有可能防止这些情况。 |
| (4) The requirement of impartiality means
that States must proceed with their investigations in a serious, effective
and unbiased manner. | (4) 要求公正调查意味着各国必须以严肃、有效和不偏不倚的方式进行调查。 |
| In some instances, the Committee against
Torture has recommended that investigation of offences be “under the direct supervision of independent members of the
judiciary”. | 禁止酷刑委员会曾在一些情况下建议，对犯罪行为的调查应“处于司法机构独立成员的直接监督之下”。 |
| In other instances, it has stated that “all government bodies not authorized to conduct investigations
into criminal matters should be strictly prohibited from doing so”. | 委员会曾在其他情况下表示，“应严格禁止所有无权进行刑事案件调查的政府机构进行此种调查。” |
| The Committee has stated that an
impartial investigation gives equal weight to assertions that the offence did
or did not occur, and then pursues appropriate avenues of inquiry, such as
checking available government records, examining relevant government
officials or ordering exhumation of bodies. | 委员会指出，公正的调查对犯罪行为发生或未发生的说法给予同等重视，然后通过适当的调查渠道追查，例如检查现有的政府记录、审查相关政府官员、或下令挖尸检验。 |
| (5) Some treaties that do not expressly
contain such an obligation to investigate have nevertheless been read as
implicitly containing one. | (5) 一些条约没有明确载列这种调查义务，但被理解为其行文暗含这一义务。 |
| For example, although the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights contains no such express obligation,
the Human Rights Committee has repeatedly asserted that States must
investigate, in good faith, violations of the Covenant. | 例如，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》没有明确载列这样的义务，但人权事务委员会一再申明各国必须秉持诚意调查违反《公约》的情况。 |
| Regional human rights bodies have also
interpreted their legal instruments as implicitly containing a duty to
conduct an investigation. | 区域人权机构也将其法律文书解释为隐含着进行调查的义务。 |
| Article 8 | 第8条 |
| Preliminary measures when an alleged
offender is present | 当被指控罪犯在境内时的初步措施 |
| 1. Upon being satisfied, after an examination
of information available to it, that the circumstances so warrant, any State
in the territory under whose jurisdiction a person alleged to have committed
any offence referred to in draft article 5 is present shall take the person
into custody or take other legal measures to ensure his or her presence. | 1. 任何国家，如果被指控犯有第5条草案所述任何罪行的人在其管辖下的领土之内，经审查所获情报后认为根据情况有此必要，应将该人拘押或采取其他法律措施确保该人留在境内。 |
| The custody and other legal measures
shall be as provided in the law of that State, but may be continued only for
such time as is necessary to enable any criminal, extradition or surrender
proceedings to be instituted. | 拘押和其他法律措施应符合该国法律的规定，但延续时间只限于提起任何刑事、引渡或移交程序所需的时间。 |
| 2. Such State shall immediately make a
preliminary inquiry into the facts. | 2. 该国应立即对事实进行初步调查。 |
| 3. When a State, pursuant to this draft
article, has taken a person into custody, it shall immediately notify the
States referred to in draft article 6, paragraph 1, of the fact that such
person is in custody and of the circumstances which warrant his or her
detention. | 3. 如一国根据本条草案将某人拘押，则应立即向第6条草案第1款所述各国通知该人受到拘押的事实和拘留该人之所以必要的情况。 |
| The State which makes the preliminary
inquiry contemplated in paragraph 2 of this draft article shall promptly
report its findings to the said States and shall indicate whether it intends
to exercise jurisdiction. | 本条草案第2款所述进行初步调查的国家应立即向所述有关各国通报调查结果，并表明是否有意行使管辖权。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 8 provides for certain
preliminary measures to be taken by the State in the territory under whose
jurisdiction an alleged offender is present. | (1) 第8条草案规定了被指控罪犯在其管辖下的领土之内时，一国应采取的某些初步措施。 |
| Paragraph 1 calls upon the State to take
the person into custody or take other legal measures to ensure his or her
presence, in accordance with that State’s law, but
only for such time as is necessary to enable any criminal, extradition or
surrender proceedings to be instituted. | 第1款促请该国依照本国法律将该人拘押或采取其他法律措施确保该人留在境内，但只限于提起任何刑事、引渡或移交程序所需的时间。 |
| Such measures are a common step in
national criminal proceedings, in particular to avoid further criminal acts
and a risk of flight by the alleged offender. | 此类措施是国家刑事诉讼程序中的惯常步骤，特别是为了避免进一步的犯罪行为和被指控罪犯逃跑的风险。 |
| (2) Paragraph 2 provides that the State
shall immediately make a preliminary inquiry into the facts. | (2) 第2款规定该国应立即对事实真相进行初步调查。 |
| The national criminal laws of States
typically provide for such a preliminary inquiry to determine whether a
prosecutable offence exists. | 各国刑法通常规定进行这种初步调查，以确定是否存在可起诉的罪行。 |
| (3) Paragraph 3 provides that the State
shall also immediately notify the States referred to in draft article 6,
paragraph 1, of its actions, and whether it intends to exercise jurisdiction. | (3) 第3款规定，该国应立即向第6条草案第1款所述各国通报其行动，及该国是否有意行使管辖权。 |
| Doing so allows those other States to
consider whether they wish to exercise jurisdiction, in which case they might
seek extradition. | 这种做法使其他国家得以考虑是否希望行使管辖权；如果是，它们有可能要求引渡。 |
| In some situations, the State may not be
fully aware of which other States have established jurisdiction (such as a
State that optionally has established jurisdiction with respect to a
stateless person who is habitually resident in that State’s territory); in such situations, the feasibility of fulfilling
the obligation may depend on the circumstances. | 有些情况下，该国也许并不充分了解哪些其他国家已经确立了管辖权(例如一国有选择地确立对惯常在该国领土内居住的一名无国籍人的管辖权)；此种情况下，履行此项义务的可行性也许要视具体情况而定。 |
| (4) Both the General Assembly and the
Security Council have recognized the importance of such preliminary measures
in the context of crimes against humanity. | (4) 联合国大会和安全理事会均认识到在危害人类罪方面采取此种措施的重要性。 |
| Thus, the General Assembly has called
upon “all the States concerned to take the necessary
measures for the thorough investigation of … crimes
against humanity … and for the detection, arrest,
extradition and punishment of all … persons guilty of
crimes against humanity who have not yet been brought to trial or punished”. | 因此，大会促请“一切有关国家采取必要措施，以彻底调查…危害人类罪…并对所有尚未交付审判或惩治之…危害人类罪犯施行侦查、逮捕、引渡及惩治”。 |
| Similarly, it has said that “refusal by States to co-operate in the arrest, extradition, trial
and punishment of persons guilty of … crimes against
humanity is contrary to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the
United Nations and to generally recognized norms of international law”. | 同样，大会还申明，“各国拒绝合作，不肯逮捕、引渡、审判和惩治…危害人类罪犯，便是违反联合国宪章的宗旨和原则以及国际法的公认规律”。 |
| The Security Council has emphasized “the responsibility of States to comply with their relevant
obligations to end impunity and to thoroughly investigate and prosecute
persons responsible for … crimes against humanity or
other serious violations of international humanitarian law in order to
prevent violations, avoid their recurrence and seek sustainable peace,
justice, truth and reconciliation”. | 安全理事会强调，“各国有责任遵守相关义务，终止有罪不罚的现象，彻底调查并起诉应对…危害人类罪或其他严重违反国际人道主义法行为负责的人，以防止违犯行为，避免这类行为重演，寻求持久和平、正义、真相与和解”。 |
| (5) Treaties addressing crimes typically
provide for such preliminary measures, such as article 6 of the Convention
against Torture. | (5) 处理犯罪问题的条约通常会规定此类初步措施，《禁止酷刑公约》第6条便是如此。 |
| Reviewing, inter alia, the provisions
contained in article 6, the International Court of Justice has explained that
“incorporating the appropriate legislation into
domestic law … would allow the State in whose
territory a suspect is present immediately to make a preliminary inquiry into
the facts …, a necessary step in order to enable that
State, with knowledge of the facts, to submit the case to its competent
authorities for the purpose of prosecution …”. | 国际法院除其他外回顾第6条所载规定时解释说，“将适当立法纳入国内法…可使嫌疑人所在国家立即对事实真相进行初步调查…这是使该国在了解事实后将案件提交其主管当局以便起诉的必要步骤…”。 |
| The Court found that the preliminary
inquiry is intended, like any inquiry carried out by the competent
authorities, to corroborate or not the suspicions regarding the person in
question. | 法院认为初步调查与主管当局进行的任何调查一样，是为了证明对所涉人员的怀疑是否属实。 |
| Those authorities who conduct the inquiry
have the task of drawing up a case file containing relevant facts and
evidence; “this may consist of documents or witness
statements relating to the events at issue and to the suspect’s possible involvement in the matter concerned”. | 开展调查的机关负责起草案卷，其中载有相关事实和证据；“这可能包括与所讨论的事件和与嫌疑人在相关事件中可能的参与情况有关的文件或目击者证词”。 |
| The Court further noted that “the choice of means for conducting the inquiry remains in the
hands of the States Parties”, but that “steps must be taken as soon as the suspect is identified in the
territory of the State, in order to conduct an investigation of that case”. | 法院还指出，“选择什么方式进行调查仍然取决于缔约国”，但“确定嫌疑人在该国境内之后，应立即采取步骤对该案件进行调查。” |
| Further, the purpose of such preliminary
measures is “to enable proceedings to be brought
against the suspect, in the absence of his extradition, and to achieve the
objective and purpose of the Convention, which is to make more effective the
struggle against torture by avoiding impunity for the perpetrators of such
acts”. | 此外，这种初步措施的目的是“在嫌疑人未被引渡的情况下对其展开司法程序，实现《公约》的宗旨和目标，即通过避免这类行为实施者有罪不罚的现象提高打击酷刑斗争的成效”。 |
| Article 9 | 第9条 |
| Aut dedere aut judicare | 引渡或审判 |
| The State in the territory under whose
jurisdiction the alleged offender is present shall submit the case to its
competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, unless it extradites or
surrenders the person to another State or competent international criminal
tribunal. | 被指控罪犯在其管辖下的领土之内的国家，应将该案提交主管当局以便起诉，除非该国将犯罪人引渡或移交另一国家或主管国际刑事法庭。 |
| Those authorities shall take their
decision in the same manner as in the case of any other offence of a grave
nature under the law of that State. | 这些当局应以处理该国法律定为性质严重的任何其他罪行的相同方式作出决定。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 9 obliges a State, in
the territory under whose jurisdiction an alleged offender is present, to
submit the alleged offender to prosecution within the State’s national system. | (1) 第9条草案规定，被指控罪犯在其管辖下的领土之内的国家，有义务在该国的国内系统将被指控罪犯提交起诉。 |
| The only alternative means of meeting
this obligation is if the State extradites or surrenders the alleged offender
to another State or competent international criminal tribunal that is willing
and able itself to submit the matter to prosecution. | 履行这项义务的唯一替代手段是该国将被指控罪犯引渡或移交愿意且有能力自行将该事项提交起诉的另一国家或主管国际刑事法庭。 |
| This obligation is commonly referred to
as the principle of aut dedere aut judicare, a principle that has been
recently studied by the Commission and that is contained in numerous
multilateral treaties addressing crimes. | 这项义务通常称为引渡或审判原则，这是委员会最近研究的一项原则， 许多有关罪行的多边条约也载有该原则。 |
| While a literal translation of aut dedere
aut judicare may not fully capture the meaning of this obligation, the
Commission chose to retain the term in the title, given its common use when
referring to an obligation of this kind. | 虽然aut dedere aut judicare的直译可能无法充分体现该义务的含义，但委员会决定应该在标题中保留这一术语，在提及此种义务时普遍使用。 |
| (2) The Commission’s 1996 draft code of crimes against the peace and security of
mankind defined crimes against humanity in article 18 and further provided,
in article 9, that: “Without prejudice to the
jurisdiction of an international criminal court, the State Party in the
territory of which an individual alleged to have committed a crime set out in
article 17, 18, 19 or 20 is found shall extradite or prosecute that
individual.” | (2) 委员会1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》第18条为“危害人类罪”作了定义，并在第9条中进一步规定，“在不妨害国际刑事法院的管辖权的情形下，在其领土上发现据指控有第17、第18、第19或第20条所述罪行之个人的缔约国应引渡或起诉该个人”。 |
| (3) Most multilateral treaties containing
such an obligation use what is referred to as “The
Hague formula”, after the 1970 Hague Convention for
the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft. | (3) 载有这种义务 的大多数多边条约使用得名于1970年《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》的所谓的“海牙套语”。 |
| Under that formula, the obligation arises
whenever the alleged offender is present in the territory of the State party,
regardless of whether some other State party seeks extradition. | 该套语规定，只要被指控罪犯在缔约国领土上，不管其他缔约国是否要求引渡，都会产生此种义务。 |
| Although regularly termed the obligation
to extradite or “prosecute”,
the obligation is to “submit the case to its
competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution”,
meaning to submit the matter to prosecutorial authorities, which may or may
not decide to prosecute. | 虽然经常被称为引渡或“起诉”义务，但所要求的义务是“将该案提交主管当局以便起诉”，这意味着将案件提交检察机关，该机关可决定是否起诉。 |
| In particular, if the competent
authorities determine that there is insufficient evidence of guilt, then the
accused need not be indicted, nor stand trial or face punishment. | 具体而言，如果主管当局确定没有足够证据定罪，则不需要起诉被指控罪犯，也不需要对其进行审判或惩处。 |
| The travaux préparatoires
of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft
indicate that the formula established “the obligation
of apprehension of the alleged offender, a possibility of extradition, the
obligation of reference to the competent authority and the possibility of
prosecution”. | 《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》的准备工作文件说明，该套语规定“有义务逮捕被指控罪犯，有可能引渡，有义务提交主管当局，并有可能进行起诉。
” |
| (4) In Questions relating to the
Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), the International
Court of Justice analysed The Hague formula in the context of article 7 of
the Convention against Torture: | (4) 在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(比利时诉塞内加尔)中，国际法院分析了《禁止酷刑公约》第7条中的海牙套语： |
| “90. As is apparent from the travaux préparatoires of the Convention, Article 7, paragraph 1, is based on
a similar provision contained in the Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, signed at The Hague on 16 December 1970. | “90. 从《公约》的准备工作文件中可以明显看出，第7条第1款是基于1970年12月16日在海牙签署的《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》中载有的一个类似规定。 |
| The obligation to submit the case to the
competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution (hereinafter the ‘obligation to prosecute’) was formulated
in such a way as to leave it to those authorities to decide whether or not to
initiate proceedings, thus respecting the independence of States parties’ judicial systems. | 有关将该案提交主管当局以便起诉的义务(以下称“起诉义务”)的规定是以交由主管当局决定是否要开始诉讼程序的方式作出的，从而显示对缔约国司法系统的独立性的尊重。 |
| These two conventions emphasize,
moreover, that the authorities shall take their decision in the same manner
as in the case of any ordinary offence of a serious nature under the law of
the State concerned (Article 7, paragraph 2, of the Convention against
Torture and Article 7 of the Hague Convention of 1970). | 此外，这两项公约都强调主管当局应根据该国法律，以对待情节严重的任何普通犯罪案件的同样方式作出决定(《禁止酷刑公约》第7条第2款和1970《海牙公约》第7条)。 |
| It follows that the competent authorities
involved remain responsible for deciding on whether to initiate a
prosecution, in the light of the evidence before them and the relevant rules
of criminal procedure. | 因此，有关国家当局仍有责任决定是否根据已经掌握的证据和有关的刑事诉讼规则提起诉讼。 |
| “91. The obligation to prosecute provided
for in Article 7, paragraph 1, is normally implemented in the context of the
Convention against Torture after the State has performed the other obligations
provided for in the preceding articles, which require it to adopt adequate
legislation to enable it to criminalize torture, give its courts universal
jurisdiction in the matter and make an inquiry into the facts. | “91. 第7条第1款中规定的起诉义务通常是在该国已履行《禁止酷刑公约》该条款之前条款中规定的其他义务后履行的，其中要求该国通过适当立法，使其可以将酷刑定为刑事罪、赋予其法院对该问题的普遍管辖权，并对事实展开调查。 |
| These obligations, taken as a whole, may
be regarded as elements of a single conventional mechanism aimed at
preventing suspects from escaping the consequences of their criminal responsibility,
if proven … | 这些义务作为一个整体可视为一个单一的公约机制的要素，这一公约机制的目的是防止嫌疑人逃脱其经证实的刑事责任的后果… |
| “94. The Court considers that Article 7,
paragraph 1, requires the State concerned to submit the case to its competent
authorities for the purpose of prosecution, irrespective of the existence of
a prior request for the extradition of the suspect. | “94. 法院认为，第7条第1款要求有关国家将案件提交其主管当局以便起诉，无论此前有无引渡嫌疑人的请求。 |
| That is why Article 6, paragraph 2,
obliges the State to make a preliminary inquiry immediately from the time
that the suspect is present in its territory. | 这就是为何第6条第2款规定，自嫌疑人入境之时起，该国必须立即进行初步调查。 |
| The obligation to submit the case to the
competent authorities, under Article 7, paragraph 1, may or may not result in
the institution of proceedings, in the light of the evidence before them,
relating to the charges against the suspect. | 第7条第1款规定的将案件提交主管当局的义务，可能会，也可能不会导致提起诉讼，这要看当局关于嫌疑人所受指控得到的证据。 |
| “95. However, if the State in whose
territory the suspect is present has received a request for extradition in
any of the cases envisaged in the provisions of the Convention, it can
relieve itself of its obligation to prosecute by acceding to that request. | “95. 然而，如果嫌疑人所在国已经在《公约》条款中设想的任一情况下收到了引渡请求，该国可以通过接受此请求免除起诉的义务。 |
| It follows that the choice between
extradition or submission for prosecution, pursuant to the Convention, does
not mean that the two alternatives are to be given the same weight. | 由此可见，《公约》虽然规定可以选择引渡或选择交付起诉，但不意味着两种选择分量相当。 |
| Extradition is an option offered to the
State by the Convention, whereas prosecution is an international obligation under
the Convention, the violation of which is a wrongful act engaging the
responsibility of the State. | 引渡是《公约》提供给国家的一个备选办法，而起诉是《公约》规定的一项国际义务，违反这项义务属于不法行为，国家为此要承担责任。 |
| “114. While Article 7, paragraph 1, of
the Convention does not contain any indication as to the time frame for
performance of the obligation for which it provides, it is necessarily
implicit in the text that it must be implemented within a reasonable time, in
a manner compatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. | “114. 尽管《公约》第7条第1款没有关于履行其规定义务的时间框架的规定，在案文中必定暗示此种义务须在合理的时间内以符合《公约》的宗旨和目的的方式履行。 |
| “115. The Court considers that the
obligation on a State to prosecute, provided for in Article 7, paragraph 1,
of the Convention, is intended to allow the fulfilment of the Convention’s object and purpose, which is ‘to make
more effective the struggle against torture’
(Preamble to the Convention). | “115. 法院认为，《公约》第7条第1款中规定国家有起诉义务，其意图是实现《公约》的宗旨和目的，即“在全世界更有效地开展反对酷刑的斗争”(《公约》序言)。 |
| It is for that reason that proceedings
should be undertaken without delay. | 为此，应毫不拖延地开展诉讼程序。 |
| “120. The purpose of these treaty
provisions is to prevent alleged perpetrators of acts of torture from going
unpunished, by ensuring that they cannot find refuge in any State party. | “120. 这些条约规定的目的是防止被指控的酷刑行为犯罪人免受处罚，方法是确保他们无法在任何缔约国避难。 |
| The State in whose territory the suspect
is present does indeed have the option of extraditing him to a country which
has made such a request, but on the condition that it is to a State which has
jurisdiction in some capacity, pursuant to Article 5 of the Convention, to
prosecute and try him.” | 嫌疑人所在国家确实可选择将其引渡到提出此种要求的国家，但根据《公约》第5条，这样做的条件是引渡的目的地国具有起诉和审判嫌疑人方面的管辖权。
” |
| (5) The Court also found that various
factors could not justify a failure to comply with these obligations: the
financial difficulties of a State; referral of the matter to a regional
organization; or difficulties with implementation under the State’s internal law. | (5) 法院还认定，下述多种因素无法成为不履行这些义务的理由：国家财政困难；
将问题提交区域组织；或根据国家的国内法难以履行此种义务。 |
| (6) The first sentence of draft article 9
recognizes that the State’s obligation can be
satisfied by extraditing or surrendering the alleged offender not just to a
State, but also to an international criminal tribunal that is competent to
prosecute the offender. | (6) 第9条草案第一句话确认，履行国家义务可通过将被指控罪犯引渡或移交另一国家，还可引渡或移交有权起诉罪犯的国际刑事法庭。 |
| This third option has arisen in
conjunction with the establishment of the International Criminal Court and
other international criminal tribunals. | 随着国际刑事法院和其他国际刑事法庭的设立，出现了这第三种选择。 |
| While the term “extradition” is often associated with the sending of a person to a State and
the term “surrender” is
typically used for the sending of a person to a competent international
criminal tribunal, draft article 9 is written so as not to limit the use of
the terms in that way. | “引渡”一词往往涉及将某人送往一国，但“移交”一词通常用于将某人送往主管国际刑事法庭，第9条草案如此编写是为了不以这种方式限制术语的使用。 |
| The terminology used in national criminal
systems and in international relations can vary and, for that reason, the
Commission considered that a more general formulation is preferable. | 国家刑事系统和国际关系中使用的术语可能各不相同， 因此，委员会认为更笼统的措辞是可取的。 |
| Further, while draft article 9 might
condition the reference to an international criminal tribunal so as to say
that it must be a tribunal whose jurisdiction the sending State has
recognized, such a qualification was viewed as unnecessary. | 此外，虽然第9条草案将提法的范围限制为国际刑事法庭以便表示必须是送出国承认其司法权的法庭，
但这种限制被视为没有必要。 |
| (7) The second sentence of draft article
9 provides that, when a State submits the matter to prosecution or extradites
or surrenders the person, its “authorities shall take
their decision in the same manner as in the case of any other offence of a
grave nature under the law of that State”. | (7) 第9条草案第2句规定，当一国将案件提交起诉或引渡或移交人员时，其“当局应以处理该国法律定为性质严重的任何其他罪行的相同方式作出决定”。 |
| Most treaties containing The Hague
formula include such a clause, the objective of which is to help ensure that
the normal procedures and standards of evidence relating to serious offences
are applied. | 载有海牙套语的大部分条约都包括这样一个条款，其目的是帮助确保与严重罪行有关的正规程序和证据标准得到适用。 |
| Article 10 | 第10条 |
| Fair treatment of the alleged offender | 公平对待被指控罪犯 |
| 1. Any person against whom measures are
being taken in connection with an offence referred to in draft article 5
shall be guaranteed at all stages of the proceedings fair treatment,
including a fair trial, and full protection of his or her rights under
applicable national and international law, including human rights law. | 1. 任何因第5条草案所述罪行而被采取法律措施的人，在诉讼的所有阶段应保障其公平待遇，包括公平审判，并应充分保护该人按照适用的国内法和国际法、包括人权法所具有的各项权利。 |
| 2. Any such person who is in prison,
custody or detention in a State that is not of his or her nationality shall
be entitled: | 2. 在非本人国籍国的监狱、扣押或拘留中的任何此类人员应有权： |
| (a) to communicate without delay with the
nearest appropriate representative of the State or States of which such
person is a national or which is otherwise entitled to protect that person’s rights or, if such person is a stateless person, of the State
which, at that person’s request, is willing to
protect that person’s rights; | (a) 立即联络下述国家的距离最近的适当代表：其国籍国或有权保护其权利的其他国家，如此人为无国籍人员，则为经其请求而愿意保护其权利的国家； |
| (b) to be visited by a representative of
that State or those States; and | (b) 接受此类国家代表的探视； |
| (c) to be informed without delay of his
or her rights under this paragraph. | (c) 立即被告知其根据本款所享有的权利。 |
| 3. The rights referred to in paragraph 2
shall be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the State
in the territory under whose jurisdiction the person is present, subject to
the proviso that the said laws and regulations must enable full effect to be
given to the purpose for which the rights accorded under paragraph 2 are
intended. | 3. 第2款所述各项权利的行使应符合该人所在领土管辖国的法律和规章，但所述法律和规章必须能使第2款所规定权利的预期目的得到充分落实。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 10 is focused on the
obligation of the State to accord to an alleged offender who is present in
territory under the State’s jurisdiction fair
treatment, including a fair trial and full protection of his or her rights. | (1) 第10条草案侧重于国家给予在该国管辖下的领土之内的被指控罪犯公平待遇，包括公平审判和充分保护其权利。 |
| Moreover, draft article 10 acknowledges
the right of an alleged offender, who is not of the State’s nationality but who is in prison, custody or detention, to have
access to a representative of his or her State. | 此外，第10条草案承认在非本人国籍国的监狱、扣押或拘留中的被指控罪犯接触其国籍国代表的权利。 |
| (2) All States provide within their
national law for protections of one degree or another for persons who they
investigate, detain, try or punish for a criminal offence. | (2) 所有国家的国内法均规定在不同程度上保护该国因刑事犯罪而受到调查、拘留、审判或惩罚的人。 |
| Such protections may be specified in a
constitution, statute, administrative rule or judicial precedent. | 这种保护可能是在宪法、法规、行政规章或司法先例中作出的明确规定。 |
| Further, detailed rules may be codified
or a broad standard may be set referring to “fair
treatment”, “due process”, “judicial guarantees” or “equal protection”. | 此外，还可能会编纂详细规则，或确立大略标准，提及“公平待遇”、“正当程序”、“司法保障”、或“平等保护”。 |
| Such protections are extremely important
in ensuring that the extraordinary power of the State’s criminal justice apparatus is not improperly brought to bear
upon a suspect, among other things preserving for that individual the ability
to contest fully the State’s allegations before an
independent court (hence, allowing for an “equality
of arms”). | 这种保护极为重要，因为它能避免国家刑事司法机构将其超常权力不当地施加于嫌疑人，其效果包括使该个人能够向独立法庭充分质疑该国的指控(因而保障“权利平等”)。 |
| (3) Important protections are also now
well recognized in international criminal law and human rights law. | (3) 现在，此种重要保护在国际刑法和人权法中也已得到明确承认。 |
| At the most general level such
protections are acknowledged in articles 10 and 11 of the 1948 Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, while more specific standards binding upon
States are set forth in article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. | 在最普遍的层面上，1948年《世界人权宣言》第十和第十一条确认了此类保护，
而《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十四条提出了对国家具有约束力的更具体的标准。 |
| As a general matter, instruments
establishing standards for an international court or tribunal seek to specify
the standards set forth in article 14 of the Covenant, while treaties
addressing national law provide a broad standard that is intended to
acknowledge and incorporate the specific standards of article 14 and of other
relevant instruments “at all stages” of the national proceedings involving the alleged offender. | 普遍而言，为国际法院或法庭规定标准的文书一般均致力于具体叙述《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十四条中规定的标准，而关于国内法的文书则采用大略的标准，意图是在涉及被指控罪犯的国内诉讼的“所有阶段”确认和体现第十四条以及其他有关文书的具体标准。 |
| (4) These treaties addressing national
law do not define the term “fair treatment”, but the term is viewed as incorporating the specific rights
possessed by an alleged offender, such as those under article 14 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. | (4) 关于国内法的这些条约没有定义“公平待遇”一词，但该词被视为包括被指控罪犯拥有的具体权利，如《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十四条规定的权利。 |
| Thus, when crafting article 8 of the
draft articles on crimes against diplomatic agents, the Commission asserted
that the formulation of “fair treatment at all stages
of the proceedings” was “intended
to incorporate all the guarantees generally recognized to a detained or
accused person”, and that an “example of such guarantees is found in article 14 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”. | 因此，委员会在起草关于防止和惩处侵害外交代表和其他应受国际保护人员的罪行的条款草案第8条时指出，“在诉讼的所有阶段受到公平待遇”的表述“旨在涵盖被拘留者或被告的所有公认保障规定”，并指出“这类保障的一个例子见《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十四条”。 |
| Further, the Commission noted that the “expression ‘fair treatment’ was preferred, because of its generality, to more usual expressions
such as ‘due process’, ‘fair hearing’ or ‘fair
trial’ which might be interpreted in a narrow
technical sense”. | 此外委员会还指出“‘适当程序’、‘公平审理’或‘公平审判’等较常见的表述可能被人从狭义的技术意义上加以解释。 与之相比，‘公平待遇’的表述比较广义，因此更可取”。 |
| Finally, the Commission also explained
that the formulation of “all stages of the
proceedings” is “intended to
safeguard the rights of the alleged offender from the moment he is found and
measures are taken to ensure his presence until a final decision is taken on
the case”. | 最后，委员会还解释说，“诉讼的各个阶段”的表述“旨在于被指控罪犯被发现和采取措施使其留在境内的时刻起直至就案件作出最后裁决期间保障其权利”。 |
| (5) While the term “fair treatment” includes the concept of a “fair trial”, in many treaties reference to
a fair trial is expressly included to stress its particular importance. | (5) 虽然“公平待遇”一词包含“公平审判”概念，但许多条约明确提及公平审判，以强调其特别重要性。 |
| Indeed, the Human Rights Committee has
found the right to a fair trial to be a “key element
of human rights protection” and a “procedural means to safeguard the rule of law”. | 事实上，人权事务委员会认为，获得公平审判的权利是“人权保护的一项关键内容”，也是“保障法治的一项程序手段”。 |
| Consequently, draft article 10, paragraph
1, refers to fair treatment “including a fair trial”. | 因此，第10条草案第1款中称公平待遇“包括公平审判”。 |
| (6) In addition to fair treatment, an
alleged offender is also entitled to the highest protection of his or her
rights, whether arising under applicable national or international law,
including human rights law. | (6) 除了公平待遇，被指控罪犯还有权得到对其权利的最高保护，无论这种权利产生于适用的国内法还是国际法，包括国际人权法。 |
| Such rights are set forth in the
constitutions, statutes or other rules within the national legal systems of
States. At the international level, they are set out in global human rights
treaties, in regional human rights treaties or in other applicable
instruments. | 这些权利载于宪法、法规或各国的国内法律制度内的其他规则，在国际层面，则载于全球人权条约、区域人权条约 或其他适用文书。 |
| Consequently, draft article 10, paragraph
1, also recognizes that the State must provide full protection of the
offender’s “rights under
applicable national and international law, including human rights law”. | 因此，第10条草案第1款还承认，各国必须充分保护罪犯“按照适用的国内法和国际法、包括人权法所具有的各项权利”。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 of draft article 10
addresses the State’s obligations with respect to an
alleged offender who is not of the State’s
nationality and who is in “prison, custody or
detention”. | (7) 第10条草案第2款阐述国家对在非本人国籍国和“在监狱、扣押或拘留中”的被指控罪犯的义务。 |
| That term is to be understood as
embracing all situations where the State restricts the person’s ability to communicate freely with and be visited by a
representative of his or her State of nationality. | 这一表述应被理解为包括国家限制人员与其国籍国代表自由联络和接受这些代表探视的所有情况。 |
| In such situations, the State in the
territory under whose jurisdiction the alleged offender is present is
required to allow the alleged offender to communicate, without delay, with
the nearest appropriate representative of the State or States of which such a
person is a national, or the State or States otherwise entitled to protect
that person’s rights. | 在这些情况下，要求被指控罪犯在其管辖下的领土之内的国家立即联络下述国家的距离最近的适当代表：其国籍国或有权保护其权利的其他国家或经其请求而愿意保护其权利的国家。 |
| Further, the alleged offender is entitled
to be visited by a representative of that State or those States. | 此外，被指控罪犯有权接受此类国家代表的探视。 |
| Finally, the alleged offender is entitled
to be informed without delay of these rights. | 最后，被指控罪犯有权立即被告知这些权利。 |
| Moreover, paragraph 2 applies these
rights as well to a stateless person, requiring that such person be entitled
to communicate without delay with the nearest appropriate representative of the
State which, at that person’s request, is willing to
protect that person’s rights and to be visited by
that representative. | 此外，第2款对无国籍人也适用这些权利，要求这些人有权立即联络经其请求而愿意保护其权利的国家的距离最近的适当代表，并接受该代表的探视。 |
| (8) Such rights are spelled out in
greater detail in article 36, paragraph 1, of the 1963 Vienna Convention on
Consular Relations, which accords rights to both the detained person and to
the State of nationality and in customary international law. | (8) 1963年《维也纳领事关系公约》第三十六条第一款 (将权利赋予被拘留者和国籍国 )和习惯国际法更为详细地阐述了这些权利。 |
| Recent treaties addressing crimes
typically do not seek to go into such detail but, like draft article 10,
paragraph 2, instead simply reiterate that the alleged offender is entitled
to communicate with, and be visited by, his or her State of nationality (or,
if a stateless person, with the State where he or she usually resides or that
is otherwise willing to protect that person’s
rights). | 最近的针对罪行的条约通常不会如此详细，而是与第10条草案第2款一样，仅重申被指控罪犯有权联络其国籍国并接受其探视(对无国籍者而言，则有权联络其通常居住的国家或其他愿意保护此人权利的国家)。 |
| (9) Paragraph 3 of draft article 10
provides that the rights referred to in paragraph 2 shall be exercised in
conformity with the laws and regulations of the State in the territory under
whose jurisdiction the person is present, provided that such laws and
regulations do not prevent such rights being given the full effect for which
they are intended. | (9) 第10条草案第3款规定，第2款所述各项权利的行使应符合该人所在领土管辖国的法律和规章，但这些法律和规章不得妨碍这些权利的预期目的得到充分落实。 |
| Those national laws and regulations may
relate, for example, to the ability of an investigating magistrate to impose
restrictions on communication for the protection of victims or witnesses, as
well as standard conditions with respect to visitation of a person being held
at a detention facility. | 这些国内法律和规章可涉及调查法官为保护受害者和证人而对联络施加限制的能力以及探视被关押在拘留设施的人的标准条件等问题。 |
| A comparable provision exists in article
36, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and has been
included as well in many treaties addressing crimes. | 《维也纳领事关系公约》第三十六条第二款 中存在一个类似条款，该条款还被列入了许多关于犯罪的条约。 |
| The Commission explained the provision in
its commentary to what became the Vienna Convention as follows: | 委员会在后来成为《维也纳公约》的条款草案的评注中对该条款作了如下解释： |
| “(5) All the above-mentioned rights are
exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the receiving State. | “(5) 上述各项权利依照接收国的法律和规章行使。 |
| Thus, visits to persons in custody or
imprisoned are permissible in conformity with the provisions of the code of
criminal procedure and prison regulations. | 因此，依照刑事诉讼法和监狱规章的规定，探视被羁押和监禁者是可允许的。 |
| As a general rule, for the purpose of
visits to a person in custody against whom a criminal investigation or a
criminal trial is in process, codes of criminal procedure require the
permission of the examining magistrate, who will decide in the light of the
requirements of the investigation. | 作为一项一般规则，为了探视正在受到刑事调查或刑事审判的被羁押者，刑事诉讼法要求得到预审法官的许可，预审法官将根据调查要求作出决定。 |
| In such a case, the consular official
must apply to the examining magistrate for permission. | 在这样的案件中，领事官员必须向预审法官申请许可。 |
| In the case of a person imprisoned in
pursuance of a judgement, the prison regulations governing visits to inmates
apply also to any visits which the consular official may wish to make to a
prisoner who is a national of the sending State. | 在一人根据一项判决而被监禁的情况下，关于探视囚犯的监狱规章也适用于领事官员对身为派遣国国民的犯人的探视。 |
| “(7) Although the rights provided for in
this article must be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of
the receiving State, this does not mean that these laws and regulations can
nullify the rights in question.” | “(7) 虽然本条规定的权利的行使必须符合接收国的法律和规章，但这不意味着这些法律和规章可以宣布有关权利无效”。 |
| (10) In the LaGrand case, the
International Court of Justice found that the reference to “rights” in article 36, paragraph 2, of the
Vienna Convention “must be read as applying not only
to the rights of the sending State, but also to the rights of the detained
individual”. | (10) 在拉格朗案中，国际法院裁定，《维也纳公约》第三十六条第二款中所述“权利”“必须被解读为不仅适用于派遣国的权利，而且也适用于被拘禁的个人的权利”。 |
| Chapter VIII | 第八章 |
| Protection of the atmosphere | 保护大气层 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 86. The Commission, at its sixty-fifth
session (2013), decided to include the topic “Protection
of the atmosphere” in its programme of work, subject
to an understanding, and appointed Mr. Shinya Murase as Special Rapporteur. | 86. 委员会第六十五届会议(2013年)决定根据一项谅解将“保护大气层”专题列入工作方案，并任命村濑信也先生为特别报告员。 |
| 87. The Commission received and
considered the first report of the Special Rapporteur at its sixty-sixth
session (2014) and the second report at its sixty-seventh session (2015). | 87. 委员会第六十六届会议(2014年)收到并审议了特别报告员提交的第一次报告， 第六十七届会议(2015年)收到并审议了第二次报告。 |
| On the basis of the draft guidelines
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in the second report, the Commission
provisionally adopted three draft guidelines and four preambular paragraphs,
together with commentaries thereto. | 委员会在特别报告员第二次报告提出的指南草案的基础上，暂时通过了三条指南草案和四个序言段落及其评注。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 88. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/692). | 88. 在本届会议上，委员会收到了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/692)。 |
| The Special Rapporteur, building on the
previous two reports, analysed several key issues relevant to the topic,
namely, the obligations of States to prevent atmospheric pollution and
mitigate atmospheric degradation and the requirement of due diligence and
environmental impact assessment. | 特别报告员在前两次报告的基础上，分析了与此专题有关的一些重要问题，即国家防止大气污染和减缓全球大气层退化的义务和尽职要求以及环境影响评估。 |
| He also explored questions concerning
sustainable and equitable utilization of the atmosphere, as well as the legal
limits on certain activities aimed at intentional modification of the
atmosphere. | 报告员还探讨了与可持续和公平利用大气层有关的问题以及对某些有意改变大气层的活动的法律限制。 |
| Accordingly, the Special Rapporteur
proposed draft guidelines on the obligation of States to protect the
environment, environmental impact assessment, sustainable utilization of the
atmosphere, equitable utilization of the atmosphere and geo-engineering. | 相应地，特别报告员提出了以下指南草案：国家保护大气层的义务、环境影响评估、可持续利用大气层、公平利用大气层、地球工程。 |
| He also proposed an additional preambular
paragraph, to be the fourth preambular paragraph, and the renumbering of the
draft guideline on international cooperation provisionally adopted by the
Commission in 2015. | 他还建议在序言部分增加一段，作为第四段，并对委员会2015年暂时通过的关于国际合作的指南草案重新编号。 |
| 89. The Special Rapporteur indicated that
in 2017 the Commission could deal with the question of the interrelationship
of the law of the atmosphere with other fields of international law (such as
the law of the sea, international trade and investment law and international
human rights law), and in 2018 with the issues of implementation, compliance
and dispute settlement relevant to the protection of the atmosphere, with the
intention of completing the first reading of the topic that year. | 89. 特别报告员表示，委员会可以在2017年处理大气层法律与其他领域的国际法(如海洋法、国际贸易和投资法及国际人权法)之间相互关系的问题，在2018年处理与保护大气层有关的执行、遵守和争端解决问题，希望在当年完成此专题的一读。 |
| 90. The Commission considered the third
report of the Special Rapporteur at its 3306th, 3307th, 3308th, and 3311th
meetings, on 27 and 31 May, and 1 and 7 June 2016. | 90. 委员会在2016年5月27日和31日、6月1日和7日举行的第3306、3307、3308、3311次会议上审议了特别报告员的第三次报告。 |
| 91. The debate in the Commission was
preceded by a dialogue with scientists organized by the Special Rapporteur on
4 May 2016. | 91. 在委员会进行辩论之前，特别报告员于2016年5月4日组织了与科学家的对话。 |
| Members of the Commission found the
dialogue and the contributions made useful. | 委员会委员认为对话和发言十分有用。 |
| 92. Following its debate on the report,
the Commission, at its 3311th meeting, on 7 June 2016, decided to refer draft
guidelines 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, together with the fourth preambular paragraph,
as contained in the Special Rapporteur’s third
report, to the Drafting Committee. | 92. 委员会在2016年6月7日举行的第3311次会议上就报告进行辩论后，决定将指南草案3、4、5、6、7，连同特别报告员第三次报告所载序言部分第四段，一并提交起草委员会。 |
| 93. At its 3314th meeting, on 4 July
2016, the Commission received the report of the Drafting Committee. | 93. 委员会在2016年7月4日举行的第3314次会议上收到了起草委员会的报告。 |
| At its 3315th meeting, on 5 July 2016,
the Commission considered and provisionally adopted five draft guidelines and
a preambular paragraph (see section C.1, below). | 委员会在2016年7月5日举行的第3315次会议上审议并暂时通过了五条指南草案以及一个序言部分段落(见下文第C.1节)。 |
| 94. At its 3341st to 3343rd meetings, on
9 and 10 August 2016, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft
guidelines provisionally adopted at the present session (see section C.2,
below). | 94. 在2016年8月9日和10日举行的第3341至3343次会议上，委员会通过了本届会议暂时通过的指南草案的评注(见下文第C.2节)。 |
| C. Text of the draft guidelines on the
protection of the atmosphere, together with preambular paragraphs,
provisionally adopted so far by the Commission | C. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的关于保护大气层的指南草案案文及序言部分段落 |
| 1. Text of the draft guidelines, together
with preambular paragraphs | 1. 指南草案案文及序言部分段落 |
| 95. The text of the draft guidelines on
the protection of the atmosphere, together with preambular paragraphs,
provisionally adopted so far by the Commission is reproduced below. | 95. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的关于保护大气层的指南草案案文及序言部分段落载录如下。 |
| Preamble | 序言 |
| Acknowledging that the atmosphere is
essential for sustaining life on Earth, human health and welfare, and aquatic
and terrestrial ecosystems, | 承认大气层是维持地球上的生命、人类健康和福祉以及水生和陆地生态系统所不可缺少的， |
| Bearing in mind that the transport and
dispersion of polluting and degrading substances occur within the atmosphere, | 铭记大气层中存在污染物质和降解物质的输送和扩散， |
| Recognizing therefore that the protection
of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation is a
pressing concern of the international community as a whole, | 因此认识到保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化是整个国际社会面临的紧迫关切问题， |
| Aware of the special situation and needs
of developing countries, | 认识到发展中国家的特殊情况和需要， |
| Recalling that these draft guidelines are
not to interfere with relevant political negotiations, including those on
climate change, ozone depletion, and long-range transboundary air pollution,
and that they also neither seek to “fill” gaps in treaty regimes nor impose on current treaty regimes legal
rules or legal principles not already contained therein, | 忆及本指南草案不会影响有关的政治谈判，包括关于气候变化、臭氧层消耗、远距离跨界空气污染的政治谈判，也不会试图“弥补”条约制度中存在的缺陷，或是给现行条约制度强加条约制度尚不具有的法律规则或法律原则， |
| [Some other paragraphs may be added and
the order of paragraphs may be coordinated at a later stage.] | [之后可增加其他段落或调整段落顺序。] |
| Guideline 1 | 指南1 |
| Use of terms | 用语 |
| For the purposes of the present draft
guidelines, | 为了本指南草案的目的， |
| (a) “Atmosphere” means the envelope of gases surrounding the Earth; | (a) “大气层”指环绕地球的气体圈层； |
| (b) “Atmospheric
pollution” means the introduction or release by
humans, directly or indirectly, into the atmosphere of substances
contributing to deleterious effects extending beyond the State of origin of
such a nature as to endanger human life and health and the Earth’s natural environment; | (b) “大气污染”指人类直接或间接向大气层引入或释放某些物质，产生的有害影响超出来源国，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象； |
| (c) “Atmospheric
degradation” means the alteration by humans, directly
or indirectly, of atmospheric conditions having significant deleterious
effects of such a nature as to endanger human life and health and the Earth’s natural environment. | (c) “大气层退化”指人类直接或间接改变大气状况，产生重大有害影响，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象。 |
| Guideline 2 | 指南2 |
| Scope of the guidelines | 指南的范围 |
| 1. The present draft guidelines [contain
guiding principles relating to] [deal with] the protection of the atmosphere
from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 1. 本指南草案[所载指导原则涉及][涉及]保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| 2. The present draft guidelines do not
deal with, but are without prejudice to, questions concerning the
polluter-pays principle, the precautionary principle, common but
differentiated responsibilities, the liability of States and their nationals,
and the transfer of funds and technology to developing countries, including
intellectual property rights. | 2. 本指南草案不处理、但也不妨碍以下问题：污染者付费原则、谨慎原则、共同但有区别的责任、国家及其国民的赔偿责任，以及向发展中国家转让资金，包括知识产权。 |
| 3. The present draft guidelines do not
deal with specific substances, such as black carbon, tropospheric ozone and
other dual-impact substances, which are the subject of negotiations among
States. | 3. 本指南草案不涉及具体物质，例如国家之间正在谈判的黑碳、对流层臭氧以及其他双重影响物质。 |
| 4. Nothing in the present draft guidelines
affects the status of airspace under international law nor questions related
to outer space, including its delimitation. | 4. 本指南草案中的任何内容都不影响国际法规定的空气空间的地位，也不影响与外层空间，包括外层空间划界有关的问题。 |
| Guideline 3 | 指南3 |
| Obligation to protect the atmosphere | 保护大气层的义务 |
| States have the obligation to protect the
atmosphere by exercising due diligence in taking appropriate measures, in
accordance with applicable rules of international law, to prevent, reduce or
control atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 各国有义务保护大气层，履行应尽义务，按照适用的国际法规则采取适当措施，防止、减少或控制大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| Guideline 4 | 指南4 |
| Environmental impact assessment | 环境影响评估 |
| States have the obligation to ensure that
an environmental impact assessment is undertaken of proposed activities under
their jurisdiction or control which are likely to cause significant adverse
impact on the atmosphere in terms of atmospheric pollution or atmospheric
degradation. | 对于在本国管辖或控制下拟议开展的活动，凡可能对大气层造成大气污染或大气层退化等重大不利影响的，各国有义务确保进行环境影响评估。 |
| Guideline 5 | 指南5 |
| Sustainable utilization of the atmosphere | 可持续利用大气层 |
| 1. Given that the atmosphere is a natural
resource with a limited assimilation capacity, its utilization should be
undertaken in a sustainable manner. | 1. 考虑到大气层是一种吸收能力有限的自然资源，应以可持续的方式加以利用。 |
| 2. Sustainable utilization of the
atmosphere includes the need to reconcile economic development with
protection of the atmosphere. | 2. 可持续利用大气层包括需要兼顾经济发展和大气层保护。 |
| Guideline 6 | 指南6 |
| Equitable and reasonable utilization of
the atmosphere | 公平合理利用大气层 |
| The atmosphere should be utilized in an
equitable and reasonable manner, taking into account the interests of present
and future generations. | 应考虑到今世后代的利益，以公平合理的方式利用大气层。 |
| Guideline 7 | 指南7 |
| Intentional large-scale modification of
the atmosphere | 有意大规模改变大气层 |
| Activities aimed at intentional
large-scale modification of the atmosphere should be conducted with prudence
and caution, subject to any applicable rules of international law. | 应遵守任何适用的国际法规则，审慎和谨慎地开展旨在有意大规模改变大气层的活动。 |
| Guideline 8 [5] International cooperation | 指南8[5]国际合作 |
| 1. States have the obligation to
cooperate, as appropriate, with each other and with relevant international
organizations for the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution
and atmospheric degradation. | 1. 各国有义务就保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化，酌情与其他国家或有关国际组织合作。 |
| 2. States should cooperate in further
enhancing scientific knowledge relating to the causes and impacts of
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 2. 各国应就进一步增进关于大气污染和大气层退化的原因与影响的科学知识开展合作。 |
| Cooperation could include exchange of
information and joint monitoring. | 合作可包括信息交流和联合监测。 |
| 2. Text of the draft guidelines, together
with a preambular paragraph, and commentaries thereto provisionally adopted
by the Commission at its sixty-eighth session | 2. 委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的指南草案案文与序言部分段落及其评注 |
| 96. The text of the draft guidelines,
together with a preambular paragraph, and commentaries thereto, provisionally
adopted by the Commission at its sixty-eighth session is reproduced below. | 96. 委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的指南草案案文与序言部分段落及其评注载录如下。 |
| Preamble | 序言 |
| Aware of the special situation and needs
of developing countries, | 认识到发展中国家的特殊情况和需要， |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The fourth preambular paragraph has
been inserted having regard to considerations of equity, and concerns the
special situation and needs of developing countries . | (1) 序言部分插入第四段是顾及公平问题，并考虑到发展中国家的特殊情况和需要。 |
| One of the first attempts to incorporate
such a principle was the Washington Conference of the International Labour
Organization in 1919, at which delegations from Asia and Africa succeeded in
ensuring the adoption of differential labour standards. | 纳入公平原则的首次尝试是亚洲和非洲代表团在1919年国际劳工组织华盛顿会议上成功促使会议通过了差异性劳工标准。 |
| Another example is the Generalized System
of Preferences elaborated under the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development in the 1970s, as reflected in draft article 23 of the Commission’s 1978 draft articles on most-favoured-nation clauses. | 另一个例子是1970年代联合国贸易和发展会议拟订的普遍优惠制，如委员会1978年最惠国条款草案第23条草案所反映的那样。 |
| (2) The need for special consideration
for developing countries in the context of environmental protection has been
endorsed by a number of international instruments, such as the 1972 Stockholm
Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment
(hereinafter, “Stockholm Declaration”), and the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
(hereinafter, “Rio Declaration”). | (2) 在环境保护中需要特别考虑发展中国家已得到一些国际文书的认可，如1972年《联合国人类环境会议斯德哥尔摩宣言》(下称“《斯德哥尔摩宣言》”)和1992年《关于环境与发展的里约宣言》(下称“《里约宣言》”)。 |
| Principle 12 of the Stockholm Declaration
attaches importance to “taking into account the
circumstances and particular requirements of developing countries”. | 《斯德哥尔摩宣言》原则十二强调应“考虑发展中国家的国情和具体需求”。 |
| Principle 6 of the Rio Declaration
highlights “the special situation and needs of
developing countries, particularly the least developed and those most
environmentally vulnerable”. | 《里约宣言》原则六重点指出“发展中国家，特别是最不发达国家和最易受环境影响国家的特殊需要”。 |
| The principle is similarly reflected in
article 3 of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
and article 2 of the 2015 Paris Agreement. | 1992年《联合国气候变化框架公约》第三条 和2015年《巴黎协定》第二条 也反映了这一原则。 |
| (3) The formulation of the present
preambular paragraph is based on the seventh paragraph of the preamble of the
1997 Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International
Watercourses. | (3) 本序言段落的行文是参照1997年《国际水道非航行使用法公约》
序言部分第七段拟订的。 |
| Guideline 3 | 指南3 |
| Obligation to protect the atmosphere | 保护大气层的义务 |
| States have the obligation to protect the
atmosphere by exercising due diligence in taking appropriate measures, in
accordance with applicable rules of international law, to prevent, reduce or
control atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 各国有义务保护大气层，履行应尽义务，按照适用的国际法规则采取适当措施，防止、减少或控制大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 3 is central to the
present draft guidelines. | (1) 指南草案3是本指南草案的核心。 |
| In particular, draft guidelines 4, 5 and
6, below, flow from this guideline; these three draft guidelines seek to
apply various principles of international environmental law to the specific
situation of the protection of the atmosphere. | 特别是，下文的指南草案4、5和6都是从这条指南中派生出来的。 这三条指南草案试图将各种国际环境法原则适用于保护大气层的具体情况。 |
| (2) The draft guideline seeks to delimit
the obligation to protect the atmosphere to preventing, reducing and
controlling atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation, thus
differentiating the kinds of obligations pertaining to each. | (2) 本条指南草案试图将保护大气层的义务界定为防止、减少和控制大气污染和大气层退化，从而对与之相关的各类义务进行区分。 |
| The formulation of the present draft
guideline finds its genesis in principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration,
which reflected the finding in the Trail Smelter arbitration. | 指南草案的行文来自《斯德哥尔摩宣言》原则二十一，其中反映了“特莱尔冶炼厂仲裁案”的裁决。 |
| This is further reflected in principle 2
of the 1992 Rio Declaration. | 此外，也可在1992年《里约宣言》原则二中找到相关论述。 |
| (3) The reference to “States” for the purposes of the draft
guideline denotes both the possibility of States acting “individually” and “jointly” as appropriate. | (3) 为了本条指南草案的目的，提及“各国”是表明国家“单独”行动和“联合”行动的可能性。 |
| The draft guideline refers to both the
transboundary and global contexts. | 指南草案提到了越境和全球背景。 |
| It will be recalled that draft guideline
1 provisionally adopted in 2015 contains a “transboundary” element in defining “atmospheric
pollution” (as the introduction or release by humans,
directly or indirectly, into the atmosphere of substances contributing to
deleterious effects “extending beyond the State of
origin”, of such a nature as to endanger human life
and health and the Earth’s natural environment), and
a “global” dimension in
defining “atmospheric degradation” (as the alteration by humans, directly or indirectly, of
atmospheric conditions having significant deleterious effects of such a
nature as to endanger human life and health and the Earth’s natural environment). | 可以回顾，2015年暂时通过的指南草案1包含用以界定“大气污染”的“越境”要素(“大气污染”指人类直接或间接向大气层引入或释放某些物质，产生的有害影响超出来源国，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象)和用以界定大气层退化的“全球”要素(“指人类直接或间接改变大气状况，产生重大有害影响，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象”)。 |
| (4) As presently formulated, the draft
guideline is without prejudice to whether or not the obligation to protect
the atmosphere is an erga omnes obligation in the sense of article 48 of the
articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, a
matter on which there are different views. | (4) 按目前行文，本条指南草案不妨碍保护大气层义务是否属于“国家对国际不法行为的责任”条款第48条 意义上的普遍义务问题，对于这一问题有不同的看法。 |
| While there is support for recognizing
that the obligations pertaining to the protection of the atmosphere from
transboundary atmospheric pollution of global significance and global
atmospheric degradation are obligations erga omnes, there is also support for
the view that the legal consequences of such a recognition are not yet fully
clear in the context of the present topic. | 有人支持保护大气层不受全球性越境污染和全球性大气层退化影响的义务属于普遍义务，但也有人支持这种承认的法律后果在本专题下还不完全明确的观点。 |
| (5) Significant adverse effects on the
atmosphere are caused, in large part, by the activities of individuals and
private industries, which are not normally attributable to a State. | (5) 对大气层造成重大不利影响的主要是个人和私营工业的活动，但这些活动通常可以归咎于国家。 |
| In this respect, due diligence requires
States to “ensure” that such
activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause significant
adverse effects. | 在这方面，尽职要求国家“确保”其管辖或控制下的这些活动不造成重大不利影响。 |
| This does not mean, however, that due
diligence applies solely to private activities since a State’s own activities are also subject to the due diligence rule. | 这并不意味着尽职仅仅适用于私营活动，因为国家自己的活动也受制于尽职规则。 |
| Due diligence is an obligation to make
best possible efforts in accordance with the capabilities of the State
controlling the activities. | 尽职是控制这些活动的国家根据能力作出最大努力的义务。 |
| Therefore, even where significant adverse
effects materialize, that does not automatically constitute a failure of due
diligence. | 因此，即使造成了重大不利影响，并不自动构成没有尽职。 |
| Such failure is limited to the State’s negligence to meet its obligation to take all appropriate
measures to prevent, reduce or control human activities where these
activities have or are likely to have significant adverse effects. | 没有尽职限于国家在履行义务方面的疏忽，也就是没有采取一切适当措施防止、减少或控制人类活动，而这些活动已经或可能造成重大不利影响。 |
| The States’
obligation “to ensure” does
not require the achievement of a certain result (obligation of result) but
only requires the best available efforts so as not to cause significant
adverse effects (obligation of conduct). | 国家的“确保”义务不要求取得某个结果(结果义务)，而是仅仅要求其作出做大努力避免造成重大不利影响(行为义务)。 |
| It requires States to take appropriate
measures to control public and private conduct. | 它要求各国采取适当措施控制公共和私人行为。 |
| Due diligence implies a duty of vigilance
and prevention. | 尽职义务意味着警惕和预防的义务。 |
| It also requires taking into account the
context and evolving standards, of both regulation and technology. | 还要求考虑到监管和技术的背景及不断发展的标准。 |
| (6) The reference to “prevent, reduce or control” denotes a
variety of measures to be taken by States, whether individually or jointly,
in accordance with applicable rules as may be relevant to atmospheric pollution
on the one hand and atmospheric degradation on the other. | (6) “防止、减少或控制”的提法表示国家应按照一方面与大气污染另一方面与大气层退化相关的适用规则，单独或联合采取各种措施。 |
| The phrase “prevent,
reduce or control” draws upon formulations contained
in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change. | “防止、减少或控制”一语借鉴于《联合国海洋法公约》和《联合国气候变化框架公约》。 |
| (7) Even though the appropriate measures
to “prevent, reduce or control” apply to both atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation,
it is understood that the reference to “applicable
rules of international law” is intended to signal a
distinction between measures taken, bearing in mind the transboundary nature
of atmospheric pollution and global nature of atmospheric degradation and the
different rules that are applicable in relation thereto. | (7) 即使“防止、减少或控制”的适当措施同时适用于大气污染和大气层退化，但不言而喻，提及“适用的国际法规则”旨在表明所采取措施之间的差别，需要铭记大气污染的越境性质和大气层退化的全球性质以及对各自适用的不同规则。 |
| In the context of transboundary
atmospheric pollution, the obligation of States to prevent significant
adverse effect is firmly established as customary international law, as
confirmed, for example, by the Commission’s articles
on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities and by the
jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals. | 在越境大气污染情况下，各国防止重大不利影响的义务已确立为习惯国际法，例如已得到委员会预防危险活动的越境损害条款和各国际法院及法庭判例的确认。 |
| However, the existence of this obligation
is still somewhat unsettled for global atmospheric degradation. | 然而，这项与全球大气层退化相关的义务的存在仍是一个未决问题。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
stated that “the existence of the general obligation
of States to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction and control
respect the environment … of areas beyond national
control is now part of the corpus of international law”, and has attached great significance to respect for the
environment “not only for States but also for the
whole of mankind”. | 国际法院指出，“各国履行一般义务以确保在其管辖和控制范围内的活动尊重…国家控制范围以外地区的环境，目前已成为国际法典的一部分，”并十分重视对环境的尊重，“不仅对国家，也对全人类而言”。 |
| The Tribunal in the Iron Rhine Railway
case stated that the “duty to prevent, or at least
mitigate [significant harm to the environment] … has
now become a principle of general international law”. | 该法院在莱茵铁路公司案中指出，“防止或至少减轻[对环境的重大损害]…现已成为一般国际法原则”。 |
| At the same time, the views of members
diverged as to whether these pronouncements may be deemed as fully supporting
the recognition that the obligation to prevent, reduce, or control global
atmospheric degradation exists under customary international law. | 然而，在这些说法可否视为完全支持对国际习惯法中存在防止、减少或控制大气污染和大气层退化这一义务的承认方面，委员们意见不一。 |
| Nonetheless, such an obligation is found
in relevant conventions. | 不过，这一义务见于某些有关公约。 |
| In this context, it should be noted that
the Paris Agreement, “acknowledging in the Preamble
that “climate change is a common concern of humankind”, states “the importance of ensuring the
integrity of all ecosystems, including oceans, and the protection of
biodiversity … ”. | 在这方面，应当指出的是，《巴黎协定》在序言中“承认气候变化是人类共同关心的问题”，指出“必须确保包括海洋在内的所有生态系统的完整性并保护…生物多样性”。 |
| Guideline 4 | 指南4 |
| Environmental impact assessment | 环境影响评估 |
| States have the obligation to ensure that
an environmental impact assessment is undertaken of proposed activities under
their jurisdiction or control which are likely to cause significant adverse
impact on the atmosphere in terms of atmospheric pollution or atmospheric
degradation. | 对于在本国管辖或控制下拟议开展的活动，凡可能对大气层造成大气污染或大气层退化等重大不利影响的，各国有义务确保进行环境影响评估。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 4 deals with
environmental impact assessment. | (1) 指南草案4涉及环境影响评估。 |
| This is the first of three draft
guidelines that flow from the overarching draft guideline 3. | 这是从总体性指南草案3中派生出来的三条指南草案的第一条。 |
| In the Construction of a Road in Costa
Rica along the San Juan River case, the International Court of Justice
affirmed that “a State’s
obligation to exercise due diligence in preventing significant transboundary
harm requires that State to ascertain whether there is a risk of significant
transboundary harm prior to undertaking an activity having the potential
adversely to affect the environment of another State. | 国际法院在哥斯达黎加沿圣胡安河修建道路案中指出，“国家对防止重大越境损害履行尽职义务，要求一国在开展可能对另一国环境造成不利影响的活动之前，必须确定是否有造成重大越境损害的可能。 |
| If that is the case, the State concerned
must conduct an environmental impact assessment”. | 如果存在这种可能，有关国家必须开展环境影响评估”。 |
| In the above-mentioned case, the Court
concluded that the State in question “ha[d] not
complied with its obligation under general international law to perform an
environmental impact assessment prior to the construction of the road”. | 在上述案件中，国际法院判定，该国“未履行一般国际法规定的在建造道路之前开展环境影响评估的义务”。 |
| In a separate opinion, Judge Owada noted
that “an environmental impact assessment plays an
important and even crucial role in ensuring that the State in question is
acting with due diligence under general international environmental law”. | 小和田恒法官在个人意见中指出，“环境影响评估对确保有关国家根据一般国际环境法规定采取行动，履行应尽职责，具有重要甚至关键性作用”。 |
| Two other judgments, in the cases
regarding the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project and the Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay,
alluded to the importance of an environmental impact assessment. | 另两位法官在Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros项目案 和乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案 中间接指出了环境影响评估的重要性。 |
| The Seabed Disputes Chamber of the
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea rendered its Advisory Opinion
on the Responsibilities and obligations of States regarding activities in the
Area in 2011, in which the Chamber listed the obligation to conduct an
environmental impact assessment as one of the direct obligations incumbent on
sponsoring States. | 国际海洋法法庭海底争端分庭2011年提出了关于“国家对区域内活动的责任和义务”的咨询意见，其中将开展环境影响评估列为担保国直接承担的义务之一。 |
| (2) The draft guideline is formulated in
the passive tense — “States have the obligation to
ensure that an environmental impact assessment is undertaken” as opposed to “States have an obligation
to undertake an appropriate environmental impact assessment” — in order to signal that this is an obligation of conduct and given
the broad nature of economic actors the obligation does not necessarily
attach to the State itself to perform the assessment. | (2) 指南草案使用被动语态――“各国有义务确保进行环境影响评估”，是相对于“各国有义务进行适当的环境影响评估”而言，表明这是一项行为义务。
由于经济行为者的广泛性，这项义务不一定要求国家本身进行环境影响评估。 |
| What is required is that the State put in
place the necessary legislative, regulatory and other measures for an
environmental impact assessment to be conducted with respect to proposed
activities. | 所要求的是国家为进行环境影响评估采取必要立法、监管和其他措施，以便对拟议活动进行环境影响评估。 |
| Notification and consultations are key to
such an assessment. | 通知和协商是评估的关键。 |
| (3) The phrase “of
proposed activities under their jurisdiction or control” is intended to indicate that the obligation of States to ensure
that an environment impact assessment is undertaken is in respect of
activities under their jurisdiction or control. | (3) “在本国管辖或控制下拟议开展的活动”一语旨在表明，各国确保进行环境影响评估的义务是针对其管辖或控制下的活动的。 |
| Since environmental threats have no
respect for borders, it is not precluded that States, as part of their global
environmental responsibility, take decisions jointly regarding environmental
impact assessments. | 由于环境威胁不分边界，不排除各国可以作为其全球环境责任的一部分，就环境影响评估做出联合决定。 |
| (4) A threshold was considered necessary
for triggering the environmental impact assessment. | (4) 阈值被认为是开展环境影响评估所必要的。 |
| The phrase “which
are likely to cause significant adverse impact” has
accordingly been inserted. | 因此添加了“可能造成重大不利影响”一语。 |
| It is drawn from the language of principle
17 of the Rio Declaration. | 这句话来自《里约宣言》原则十七。 |
| Moreover, there are other instruments,
such as the Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary Context, that use a similar threshold. | 其他一些文书也使用了类似的阈值，如《关于越境环境影响评估的埃斯波公约》。 |
| In the Pulp Mills case, the Court
indicated that “it may now be considered a
requirement under general international law to undertake an environmental
impact assessment where there is a risk that the proposed industrial activity
may have a significant adverse impact in a transboundary context, in
particular, on a shared resource”. | 国际法院在纸浆厂案中裁定，“现在可以认为，这是一项一般国际法要求，如果拟议工业活动具有造成重大越境不利影响的风险，特别是在共有资源上，就需要进行环境影响评估”。 |
| (5) By having a threshold of “likely to cause significant adverse impact”, the draft guideline excludes an environmental impact assessment
for an activity whose impact is likely to be minor. | (5) 使用“可能造成重大不利影响”的阈值，指南草案排除了对影响可能轻微的活动的环境影响评估。 |
| The impact of the potential harm must be “significant” for both “atmospheric pollution” and “atmospheric degradation”. | 潜在危害的影响在“大气污染”和“大气层退化”方面必须是“重大”的。 |
| What constitutes “significant” requires a factual
determination. | 何为“重大”需要作出事实判定。 |
| (6) The phrase “in
terms of atmospheric pollution or atmospheric degradation” was considered important as it relates the draft guideline to the
two main issues of concern to the present draft guidelines as regards
protection of the environment, namely transboundary atmospheric pollution and
atmospheric degradation. | (6) “在大气污染或大气层退化方面”一语被认为十分重要，因为它将本条指南草案与本套指南草案关注的两个主要环境保护问题联系起来，即越境大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| While the relevant precedents for the
requirement of an environmental impact assessment primarily address
transboundary contexts, it is considered that there is a similar requirement
for projects that are likely to have significant adverse effects on the
global atmosphere, such as those activities involving intentional large-scale
modification of the atmosphere. | 虽然环境影响评估要求的相关先例主要涉及越境污染，但人们认为可能对全球大气层造成重大不利影响的项目也需遵守类似要求，如蓄意大规模改变大气层活动。 |
| As regards the protection of the
atmosphere, such activities may carry a more extensive risk of severe damage
than even those causing transboundary harm, and therefore the same considerations
should be applied a fortiori to those activities potentially causing global
atmospheric degradation. | 与保护大气层相比，这些活动可能甚至比越境损害在更大范围内造成严重损害；因此，相同规则更有理由适用于可能造成全球大气层退化的活动。 |
| Thus, the Kiev Protocol on Strategic
Environmental Assessment to the Convention on the Environmental Impact in the
Transboundary Context encourages “strategic
environmental assessment” of the likely
environmental, including health, effects, which means any effect on the
environment, including human health, flora, fauna, biodiversity, soil,
climate, air, water, landscape, natural sites, material assets, cultural
heritage and the interaction among these factors. | 鉴此，《越境环境影响评估公约关于战略环境评估的基辅议定书》鼓励对可能的环境影响包括健康影响进行“战略环境评估”，这是指对环境，包括人类健康、动物、植物、生物多样性、土壤、气候、空气、水、景观、自然遗产、物质资产、文化遗产的影响以及这些因素之间的相互作用。 |
| (7) While it is acknowledged that
transparency and public participation are important components in ensuring
access to information and representation, it was considered that the parts
dealing with procedural aspects of an environmental impact assessment should
not be dealt with in the draft guideline itself. | (7) 人们承认透明度和公众参与是获得信息和保障代表性的重要内容，但也有人认为指南草案本身不应该涉及环境影响评估的程序方面。 |
| Principle 10 of the 1992 Rio Declaration
provides that environmental issues are best handled with the participation of
all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. | 1992年《里约宣言》原则十规定环境问题最好在所有有关公民在有关一级的参加下加以解决。 |
| This includes access to information, the
opportunity to participate in decision-making processes, and effective access
to judicial and administrative proceedings. | 这包括获得信息；有机会参与决策；有效诉诸司法和行政程序。 |
| The Convention on Access to Information,
Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental
Matters also addresses these issues. | 《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》也论述了这些问题。 |
| The Kiev Protocol on Strategic
Environmental Assessment encourages the carrying out of public participation
and consultations, and the taking into account of the results of the public
participation and consultations in a plan or programme. | 《关于战略环境评价的基辅议定书》鼓励公众参与和协商，并在计划或方案中考虑公众参与和协商的结果。 |
| Guideline 5 | 指南5 |
| Sustainable utilization of the atmosphere | 可持续利用大气层 |
| 1. Given that the atmosphere is a natural
resource with a limited assimilation capacity, its utilization should be
undertaken in a sustainable manner. | 1. 考虑到大气层是一种吸收能力有限的自然资源，应以可持续的方式加以利用。 |
| 2. Sustainable utilization of the
atmosphere includes the need to reconcile economic development with
protection of the atmosphere. | 2. 可持续利用大气层包括需要兼顾经济发展和大气层保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The atmosphere is a natural resource
with limited assimilation capacity. | (1) 大气层是一种吸收能力有限的自然资源。 |
| It is often not conceived of as
exploitable in the same sense as, for example, mineral or oil and gas
resources are explored and exploited. | 人们常常认为，就勘探和开采矿物或油气等资源的意义上而言，大气层是无法开采的。 |
| In truth, however, the atmosphere, in its
physical and functional components, is exploitable and exploited. | 但事实是，大气层在物质成份和功能成份上均可以开采，并且受到开采。 |
| The polluter exploits the atmosphere by
reducing its quality and its capacity to assimilate pollutants. | 污染方会通过降低大气层的质量及其吸收污染物的能力而开采大气层。 |
| The draft guideline draws analogies from
the concept of “shared resource”, while also recognizing that the unity of the global atmosphere
requires recognition of the commonality of interests. | 指南草案类比“共有资源”的概念，同时确认，全球大气层的整体性要求承认各方利益的共同性。 |
| Accordingly, this draft guideline
proceeds on the premise that the atmosphere is a resource with limited
assimilation capacity, the ability of which to sustain life on Earth is
impacted by anthropogenic activities. | 相应地，指南草案所立足的前提是，大气层是吸收能力有限的自然资源，其维持地球生命的能力会受到人类活动的影响。 |
| In order to secure its protection, it is
important to see it as a resource that is subject to exploitation, thereby
subjecting the atmosphere to the principles of conservation and sustainable
use. | 为了使大气层得到保护，必须将大气层视为可开采资源，从而对之适用保护原则和可持续利用原则。 |
| Some members expressed doubts whether the
atmosphere could be treated analogously as transboundary watercourses or
aquifers. | 有些委员对可否将大气层类比跨界水道或含水层对待表示怀疑。 |
| (2) It is acknowledged in paragraph 1
that the atmosphere is a “natural resource with a
limited assimilation capacity”. | (2) 第1段承认，大气层是“吸收能力有限的自然资源”。 |
| The second part of paragraph 1 seeks to
integrate conservation and development so as to ensure that modifications to
the planet continue to enable the survival and wellbeing of organisms on
Earth. | 第1段第二部分试图将保护与开发结合起来，确保对地球的改造不会妨碍地球上生物的存续和福祉。 |
| It does so by reference to the
proposition that the utilization of the atmosphere should be undertaken in a
sustainable manner. | 这样做是援引了利用大气层应采取可持续方式这一主张。 |
| This is inspired by the Commission’s formulations as reflected in the Convention on the Law of the
Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, and the law of
transboundary aquifers. | 此句受到了《国际水道非航行使用法公约》和跨界含水层法中反映的委员会措词方式的启发。 |
| (3) The term “utilization” is used broadly and in general terms evoking notions beyond
actual exploitation. | (3) “利用”一词取广义，包含实际开采之外的其他概念。 |
| The atmosphere has been utilized in
several ways. | 人们已通过若干方式利用了大气层。 |
| Likely, most of these activities that
have been carried out so far are those conducted without a clear or concrete
intention to affect atmospheric conditions. | 迄今为止开展的大多数活动可能并无影响大气状况的明确或具体意图。 |
| However, there have been certain
activities the very purpose of which is to alter atmospheric conditions, such
as weather modification. | 但是，也有某些活动，其目的就是改变大气状况，例如人工影响天气。 |
| Some of the proposed technologies for
intentional, large-scale modification of the atmosphere are examples of the
utilization of the atmosphere. | 提出的有意大规模改变大气层 的技术中，有些就是利用大气层的实例。 |
| (4) The formulation “its utilization should be undertaken in a sustainable manner” in the present draft guideline is simple and not overly
legalistic, which well reflects a paradigmatic shift towards viewing the
atmosphere as a natural resource that ought to be utilized in a sustainable
manner. | (4) 指南草案中“应以可持续的方式加以利用”的措词简明而不过于注重法律细节，很好地反映了将大气层视为应得到可持续利用的自然资源这一范式转变。 |
| It is presented more as a statement of
international policy and regulation than an operational code to determine
rights and obligations among States. | 其行文方式更贴近国际政策和规范的声明，而非确定各国权利和义务的操作守则。 |
| (5) Paragraph 2 builds upon the language
of the International Court of Justice in its judgment in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project case, in which it referred to the “need to
reconcile environmental protection and economic development”. The Commission also noted other relevant precedents. | (5) 第2段立足于国际法院Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros项目案判决中的用语，国际法院在其中提到，“需要协调环境保护与经济发展”，同时还提到了其他有关先例。 |
| The reference to “protection of the atmosphere” as opposed
to “environmental protection”
seeks to focus the paragraph on the subject matter of the present topic,
which is the protection of the atmosphere. | 提到“大气层保护”而非“环境保护”，是为了使该段侧重于本专题的主旨，即保护大气层。 |
| Guideline 6 | 指南6 |
| Equitable and reasonable utilization of
the atmosphere | 公平合理利用大气层 |
| The atmosphere should be utilized in an
equitable and reasonable manner, taking into account the interests of present
and future generations. | 应考虑到今世后代的利益，以公平合理的方式利用大气层。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Although equitable and reasonable
utilization of the atmosphere is an important element of sustainability, as
reflected in draft guideline 5, it is considered important to state it as an
autonomous principle. | (1) 如指南草案5所反映的，公平合理地利用大气层是可持续性的一项重要要素，但必须将之单列为一项自主原则。 |
| Like draft guideline 5, the present
guideline is formulated at a broad level of abstraction and generality. | 同指南草案5一样，本指南措词较为抽象而宽泛。 |
| (2) The draft guideline is formulated in
general terms so as to apply the principle of equity to the protection of the
atmosphere as a natural resource that is to be shared by all. | (2) 指南草案措词宽泛，以便对保护大气层这一世界共有自然资源的工作适用公平原则。 |
| The first part of the sentence deals with
“equitable and reasonable”
utilization. | 该句第一部分论及“公平合理”的利用。 |
| The formulation that the “atmosphere should be utilized in an equitable and reasonable
manner” draws, in part, upon article 5 of the
Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International
Watercourses, and article 4 of the law of transboundary aquifers. | “应…以公平合理的方式利用大气层”这一表述部分参考《国际水道非航行使用法公约》第5条以及跨界含水层法第4条。 |
| It requires a balancing of interests and
consideration of all relevant factors that may be unique to either atmospheric
pollution or atmospheric degradation. | 该句要求平衡各种利益并考虑大气污染或大气层退化可能独有的所有有关因素。 |
| (3) The second part of the formulation
addresses questions of intra- and intergenerational equity. | (3) 该句第二部分论及代内和代际公平问题。 |
| In order to draw out the link between the
two aspects of equity, the Commission elected to use the phrase “taking into account the interests of future” instead of “and for the benefit of
present and future generations of humankind”. | 为了说明公平的这两个方面之间的关系，委员会选择使用“考虑到…后代的利益”这一短语，而非“为人类当代和后代的福利”。 |
| The words “the
interests of”, and not “the
benefit of”, have been used to signal the integrated
nature of the atmosphere, the “exploitation” of which needs to take into account a balancing of interests to
ensure sustenance for the Earth’s living organisms. | 使用“利益”一词而非“福利”以显示大气层的一体性，“开采”大气层需要考虑平衡各方利益，以确保地球生物的存续。 |
| Guideline 7 | 指南7 |
| Intentional large-scale modification of
the atmosphere | 有意大规模改变大气层 |
| Activities aimed at intentional
large-scale modification of the atmosphere should be conducted with prudence
and caution, subject to any applicable rules of international law. | 应遵守任何适用的国际法规则，审慎和谨慎地开展旨在有意大规模改变大气层的活动。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 7 deals with
activities the very purpose of which is to alter atmospheric conditions. | (1) 指南草案7论及旨在改变大气状况的活动。 |
| As the title of the draft guideline
signals, it addresses only intentional modification on a large scale. | 如指南草案标题所示，它仅涉及有意的大规模改变。 |
| (2) The term “activities
aimed at intentional large-scale modification of the atmosphere” is taken in part from the definition of “environmental
modification techniques” that appears in the
Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any Hostile Use of Environmental
Modification Techniques, which refers to techniques for changing — through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes — the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including
its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space. | (2) “旨在有意大规模改变大气层的活动”一词源自《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》所载的“改变环境的技术”的定义，“改变环境的技术”指通过蓄意操纵自然过程改变地球(包括其生物群、岩石圈、水气层和大气层)或外层空间的动态、组成或结构的技术。 |
| (3) These activities include what is
commonly understood as “geo-engineering”, the methods and technologies of which encompass carbon dioxide
removal and solar radiation management. | (3) 这些活动包括通常被理解为“地球工程”的活动，其方法和技术包括二氧化碳清除和太阳能辐射管理。 |
| Activities related to the former involve
the ocean, land and technical systems and seek to remove carbon dioxide from
the atmosphere through natural sinks or through chemical engineering. | 与前者有关的活动涉及海洋、陆地和技术系统，试图通过天然吸收槽或化学工程从大气层清除二氧化碳。 |
| Proposed techniques for carbon dioxide
removal include: soil carbon sequestration; carbon capture and sequestration;
ambient air capture; ocean fertilization; ocean alkalinity enhancement; and
enhanced weathering. | 提出的二氧化碳清除技术包括：土壤固碳、碳捕集和固存、海洋肥化、海洋碱性提升，以及加强风化。 |
| Indeed, afforestation has traditionally
been employed to reduce carbon dioxide. | 实际上，造林一直被用于减少二氧化碳。 |
| (4) According to scientific experts,
solar radiation management is designed to mitigate the negative impacts of
climate change by intentionally lowering the surface temperatures of the
Earth. | (4) 科学专家指出，太阳能辐射管理旨在有意降低地球表面温度从而减缓气候变化的不利影响。 |
| Proposed activities here include: “albedo enhancement”, a method that
involves increasing the reflectiveness of clouds or the surface of the Earth,
so that more of the heat of the sun is reflected back into space;
stratospheric aerosols, a technique that involves the introduction of small,
reflective particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect sunlight before it
reaches the surface of the Earth; and space reflectors, which entail blocking
a small proportion of sunlight before it reaches the Earth. | 此处提出的活动包括：“反照率提升”，该方法涉及提高云层或地球表面的反射性，以便将更多的太阳热量反射回太空；平流层气溶胶，该技术涉及将微小的反射性颗粒注入高层大气层，以便在太阳光到达地球表面之前予以反射；太空反射镜，涉及在太阳光到达地球表面之前阻断一部分太阳光。 |
| (5) As noted earlier, the term “activities” is broadly understood. | (5) 如前文所述，对“活动”一词，应取广义。 |
| There are certain other activities that
are prohibited by international law, which are not covered by the present
draft guideline, such as by the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or
any Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques and Protocol I to
the Geneva Conventions of 1949. | 有些其他活动被国际法所禁止，不属于本指南草案的范围，如《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》和《一九四九年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》。 |
| Accordingly, the present draft guideline
applies only to “non-military” activities. | 相应地，指南草案只适用于“非军事”活动。 |
| Military activities involving deliberate
modifications of the atmosphere are outside the scope of the present
guideline. | 涉及蓄意改变大气层的军事活动不属于本指南的范围。 |
| (6) Likewise, other activities will
continue to be governed by various regimes. | (6) 同样，其他活动将继续处于各种体制的规范之下。 |
| For example, afforestation has been
incorporated in the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change regime and in the Paris Agreement (article 5, paragraph 2). | 例如，造林已被纳入《〈联合国气候变化框架公约〉京都议定书》体制和《巴黎协定》(第五条第二款)。 |
| Under some international legal
instruments, measures have been adopted for regulating carbon capture and
storage. | 在一些国际法律文书下，已经通过了规范碳捕集和封存的措施。 |
| The 1996 Protocol (London Protocol) to
the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of
Wastes and Other Matter now includes an amended provision and annex, as well
as new guidelines for controlling the dumping of wastes and other matter. | 《1972年〈防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约〉1996年议定书》(《伦敦议定书》)载有一项经过修正的条款和附件，以及控制废物和其他物质倾倒的新准则。 |
| To the extent that “ocean iron fertilization” and “ocean alkalinity enhancement” relate to
questions of ocean dumping, the 1972 Convention and the London Protocol
thereto are relevant. | “海洋铁肥化”和“海洋碱性提升”与海洋倾倒问题有关，因此1972年《公约》及其《伦敦议定书》也是有关文书。 |
| (7) Activities aimed at intentional
large-scale modification of the atmosphere have a significant potential for
preventing, diverting, moderating or ameliorating the adverse effects of
disasters and hazards, including drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, and
enhancing crop production and the availability of water. | (7) “旨在有意大规模改变大气层的活动”具有极大潜力，可以防止、转移、调节或缓解干旱、飓风、旋风等灾害和危害的不利影响，并提高作物产量和水的供应。 |
| At the same time, it is also recognized
that they may have long-range and unexpected effects on existing climatic
patterns that are not confined by national boundaries. | 与此同时，人们也认识到，这些方法和技术可能对当前的气候格局产生长远和意料之外的影响，而且不受国境的局限。 |
| As noted by the World Meteorological
Organization with respect to weather modification: “The
complexity of the atmospheric processes is such that a change in the weather
induced artificially in one part of the world will necessarily have
repercussions elsewhere … . Before undertaking an experiment
on large-scale weather modification, the possible and desirable consequences
must be carefully evaluated, and satisfactory international arrangements must
be reached.” | 如世界气象组织就人工影响天气所述：“大气过程是非常复杂的过程，以至于以人工方式导致世界某一处发生的天气变化很有可能对别处产生影响…在开始大规模人工影响天气的实验之前，必须认真评估可能的结果和理想的结果，并且必须达成令人满意的国际安排。
” |
| (8) It is also not the intention of the
present draft guideline to stifle innovation and scientific advancement. | (8) 本条指南草案也无意抑制创新和科学进步。 |
| Principles 7 and 9 of the Rio Declaration
acknowledge the importance of new and innovative technologies and cooperation
in these areas. | 《里约宣言》原则七和原则九承认了新技术和创新技术以及在此领域开展合作的重要意义。 |
| At the same time, this does not mean that
those activities always have positive effects. | 同时，这并不意味着这些活动的影响总是正面的。 |
| (9) Accordingly, the draft guideline does
not seek either to authorize or to prohibit such activities unless there is
agreement among States to take such a course of action. | (9) 相应地，本条指南草案并不试图授权或禁止这种活动，除非各国达成协定，要采取这种行动步骤。 |
| It simply sets out the principle that
such activities, if undertaken, should be conducted with prudence and
caution. | 指南草案仅仅是指出了以下原则，即应审慎和谨慎地开展这种活动。 |
| The reference to “prudence and caution” is inspired by the
language of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in the cases of
Southern Blue Fin Tuna, the Case of Mox Plant; and the Case concerning Land
Reclamation. | “审慎和谨慎”的提法受到国际海洋法法庭在南方蓝鳍金枪鱼案、混合氧化物核燃料厂案和填海案中用语的启发。 |
| The Tribunal stated in the last case: “Considering that, given the possible implications of land
reclamation on the marine environment, prudence and caution require that
Malaysia and Singapore establish mechanisms for exchanging information and
assessing the risks or effects of land reclamation works and devising ways to
deal with them in the areas concerned. ” | 该法庭在上述最后一个案件中指出：“有鉴于此，考虑到土地改良可能对海洋环境造成的影响，审慎和谨慎原则要求马来西亚和新加坡建立相关机制，交流信息和评估土地改良工程的风险或影响，并制定在相关地区应对这些风险或影响的方式。” |
| The draft guideline is cast in hortatory
language, aimed at encouraging the development of rules to govern such
activities, within the regimes competent in the various fields relevant to
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 指南草案使用了劝告性的语言，旨在鼓励在与大气污染和大气层退化有关的各种领域的主管体制内，制订规则以规范这些活动。 |
| (10) The last part of the guideline
refers to “subject to any applicable rules of
international law”. | (10) 指南后半部分提到“遵守任何适用的国际法规则”。 |
| It is understood that international law
would continue to operate in the field of application of the draft guideline. | 理解是，在指南草案的适用方面，国际法将继续发挥作用。 |
| (11) It is widely acknowledged that such
an activity should be conducted in a fully disclosed and transparent manner,
and that an environmental impact assessment provided for in draft guideline 4
may be required for such an activity. | (11) 广为承认的是，这种活动应以充分公开和透明的方式进行，而且可能需要进行指南草案4所规定的环境影响评估。 |
| It is considered that a project involving
intentional large-scale modification of the atmosphere may well carry an
extensive risk of severe damage, and therefore that a fortiori an assessment
is necessary for such an activity. | 有人认为，项目凡是涉及蓄意大规模改变大气层的，很可能伴有造成严重损害的巨大风险，因此尤其有必要对这种活动进行评估。 |
| (12) A number of members remained
unpersuaded that there was a need for a draft guideline on this matter, which
essentially remains controversial, and the discussion on it was evolving, and
is based on scant practice Other members were of the view that the draft
guideline could be enhanced during second reading. | (12) 有些委员仍然认为无需拟订有关这一事项的指南草案，因为本质上对此事项仍有争议，这方面的讨论不断变化，而且可依据的实践很少。
另一些委员认为，可在二读期间加强本条指南草案。 |
| Chapter IX | 第九章 |
| Jus cogens | 强行法 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 97. At its sixty-seventh session (2015),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Jus
cogens” in its programme of work and appointed Mr.
Dire Tladi as Special Rapporteur for the topic. | 97. 委员会在第六十七届会议(2015年)上，决定将“强行法”专题列入工作方案，并任命迪雷 •特拉迪先生为该专题特别报告员。 |
| The General Assembly subsequently, in its
resolution 70/236 of 23 December 2015, took note of the decision of the
Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会随后在2015年12月23日第70/236号决议里注意到委员会决定将此专题列入工作方案。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 98. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the first report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/693), which sought to set out the Special Rapporteur’s general approach to the topic and, on that basis, to obtain the
views of the Commission on its preferred approach, and to provide a general
overview of conceptual issues relating to jus cogens (peremptory norms of
international law). | 98. 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/693)，该报告试图说明特别报告员处理此专题的总体方法，以此为基础了解委员会关于倾向采取的方法的意见，并总体概述与强行法(国际法强制性规范)有关的概念问题。 |
| 99. The Commission considered the first
report at its 3314th to 3317th, and 3322nd and 3323rd meetings, from 4 to 8,
and 18 and 19 July 2016. | 99. 委员会在2016年7月4日至8日和18日至19日举行的第3314至3317次会议和第3322至3323次会议上审议了第一次报告。 |
| 100. At its 3323rd meeting, on 19 July
2016, the Commission referred draft conclusions 1 and 3, as contained in the
Special Rapporteur’s first report, to the Drafting
Committee. | 100. 委员会在2016年7月19日举行的第3323次会议上，将特别报告员第一次报告所载的结论草案1和3转交起草委员会。 |
| 101. At its 3342nd meeting, on 9 August
2016, the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee presented an interim report
of the Drafting Committee on “Jus cogens”, containing the draft conclusions it provisionally adopted at the
sixty-eighth session. | 101. 在2016年8月9日举行的第3342次会议上，起草委员会主席提交了起草委员会关于“强行法”的临时报告，其中载有委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的结论草案。 |
| The report was presented for information
only, and is available on the Commission’s website. | 该报告仅供参考，可在委员会网站上查阅。 |
| 1. Introduction by the Special Rapporteur
of the first report | 1. 特别报告员介绍第一次报告 |
| 102. The Special Rapporteur indicated
that his first report addressed mainly conceptual issues relating to
peremptory norms (jus cogens), including their nature and definition. | 102. 特别报告员表示，他的第一次报告主要论及与强制性规范(强行法)有关的概念问题，包括强行法的本质和定义。 |
| The report also traced the historical
evolution of jus cogens and the acceptance in international law of the
elements central to the concept of jus cogens. | 该报告还追溯了强行法的历史演变，以及国际法中对强行法概念的核心要素的接受情况。 |
| It further raised a number of
methodological issues on which members of the Commission were invited to
comment. | 报告进而提出了一系列方法学问题，请委员会委员予以评论。 |
| Chapter two of the report reviewed the
debates in the Sixth Committee in 2014 and 2015. | 报告第二章回顾了2014年和2015年第六委员会的辩论。 |
| It was recalled that most States
expressed support for the Commission’s topic. | 报告回顾指出，大多数国家都对委员会的专题表示了支持。 |
| In those debates, the Member States had
raised several themes. | 在这些辩论中，各会员国提出了若干主题。 |
| 103. One such theme concerned the
question whether the Commission should draft an illustrative list of norms
that have already acquired the status of jus cogens. | 103. 其中一项主题涉及的问题是，委员会是否应当起草一份说明性清单，列出所有已经取得强行法地位的规范。 |
| Some States had supported the idea. A
number of other States, however, raised serious questions. | 一些国家对这一想法表示支持，但有若干其他国家提出了严重的问题。 |
| The view of the Special Rapporteur was
that the Commission should not base its decision whether to provide an
illustrative list on the possibility that some might interpret it as a
numerus clausus. | 特别报告员的意见是，虽然有些人可能会将说明性清单解释为法定限额，但委员会在决定是否提供该清单时，不应将此作为决定依据。 |
| Nonetheless, he expressed the concern
that seeking to provide an illustrative list could substantially change the
nature of the topic, blurring the fundamentally
process-oriented/methodological nature of the topic by shifting the focus
towards the legal status of particular primary rules. | 不过特别报告员也关切地指出，试图提供说明性清单可能显著改变这一专题的性质，使其重点转向具体主要规则的法律地位，进而模糊其以基本进程为导向的性质/方法学性质。 |
| In his view, the Commission might
consider dispensing with the inclusion of an illustrative list. | 他认为，委员会或可考虑放弃编写说明性清单。 |
| At the same time, the Commission could
consider other ways to provide guidance to States and practitioners on norms
which, at present, meet the requirements for jus cogens, without necessarily
providing an illustrative list. | 与此同时，委员会可以考虑采取其他方法，就目前满足强行法要求的规范向各国和从业者提供指导，而不一定要提供一份说明性清单。 |
| 104. Another theme raised by Member
States concerned methodology and in particular the materials on which the
Commission would base its work and conclusions. | 104. 各会员国提出的另一项主题涉及方法学问题，特别是委员会开展工作和得出结论所依据的材料。 |
| In the view of the Special Rapporteur,
the Commission should undertake a thorough analysis of the rich variety of
practice, which included both State and judicial practice. | 特别报告员认为，惯例的种类非常丰富，既包括国家惯例也包括司法惯例，委员会应对各种惯例进行透彻的分析。 |
| In addition, scholarly writings on the
topic, while not dispositive, could also assist in analysing primary sources. | 此外，此专题方面的学术著作尽管不具备决定性作用，也可有助于分析主要材料。 |
| 105. The Special Rapporteur proceeded to
provide an overview of the discussion in chapter IV of his report on the
historical antecedents of jus cogens, both prior to and during the twentieth
century. | 105. 特别报告员进而在其报告第四章概述了对二十世纪前和二十世纪中强行法历史先例的讨论。 |
| He observed that the position in
international law of fundamental rules, at the time of the Second World War,
could be summarized as follows: the literature, going back to the seventeenth
century, recognized the existence of norms that States could not contract out
of. | 他指出，在第二次世界大战时，基本规则在国际法中的地位可被概括为：文献确认了存在这样一种规范，各国不得通过协约脱离其约束。 |
| There may have been disagreement about
the basis for this proposition, but the proposition itself was not seriously
questioned in the literature. | 对该论点的依据可能存在分歧，但论点本身在文献中并未受到严重质疑。 |
| Practice supporting the proposition,
however, was scant. | 不过，能佐证论点的惯例不足。 |
| The little practice that could be found
concerned peremptory treaty rules and not rules of general international law. | 可以找到的极少数惯例涉及的是适用于条约缔约方的强制性条约规则，而非一般国际法规则。 |
| 106. It was also recalled that the
Commission, itself, has been instrumental in the development, acceptance and
mainstreaming of jus cogens in international law, and that much of the recent
practice, both judicial and State practice, had been inspired by the work of
the Commission. | 106. 特别报告员还回顾称，委员会本身在国际法中强行法的发展、接受和主流化过程中发挥了重要的作用，近期惯例中，不论是司法惯例还是国家惯例，许多都受到委员会工作的启发。 |
| From the time that Sir Hersch Lauterpacht
introduced a provision on the invalidity of a treaty if its performance would
involve an “act which is illegal under international
law”, to the inclusion of the term “jus cogens” in the respective reports of
Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice and Sir Humphrey Waldock, members of the Commission
did not question the basic proposition. | Hersch Lauterpacht爵士曾提出一项条款，即如果一项条约的履行涉及“国际法规定的非法行为”，则该条约无效， Gerald Fitzmaurice爵士 和Humphrey Waldock爵士
也在各自的报告中加入了“强行法”这一术语，从始至终，委员会的诸位委员均未对上述基本论点提出质疑。 |
| There were questions about the drafting
as well as the theoretical basis of the proposition of invalidity on the
grounds of jus cogens, but not about the proposition itself, nor its status
in international law. | 对依强行法认定条约无效的论点而言，其起草方式和理论基础都曾受过质疑，但该论点本身及其在国际法中的地位未曾受过质疑。 |
| 107. Yet, what had not been foreseen was
the acceptance of the proposition by States. | 107. 然而，各国对该论点的接受是先前没有预见到的。 |
| Reference was made to the overview
provided in the report on the position taken by States, and, in particular,
the conclusion that “it [was] safe to say that almost
all States expressed support” for the concept of jus
cogens. | 特别报告员提到了报告中对各国立场的概述，特别是以下结论：“可以有把握地说，几乎所有国家都表示支持” 强行法的概念。 |
| At the same time, some States had raised
important concerns about the drafting of the relevant provisions of the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (the “1969
Vienna Convention”). | 与此同时，一些国家曾就《维也纳条约法公约》(“1969年《维也纳公约》”) 有关条款的起草提出重要关切。 |
| In particular, it was recalled that some
States had expressed, at the Vienna Conference, the concern that, without
clearer guidelines as to what norms constituted jus cogens, the text was
likely to be abused in order to put into question validly concluded treaties. | 具体而言，特别报告员回顾指出，一些国家曾在维也纳会议上表达这样的关切，即如果没有更明确的指南说明哪些规范属于强行法，则该案文可能遭到滥用，被用于质疑合法缔结的条约。 |
| The solution found, at the time, was
article 66 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, which established an important role
for the International Court of Justice in relation to the invocation of jus
cogens to invalidate a treaty. | 当年的解决之道是1969年《维也纳公约》第六十六条，该条规定，涉及援引强行法认定一项条约无效时，国际法院应发挥重要作用。 |
| The important point, however, was that,
contrary to widespread assumption, States did not question the idea of jus
cogens, nor did they question its status as part of international law as it
stood at the time. | 但重点是，与普遍认识不同，各国未曾质疑强行法这一概念，也未曾质疑当年强行法作为国际法一部分的地位。 |
| 108. The Special Rapporteur observed
further that, subsequent to the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention,
States had consistently invoked jus cogens in diplomatic and other
communication. | 108. 特别报告员进而表示，1969年《维也纳公约》通过之后，各国一直在外交往来和其他往来中援引强行法。 |
| Moreover, judicial invocation of jus
cogens had also increased, including through explicit recognition by the
International Court of Justice, as well as by other international courts and
tribunals, and by regional and national courts. | 此外，对强行法的司法援引也有所增加，包括国际法院明确承认了强行法，其他国际性法院和法庭以及区域和国家法院也明确承认了强行法。 |
| 109. Reference was further made to
chapter V of the report, in which the Special Rapporteur provided an overview
of the theoretical debate concerning the nature of jus cogens, as found in
the literature and judicial practice. | 109. 特别报告员还提到了报告第五章，他在该章概述了文献和司法惯例中关于强行法的本质的理论辩论情况。 |
| No attempt was made at resolving the
debate. | 特别报告员没有试图解决这一辩论。 |
| At the same time, in his view, any
attempt to distil the criteria for jus cogens needed to be based on an
appreciation of its theoretical underpinnings. | 与此同时，他认为任何提炼强行法的标准的尝试都需要立足于对其理论支柱的分析。 |
| 110. The Special Rapporteur proposed
three draft conclusions: the first dealt with the scope of the entire set of
draft conclusions; the second sought to draw a distinction between jus cogens
and other rules of international law that may be modified, abrogated or
derogated from by the agreement of States, namely rules of a jus dispositivum
character; the third sought to describe the general character of jus cogens. | 110. 特别报告员提出了三条结论草案：第一条结论草案论及整套结论草案的范围；第二条试图将强行法与可被各国协定更改、克减或废除的其他国际法规则即具有酌定法性质的规则区分开来；第三条试图描述强行法的一般性质。 |
| He observed that the reference, in the
second paragraph of the third draft conclusion, to the character of jus
cogens as being designed to protect the fundamental values of the
international community, and their nature as hierarchically superior and
universally applicable norms, was supported by practice and was widely
accepted in the literature. | 他指出，第三条结论草案第2段中提到强行法具有旨在保护国际社会基本价值观的性质、其本质是等级高并且普遍适用的规范，这是有惯例佐证、已被文献广泛接受的。 |
| 111. The Special Rapporteur further
reiterated his view that draft conclusions were the most appropriate outcome
for the topic. | 111. 特别报告员进而重申其观点，即上述结论草案是此专题最适当的成果。 |
| As regards the future programme of work,
he envisaged that the Commission would consider: the criteria for jus cogens,
in 2017; their consequences, in 2018; and any remaining miscellaneous issues,
in 2019. | 关于未来的工作方案，他设想委员会将：于2017年审议强行法的标准；于2018年审议强行法的后果；于2019年审议任何余下的杂项问题。 |
| 2. Summary of the debate | 2. 辩论摘要 |
| 112. In welcoming the first report of the
Special Rapporteur, members made reference to the wide support, among Member
States, for consideration of the topic, as expressed in the Sixth Committee. | 112. 委员们对特别报告员的第一次报告表示欢迎，提到了会员国在第六委员会中对此专题的审议工作表示的广泛支持。 |
| At the same time, the Special Rapporteur
was encouraged to keep in mind the differences in understandings expressed by
Member States and, accordingly, to approach the topic with caution. | 与此同时，有人鼓励特别报告员铭记会员国所表示的理解上的分歧，并相应地谨慎处理这一专题。 |
| It was also stated that the Commission
should, from the outset, avoid an outcome that could result in, or be
interpreted as, a deviation from the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 还有人指出，委员会应从一开始就避免可能导致或被解释为偏离1969年《维也纳公约》的结果。 |
| Several members pointed to the historical
significance of the study being undertaken by the Commission. | 若干委员指出了委员会正在开展的研究的重大历史意义。 |
| It was stressed that the scope of the
topic extends beyond the law of treaties, and includes areas of international
law such as the one on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful
acts. | 有人强调，本专题的范围超出了条约法，包括一些国际法领域，如国家对国际不法行为的责任。 |
| 113. Members expressed support for the
Special Rapporteur’s recommendations on the
methodology to be pursued. Agreement was expressed with his view that, in
principle, the study should be based on both State and judicial practice, and
supplemented by scholarly writings. | 113. 各委员表示支持特别报告员关于要采取的方法的建议，并表示同意他的意见，即原则上，研究应当以国家惯例和司法惯例为基础，并以学术著作为补充。 |
| The fact that the International Court of
Justice and other international and regional courts and tribunals had
referred to the concept in a number of cases was cited in support of the
assertion that the existence of jus cogens was no longer seriously contested. | 有人提出，国际法院及其他国际和区域法院和法庭已在若干案件中提到了有关概念，这证明强行法的存在已没有严重争议。 |
| The view was expressed that since the
existence of jus cogens was well established, the task at hand was to
determine the right balance between ordinary rules of international law,
which could be modified by regular procedures, and certain foundational
rules, which could not be so modified. | 有人认为，鉴于强行法的存在已得到公认，目前的任务是在可被常规程序更改的国际法普通规则和不可被更改的某些基本规则之间确定正确的平衡。 |
| At the same time, some members cautioned
that the Commission should avoid purporting to create new peremptory norms,
and stated that the Commission should proceed from the assumption that
peremptory norms, by their nature, were exceptions. | 与此同时，有些委员警示称，委员会应避免试图创建新的强制性规范，并指出委员会开展工作时应从这一假设出发，即强制性规范本质上属于例外。 |
| It was also suggested that a distinction
be drawn between reviewing the pronouncements of international courts and
tribunals in the determination of the existence of jus cogens, and the
practice of States, which gave the norms in question their peremptory
character. | 还有人建议，应对以下两种工作进行区分，即审查国际性法院和法庭的声明以确定强行法是否存在，以及审查对所涉规范赋予强制性的国家惯例。 |
| 114. The view was expressed that the
theoretical basis of jus cogens was not necessarily to be found in any one
particular school of thought (naturalist or positivist). | 114. 有人认为，强行法的理论基础不一定属于任何具体的学派(自然法或实证法)，也不一定以同意为基础。 |
| Nor was it necessarily based on consent.
Instead, its obligatory force was based on a general practice of States — undertaken as a matter of law — which
considered the norms in question to be non-derogable (even if they could be
replaced by other norms of the same character). | 反之，强行法所具备的强制力的依据是，各国将所涉规范视为不可克减(即便所涉规范可被具有相同性质的其他规范所替代)的一般惯例，且这一惯例被各国视作法律执行。 |
| In terms of a further view, it was
important for the Commission to adhere as closely as possible to the agreed
language of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 还有一种意见认为，委员会必须尽可能贴近1969年《维也纳公约》的用语。 |
| In that connection, several members were
of the view that articles 53 and 64 of the 1969 Vienna Convention offered a
satisfactory legal basis, by emphasizing the acceptance and recognition of a
norm by the international community of States. | 在这方面，若干委员认为1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三和第六十四条提供了令人满意的法律依据，强调了规范要得到由各国组成的国际社会的接受和承认。 |
| In terms of a further view, such
recognition should be extended to that of other entities, such as
international and non-governmental organizations, and the international
society more broadly. | 还有一种意见认为，还应得到国际组织和非政府组织等其他实体以及广大国际社会的这种承认。 |
| It was also suggested that if the Special
Rapporteur were to undertake further study of the theoretical aspects of jus
cogens, he could look at the link between the concept of jus cogens and that
of transnational public policy. | 另有人提出，特别报告员若要对强行法的理论基础展开进一步研究，可以审视强行法概念与跨国公共政策概念之间的联系。 |
| In terms of yet another view, the Commission
should not refrain from taking a position on some of the theoretical issues,
as doing so would help guide it, for example, in developing an illustrative
list of norms. | 又有一种意见认为，委员会应当就部分理论问题采取立场，这样将有助于引导委员会，例如有助于引导委员会拟订一份说明性规范清单。 |
| 115. It was suggested that, on the basis
of the discussion in the Special Rapporteur’s report,
the following elements of jus cogens could be identified: derogation from a
peremptory norm was impermissible; the rule or rules in question formed part
of general international law; a peremptory norm was recognized as such by the
international community; it was universally applicable; the fact of
non-derogability was a consequence of its peremptory status; jus cogens norms
were hierarchically superior to other rules of international law; jus cogens
norms had as their purpose the protection of international public order
(ordre public). | 115. 有人建议，根据特别报告员报告中的讨论，可以识别出强行法具有以下要素：强制性规范不得克减；所涉规则构成一般国际法的一部分；强制性规范得到国际社会的公认；强制性规范普遍适用；所涉规范因为具有强制性而不可克减；强行法规范在等级上高于其他国际法规范；强行法规范以保护国际公共秩序为目的。 |
| It was expressed that jus cogens norms
are essentially norms of customary international law with a special form of
opinio juris, that is, the conviction of the existence of a legal right or
obligation of a peremptory character. | 有人认为，强行法规范主要是习惯国际法规范，具备特殊的法律确信形式，也就是说，确信存在具有强制性质的法律权利或义务。 |
| Accordingly, such a norm consist of a
general practice accepted as peremptory law. | 因此，这种规范包括经接受为强制法的一般实践。 |
| In other words, a general practice
accompanied by opinio juris cogens. | 换言之，即有强制性法律确信伴行的一般实践。 |
| It was also pointed out that treaties
might be at the origin or reflect norms of jus cogens, and that peremptory
norms might also be based on general principles of law, which deserve further
study. | 还有人指出，条约可能是强行法的来源，或反映强行法规范，强制性规范也可能以一般法律规则为基础，这值得开展进一步的研究。 |
| At the same time, the Special Rapporteur
was called upon to undertake an in-depth study of the travaux préparatoires of the relevant provisions of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 与此同时，吁请特别报告员对1969年《维也纳公约》有关条款的准备工作开展一项深入研究。 |
| 116. Members expressed different views
concerning the possibility of developing an illustrative list of norms that
had acquired the status of jus cogens. | 116. 对是否可能拟订一份已取得强行法地位的规范的说明性清单的问题，各委员观点不一。 |
| Reference was made in the debate to the
fact that the concept of jus cogens was recognized in the constitutions of several
States. | 有人在辩论中提到，强行法的概念已在若干国家的宪法中得到承认。 |
| That made the possibility of developing
an indicative list of such norms, as recognized by international law,
particularly significant. | 因此，是否可能拟订一份国际法承认的此种规范的指示性清单问题尤为重要。 |
| According to such views, the usefulness
of the work on the topic would be diminished were the Commission not to
develop an indicative list, or if it were to limit itself to providing mere
examples. | 这种意见认为，如果委员会不拟订指示性清单，或者仅限于提供例子，则该专题工作的用处将会降低。 |
| The view was also expressed that
consideration of the topic should not be limited to methodological
considerations. | 还有意见认为，对该专题的审议工作不应局限于方法学方面的考虑。 |
| It was stated that a global society
required global norms, and that the Commission could contribute to the
identification of such norms through, inter alia, the preparation of a list
of peremptory norms, even if they were only indicative. | 有人指出，全球性的社会需要有全球性的规范，除其他外，委员会可以编写一份强制性规范的清单，哪怕是指示性的清单，也能对这种规范的识别作出贡献。 |
| It was observed that, unlike when the
1969 Vienna Convention was adopted, a variety of legal materials existed from
which to draw on in order to develop a list of such norms. | 有人表示，与1969年《维也纳公约》通过时不同，现在有许多种法律材料可供借鉴，以便拟订这种规范的清单。 |
| Furthermore, contrary to work on the
topic of “Identification of customary international
law” where the drawing up of a list of customary
rules would not have been feasible, the relatively limited number of jus
cogens norms made it possible to envisage such a list. | 此外，强行法专题与“习惯国际法的识别”专题不同，对后者而言，拟订一份习惯规则清单并不可行，而前者则与之相反，强行法规范的数量相对有限，拟订出这一清单是可能的。 |
| It was thought that the Commission could
also take into account the examples identified in its previous work,
including that on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts,
the fragmentation of international law, the responsibility of international
organizations and reservations to treaties. | 有人认为，委员会还可将其过去工作中识别的例子纳入考虑，包括国家对国际不法行为的责任的例子、国际法不成体系的例子、国际组织的责任的例子
和对条约的保留的例子。 |
| It was also recalled that the Commission
had developed an illustrative list in the context of its work on the effects
of armed conflicts on treaties. | 还有人回顾称，委员会在就武装冲突对条约的影响问题开展工作时，曾拟订过一份说明性清单。 |
| In considering drawing up a list, some
members also pointed out that the Commission could look at the judgments and
decisions of international courts and tribunals, at the global and regional
levels. | 在考虑起草清单的问题时，一些委员还指出，委员会可以研究全球和区域各级国际性法院和法庭的判决和裁决。 |
| 117. Support was further expressed for
the possibility of dealing with the matter through a discussion of
illustrative examples in the commentary, or in an annex, although the view
was also expressed that there was little difference between those options and
drawing up an illustrative list. | 117. 有人进而表示，支持通过在评注或附件中讨论说明性例子的方式来处理这一事项，但也有意见认为，这种方法和起草一份说明性清单几乎没有差别。 |
| It was also suggested that the Commission
postpone a decision on the matter until a later stage. | 还有人建议委员会推迟至较后阶段再就该事项作出决定。 |
| 118. Several other members were of the
view that it was not advisable to seek to develop such a list, nor even to
provide illustrative examples in the commentary, as that would necessarily
require the Commission to take a position on the status of the rules in question. | 118. 若干其他委员认为，不宜试图拟订这一清单，甚至不宜在评注中提供说明性例子，因为这样一定会要求委员会就所涉规则的地位采取立场。 |
| The concern was also that attempting to
produce such a list might involve considerable additional work and detailed
analysis of substantive areas of law, and lead to fruitless disputes about
the inclusion or non-inclusion of norms. | 还有一项关切是，试图编制这样的一份清单可能会产生较大的额外工作、要求对法律的实质性领域进行详细分析，并导致关于是否应将有些规范纳入清单的徒劳争端。 |
| The concern was also expressed that
establishing a list, even if only illustrative, would result in equally
important rules of international law being given an inferior status. | 还有人关切地指出，拟出一份清单，哪怕只是说明性的清单，都会导致同等重要的国际法规则落入较低的地位。 |
| 119. Several members also expressed
doubts as to the existence of regional jus cogens. | 119. 若干委员还对区域强行法的存在表示了疑问。 |
| It was maintained that such a
possibility, by definition, contradicted the universal applicability of jus
cogens. | 有人表示，这种可能性从定义上就与强行法的普遍适用性冲突。 |
| Furthermore, such a possibility raised
questions as to their legal effects in relation, for example, to States
outside the region in question, as well as the relationship between universal
and regional jus cogens. | 此外，这一可能性会产生问题，例如区域强行法对所涉区域外国家的法律效果问题，以及普遍强行法与区域强行法的关系问题。 |
| The concern was also expressed that if
the notion of regional jus cogens were recognized, there would, in principle,
be no bar to also recognizing subregional norms, which could further
undermine the concept, and potentially lead to the fragmentation of
international law. | 还有人关切地表示，如果区域强行法的概念得到承认，那原则上承认次区域规范也不存在障碍，这会进一步损害这一概念，并有可能导致国际法不成体系。 |
| 120. However, other members pointed out
that some references to regional jus cogens with respect to certain norms had
been made, for example, by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. | 120. 但另一些委员指出，对某些规范方面的区域强行法有一定的提及，例如美洲人权委员会就提到过。 |
| Reference was also made to the
possibility that regional rules of jus cogens existed in Europe Accordingly,
the possibility of other forms of peremptory norms, such as regional norms,
deserved further study, and should not a priori be excluded. | 另外还提到欧洲可能存在强行法的区域规则。 因此，存在区域规范等其他形式的强制性规范的可能性问题值得进一步研究，不应预先予以排除。 |
| It was also suggested that while there
might be no reason, in principle, to limit the concept to rules of universal
applicability, the Commission could decide simply to limit the scope of its
study to only jus cogens of universal applicability. | 还有人建议，虽然原则上可能没有理由将强行法的概念局限为普遍适用的规则，但委员会仍可决定限制自己的研究范围，只研究普遍适用的强行法。 |
| 121. Several members emphasized the
incompatibility of the notion of the persistent objector with jus cogens
norms, which have by definition a universal peremptory character. | 121. 若干委员强调了“一贯反对者”概念与强行法规范的不相容性，后者从定义上看具有普遍强制性质。 |
| In this regard, those members added it
would be impossible to admit, for example, a persistent objector to the
prohibition of the crime of genocide. | 在这方面，这些委员还指出，例如，不可能承认对禁止灭绝种族罪的一贯反对者。 |
| In terms of another view, it was too
early to take a decision on that point, since the Commission had not yet
considered the meaning of the phrase “accepted and
recognized by the community of States as a whole”. | 另一意见认为，就此问题作出决定为时过早，因为委员会尚未审议“各国组成的国际社会整体接受并公认”这一短语的含义。 |
| It was also suggested that a distinction
be drawn between an analysis of the source of jus cogens and the effect of
their application, with the persistent objector being concerned more with the
latter than the former. | 还有人建议，应将强行法的渊源研究同强行法的适用效果区分开来，一贯反对者规则与后者更为相关，而非前者。 |
| 122. General support was expressed for
the proposal that the Commission focus on developing draft “conclusions” on the topic. | 122. 关于委员会应侧重于拟订该专题结论草案的提议得到了普遍支持。 |
| At the same time, the view was expressed
that it would have been preferable for the Commission to consider the type of
outcome after analysing all the elements of peremptory norms. | 同时也有意见认为，委员会原本应该先分析强制性规范的所有要素，然后再审议这种结果才好。 |
| 123. As regards proposed draft conclusion
1, the view was expressed that it was not clear whether the process of “identification” was merely a matter of
recognition or whether it included a normative exercise of determination of
the existence and content of a norm. | 123. 关于拟议的结论草案1，有意见指出，有一点并不明确，即“识别”这一过程仅仅关乎于承认，还是包括对规范的存在与内容进行确定的规范性工作？ |
| It was also suggested that the provision
be recast more clearly in the form of a provision concerning scope, and that
it could be expanded to include the activities of non-State actors. | 还有人建议，应重写该条，更清楚地从形式上显示该条是关于范围的条款，并可扩大其范围，将非国家行为方的活动也包括在内。 |
| It was also suggested that express
mention be made not only of the criteria for the determination of jus cogens,
but also its content. | 又有人建议，除明确提到强行法的确定标准之外，还应提到强行法的内容。 |
| 124. Concerning draft conclusion 2,
doubts were expressed about the necessity of drawing a comparison with jus
dispositivum. | 124. 关于结论草案2，有人质疑是否有必要与酌定法进行比较。 |
| Several members suggested that the matter
could be dealt with in the commentary. | 若干委员建议，可将这一事项放在评注中讨论。 |
| Doubts were also expressed about the
appropriateness of including a reference to the modification, derogation or
abrogation of regular rules of international law. | 还有人质疑，提到国际法常规规则的更改、克减或废除是否适当。 |
| It was also pointed out that it was
confusing to treat jus cogens as, on the one hand, hierarchically superior,
while, on the other hand, as an exception to a standard rule. | 有人指出，一方面将强行法视为等级更高的规范，另一方面又将其视为标准规则的例外，这令人难以理解。 |
| A doubt was also expressed as to the
extent to which the proposed formulation suggested that parties to a treaty
could bind themselves simply by proclaiming that a particular treaty rule may
not be changed by their own agreement. | 还有人表示疑惑，拟议的行文可以在多大程度上说明，条约缔约方仅仅宣称其自身的协定不得更改某项具体规则，就可对自身产生约束力？ |
| It was maintained that a rule did not
acquire the character of jus cogens simply by the agreement of parties to a
treaty. | 有人指出，仅有条约缔约方达成协定，不足以使有关规则获得强行法的性质。 |
| 125. Several members suggested that draft
conclusion 3 be recast as a definition of jus cogens, and it was proposed
that the provision track the formulation of article 53 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention as closely as possible. | 125. 若干委员建议将结论草案3重写为强行法的定义，还有人建议该条款应尽可能贴近1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条的行文。 |
| Several members expressed support for the
content of paragraph 2, while several others expressed doubts concerning its
inclusion. | 若干委员支持第2段的内容，另外一些委员则质疑是否应将其加入结论草案。 |
| It was maintained that there was no
practice to support the inclusion of the elements listed in paragraph 2,
which also seemed to depart from the definition provided in article 53 of the
1969 Vienna Convention. | 有人认为，第2段所列的各项要素没有惯例佐证，且该段似乎偏离了1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条所载的定义。 |
| The view was expressed that the
distinctive feature of jus cogens norms was less their hierarchical nature,
and more their special importance. | 有意见认为，强行法规范的特征不在于其等级高低，而更在于其特殊重要性。 |
| The Commission was cautioned against the
risk of inadvertently creating additional requirements for the recognition of
jus cogens. | 有人警示委员会，要注意风险，不要无意中给强行法增加了额外的识别要求。 |
| The view was expressed that the notion of
“hierarchical superiority”
was unclear, and potentially misleading, including because it blurred the
distinction between the identification of jus cogens and the consequences of
conflict with such norms. | 有意见认为，“等级高”这一概念并不明确，可能还会引起误解，因为它模糊了强行法的识别与违反强行法规范的后果之间的差异。 |
| In terms of a further view, the reference
to “hierarchy” required
further elaboration of the particular kind of hierarchy produced by jus
cogens, which was based on the nullity of treaties that contravened it, as
opposed to other hierarchies in international law, such as that established
by Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations. | 还有意见认为，既然提到“等级”，就要进一步说明强行法所产生的等级的具体种类，这种等级的依据是，违反强行法的条约属于无效，这与国际法中的其他等级不同，例如《联合国宪章》第一百零三条所设立的等级。 |
| In terms of different view, the
hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms was well established and had
been recognized by the Commission itself in its work on the fragmentation of
international law. | 有不同意见认为，委员会本身已在关于国际法不成体系问题的工作中很好地确定和承认了强制性规则的高等级。 |
| It was further suggested that paragraph 2
could be made the subject of a separate draft conclusion. | 进而有人建议可将第2段作为一条独立的结论草案的主题。 |
| 126. Several members also expressed their
disagreement with the necessity of referring to “the
values of the international community”, since the
existence of jus cogens depended upon its acceptance and recognition as such
by the international community of States as a whole and not on a subjective
assessment of values. | 126. 若干委员还认为，没有必要提到“国际社会的价值观”，因为强行法的存在取决于各国组成的国际社会整体接受和承认强行法，而不是取决于对价值观的主观评估。 |
| Another view was that the reference to “fundamental values” was too narrow if it
only referred to those jus cogens norms of a humanitarian character, to the
exclusion of others, such as the prohibition on the use of force. | 另有意见认为，所提到的“基本价值观”如果仅指具有人道主义性质的强行法规范，而排除其他强行法规范，例如禁止使用武力，则过于狭隘。 |
| Accordingly, it was proposed that the
draft conclusion refer instead to “the most
fundamental principles”. | 相应地，有人提议该条结论草案应提到“最基本的原则”。 |
| In terms of a further view, the provision
could, in fact, usefully supplement the 1969 Vienna Convention by clarifying
the nature of jus cogens through the inclusion of a reference to the “fundamental values of the international community as a whole”. | 还有意见认为，该条实际上可以通过加入“国际社会的基本价值观”这一提法，澄清强行法的性质，从而对1969年《维也纳公约》作出有益补充。 |
| 127. Notwithstanding the views expressed
on the possibility of the existence of regional jus cogens, support was
expressed for the element of “universal applicability”, which was listed in paragraph 2. | 127. 尽管有人就存在区域强行法的可能性表达了意见，但也有人对第2段所列的“普遍适用”这一要素表示了支持。 |
| 128. Other suggestions included
developing a further draft conclusion on the definition of jus cogens. | 128. 其他建议包括另拟一条关于强行法定义的结论草案。 |
| It was also recommended that there be
more consistency in referring to either “norms” or “rules”. | 还有人建议，在提到“规范”或“规则”时应当更加一致。 |
| A preference was expressed for using “norms”, as had been done in the 1969
Vienna Convention. | 有人倾向于参照1969年《维也纳公约》使用“规范”。 |
| A further suggestion was to change the
title of the topic to “jus cogens in international
law”, “peremptory norms” or “jus cogens in the international legal
order”. | 另有人建议，应将该专题的标题改为“国际法中的强行法”、“强制性规范”或“国际法律秩序中的强行法”。 |
| It was also suggested that the draft
conclusions deal with the invalidating effect of jus cogens, including the
question of who determines whether there is a conflict with jus cogens. | 还有人建议，这些结论草案应论及强行法使其他规定无效的效果，包括由谁来决定所涉规定是否与强行法冲突的问题。 |
| 129. Support was expressed for the
Special Rapporteur’s indication of the planned future
work on the topic. | 129. 特别报告员就该专题未来计划开展的工作所作的说明得到了支持。 |
| It was suggested that the Special
Rapporteur also investigate the relationship between general principles of
law and jus cogens. | 有人建议，特别报告员还应调查一般法律原则与强行法之间的关系。 |
| Other suggestions for future work
included analysing: the phrase “accepted and
recognized by the international community of States as a whole” and the extent to which such a concept was synonymous with
consent; the relationship between jus cogens and erga omnes obligations; the
extent to which non-derogation was a defining characteristic of jus cogens;
the process by which a subsequent peremptory norm could replace such a
previous norm; the relationship between the existence of fundamental values
underlying jus cogens and the expression of their existence; the dispute
settlement mechanism in article 66 of the 1969 Vienna Convention; and the
question of how to regulate conflict between contradictory peremptory norms. | 其他关于未来工作的建议包括分析：“各国组成的国际社会整体接受并公认”这一短语，以及该概念与同意的相近程度；强行法与普遍义务之间的关系；不克减在多大程度上属于强行法的决定性特征；嗣后强制性规范可以替代旧规范的程序；强行法之下基本价值观的存在与其存在的表达之间的关系；1969年《维也纳公约》第六十六条所载的争端解决机制；以及如何管理相互矛盾的强制性规范之间的冲突问题。 |
| 3. Concluding remarks of the Special
Rapporteur | 3. 特别报告员的总结 |
| 130. In responding to the debate, the
Special Rapporteur addressed the comments on the theoretical basis for jus
cogens, and expressed his disagreement with those who were of the view that
article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention resolved the matter. | 130. 特别报告员在就辩论内容作答复时，谈到了有关强行法理论基础的评论，并表示不同意那些认为1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条已经解决了这一事项的委员的意见。 |
| Nevertheless, he remained of the view
that it was not necessary for the Commission to resolve the matter. | 不过，他仍然认为，没有必要由委员会来解决这一事项。 |
| 131. It was noted that there had been general
agreement on the need to base the study mainly on the practice of States,
judicial decisions and scholarly writings, as appropriate. | 131. 特别报告员指出，委员们已经广泛达成一致意见，有必要将国家惯例、司法裁决以及在适当情况下将学术著作作为研究的主要依据。 |
| In response to views, expressed in the
debate, that some of the elements in his first report were not fully
substantiated by State practice, or that the relative lack of such practice
made it necessary to fall back on theoretical constructs, the Special
Rapporteur recalled that there existed a significant amount of State and
judicial practice. | 辩论中有人表示，特别报告员的第一次报告中的一些要素没有充分的国家惯例佐证，还有人表示由于这种惯例相对缺乏，有必要依赖于理论构建，对此，特别报告员回顾称，其实存在着大量的国家惯例和司法惯例。 |
| 132. Concerning the possibility of
developing an illustrative list, the Special Rapporteur noted the differences
of opinion within the Commission, and acknowledged that the possibility of
developing such a list sounded attractive. | 132. 关于拟订一份说明性清单的可能性问题，特别报告员注意到委员会内部存在意见分歧，并承认拟订这一清单不乏吸引力。 |
| Nonetheless, he recalled his concern that
it would detract from the methodological focus of the topic. | 尽管如此，他回顾自己的关切，即这会偏离该专题的方法学侧重。 |
| However, he remained open to the
possibility of an illustrative list, focusing on the most well-accepted
peremptory norms. | 不过，他对拟订一份侧重于最广为接受的强制性规范的说明性清单的可能性仍保持开放态度。 |
| 133. On the question of regional jus
cogens, the Special Rapporteur reiterated his intention to consider the
matter in future reports. | 133. 关于区域强行法的问题，特别报告员重申，他有意在未来的报告中审议这一事项。 |
| At the same time, while he did not
believe that the notion of a regional jus cogens norm was well founded in
international law, in his view the universal character of jus cogens, which
was well established, did not a priori exclude the possibility of regional
peremptory norms. | 与此同时，虽然他不认为区域强行法规范的概念在国际法中具有扎实的依据，但在他看来，虽然已公认强行法具备普遍性，但并不能因此就预先排除存在区域强制性规范的可能性。 |
| 134. The Special Rapporteur further
confirmed that he did not intend to overlook the implication of jus cogens in
the context of the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful
acts. | 134. 特别报告员进而证实，他无意忽视强行法在国家对国际不法行为的责任方面的影响。 |
| As had been indicated in the syllabus,
the topic was broader than the law of treaties. | 如摘要中所述，该专题的范围比条约法更广。 |
| His intention had been to deal with such
matters in later reports on the consequences of jus cogens. | 他本意是在关于强行法后果的后续报告中讨论这一事项。 |
| He did, however, express disagreement
with the view that the nature and definition of jus cogens may be different
depending on the area of international law. | 但是，对强行法的本质和定义可根据国际法领域的不同而不同这一观点，他表示不同意。 |
| 135. As regards future work, he had taken
note of the views concerning the possibility of treaty-based jus cogens. | 135. 关于未来的工作，他注意到有关基于条约的强行法的可能性的意见。 |
| He further confirmed his intention to
consider the relationship between jus cogens norms and erga omnes
obligations. | 他还证实，有意考虑强行法规范与普遍义务之间的关系。 |
| 136. Concerning the proposed draft
conclusions, the Special Rapporteur noted the various drafting suggestions made
in the debate. | 136. 关于各条拟议的结论草案，特别报告员注意到辩论中提出的各种关于起草的建议。 |
| He also accepted the criticism that draft
conclusion 2 dealt with issues that were outside the scope of the topic. | 他还接受以下批评，即结论草案2论及了该专题范围之外的问题。 |
| He explained that he had intended, by
means of the draft proposal, to make the point that peremptory norms were, by
their very nature, exceptional in relation to other rules of international
law. | 他解释称，本打算通过提案草案的形式指出强制性规范本质上是其他国际法规则的例外。 |
| Nonetheless, he accepted the view of the
Commission that the proposed draft conclusion need not be referred to the
Drafting Committee. | 尽管如此，他接受委员会的意见，即不需要将该条拟议的结论草案转交起草委员会。 |
| 137. As regards draft conclusion 3, while
he was open to the suggestions for improvement to paragraph 1, including
aligning the formulation with that in article 53 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention, he disagreed with those members of the Commission who had
suggested that there existed no, or a limited, basis in the practice of
States and in the pronouncements of courts and tribunals to support the
inclusion of the elements of fundamental values, hierarchical superiority and
universal applicability of jus cogens. | 137. 关于结论草案3，虽然他对改进第1段的建议，包括使行文与1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条接轨的建议持开放态度，但他不同意的是，有些委员会委员提出在国家惯例以及法院和法庭的声明中，没有依据或只有有限的依据支持将强行法的基本价值观、等级高和普遍适用要素纳入结论。 |
| In addition to the authorities in his
first report, he provided additional authorities for the positions taken by
States on jus cogens, primarily within the context of the United Nations, as
well as the pronouncements of courts and tribunals. | 除了他的第一次报告中提到的当局外，他还增加了更多各国就强行法采取立场的例证，主要是在联合国背景下就强行法采取立场的例证，以及各法院和法庭的声明。 |
| 138. He further expressed the view that
there was merit in considering suggestions for modifying the title of the
project and that this could be considered in a future report. | 138. 他进一步表示，可以考虑有关建议，修改该项目的标题，并可在今后的报告中讨论这一问题。 |
| Chapter X | 第十章 |
| Protection of the environment in relation
to armed conflicts | 与武装冲突有关的环境保护 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 139. At its sixty-fifth session (2013),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Protection
of the environment in relation to armed conflicts” in
its programme of work, and appointed Ms. Marie G. Jacobsson as Special
Rapporteur for the topic. | 139. 国际法委员会在第六十五届会议(2013年)上决定将“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”专题列入其工作方案，并任命玛丽G •雅各布松女士为本专题特别报告员。 |
| 140. At its sixty-sixth session (2014),
the Commission considered the preliminary report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/674 and Corr.1). | 140. 委员会在第六十六届会议(2014年)上审议了特别报告员的初步报告(A/CN.4/674和Corr.1)。 |
| At its sixty-seventh session (2015), the
Commission considered the second report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/685) and took note of the draft introductory provisions and draft
principles I-(x) to II-5, provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee
(A/CN.4/L.870). | 委员会在第六十七届会议(2015年)上审议了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/685)，并注意到起草委员会暂时通过的导言部分规定草案和原则草案1-(x)至2-5(A/CN.4/L.870)。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 141. At the present session, the Commission
had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/700), which
it considered at its 3318th to 3321st and 3324th meetings, from 12 to 15 July
and on 20 July 2016. | 141. 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/700)，在2016年7月12日至15日和7月20日的第3318次至第3321次和第3324次会议上审议了这份报告。 |
| 142. In her third report, the Special
Rapporteur focused on identifying rules of particular relevance to
post-conflict situations, while also addressing some issues relating to
preventive measures to be undertaken in the pre-conflict phase, as well as
the particular situation of indigenous peoples (chapter II). | 142. 特别报告员在第三次报告中重点确定与冲突后局势特别相关的规则，同时还论述了一些与冲突前阶段应采取的预防措施有关的问题，以及土著人民的特殊情况(第二章)。 |
| The Special Rapporteur proposed three
draft principles on preventive measures, five draft principles concerning the
post-conflict phase and one draft principle on the rights of indigenous
peoples, placed in Part Four of the draft principles. | 特别报告员提出三项关于预防措施的原则草案，五项关于冲突后阶段的原则草案，和一项关于土著人民权利的原则草案，这条草案被列入原则草案的第四部分。 |
| In her report, the Special Rapporteur
also provided a brief analysis of the work conducted so far and made some
suggestions for the future programme of work on the topic (chapter III). | 特别报告员在报告中还简要分析了迄今为止开展的工作，并就本专题今后的工作方案提出了一些建议(第三章)。 |
| 143. At its 3324th meeting, on 20 July
2016, the Commission referred draft principles I-1, I-3, I-4, III-1 to III-5
and IV-1, as contained in the third report of the Special Rapporteur, to the
Drafting Committee. | 143. 在2016年7月20日第3324次会议上，委员会将特别报告员第三次报告所载原则草案1-1、1-3、1-4、3-1至3-5和4-1转交起草委员会。 |
| 144. At the same meeting, the Commission
also decided to refer back to the Drafting Committee the draft introductory
provisions and draft principles contained in the report of the Drafting
Committee (A/CN.4/L.870) that the Commission had taken note of during its
previous session to address some technical issues in the text involving the
use of brackets and some inconsistencies regarding the terminology employed. | 144. 在同一次会议上，委员会还决定将起草委员会报告(A/CN.4/L.870)所载、委员会在上一次届会注意到的导言部分规定草案和原则草案发回起草委员会，以解决案文中一些涉及括号的用法及使用术语不一致的技术问题。 |
| 145. At its 3337th and 3342nd meetings,
on 5 and 9 August 2016 respectively, the Chairperson of the Drafting
Committee presented two reports of the Drafting Committee on “Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts”. | 145. 在分别于2016年8月5和9日举行的第3337次和第3342次会议上，起草委员会主席介绍了 起草委员会关于“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”的两份报告。 |
| The first contained the draft
introductory provisions and draft principles taken note of by the Commission
during the sixty-seventh session (2015), which had been renumbered and
revised for technical reasons by the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.870/Rev.1). | 第一份报告载有委员会在第六十七届会议(2015年)期间注意到的导言部分规定草案和原则草案，起草委员会已经因技术原因对草案重新编号并做出修订(A/CN.4/L.870/Rev.1)。 |
| The Commission provisionally adopted
draft principles 1, 2, 5 [I-x], 9 [II-1], 10 [II-2], 11 [II-3], 12 [II-4], 13
[II-5] (see section C.1 below). | 委员会暂时通过了原则草案1、2、5[1-x]、9[2-1]、10[2-2]、11[2-3]、12[2-4]、13[2-5](见下文C.1节)。 |
| At its 3344th meeting, on 10 August 2016,
the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft principles provisionally
adopted at the present session (see section C.2 below). | 在2016年8月10日举行的第3344次会议上，委员会通过了本届会议暂时通过的原则草案的评注(见下文第C.2节)。 |
| 146. The second report contained draft
principles 4, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18 provisionally adopted by the
Drafting Committee at the present session (A/CN.4/L.876). | 146. 第二份报告载有起草委员会在本届会议上暂时通过的原则草案4、6、7、8、14、15、16、17和18(ACN.4/L.876)。 |
| The Commission took note of the draft
principles as presented by the Drafting Committee. | 委员会注意到起草委员会提交的原则草案。 |
| It is anticipated that commentaries to
the draft principles will be considered at a future session. | 预计将在今后的一届会议上审议这些原则草案的评注。 |
| 1. Introduction by the Special Rapporteur
of the third report | 1. 特别报告员介绍第三次报告 |
| 147. The Special Rapporteur stated that
the main purpose of the third report was to identify rules of particular
relevance in post-conflict situations, and also address some preventive
measures that had not been dealt with in the previous reports. | 147. 特别报告员指出，第三次报告的主要目的是确定在冲突后局势中特别相关的规则，并论述前两次报告尚未述及的一些预防措施。 |
| She recalled that the preliminary report
had provided an overview of pertinent rules and principles applicable to a
potential armed conflict (pre-conflict phase) and that the second report had
identified existing rules of armed conflict directly relevant to the
protection of the environment during armed conflict. | 她回顾说，初步报告概述了适用于潜在武装冲突(冲突前阶段)的相关规则和原则，第二次报告确定了与“武装冲突期间的环境保护”直接相关的现有的武装冲突规则。 |
| The three reports sought to provide an
overview of the applicable law before, during and after an armed conflict
(phases I, II and III, respectively) in an attempt to close the circle of the
three temporal phases. | 三次报告旨在全面概述武装冲突之前、期间和之后(分别为第一、第二和第三阶段)适用的法律，试图完整地覆盖这三个时间段。 |
| She observed that there were no clear-cut
boundaries between the various phases and that it was important to read the
reports together for a proper understanding of the topic. | 她指出，各个阶段之间没有明确的界限，要充分了解这一专题，必须将三次报告一并阅读。 |
| 148. The third report did not attempt to
undertake a comprehensive review of international law in general, but
examined specific conventions and legal issues that were of particular
relevance to the topic. | 148. 第三次报告没有尝试对国际法进行全面综述，而是审查了具体的环境公约和与本专题特别相关的其他法律问题。 |
| It addressed, inter alia, pertinent
aspects with regard to conventions on legal liability, international
investment agreements, rights of indigenous peoples, remnants of war, as well
as the practice of States in the form of peace agreements and the status of
forces and status of mission agreements. | 除其他外，报告讨论了关于法律责任、国际投资协定、土著人民权利、战争遗留物等各项公约的相关内容，以及和平协定、部队地位协定和特派团地位协定等形式的国家实践。 |
| One section was also dedicated to the
practice of international organizations, with special emphasis on the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). | 还有一节专门讨论国际组织的实践，着重强调联合国环境规划署(环境署)的实践。 |
| In addition, the Special Rapporteur
indicated that the report provided a brief recapitulation of the discussions
within the Commission during the previous session, as well as information on
the views and practice of States and of select case law. | 此外，特别报告员指出，报告简要阐述了委员会上一届会议期间的讨论情况，并介绍了各国的评论和实践以及若干案例法。 |
| She noted, however, that similarly to the
findings in the second report, the case law in this area rarely covered
environmental harm in and of itself; it almost always took the form of damage
to natural resources or property. | 但是她指出，与第二次报告的调查结果一致，这个领域的案例法极少涉及环境损害本身，几乎总是采用自然资源损害或财产损害的形式。 |
| The Special Rapporteur further
highlighted the section of the report that addressed the question of access
to and sharing of information and the obligation to cooperate (paras.
130-152), which she considered of particular importance for all three phases
of the topic. | 特别报告员还强调了报告中讨论获取和分享信息问题及合作义务的章节(第130-152段)，她认为这对于本专题所有三个阶段都特别重要。 |
| 149. The report contained proposals for
nine draft principles. | 149. 报告载有拟议的九条原则草案。 |
| Three draft principles were proposed for
Part One, which primarily concerned preventive measures (pre-conflict phase). | 报告中为第一部分建议了三条原则草案，主要涉及预防措施(冲突前阶段)。 |
| Draft principle I-1 addressed the need
for States to adopt legislative, administrative, judicial or other preventive
measures at the domestic level to enhance the protection of the environment. | 原则草案1-1述及各国需要采取立法、行政、司法或其他预防措施，加强对环境的保护。 |
| The draft principle was short and general
in nature. | 这是条简短的一般性原则草案。 |
| Draft principle I-3 reflected the
emerging trend among States and organizations to address environmental
matters in the status of forces and status of mission agreements. | 原则草案1-3反映了各国和各组织在部队地位协定和特派团地位协定中处理环境事项的新趋势。 |
| Draft principle I-4 dealt with
environmental consequences of peace operations and the importance of taking
the necessary measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate any negative impact
of such operations. | 原则草案1-4述及和平行动的环境后果及采取必要措施防止、减轻和补救此类行动负面影响的重要性。 |
| 150. Five draft principles were proposed
for Part Three, which related to post-conflict measures. | 150. 报告中为第三部分建议了五条主要与冲突后措施有关的原则草案。 |
| Draft principle III-1 addressed peace
agreements, which, it was noted, increasingly regulate environmental
questions. | 原则草案3-1述及和平协定，指出和平协定越来越多地规范环境问题。 |
| Draft principle III-2 concerned the need
to undertake post-conflict environmental assessments and reviews and consisted
of two paragraphs. | 原则草案3-2涉及需要开展冲突后环境评估和审查，由两段组成。 |
| Whereas paragraph 1 encouraged
cooperation among States and former parties to an armed conflict for this
purpose, including with States that were not parties to the conflict,
paragraph 2 dealt with steps to be taken after the conclusion of a peace
operation. | 第1段鼓励各国及前武装冲突各方为这一目的合作，包括与非冲突各方合作；第2段述及和平行动结束后要采取的步骤。 |
| The purpose of the draft principle was
not to attribute responsibility, but rather to ensure that assessments and
recovery measures could be undertaken. | 这条原则草案的目的不是确定责任归属，而是确保能够开展评估和采取恢复措施。 |
| Draft principles III-3 and III-4 dealt
with remnants of war and remnants of war at sea, respectively. | 原则草案3-3和3-4分别述及战争遗留物和海上战争遗留物。 |
| Draft principle III-3 was general in
nature and primarily reflected obligations that already exist under the law
of armed conflict. | 原则草案3-3属一般性条款，主要反映武装冲突法之下已经存在的义务。 |
| The emphasis was on the need to act
without delay and to cooperate to eliminate threats from remnants of war. | 这一条重点强调需要立即采取行动并开展合作，消除战争遗留物的威胁。 |
| Draft principle III-4 specifically
addressed remnants of war at sea. | 原则草案3-4专门论述海上战争遗留物。 |
| The Special Rapporteur observed that
those remnants were not directly regulated under the law of armed conflict
and entailed particular complexities in light of the different legal statuses
of various maritime zones. | 特别报告员指出，这些遗留物不直接受武装冲突法的规范，鉴于各海区的法律地位不同，引起了特别复杂的问题。 |
| The two draft principles aimed at
covering all types of remnants that constituted a threat to the environment. | 这两条原则草案旨在涵盖对环境构成威胁的所有类型的遗留物。 |
| Draft principle III-5 concerned the need
for States and international organizations to grant access to and share
information in order to enhance the protection of the environment. | 原则草案3-5涉及各国和各国际组织须准许获取和分享信息，以加强对环境的保护。 |
| These were seen as essential requirements
to ensure effective cooperation. | 这被视为确保有效开展合作的最基本要求。 |
| 151. One draft principle was proposed for
Part Four. | 151. 报告中为第四部分建议了一条原则草案。 |
| Draft principle IV-1 reflected the
present legal status of indigenous peoples and their lands and territories
under relevant international legal instruments and case law. | 原则草案4-1反映了土著人民及其土地和领地在相关国际法律文书和案例法之下现有的法律地位。 |
| The Special Rapporteur foresaw that more
draft principles could be added to this part. | 特别报告员预见，这部分可能增加更多的原则草案。 |
| 152. The Special Rapporteur further drew
attention to certain issues that the third report did not cover, including
the Martens clause and issues relating to occupation, and observed that the
Commission may wish to consider these matters in its future work on the
topic. | 152. 特别报告员还提请注意第三次报告没有述及的某些问题，包括马顿斯条款和与占领有关的问题。
报告员还指出，委员会不妨在本专题今后的工作中审议这些事项。 |
| In addition, she highlighted several
other issues that may be pertinent for the topic, such as questions on
responsibility and liability, as well as the responsibility and practice of
non-State actors and organized armed groups in non-international armed
conflicts. | 此外，报告员强调指出其他几个可能与本专题相关的问题，如责任和赔偿责任的问题，以及非国家行为者和有组织的武装团体在非国际性武装冲突中的责任和实践。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also observed that
it might be appropriate to include a clear reference in a future preamble to
the Commission’s articles on the effects of armed
conflicts on treaties, which was of particular relevance for the present
topic. | 特别报告员还提出，在未来的序言部分似宜明确提及委员会关于武装冲突对条约的影响的条款， 这些条款与本专题尤为相关。 |
| 153. Finally, the Special Rapporteur
encouraged continued consultations with other entities, such as the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) and other relevant parts of the United Nations
system and regional organizations, and pointed out that the Commission may
find it useful to continue to receive information from States on national
legislation and case law relevant to the topic. | 153. 最后，特别报告员鼓励委员会继续与红十字国际委员会(红十字委员会)、联合国环境规划署(环境署)等其他实体及联合国系统其他有关部门和区域组织进行协商。 报告员还指出，各国继续提供与本专题有关的国家立法和案例法的资料，对委员会可能有所帮助。 |
| 2. Summary of the debate | 2. 辩论摘要 |
| (a) General comments | (a) 一般评论 |
| 154. The importance of the topic was
reiterated by some members, noting not only its contemporary relevance but
also the challenges it presented, in particular since it sat at a
cross-section of various legal fields. | 154. 一些委员重申本专题的重要意义，不仅指出它的现实意义，而且提到它带来的挑战，特别是本专题因贯穿各个法律领域所带来的挑战。 |
| The fact that the Special Rapporteur, through
her reports, had treated the three temporal phases as equally important had
contributed to the development of the topic. | 特别报告员在几次报告中对三个时间段给予同样的重视，这一点促进了本专题的发展。 |
| While some members acknowledged the
purpose of the third report, they also observed that its structure had made
it difficult to clearly discern the relevance of the materials presented with
regard to the intended temporal phase. | 一些委员肯定了第三次报告的意图，但是又评论说，报告采取这样的结构安排，难以明确分辨所列资料与其打算说明的时间段之间的联系。 |
| In this regard, the view was expressed
that it was necessary to clearly distinguish between the three temporal
phases and to identify the applicable law in each of them. | 有人就此表示，有必要明确区分三个时间阶段，并确定每个阶段适用的法律。 |
| To facilitate consideration of the topic,
a suggestion was made that the pre-conflict and post-conflict phases be
limited to the period immediately before and immediately after the
hostilities, respectively. | 为便于审议这一专题，有人建议将冲突前和冲突后阶段分别限制为敌对行动即将开始前和刚刚结束后。 |
| 155. While some members welcomed the
wealth of materials included in the report, other members observed that it
was too extensive and included information that was of limited relevance. | 155. 一些委员对报告中的丰富资料表示欢迎，还有些委员认为，报告的内容过于广泛，其中一些信息的相关性有限。 |
| This had made it difficult to obtain a
proper understanding of the direction the topic was taking. | 这样便很难正确理解这个专题的走向。 |
| It would have been more conducive if the
report had provided an extensive analysis of relevant materials upon which
the draft principles were based, thereby justifying their content. | 如果报告对原则草案所依据的相关材料进行详尽分析，从而证明草案内容的合理性，作用可能会更大。 |
| 156. Some members agreed with the Special
Rapporteur that an examination of all environmental treaties to determine
their continued applicability during armed conflict was not warranted. | 156. 有些委员同意特别报告员的观点，认为没有理由审查所有环境条约，确定它们在武装冲突期间是否继续适用。 |
| It was recalled that the Commission had already
studied this question in the context of its work on the articles on the
effects of armed conflicts on treaties. | 他们回顾指出，委员会已经在为关于武装冲突对条约的影响条款所做的工作中处理了环境条约的普遍使用性问题。 |
| Environmental agreements featured in the
indicative list of treaties the subject-matter of which implied that they
continue in operation. | 环境协定已列入指示性条约清单，这些条约的主题事项含有条约继续施行之意。 |
| The articles and the commentaries thereto
were certainly relevant for the current topic. | 这些条款及其评注当然与本专题相关。 |
| 157. Caution was expressed by some
members against an attempt to simply transpose peacetime obligations to deal
with the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict. | 157. 有些委员告诫说，不要试图简单地套用和平时期的义务，处理与武装冲突有关的环境保护问题。 |
| While it was acknowledged that it was not
necessary to examine the continued applicability of every environmental law
treaty during armed conflict, such an exercise was nevertheless required for
those rules that were considered relevant for the topic. | 虽然委员们承认不必审查每项环境法条约在武装冲突期间是否持续适用，但是被认为与本专题相关的规则仍然需要接受审查。 |
| In this context, the term “applicability” raised two questions that
needed to be addressed, namely, whether or not the rule applied, in the
formal sense, and whether applicability of the rule could be transposed to
situations of armed conflict or if this required that the rule be adapted. | 在此背景下，“适用”一词提出了两个需要解决的问题，即规则是否在正式意义上适用，以及规则的适用性是可以套用于武装冲突局势，还是需要对规则做出调整。 |
| It was pointed out that this sort of
analysis seemed to be lacking with regard to a number of the proposed draft
principles. | 委员们指出，拟议的若干原则草案中似乎缺少这种分析。 |
| 158. Also with regard to methodology, it
was pointed out that the draft principles needed to differentiate between
international and non-international armed conflicts since the rules
applicable to the two categories of conflicts differed, as did the
stakeholders involved. | 158. 关于方法问题，委员们还指出，原则草案需要区别国际性和非国际性武装冲突，因为这两类冲突因所涉利益攸关方不同，适用的规则也因此不同。 |
| 159. Regarding the scope of the topic,
while some members welcomed the broad approach suggested by the Special
Rapporteur, other members considered the report and the proposed draft
principles to extend too far beyond the protection of the environment as such
by also addressing the environment as a natural resource and as a human
environment, bringing in a human rights perspective. | 159. 关于本专题的范围，一些委员欢迎特别报告员建议采用的宽泛做法，但有些委员认为，报告和拟议的原则草案远远超越了环境保护本身的范畴，将环境作为自然资源和人类环境处理，引入了人权观。 |
| Furthermore, whereas some members
considered that the scope of the topic should be limited to the natural
environment, some other members supported a more comprehensive approach. | 此外，有些委员认为本专题的范围应限于自然环境，而另一些委员赞同采用更全面的办法。 |
| 160. The need to use uniform terminology
throughout the draft principles was also raised. | 160. 委员们还提出，原则草案从头至尾需要使用统一的术语。 |
| This was particularly relevant with
regard to the terms “environment” and “natural environment”. | 对于“环境”和“自然环境”这两个术语，这一点尤为重要。 |
| 161. Concerning the outcome of the topic,
while some members reiterated their support for draft principles, it was also
suggested that a more prescriptive approach may be envisaged, such as draft
articles. | 161. 关于本专题的结果，一些委员再次表示支持原则草案的形式，但也有人认为，可以设想采用规范性更强的形式，例如条款草案。 |
| Several members stressed the importance
of ensuring that the terminology employed in the draft principles
corresponded to the normative status intended for the topic. | 几名委员强调，必须确保原则草案使用的术语符合本专题意图达到的规范性地位。 |
| In this regard, references were made to
the inconsistent use of the terms “shall”, “should” and “are encouraged”. | 关于这一点，有人提到“须”、“应”和“鼓励”这几个词语的使用不一致。 |
| 162. The detailed information on State
practice and analysis of applicable rules contained in the report was
welcomed by some members. | 162. 报告中关于国家惯例的详细资料和对适用规则的分析，受到一些委员的欢迎。 |
| Certain submissions were considered of
particular interest in putting forward the viewpoints of the victims of
environmental damage from armed conflict. | 一些材料介绍了武装冲突所致环境损害的受害者的观点，尤为引人关注。 |
| (b) Draft principle I-1 — Implementation and enforcement | (b) 原则草案1-1――实施和强制执行 |
| 163. While several members found the
content of draft principle I-1 to be pertinent for the topic, some other
members pointed out that the draft principle was not substantiated by the
materials contained in the report and that it was therefore difficult to
properly appreciate it. | 163. 一些委员认为原则草案1-1的内容与本专题相关，但另一些委员指出，这条原则草案没有得到报告中所载材料的充分印证，因此很难得到正确理解。 |
| Generally, members observed that the
preventive measures envisaged in the draft principle needed to be further
specified as it was drafted in overly broad terms. | 委员们普遍认为，原则草案中设想的预防措施由于措辞过于宽泛，需要进一步明确。 |
| It was also noted that the temporal scope
of the draft principle was unclear. | 委员们还指出，这条原则草案的时间范围不明。 |
| In this regard, some members were of the
view that the draft principle was equally relevant to the post-conflict phase
as to the pre-conflict phase. | 在这方面，有些委员认为，这条原则草案对于冲突后阶段和冲突前阶段同样适用。 |
| The draft provision’s relationship with the ensuing draft principles in Part One also
required clarification, in particular whether the latter constituted different
forms of application of the former. | 还需要澄清这条原则草案与第一部分中的后续原则草案之间的关系，特别是后者是否构成与前者不同的适用形式。 |
| It was also suggested that the title be
revisited to better correspond to the content of the draft principle. | 委员们还建议重新考虑这条原则草案的标题，使之更符合原则草案的内容。 |
| (c) Draft principle I-3 — Status of forces and status of mission agreements | (c) 原则草案1-3――部队地位协定和特派团地位协定 |
| 164. The relevance of draft principle I-3
for the topic was questioned by several members. | 164. 几名委员对原则草案1-3与本专题的相关性提出质疑。 |
| In their view, status of forces and
status of mission agreements did not concern the conduct of stationed forces
as envisaged in the proposed provision and did not relate directly to armed
conflict as such. | 他们认为，部队地位协定和特派团地位协定并不像拟议条款中设想的那样涉及驻扎部队的行为，而且与武装冲突本身没有直接联系。 |
| It was suggested that the reference to
such agreements be replaced with “special agreements” if the provision was going to be retained. | 有人建议如果保留这个条款，应当用“特殊协定”来指代此类协定。 |
| It was, however, pointed out that
contemporary status of forces and status of mission agreements seemed to
include provisions on environmental protection and the measures proposed in
the draft principle could therefore be contemplated. | 然而，委员们指出，目前的部队地位协定和特派团地位协定似乎已包括关于环境保护的条款，因此可以考虑原则草案中建议的措施。 |
| While acknowledging that status of forces
and status of mission agreements did not address armed conflict, some other
members nevertheless considered that the draft principle constituted an
important preventive measure, which could address other potential
environmental consequences, such as contamination of military bases. | 另一些委员虽然承认部队地位协定和特派团地位协定不涉及武装冲突，但是他们认为，这条原则草案构成一项重要的预防措施，可以处理对环境的其他潜在影响，例如军事基地的污染。 |
| It was further stressed that the “polluter pays” principle be reflected in
the draft principle. | 委员们进一步强调，这条原则草案应反映“污染者付费”的原则。 |
| The view was also expressed that the last
sentence of the draft principle enumerating various measures gave rise to
confusion as to which temporal phase the draft provision belonged. | 还有人表示，这条原则草案的最后一句列举了各种措施，导致难以确定这个条款草案属于哪个时间段。 |
| (d) Draft principle I-4 — Peace operations | (d) 原则草案1-4――和平行动 |
| 165. Recognizing that peace operations
increasingly seemed to take into account environmental concerns, several
members expressed support for addressing this issue in the context of the
topic. | 165. 认识到和平行动似乎越来越多地考虑到令人关切的环境问题，几名委员表示赞同在本专题内讨论这个问题。 |
| They questioned, however, the placement
of the draft principle in the pre-conflict phase, since the measures
exemplified in the proposed provision seemed applicable not only during the
preventive phase, but also during the operation phase (mitigation) and the
post-conflict phase (remediation). | 然而，他们质疑不该将这条原则草案安排在冲突前阶段，因为拟议条款中列举的措施看来不仅适用于预防阶段，而且适用于行动阶段(缓解)和冲突后阶段(补救)。 |
| The obligations should thus either be
reflected in each phase or placed in an overarching section dealing with
general principles that were relevant for all temporal phases. | 因此，应该在每一阶段都体现这些义务，或者把它们安排在论述与所有时间段均相关的一般原则的总则部分。 |
| It was also pointed out that peace
operations could play an important role in post-conflict recovery and the
draft principle should therefore focus on restorative and remediation
measures. | 委员们还指出，和平行动在冲突后恢复中可发挥重要作用，因此这条原则草案应把重点放在恢复和补救措施上。 |
| In order to define better the scope of
the draft principle, it was suggested that the term “peace
operation” be defined for the purpose of the draft
principle, or at least explained in the commentary. | 为了更好地界定这条原则草案的范围，委员们建议界定“和平行动”一词在这条原则草案中的含义，或至少在评注中加以解释。 |
| Furthermore, the language in the draft
principle needed to be more permissive in order to better reflect the current
status of the law — no corresponding obligation
seemed yet to exist under international law. | 此外，原则草案中的措辞需要更宽松，以更好地反映当前的法律状况――国际法中似乎还没有任何相应的义务。 |
| In this regard, some members observed
that the report did not contain sufficient research and analysis of the
practice with regard to peace operations to substantiate the content of the
proposed provision. | 一些委员就此指出，报告所载关于和平行动实践的研究和分析不足以证实拟议条款的内容。 |
| It was further pointed out that the
premise upon which a peacekeeping operation was based, in particular the
non-use of force and consent of the parties, distinguished it from armed
conflict. | 委员们还指出，维持和平行动的前提条件，特别是不使用武力和须当事各方同意的要求，使之有别于武装冲突。 |
| Including peacekeeping operations in the
scope of the topic risked portraying its engagement as armed conflict,
endangering the viability and usefulness of such operations as a whole. | 将维持和平行动纳入本专题的范围，有将其描述为武装冲突的风险，会影响此类行动在整体上的可行性和作用。 |
| (e) Draft principle III-1 — Peace agreements | (e) 原则草案3-1――和平协定 |
| 166. Several members expressed support
for draft principle III-1 and agreed that peace agreements should contain
provisions concerning the restoration of environmental damage caused by armed
conflict. | 166. 几名委员表示赞同原则草案3-1,
认为和平协定中应载有关于恢复因武装冲突受损害的环境的条款。 |
| It was nevertheless emphasized that
post-conflict environmental protection management and the allocation of
responsibilities for such management fell outside the scope of the topic. | 不过他们强调，冲突后环境保护的管理和管理责任的分配不属于本专题的范围。 |
| Pointing to what they saw as a lacuna in
the draft principle, some members were of the view that peace agreements
should also include provisions addressing questions relating to
incrimination, allocation of responsibility for environmental damage and
compensation. | 一些委员指出这条原则草案在他们眼中的一个缺陷，认为和平协定中还应载有相关条款，处理与证明犯罪、分配环境损害的责任和赔偿有关的问题。 |
| It was stated that the facilitating role
played by international and regional organizations concerning the inclusion
of such provisions in peace agreements should also be reflected. | 委员们指出，国际组织和区域组织为促进将此类条款纳入和平协定所发挥的作用，也应得到体现。 |
| 167. Some other members observed that the
draft principle referred to armed conflict without any qualifier as to the
nature of the conflict and without distinguishing between States and
non-State actors. | 167. 另一些委员评论说，这条原则草案在提到武装冲突时没有对冲突的性质加以任何限定，也没有区分国家和非国家行为者。 |
| Such an approach was problematic since
the dynamics between the parties to the conflict differed significantly in
international and non-international armed conflicts; in the latter case, a
party to the conflict may simply vanish. | 这种做法存在问题，因为在国际性和非国际性武装冲突中，冲突各方之间的动态关系也大相径庭；在后一种情况下，冲突一方可能消失不见。 |
| Furthermore, providing non-State actors
with obligations similar to those of States risked legitimizing a party to
the conflict. | 此外，为非国家行为者规定与国家类似的义务，有可能使冲突一方合法化。 |
| In this regard, suggestions were made
that the material scope of the draft principle be limited to international
armed conflicts, while noting, however, that this may require further study
since the report had mainly examined peace agreements in respect of
non-international armed conflicts. | 委员们就此建议，应将这条原则草案的实质范围限定为国际性武装冲突；但他们同时指出，由于报告主要讨论了与非国际性武装冲突有关的和平协定，这个问题可能需要进一步研究。 |
| The view was nevertheless also expressed
that peace agreements between States were rarely concluded these days and, if
concluded, usually did not contain provisions on environmental protection. | 不过还有委员表达了以下看法：目前国家之间很少缔结和平协定，而且缔结协定的时候，通常也不包含关于环境保护的条款。 |
| The scope should therefore be limited to
non-international armed conflicts. | 因此，应将范围限定为非国际性武装冲突。 |
| (f) Draft principle III-2 — Post-conflict environmental assessments and reviews | (f) 原则草案3-2――冲突后环境评估和审查 |
| 168. The importance of post-conflict
environmental assessments and reviews were generally recognized by the
members of the Commission. | 168. 委员会委员普遍承认冲突后环境评估和审查的重要性。 |
| It was noted that the draft principle did
not reflect existing legal obligations under international law but proposed
an important policy consideration. | 有人指出，原则草案没有反映国际法之下现有的法律义务，而是提出了一项重要的政策考虑因素。 |
| Questions were nevertheless raised with
regard to the temporal scope of paragraph 1 of the draft principle, both with
regard to the point in time when such assessments and reviews were supposed
to be carried out and to its placement in the post-conflict phase. | 然而，委员们就这条原则草案第1段的时间范围提出了问题，一个是在哪个时间点应开展此类评估和审查，另一个是将这个条款安排在冲突后阶段的问题。 |
| Concerning the former, it was pointed out
that former belligerents were unlikely to cooperate immediately after the
cessation of hostilities, which left an important temporal gap to be filled. | 关于前一个问题，委员们指出，前交战各方不大可能在敌对行动停止后立即合作，留下了一大段需要填补的空白。 |
| With regard to the latter, it was
suggested that assessments and reviews were equally important during the
armed conflict phase, especially when damage required immediate mitigating
measures. | 关于后一个问题，委员们建议说，评估和审查在武装冲突阶段同样重要，特别是在需要立即对损害采取缓解措施的时候。 |
| Moreover, the view was expressed that the
scope of paragraph 1 of the draft principle should be limited to States since
the need for cooperation with non-State actors could only be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis. | 此外，委员们还表示，这条原则草案第1段的范围应限于国家，因为与非国家行为者合作的需要只能逐一评价。 |
| Concerning paragraph 2, it was observed
that if the intention was only to conduct such assessments for the benefit of
future operations, which in itself was questioned, the provision would be
better placed in the preventive phase, or could be deleted all together since
it was covered in draft principle I-4. | 关于第2段，委员们指出，如果开展此类评估的目的只是为了惠及今后的行动(这一目的本身就受到质疑)，本条款更宜安排在预防阶段，或者完全删除，因为原则草案1-4已经涵盖了它的内容。 |
| It was further suggested that the draft
principle should also reflect the need to protect personnel conducting
environmental assessments and reviews. | 另有建议说，这条原则草案还应反映出开展环境评估和审查的人员需要得到保护。 |
| 169. It was further pointed out that an
analysis on how and to what extent the environmental rule upon which the
draft principle was based was required in order to properly evaluate its
relevance and applicability in relation to armed conflict. | 169. 委员们进一步指出，需要分析这条原则草案如何及在多大程度上依据了环境规则，以便适当评价它对于武装冲突的相关性和适用性。 |
| (g) Draft principle III-3 — Remnants of war, and draft principle III-4 — Remnants of war at sea | (g) 原则草案3-3――战争遗留物和原则草案3-4――海上战争遗留物 |
| 170. Several members considered that
draft principles III-3 and III-4 were highly pertinent for the topic. | 170. 几名委员认为，原则草案3-3和3-4与本专题极为相关。 |
| Some members observed, however, that the
link to the protection of the environment must be further specified in the
draft principles. | 然而有些委员指出，这两条原则草案必须进一步明确与环境保护的联系。 |
| This was particularly true with regard to
draft principle III-3, which seemed to be justified on the basis of harm done
to humans and property rather than to the environment. | 这一点对于原则草案3-3尤为重要，这条草案依据的理由似乎是对人和财产造成的损害，而不是对环境的损害。 |
| For similar reasons, it was pointed out
that the reference to public health and the safety of seafarers in draft
principle III-4 should be deleted. | 出于同样的原因，委员们指出，原则草案3-4中提到公共健康和海员安全之处，应予删除。 |
| 171. Draft principle III-3 also required
clarification with regard to who should have the primary responsibility to
carry out the obligations contained therein. | 171. 原则草案3-3中还需澄清谁应承担主要责任，履行其中所载义务的问题。 |
| In this regard, some members expressed
the view that such responsibility should remain with the State having
effective jurisdiction and relevant international organizations; it would be
unrealistic to expect non-State actors involved in the armed conflict to
carry out the measures envisaged in the draft principle. | 一些委员就此表示，这种责任仍应该由拥有有效管辖权的国家和相关国际组织承担；期望参与武装冲突的非国家行为者采取原则草案中设想的措施，并不现实。 |
| It was also suggested that a duty of
notification as contained in article 5 of the Convention relative to the
Laying of Automatic Submarine Contact Mines be incorporated into the draft
principle. | 委员们还建议，在这条原则草案中纳入《敷设水下自动触发水雷公约》第5条所载的通知义务。 |
| 172. Several references were made to the
use of the term “without delay” in paragraph 1 of draft principle III-3, which seemed to neither
reflect practice nor appear realistic. | 172. 委员们几次提及原则草案3-3第1段使用的“毫不拖延”一词，该词似乎既没有反映目前的实践，也不现实。 |
| The removal of remnants of war would only
be considered a priority after the cessation of hostilities if such removal
was necessary to satisfy the immediate needs of the population. | 清除战争遗留物只有在为满足人民的迫切需要时，方可视为敌对行动停止后的优先事项。 |
| The point was also made that paragraph 2
of the same draft principle seemed to lay down unconditional obligations that
went beyond State practice. | 委员们还指出，同一条原则草案的第2段似乎规定了超越国家实践的无条件义务。 |
| 173. Another area requiring further
examination concerned the types of remnants of war that the draft principles
aimed to cover, the current wording seeming over-inclusive and
under-inclusive at the same time. | 173. 另一个需要进一步研究的领域涉及这条原则草案旨在涵盖的战争遗留物类型，目前的措辞似乎既过于宽泛，又不够全面。 |
| In this respect, while several members
considered it important to take a broad, non-exhaustive approach, it was also
observed that attempting to cover all remnants of war would require further
study. | 在这方面，几名委员认为，必须采取并非详尽无遗的宽泛办法，但也有人指出，若试图涵盖所有战争遗留物，需要开展进一步研究。 |
| It was also suggested that the type of
information envisaged under paragraph 2 of draft principle III-4 be further
specified, possibly in the commentaries. | 委员们还建议进一步明确原则草案3-4第2段设想的信息种类，可以在评注中说明。 |
| 174. Some members stressed that the
relationship between draft principles III-3 and III-4 necessitated further
clarification. | 174. 一些委员强调，需要进一步澄清原则草案3-3和3-4之间的关系。 |
| It was unclear, for example, if draft
principle III-3 was of a generic character. | 例如，目前尚不清楚原则草案3-3是否属于一般性条款。 |
| Some suggestions were made that the two
provisions could be merged. | 有人建议可将这两条合并。 |
| It was also observed that the draft principles
did not contain corresponding obligations and the question was raised why the
obligation to remove remnants of war had been omitted from draft principle
III-4. | 还有人指出，原则草案中不包含相应的义务，并提出原则草案3-4为何没有提及消除战争遗留物的义务这个问题。 |
| The view was further expressed that the
question of allocation of responsibility for the removal of remnants of war
at sea should be reflected in the draft principle. | 还有意见认为，原则草案应反映如何分配消除海上战争遗留物的责任问题。 |
| (h) Draft principle III-5 — Access to and sharing of information | (h) 原则草案3-5――获取和分享信息 |
| 175. While granting access to and sharing
of information was generally considered to be important for the purpose of
the topic, some members were of the view that draft principle III-5 was
drafted in excessively broad terms. | 175. 委员们普遍认为，准许获取和分享信息对于本专题十分重要，但一些委员认为原则草案3-5拟订得过于宽泛。 |
| The scope of the obligation needed to be
both clarified and adjusted, in particular to take into account situations
where States had valid reasons not to share information, for example due to
national security concerns. | 需要明确和调整义务的范围，尤其要考虑到各国有正当理由(如出于对国家安全的关切)不分享信息的情况。 |
| It was nevertheless also pointed out that
since the obligation was drafted with the caveat “in
accordance with their obligations under international law” the proposed provision did not imply such extensive obligations. | 不过，委员们还指出，由于在起草这项义务时加上了“根据其在国际法下承担的义务”的限制，所以拟议的条款并不包含如此广泛的义务。 |
| Some members observed that since granting
access to and sharing information rested on the consent of the State, the
language in the draft principle needed to be less prescriptive. | 一些委员指出，由于准许获取和分享信息要建立在国家同意的基础上，所以需要弱化这条原则草案措辞的指令性。 |
| It was also noted that granting access to
and sharing of information were two distinct obligations, and that it was not
possible to address them in the same manner. | 还有人指出，准许获取和分享信息是两项不同的义务，不可能以同一方式处理。 |
| 176. Several members observed that the
temporal scope of the draft principle needed to be specified since it was
unclear at what point in time the information should be shared. | 176. 几名委员指出，需要明确这条原则草案的时间范围，因为还不清楚信息应该在哪个时间点分享。 |
| Due to the general nature of the draft
principle, some members considered that it applied to all three phases and
that it would be better placed in a part dealing with “general principles”. | 由于这条原则草案具有普遍性，一些委员认为，它适用于所有三个阶段，最好把它安排在“一般原则”部分。 |
| However, other members stressed that the
obligation to grant access to and share information could not apply to phase
II (during armed conflict). | 然而，其他委员强调，准许获取和分享信息的义务不能适用于第二阶段(武装冲突期间)。 |
| The principle for granting access to and
sharing of information was based on rules applicable in peacetime and could
not simply be transposed to situations of armed conflict. | 准许获取和分享信息原则依据的是和平时期适用的规则，不能简单地套用于武装冲突的局势。 |
| The point was also made, however, that
should the draft principle be applicable during the armed conflict phase,
sufficient caveats could be employed to clarify the scope of the obligation
so that it would not relate to matters of national security or defence. | 但是委员们还提出，如果这条原则草案适用于武装冲突期间阶段，可以使用充分的限制条款来澄清义务的范围，使之不会涉及国家安全或国防事项。 |
| A suggestion was also made to specify
that the draft principle only related to the post-conflict phase. | 委员们还建议，明确说明这条原则草案仅涉及冲突后阶段。 |
| Clarifications were sought as to which
actors access to information should be granted and what type of information
should be shared during each respective phase. | 委员们还要求说明每个阶段中应准予哪些行为者获得信息，以及应分享何种信息。 |
| (i) Draft principle IV-1 — Rights of indigenous peoples | (i) 原则草案4-1――土著人民权利 |
| 177. Several members considered that
issues pertaining to the rights of indigenous peoples were outside the scope
of the current topic and the fact that indigenous peoples had a special
relationship with their land and the living environment did not justify
addressing this matter. | 177. 一些委员认为，与土著人民权利有关的问题不属于本专题的范畴。
土著人民与其土地和生活环境之间具有特殊关系，并不能证明应在此处理这一事项。 |
| In addition, the content of draft
principle IV-1 was not relevant to the current topic; it simply did not deal
with damage from armed conflicts as it relates to indigenous peoples. | 此外，原则草案4-1的内容与本专题无关；这条草案在述及土著人民时根本不涉及武装冲突造成的损害。 |
| Instead, the matter had been tackled from
a human rights perspective that failed to address the reasoning behind the
need to touch upon this issue. | 相反，这条条款草案从人权角度论述这一事项，但未能说明需要讨论这一问题背后的理由。 |
| Several other members acknowledged that
the question had been analysed from a very narrow perspective in the report,
which did not do justice to the issue. | 还有几名委员承认，报告从非常狭隘的角度分析这个问题，未能如实反映这个问题。 |
| While recognizing both this and that the
content of draft principle IV-1 did not properly address the issue at hand,
they nevertheless considered it important to reflect the situation of
indigenous peoples in the draft principles. | 虽然委员们承认这一点，也承认原则草案4-1的内容没有适当处理这个问题，但他们也认为，原则草案中必须反映土著人民的处境。 |
| They emphasized that those peoples were
particularly vulnerable to external interference and therefore needed special
consideration with regard to the protection of their environment, including
in relation to armed conflicts. | 他们强调，土著人民特别容易受到外部干预的影响，因此需要特别考虑保护他们的环境，包括与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| In this regard, reference was made to
pertinent provisions contained in the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the American Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples. | 委员们就此提到《联合国土著人民权利宣言》 和《美洲土著人民权利宣言》 所载相关条款。 |
| Instead of excluding the issue entirely,
the draft principle should be redrafted to focus on the need to protect the
lands and the environment of indigenous peoples. | 应该做的不是将这个问题完全排除在外，而是重新起草这条原则草案，强调需要保护土著人民的土地和环境。 |
| It was also suggested that indigenous
peoples are particularly affected by, and have an important role to play in,
post-conflict remediation efforts. | 委员们还建议，冲突后的补救工作对土著人民的影响尤为巨大，土著人民也可以在其中发挥重要作用。 |
| The draft principle should therefore focus
on this phase and relate more specifically to obligations of States in
dealing with the environmental consequences of armed conflict. | 因此，这条原则草案应将重点放在这一阶段，更具体地论述处理武装冲突的环境后果方面的国家义务。 |
| The view was also expressed that the
question could possibly be dealt with in the context of draft principle I-(x)
on protected zones, which the Commission had taken note of last year. | 还有人表示，可以在委员会去年注意到的关于保护区的原则草案1-(x) 的范围内处理这个问题。 |
| It was suggested that the draft principle
on the rights of indigenous peoples was relevant for all three temporal
phases and should therefore be placed in a part containing “general principles”. | 委员们建议，关于土著人民权利的原则草案与所有三个时间段都相关，因此应该安排在包含“一般原则”的部分。 |
| (j) Future programme of work | (j) 今后的工作方案 |
| 178. Some members reiterated the
importance they attached to this topic and expressed their strong desire to
see it continue in the next quinquennium, noting that the Special Rapporteur
was about to end her term with the Commission. | 178. 一些委员重申他们重视本专题，表示强烈希望看到在下一个五年期继续讨论本专题，指出特别报告员在委员会的任期即将结束。 |
| Regarding specific issues to be
considered in the future, several members stressed the importance of
addressing questions concerning responsibility, liability and compensation in
the context of the draft principles. | 关于今后要审议的具体问题，一些委员强调，必须在原则草案中处理与责任、赔偿责任和补偿有关的问题。 |
| The point was also made, however, that an
attempt to include these issues in the draft principles might render the
outcome much more prescriptive. | 然而，还有委员提出，试图将这些问题纳入原则草案，也许会使最终的案文更具指令性。 |
| Some members agreed with the Special
Rapporteur’s view that it may be pertinent to examine
the question of occupation. | 一些委员同意特别报告员的意见，认为审查占领的问题可能与之相关。 |
| In addition, some members observed that
questions on responsibility of non-State actors and organized armed groups
and non-international armed conflicts might also be of interest. | 此外，一些委员指出，非国家行为者和有组织武装团体的责任以及非国际性武装冲突的问题可能也有意义。 |
| In this regard, it was nevertheless
observed that the current draft principles seemed to already include
non-international armed conflicts within their scope, which therefore raised
the question if, pending such future consideration, this would impact on work
already undertaken. | 不过有人就此指出，目前的原则草案似乎已将非国际性武装冲突纳入其范畴，从而产生了这样的问题：在今后进行此类审议之前，这是否会影响已经开展的工作。 |
| It was further suggested that a draft
principle should be included acknowledging that States should carefully test new
weapons and prepare adequate military manuals in anticipation of future armed
conflicts. | 委员们进一步建议，应当纳入一条原则草案，确认各国应认真测试新的武器，并编写适当的军事手册，以备在今后的武装冲突时使用。 |
| Furthermore, the view was expressed that
it may be useful to examine how the environment was factored in the
activities of various financial and investment institutions, such as the
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, the Multilateral
Investment Guarantee Agency and the International Finance Corporation, in
particular whether damage to the environment could be insured. | 此外，委员们还表示，不妨审查各种金融和投资机构，如国际投资争端解决中心、多边投资担保机构和国际金融公司在其活动中如何纳入环境因素，尤其是是否可以为环境损害投保。 |
| 179. Some members agreed with the Special
Rapporteur that it would be valuable for the Commission to continue
consultations with other entities, such as ICRC, the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and UNEP, as well
as regional organizations. | 179. 一些委员同意特别报告员的看法，认为继续与红十字委员会、联合国教育、科学及文化组织(教科文组织)和环境署等其他实体以及区域组织协商，对委员会大有益处。 |
| They also agreed that it would be useful
if States would continue to provide examples of legislation and relevant case
law. | 他们同样认为，若各国能继续提供立法实例和有关的案例法，也将有所助益。 |
| 3. Concluding remarks of the Special
Rapporteur | 3. 特别报告员的总结 |
| 180. In light of the comments made during
the plenary debate concerning the methodology of the report and the topic at
large, the Special Rapporteur considered it useful to clarify that the
temporal division of the topic had been employed to facilitate the research
and analysis of the topic given its extensive nature. | 180. 鉴于全体会议辩论期间就本报告的方法和整个专题提出的意见，特别报告员认为，应该说明的是，考虑到本专题性质广泛，因此分为几个时间段，以便于开展研究和分析工作。 |
| She agreed that maintaining the
arrangement of draft principles under temporal headings, which stemmed from
work undertaken in the Drafting Committee, reflected in the outcome of the
work posed substantive problems since, as had been noted in the debate,
several of the draft principles were relevant to more than one phase. | 她同意这种意见，即根据起草委员会开展的工作，将原则草案按不同的时间段排列，这种做法反映在工作结果中，产生了实质性问题，因为正如辩论中已经指出的那样，有几条原则草案涉及不止一个阶段。 |
| Should the Commission decide to reflect
the temporal division in the draft principles, it would be appropriate to
insert a separate part entitled “Principles of
general application” at the very beginning. | 如果委员会决定在原则草案中体现出不同时段，宜在文首单独插入题为“一般适用原则”的部分。 |
| This part would replace the tentatively
entitled “Part Four —
[Additional principles]”. | 这部分将取代标题暂定为“增列的原则草案”的第四部分。 |
| She was convinced that the concerns
expressed over the temporal boundaries could be addressed in the Drafting
Committee. | 她相信，可在起草委员会中解决委员们就时间范围表达的关切。 |
| 181. With regard to the comments on the
adequacy of some of the research contained in the report and also its
relevance for the topic, the Special Rapporteur noted that the protection of
the environment in relation to armed conflicts was a new area of legal development. | 181. 关于委员们就报告所载的某些研究是否充分及其与本专题的相关性提出的意见，特别报告员指出，与武装冲突有关的环境保护是法律发展中的新领域。 |
| It was therefore important to show how
environmental concerns in this context were increasingly reflected in
different legal fields, sometimes in ways that could be perceived as only
indirectly relevant to the topic. | 因此，重要的是表明这方面的环境问题如何越来越多地反映在不同的法律领域中，有时可能是以被视为与本专题仅间接相关的方式。 |
| This was particularly evident in the case
law concerning environmental damage, which often took detours and seemed to
address property or human rights only, as this constituted a more viable
legal argument. | 在关于环境损害的案例法方面，这一点尤其明显。 这些案例法往往采取迂回的办法，似乎仅处理财产或人权问题，因为这在法律上更站得住脚。 |
| Another area of the report that had
generated similar criticism pertained to the section on investment
agreements. | 报告中引发类似批评的另一领域涉及有关投资协定的章节。 |
| Referring to the Commission’s articles on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties, the
Special Rapporteur recalled that investment agreements are part of a group of
treaties that have an implication of continued operation during armed
conflict. | 特别报告员谈到委员会关于武装冲突对条约的影响条款，回顾指出，投资协定属于暗含在武装冲突期间继续施行之意的一组条约。 |
| They therefore served to illustrate that
environmental protection is incorporated into treaties that may continue to
operate during armed conflict. | 因此，这些协定是说明可将环境保护纳入在武装冲突期间可继续施行的条约的例证。 |
| The Special Rapporteur maintained that
these issues were both important and relevant for the development of the
topic. | 特别报告员坚称，对于本专题的发展，这些问题既重要又相关。 |
| She further stressed that the topic was
not limited to the protection of the environment during armed conflict; its
entire rationale was also to address other areas of international law and not
remain limited to the law of armed conflict. | 她还强调，本专题不仅限于武装冲突期间的环境保护；本专题的全部目的还在于处理国际法的其他领域，不仅限于武装冲突法。 |
| The title of the topic clearly underlined
this point. | 这一点在本专题的标题中得到明确强调。 |
| However, the Special Rapporteur
acknowledged the criticism that the connection to the protection of the
environment could be enhanced in several of the draft principles. | 然而，特别报告员承认，关于在几条原则草案中可以加强与环境保护的联系这种批评意见，言之有理。 |
| 182. In response to comments that the
section on future work was not sufficiently elaborated, the Special
Rapporteur noted that she had found it more appropriate to simply highlight
certain issues that the Commission may wish to consider since it would be for
the next Special Rapporteur to decide on how to proceed. | 182. 针对关于今后工作的章节没有得到充分阐述的意见，特别报告员指出，她认为更适于仅重点提出委员会不妨考虑的一些问题，因为将由下一任特别报告员决定如何开展工作。 |
| 183. The Special Rapporteur also
addressed some of the comments concerning the draft principles. | 183. 特别报告员还谈到关于原则草案的一些意见。 |
| With regard to draft principle I-1, she
recognized that it had been drafted in general terms, without specifying the
various measures envisaged. | 关于原则草案1-1，她承认起草的措辞较为笼统，没有具体说明设想的各种措施。 |
| This could be addressed by exemplifying
some of the measures intended, either within the draft principle or in the
commentaries. | 要解决这个问题，可在原则草案或在评注中列举一些打算采取的措施。 |
| 184. In response to the comments
questioning the relevance of status of forces and status of mission
agreements, in draft principle I-3, the Special Rapporteur reiterated that
the topic was not limited to address the phase during armed conflict and
observed that such agreements may address issues that are vital for the
protection of the environment. | 184. 有些意见质疑原则草案1-3中部队地位协定和特派团地位协定的相关性。
对此，特别报告员重申，本专题所涉不限于武装冲突期间这个阶段；她还指出，此类协定处理的可能是对环境保护至关重要的问题。 |
| In this regard, the marking,
reconstruction and preventive measures to deal with toxic substances were
mentioned as relevant examples. | 特别报告员就此提到为处理有毒物质进行标记、重建和开展预防措施等相关例子。 |
| Turning to draft principle I-4, the
Special Rapporteur observed that the idea of addressing peace operations in
the draft principles seemed to have garnered general support. | 关于原则草案1-4，特别报告员评论说，在原则草案中述及和平行动的想法似乎已获得普遍支持。 |
| However, in relation to the concern
expressed that including peacekeeping missions in the scope of the topic may
portray its engagement as armed conflict, she once again emphasized that the
draft principles were not confined to situations of armed conflict but also
covered the pre- and post-conflict phases. | 然而，对于有委员表示关切称，将维持和平特派团纳入本专题的范围，有可能把特派团的活动描述为武装冲突，特别报告员再次强调，这些原则草案不局限于武装冲突局势，也包括冲突前和冲突后阶段。 |
| She also recalled that international
humanitarian law applies to such missions. | 她还回顾说，国际人道主义法适用于这类特派团。 |
| 185. With regard to draft principles
III-3 and III-4 on remnants of war, the Special Rapporteur noted that
comments on them had related to the exhaustiveness of the list of remnants of
war referred to therein, allocation of responsibility for their removal, the
temporal aspect of the draft provisions and the political realties with
regard to their implementation. | 185. 至于有关战争遗留物的原则草案3-3和3-4，特别报告员指出，对这两条草案的意见涉及其中提到的战争遗留物清单的详尽性、移除责任的分配、条款草案的时间问题和条款执行方面的政治现实。 |
| Concerning the types of remnants referred
to in draft principle III-3, she observed that the draft principle reflected
the law of armed conflict as it currently stands. | 关于原则草案3-3所述遗留物的类型，她指出，这条原则草案反映了武装冲突法的现状。 |
| Nevertheless, she welcomed suggestions to
revisit the issue to ensure that other toxic and hazardous remnants were also
covered. | 然而，她欢迎委员们建议重新审议这个问题，以确保涵盖其他有毒和危险遗留物。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also clarified
that the allocation of responsibility for removing remnants of war was
regulated by the law of armed conflict and had therefore not been addressed
in the draft principles. | 特别报告员还澄清说，移除战争遗留物的责任分配问题由武装冲突法规范，因此没有在原则草案中加以讨论。 |
| Furthermore, the relevant legal
provisions on this matter denoted that such responsibility was not limited to
States but could be interpreted to also include other actors involved in a
conflict. | 此外，关于这一事项的相关法律规定表明，此种责任不限于由国家承担，而是可以解释为也包括卷入冲突的其他行为者。 |
| Regarding the temporal aspect of the
draft principles, the Special Rapporteur recalled that they had been placed
in the post-conflict phase and, as such, were intended to apply to this
phase. | 关于这两条原则草案的时间问题，特别报告员回顾指出，把它们安排在冲突后阶段，意图便是适用于这个阶段。 |
| Referring to the concerns raised that the
words “without delay”
included in draft principle III-3 would impose an unreasonable obligation on
States, she noted that this expression was used in article 10 of the Protocol
on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other
Devices. | 谈到委员们就原则草案3-3包含“毫不拖延”的措辞将为各国强加不合理义务提出的关切，特别报告员指出，《禁止或限制使用地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的议定书》第10条 使用了这一表述方式。 |
| 186. Referring to the comments on the
applicable phase of draft principle III-5, the Special Rapporteur was of the
view that if the temporal headings were retained in the draft principles, this
provision was best suited for post-conflict situations. | 186. 谈到关于原则草案3-5适用阶段的意见，特别报告员认为，如果在原则草案中保留时间分段，这个条款最宜放在冲突后局势部分。 |
| She also observed that exceptions to the
principle of granting access to and sharing of information for reasons of
national security and defence could be reflected in the proposed provision,
as had been suggested by some members. | 她还指出，如一些委员建议的那样，拟议条款中可以体现准许获取和分享信息原则因国家安全和国防原因出现的例外。 |
| She noted, however, that while such
exceptions were provided for in several existing legal instruments, this did
not relieve parties from the obligation to cooperate in good faith. | 然而，她指出，虽然若干现有法律文书中规定了这种例外，但这并不能免除缔约国善意合作的义务。 |
| 187. The Special Rapporteur observed that
draft principle IV-1 on rights of indigenous peoples had generated extensive
comments, which had revealed divergent views among members on whether or not
to address this issue in the context of the current topic. | 187. 特别报告员指出，关于土著人民权利的原则草案4-1引发了大量评论，表明关于是否在本专题的范围内处理这一问题，委员们存在意见分歧。 |
| The Special Rapporteur remained convinced
that this issue was highly pertinent for the topic and referred to various
instruments where the connection between indigenous peoples with their
environment had been emphasized and to instruments that demonstrated that
this connection was particularly relevant in the context of armed conflict. | 特别报告员仍然深信这个问题与本专题极为相关，并且提到了强调土著人民与其环境之间的联系的各种文书，还提到一些表明在武装冲突的背景下这种联系尤为重要的文书。 |
| She acknowledged, however, that this
connection should be enhanced in the draft principle, which should not only
clearly focus on the protection of the environment of indigenous peoples but
also provide a direct link to situations of armed conflict. | 然而，她承认，在这条原则草案中应该加强这种联系，不仅应明确侧重于保护土著人民的环境，而且应该与武装冲突局势建立直接的联系。 |
| C. Text of the draft principles on
protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts provisionally
adopted so far by the Commission | C. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft principles | 1. 原则草案案文 |
| 188. The text of the draft principles
provisionally adopted so far by the Commission is reproduced below. | 188. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的原则草案案文载录如下。 |
| Draft principle 1 | 原则草案1 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| The present draft principles apply to the
protection of the environment* before, during or after an armed conflict. | 本原则草案适用于武装冲突之前、期间和之后的环境*保护。 |
| * Whether the term “environment” or “natural
environment” is preferable for all or some of these
draft principles will be revisited at a later stage. | * 以后再研究全部或部分原则草案使用“环境”还是“自然环境”更合适。 |
| Draft principle 2 | 原则草案2 |
| Purpose | 宗旨 |
| The present draft principles are aimed at
enhancing the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict,
including through preventive measures for minimizing damage to the
environment during armed conflict and through remedial measures. | 本原则草案旨在通过最大限度地减少武装冲突期间对环境损害的预防措施以及通过补救措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Part One | 第一部分 |
| General principles | 一般原则 |
| Draft principle 5 [I-(x)] | 原则草案5[1-(x)] |
| Designation of protected zones | 指定受保护区 |
| States should designate, by agreement or
otherwise, areas of major environmental and cultural importance as protected
zones. | 国家应当以协议或其他方式，指定具有重大环境和文化意义的区域为受保护区。 |
| Part Two | 第二部分 |
| Principles applicable during armed
conflict | 适用于武装冲突期间的原则 |
| Draft principle 9 [II-1] | 原则草案9[2-1] |
| General protection of the natural
environment during armed conflict | 武装冲突期间对自然环境的总体保护 |
| 1. The natural environment shall be
respected and protected in accordance with applicable international law and,
in particular, the law of armed conflict. | 1. 应按照适用的国际法，特别是武装冲突法，尊重和保护自然环境。 |
| 2. Care shall be taken to protect the
natural environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage. | 2. 应注意保护自然环境免遭广泛、长期和严重的损害。 |
| 3. No part of the natural environment may
be attacked, unless it has become a military objective. | 3. 除非自然环境成为军事目标，否则任何一部分都不得受到攻击。 |
| Draft principle 10 [II-2] | 原则草案10[2-2] |
| Application of the law of armed conflict
to the natural environment | 对环境适用武装冲突法 |
| The law of armed conflict, including the
principles and rules on distinction, proportionality, military necessity and
precautions in attack, shall be applied to the natural environment, with a
view to its protection. | 应对自然环境适用武装冲突法，包括关于区分、相称性、军事必要性和攻击中采取预防措施的原则和规则，以期保护环境。 |
| Draft principle 11 [II-3] | 原则草案11[2-3] |
| Environmental considerations | 环境因素 |
| Environmental considerations shall be
taken into account when applying the principle of proportionality and the
rules on military necessity. | 适用相称性原则和军事必要性规则时，应考虑环境因素。 |
| Draft principle 12 [II-4] | 原则草案12[2-4] |
| Prohibition of reprisals | 禁止报复 |
| Attacks against the natural environment
by way of reprisals are prohibited. | 禁止作为报复而对[自然]环境进行攻击。 |
| Draft principle 13 [II-5] | 原则草案13[2-5] |
| Protected zones | 受保护区 |
| An area of major environmental and
cultural importance designated by agreement as a protected zone shall be
protected against any attack, as long as it does not contain a military
objective. | 以协议指定为受保护区的具有重大环境和文化意义的地区，只要不包含军事目标，应保护其不受任何攻击。 |
| 2. Text of the draft principles and
commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its
sixty-eighth session | 2. 委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的原则草案案文及相关评注 |
| 189. The text of the draft principles and
commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its
sixty-eighth session is reproduced below. | 189. 委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的原则草案案文及相关评注载录如下。 |
| Protection of the environment in relation
to armed conflicts | 与武装冲突有关的环境保护 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| (1) Structurally, the set of draft
principles are divided into three parts following the initial part entitled “Introduction” which contains draft principles
on the scope and purpose of the draft principles. | (1) 从结构上看，本套原则草案起首部分为“导言”，其中载有关于原则草案范围和宗旨的原则草案，之后分为三个部分。 |
| Part One concerns guidance on the
protection of the environment before the outbreak of an armed conflict but
also contains draft principles of a more general nature that are of relevance
for all three temporal phases: before, during and after an armed conflict. | 第一部分涉及为武装冲突爆发之前保护环境的问题提供的指导，但也载有与所有三个时期即武装冲突之前、期间和之后均有关的更具一般性的原则草案。 |
| Additional draft principles will be added
to this part at a later stage. | 稍后将在这一部分添加更多的原则草案。 |
| Part Two pertains to the protection of
the environment during armed conflict, and Part Three pertains to the
protection of the environment after an armed conflict. | 第二部分涉及武装冲突期间保护环境的问题，第三部分涉及武装冲突之后保护环境的问题。 |
| (2) The provisions have been cast as
draft “principles” based on
the understanding that the final form will be subject to consideration at a
later stage. | (2) 把这些条款作为“原则草案”是基于这样一种理解，即最后的形式将由后期的审议决定。 |
| The intersection between the law relating
to the environment and the law of armed conflict is inherent to the topic. | 环境法与武装冲突法交织在一起是本专题所固有的特点。 |
| It is for this reason that the principles
are cast normatively at a general level of abstraction. | 正因为如此，从规范角度看，本原则的抽象程度一般。 |
| (3) The Commission has yet to formulate a
preamble to accompany the draft principles. | (3) 委员会尚未拟出原则草案的序言。 |
| It is understood that a preamble,
formulated in the usual manner, will be prepared at the appropriate time. | 有一项理解是，将在适当时候按常规方式拟定序言。 |
| (4) In the preliminary report, the
Special Rapporteur tentatively suggested definitions of the terms “armed conflict” and “environment” to be included in a “use of terms” provision, should the
Commission decide to include such definitions. | (4) 特别报告员在初步报告中初步建议，如果委员会决定列入“武装冲突”和“环境”这两个术语的定义，则应将此类定义列入“术语的使用”条款。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also made it clear
that she was not convinced of the need to adopt such a provision,
particularly not at an early stage of the work. | 特别报告员还明确指出，她不认为需要通过此项条款，尤其是在工作的早期阶段。 |
| However, putting them forward served the
purpose of illustrating some questions that might arise when defining these
terms, and allowed the opportunity to take members’
views on the matter into consideration. | 然而，现在就提出定义有助于说明在确定这两个术语的定义时可能出现的一些问题，以便有机会在审议时考虑到各委员的相关意见。 |
| In her second report, the Special
Rapporteur included the “use of terms” provision in the proposed draft principles, but requested that
this particular provision not be sent to the Drafting Committee. | 在第二次报告中，特别报告员在拟议原则草案中列入了“术语的使用”条款，但要求不要将此条款送交起草委员会。 |
| Some members, including the Special
Rapporteur, remained reluctant to include definitions, whereas others took
the opposite view. | 包括特别报告员在内的一些委员仍不愿列入这两项定义，而其他一些委员则持相反观点。 |
| In light of this, it was considered
premature to delete it and the Special Rapporteur retained the proposal in
order to evaluate the need for the provision in the light of subsequent
discussions. | 有鉴于此，现在就将其删去还为时过早，特别报告员保留了这项提议，以便于根据随后的讨论情况评估是否需要此款。 |
| Draft principle 1 | 原则草案1 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| The present draft principles apply to the
protection of the environment* before, during or after an armed conflict. | 本原则草案适用于武装冲突之前、期间和之后的环境* 保护。 |
| * Whether the term “environment” or “natural
environment” is preferable for all or some of these
draft principles will be revisited at a later stage. | * 以后再研究全部或部分原则草案使用“环境”还是“自然环境”更合适。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) This provision defines the scope of
the draft principles. | (1) 本条款确定了原则草案的范围。 |
| It provides that they cover three
temporal phases: before, during and after armed conflict. | 本条规定，原则草案的范围涵盖三个时间段：武装冲突之前、期间和之后。 |
| It was viewed as important to signal
quite early that the scope of the draft principles relates to these phases. | 大家认为必须早早表明原则草案涉及这三个阶段。 |
| The disjunctive “or” seeks to underline that not all draft principles would be
applicable during all phases. | “或”这一反义连接词的目的是重点说明并不是所有原则草案都在所有阶段适用。 |
| However, this is worth emphasizing that
there is, at times, a certain degree of overlap between these three phases. | 但值得强调的是，这三个阶段有时有一定程度的重叠。 |
| Furthermore, the formulation builds on
discussions within the Commission and in the Sixth Committee of the General
Assembly. | 而且，这一提法是在委员会内部和大会第六委员会的讨论基础上提出的。 |
| (2) The division of the principles into
the temporal phases described above (albeit without strict dividing lines)
sets out the ratione temporis of the draft principles. | (2) 将原则分为上述三个时间段(尽管没有严格的分界线)确立了原则草案的属时管辖权。 |
| It was considered that addressing the
topic from a temporal perspective rather than from the perspective of various
areas of international law, such as international environmental law, the law
of armed conflict and international human rights law, would make the topic
more manageable and easier to delineate. | 大家认为，从时间角度，而不是从国际法不同方面，如国际环境法、武装冲突法和国际人权法的角度处理本专题，可以使专题较容易管理并较容易界定。 |
| The temporal phases would address legal
measures taken to protect the environment before, during and after an armed
conflict. | 将按时间段规定在武装冲突之前、期间和之后采取的法律措施。 |
| Such an approach allowed the Commission
to identify concrete legal issues relating to the topic that arose at the
different stages of an armed conflict, which facilitated the development of
the draft principles. | 这一方式使委员会可以查明在武装冲突的不同阶段所产生的与本专题有关的法律问题，从而方便了原则草案的拟定。 |
| (3) Regarding the ratione materiae of the
draft principles, reference is made to the term “protection
of the environment” as it relates to the term “armed conflicts”. | (3) 关于原则草案的属事管辖权问题，请参考与“武装冲突”有关的“环境保护”这一术语。 |
| No distinction is made between
international armed conflicts and non-international armed conflicts. | 对于国际武装冲突与非国际武装冲突不作区分。 |
| (4) The asterisk attached to the term “environment” indicates that the Commission
has not yet decided whether a definition of this term should be included in
the text of the draft principles and, if so, whether the term to be defined
should be the “natural environment” or simply the “environment”. | (4) “环境”一词后面的星号表示委员会尚未决定是否应将该词的定义列入原则草案案文，以及如果列入的话，将给出定义的术语应是“自然环境”，还是只是“环境”。 |
| Draft principle 2 | 原则草案2 |
| Purpose | 宗旨 |
| The present draft principles are aimed at
enhancing the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict,
including through preventive measures for minimizing damage to the
environment during armed conflict and through remedial measures. | 本原则草案旨在通过最大限度地减少武装冲突期间对环境损害的预防措施以及通过补救措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) This provision outlines the
fundamental purpose of the draft principles. It makes it clear that the draft
principles aim to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to
armed conflict, including through preventive measures (which aim to minimize
damage to the environment during armed conflict) and also through remedial
measures (which aim to restore the environment after damage has already been
caused as a result of armed conflict). | (1) 本条款列出了原则草案的基本宗旨，表明原则草案的目的是通过包括(旨在最大限度地减少武装冲突期间对环境损害的)预防措施和(旨在在武装冲突已经造成损害后恢复环境的)补救措施在内的方式，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| It should be noted that the purpose of
the provision is reflected in the word “enhancing”, which in this case should not be interpreted as an effort to
progressively develop the law. | 应当指出，本条款的宗旨体现在“加强”一词，在此不应将其理解为逐步编纂法律的行为。 |
| (2) The provision states the purpose of
the draft principles, which would be subject of further elaboration in the
ensuing principles. | (2) 本条款说明了原则草案的宗旨，这项宗旨须在随后各项原则中进一步阐述。 |
| The reference to “including through preventive measures for minimizing damage to the
environment during armed conflict and through remedial measures” is meant to signal the general kinds of measures that would be
required to offer the necessary protection. | “通过最大限度地减少武装冲突期间对环境损害的预防措施以及通过补救措施”这一说法目的是要表明为提供必要的保护所需采取的措施的一般类型。 |
| (3) Similar to the provision on scope,
the present provision covers all three temporal phases. | (3) 本条款与关于范围的条款类似，涵盖所有三个时间段。 |
| While it has been recognized both within
the Commission and within the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly that
the three phases are closely connected, the reference to “preventive measures for minimizing damage”
relates primarily to the situation before and during armed conflict, and the
reference to “remedial measures” in turn principally concerns the post-conflict phase. | 虽然国际法委员会和大会第六委员会都承认，这三个时间段是密切相连的， 但是，“最大限度地减少…损害的预防措施”的说法主要是指武装冲突之前和武装冲突期间的局势，而“补救措施”的说法则主要是指冲突后阶段。 |
| It should be noted that a State may take
remedial measures to restore the environment even before the conflict has
ended. | 应该指出，一国可在冲突结束前就采取补救措施恢复环境。 |
| (4) The term “remedial
measures” was preferred to the term “restorative measures” as it was viewed as
clearer and broader in scope, encompassing any measure of remediation that
may be taken to restore the environment. | (4) 大家倾向于用“补救措施”而非“恢复措施”这一术语是因为，“补救措施”被认为更加清楚，范围更广，涵盖任何为恢复环境而可能采取的补救性质的措施。 |
| This might include, inter alia, loss or
damage by impairment to the environment, costs of reasonable measures of
reinstatement, as well as reasonable costs of clean-up associated with the
costs of reasonable response measures. | 这可能还包括损害环境所造成的损失或损害、合理的恢复措施所涉的费用以及与合理反应措施的费用相关的合理清理费用。 |
| Part One | 第一部分 |
| General principles | 一般原则 |
| Draft principle 5 [I-(x)] | 原则草案5[1-(x)] |
| Designation of protected zones | 指定受保护区 |
| States should designate, by agreement or
otherwise, areas of major environmental and cultural importance as protected
zones. | 国家应当以协议或其他方式，指定具有重大环境和文化意义的区域为保护区。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 5 [I-(x)] is entitled
“Designation of protected zones” and provides that States should designate, by agreement or otherwise,
areas of major environmental and cultural importance as protected zones. | (1) 原则草案5[1-(x)]的标题为“指定保护区”，其中规定，国家应当以协议或其他方式，指定具有重大环境和文化意义的区域为保护区。 |
| The term “protected
zones” was employed as opposed to “demilitarized zones”, as the latter term
is amenable to different understandings. | 用“保护区”而不用“非军事区”的说法，是因为对后者可能有不同的理解。 |
| Part One (“General
principles”), where this provision is placed, deals
with the pre-conflict stage, when peace is prevailing, but also contain
principles of a more general nature that are relevant to all three temporal
phases. | 这项条款所在的第一部分(“一般原则”)涉及冲突前阶段，即和平处于主导地位的时期，但也载有与所有三个时期均有关的更具一般性的原则草案。 |
| Draft principle 5 [I-(x)] therefore does
not exclude instances in which such areas could be designated either during
or soon after an armed conflict. | 因此，原则草案5[1-(x)]并不排除在武装冲突期间或在武装冲突后不久指定保护区的情况。 |
| It was recognized that there would be
certain draft principles that cut across and straddle the various phases, and
draft principle 5 [I-(x)] serves as an example of such a principle. | 大家认识到，某些原则草案可能贯穿并横跨不同阶段，原则草案5[1-(x)]便是一个例子。 |
| In addition, draft principle 5 [I-(x)]
has a corresponding draft principle (draft principle 13 [II-5]) which is
placed in Part Two “Principles applicable during
armed conflict”. | 而且，原则草案5[1-(x)]在第二部分“适用于武装冲突期间的原则”中有一条对应的原则草案(原则草案13[2-5])。 |
| (2) A State may already be taking the
necessary measures to protect the environment in general. | (2) 一国可能已经在采取必要措施保护总体环境。 |
| Such measures may include, in particular,
preventive measures in the event that an armed conflict might occur. | 这类措施尤其可能包括在可能发生武装冲突时采取的预防措施。 |
| It is not uncommon that physical areas
are assigned a special legal status as a means to protect and preserve a
particular area. | 赋予实际地理区域特殊法律地位，以此来保护和保全某个区域，这种做法较常见。 |
| This can be done through international
agreements or through national legislation. | 可以通过国际协定或国家立法来达到上述目的。 |
| In some instances such areas are not only
protected in peacetime, but are also immune from attack during an armed
conflict. | 在某些情况下，这些区域不仅在和平时期受保护，在武装冲突期间也免受攻击。 |
| As a rule, this is the case with
demilitarized and neutralized zones. | 通常“非军事区”和“中立区”便是如此。 |
| It should be noted that the term “demilitarized zones” has a special meaning
in the context of the law of armed conflict. | 应当指出，“非军事区”一词在武装冲突法范畴内具有特殊含义。 |
| Demilitarized zones are established by
the parties to a conflict and imply that the parties are prohibited from
extending their military operations to that zone if such an extension is
contrary to the terms of their agreement. | 非军事区是冲突各方建立的，这意味着，若将其军事活动扩展至该地带会违反协定规定，则这种扩展便是禁止的。 |
| Demilitarized zones can also be
established and implemented in peacetime. | 在和平时期也可以建立非军事区。 |
| Such zones can cover various degrees of
demilitarization, ranging from areas that are fully demilitarized to ones
which are partially demilitarized, such as nuclear weapon free zones. | 这类区域的非军事化程度可以不同，它们可以是完全非军事化的区域，也可以是部分非军事化的区域，如无核武器区。 |
| (3) When designating protected zones
under this draft principle, particular weight should be given to the
protection of areas of major environmental importance that are susceptible to
the adverse consequences of hostilities. | (3) 在根据本原则草案指定保护区时，应特别着重考虑对具有重大环境意义的区域的保护，这些区域很容易遭受敌对行动的不良后果。 |
| Granting special protection to areas of
major ecological importance was suggested at the time of the drafting of the
Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions. While the proposal was not
adopted, it should be recognized that it was formulated in the infancy of
international environmental law. | 在起草日内瓦四公约附加议定书时就已建议对具有重大生态意义的区域给予特别保护，虽然这项提案没有获得通过，但应当承认，这是在国际环境法初创时期提出的。 |
| Other types of zones are also relevant in
this context, and will be discussed below. | 与此相关的还有其他类型的一些地区，下文将再作讨论。 |
| (4) The areas referred to in this draft
principle may be designated by agreement or otherwise. | (4) 本原则草案所涉的区域可以以协议或其他方式指定。 |
| The reference to “agreement or otherwise” is intended to
introduce some flexibility. | “以协议或其他方式”的说法是为了具有一定的灵活性。 |
| The types of situations foreseen may
include, inter alia, an agreement concluded verbally or in writing,
reciprocal and concordant declarations, as well as those created through a
unilateral declaration or designation through an international organization. | 可能预见到的情况有：口头协议或书面协定，相互而一致的声明，以及通过单方宣告或通过国际组织指定设立的保护区。 |
| It should be noted that the reference to
the word “State” does not
preclude the possibility of agreements being concluded with non-State actors. | 应当指出，采用“国家”一词并不排除非国家行为者订立协议的可能性。 |
| The area declared has to be of “major environmental and cultural importance”. | 宣布的区域必须“具有重大环境和文化意义”。 |
| The formulation leaves open the precise
meaning of this requirement on purpose, to allow room for interpretation. | 这一措辞故意不设定这项规定的确切含义，以便留有解释的余地。 |
| While the designation of protected zones
could take place at any time, it should preferably be before or at least at
the outset of an armed conflict. | 尽管任何时候都可以指定保护区，但最好在武装冲突之前或至少在武装冲突一开始就指定保护区。 |
| (5) It goes without saying that under
international law, an agreement cannot bind a third party without its
consent. | (5) 毫无疑问，根据国际法，不经第三方同意，任何协议都不能对其有约束力。 |
| Thus two States cannot designate a
protected area in a third State. | 因此，两个国家不能在第三国指定保护区。 |
| The fact that States cannot regulate
areas outside their sovereignty or mandate of jurisdiction in a manner that
is binding on third States, whether through agreements or otherwise, was also
outlined in the second report of the Special Rapporteur. | 不论是以协议还是以其他方式，国家均不能以对第三国具约束力的方式管制其主权或管辖授权以外的区域，这一点在特别报告员的第二次报告中也有说明。 |
| (6) Different views were initially expressed
as to whether or not the word “cultural” should be included. | (6) 最初大家对是否应列入“文化”一词表示了不同观点。 |
| Ultimately, the Commission opted for the
inclusion of the term. | 最后，委员会决定列入该词。 |
| It was noted that it is sometimes
difficult to draw a clear line between areas which are of environmental
importance and areas which are of cultural importance. | 有人指出，有时难以对具有重大环境意义和具有重大文化意义的区域作严格区分。 |
| This is also recognized in the Convention
concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage
(hereafter the World Heritage Convention). | 《保护世界文化和自然遗产公约》(下称《世界遗产公约》) 中也承认了这一点。 |
| The fact that the heritage sites under
this Convention are selected on the basis of a set of ten criteria, including
both cultural and natural (without differentiating between them) illustrates
this point. | 该公约下的遗址是按10项标准选择的，其中既包括文化标准，也包括自然标准(但对其不作区分)，这便说明了这一点。 |
| (7) It should be recalled that prior to
an armed conflict, States parties to the 1954 Convention for the Protection
of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (hereafter the 1954 Hague
Convention) and its Protocols, are under the obligation to establish
inventories of cultural property items that they wish to enjoy protection in
the case of an armed conflict, in accordance with article 11, paragraph 1, of
the 1999 Protocol to the Convention. | (7) 应当指出，根据1954年《关于发生武装冲突时保护文化财产的公约》 (下称1954年《海牙公约》)1999年《议定书》第11条第1款的规定，在武装冲突之前，《公约》及其《议定书》的缔约国有义务建立一份它们希望在武装冲突时享有保护资格的文化财产目录。 |
| In peacetime, State parties are required
to take other measures that they find appropriate to protect their cultural
property from anticipated adverse impacts of armed conflicts, in accordance
with article 3 of the Convention. | 根据《公约》第三条，在和平时期，缔约国必须采取其认为适当的其他措施，以保护其文化财产免受武装冲突可预见的不利影响。 |
| (8) The purpose of the present draft
principle is not to affect the regime of the 1954 Hague Convention, which is
separate in its scope and purpose. | (8) 本原则草案的目的不是要影响1954年《海牙公约》所规定的制度，因为其范围和宗旨均不相同。 |
| The Commission underlines that the 1954
Hague Convention including its additional protocols are the special regime
that governs the protection of cultural property both in times of peace, and
during armed conflict. | 委员会着重指出，1954年《海牙公约》包括其附加议定书是为在和平时期和武装冲突期间保护文化财产而设的专门制度。 |
| It is not the intention of the present
draft principle to replicate that regime. | 本原则草案无意复制这项制度。 |
| The idea here is to protect areas of
major “environmental importance”. | 其目的是保护具有重大“环境意义”的区域。 |
| The reference to the term “cultural” is intended to infer the
existence of a close linkage to the environment. | 提到“文化”一词是为了表明与环境存在的密切联系。 |
| In this context, it should be noted
though that the draft principle does not extend to cultural objects per se. | 为此，还是应当指出，原则草案的范围不延伸至文物本身。 |
| The term would however include, for
example, ancestral lands of indigenous peoples, who depend on the environment
for their sustenance and livelihood. | 不过，这一用语包括土著人民的祖传土地，因为他们依赖环境维持供养和生计。 |
| (9) The designation of the areas foreseen
by this draft principle can be related to the rights of indigenous peoples,
particularly if the protected area also serves as a sacred area which
warrants special protection. | (9) 指定本原则草案设想的区域的工作可能与土著人民的权利相关，尤其是如果保护区也是需要特别保护的一块圣地。 |
| In some cases, the protected area may
also serve to conserve the particular culture, knowledge and way of life of
the indigenous populations living inside the area concerned. | 在某些情况下，保护区也可以用来保护住在里面的土著居民的特定文化、知识和生活方式。 |
| The importance of preserving indigenous
culture and knowledge has now been formally recognised in international law
under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). | 根据《生物多样性公约》，保存土著文化和知识的重要性现已在国际法中得到正式承认。 |
| Article 8 (j) states that each
Contracting Party shall, as far as possible and as appropriate: “Subject to its national legislation, respect, preserve and
maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local
communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation
and sustainable use of biological diversity and promote their wider
application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such
knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the equitable sharing of
the benefits arising from the utilization of such knowledge, innovations and
practices”. | 第8条(j)款规定，每一缔约国应尽可能并酌情：“依照国家立法，尊重、保存和维持土著和地方社区体现传统生活方式而与生物多样性的保护和持久使用相关的知识、创新和做法并促进其广泛应用，由此等知识、创新和做法的拥有者认可和参与其事并鼓励公平地分享因利用此等知识、创新和做法而获得的惠益”。 |
| In addition, the United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, although not a binding
instrument, refers to the right to manage, access and protect religious and
cultural sites. | 此外，《联合国土著人民权利宣言》 虽不是一项有约束力的文书，但其中提到了管理、进出和保护宗教和文化场所的权利。 |
| (10) The protection of the natural
environment as such and the protection of sites of cultural and natural
importance sometimes correspond or overlap. | (10) 保护自然环境本身与保护具有文化和自然意义的场所两者有时相互呼应，有时又相互重叠。 |
| The term “cultural
importance”, which is also used in draft principle 13
[II-5], builds on the recognition of the close connection between the natural
environment, cultural objects and characteristics in the landscape in
environmental protection instruments such as the 1993 Convention on Civil
Liability for Damage Resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment
(adopted under Council of Europe). | 原则草案13[2-5]也采用了“文化意义”一语，其根据是在欧洲委员会主持下通过的1993年《关于危害环境的活动造成损害的民事责任公约》 等环境保护文书中对自然环境、文物和地貌景观之间密切联系的认识。 |
| Article 2, paragraph 10, defines the term
“environment” for the purpose
of the Convention to include: “natural resources both
abiotic and biotic, such as air, water, soil, fauna and flora and the
interaction between the same factors; property which forms part of cultural
heritage; and characteristic aspects of the landscape”. | 第2条第10款为《公约》之目的规定“环境”一词的定义包括“生物性和非生物性自然资源，例如空气、水、土壤、动物和植物等以及这些因素之间的相互作用；作为文化遗产的财产；以及景观的特征部分”。 |
| In addition, article 1, paragraph 2, of
the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and
International Lakes stipulates that “effects on the
environment include effects on human health and safety, flora, fauna, soil,
air, water, climate, landscape and historical monuments or other physical
structures or the interaction among these factors; they also include effects
on the cultural heritage or socio-economic conditions resulting from
alterations to those factors”. | 此外，《跨界水道和国际湖泊保护和利用公约》第1条第2款规定，“对环境的影响包括对人类健康和安全、植物、动物、土壤、空气、水、气候、地貌和历史纪念物或其他物理结构影响或这些因素之间的互动；它们也包括上述因素的变化对于文化遗产或社会经济状况而产生的影响。
” |
| (11) Moreover, the CBD speaks to the
cultural value of biodiversity. | (11) 此外，《生物多样性公约》还涉及生物多样性的文化价值问题。 |
| The preamble of the CBD reaffirms that
the parties are: “Conscious of the intrinsic value of
biological diversity and of the ecological, genetic, social, economic,
scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and aesthetic values of
biological diversity and its components. ” | 《生物多样性公约》序言重申，缔约国：“意识到生物多样性的内在价值，和生物多样性及其组成部分的生态、遗传、社会、经济、科学、教育、文化、娱乐和美学价值。” |
| Similarly, the first paragraph of annex I
to the CBD highlights the importance of ensuring protection for ecosystems
and habitats “containing high diversity, large
numbers of endemic or threatened species, or wilderness; required by
migratory species; of social, economic, cultural or scientific importance;
or, which are representative, unique or associated with key evolutionary or
other biological processes”. | 同样，《生物多样性公约》附件1第1款重点指出必须确保以下生态系统和生境得到保护：“内有高度多样性，大量地方特有物种或威胁物种或原野；为移栖物种所需；具有社会、经济、文化或科学重要性，或具有代表性、独特性或涉及关键进化过程或其他生物进程”。 |
| (12) In addition to these binding
instruments, a number of non-binding instruments use a lens of cultural
importance and value to define protected areas. | (12) 除了这些有约束力的文书之外，一些不具约束力的文书也采用文化重要性和价值的视角来确定保护区。 |
| For instance, the draft convention on the
prohibition of hostile military activities in internationally protected areas
(prepared by the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law and the International
Council of Environmental Law) defines the term “protected
areas” as follows: “natural
or cultural area [sic] of outstanding international significance from the
points of view of ecology, history, art, science, ethnology, anthropology, or
natural beauty, which may include, inter alia, areas designated under any
international agreement or intergovernmental programme which meet these
criteria”. | 例如，由国际自然及自然资源保护联盟环境法委员会和国际环境法理事会编写的禁止在国际保护区开展敌对军事活动公约草案对“保护区”一语的定义如下：“从生态、历史、艺术、科学、人种学、人类学或自然风光的角度看具有突出国际意义的自然或文化区[原文如此]，可包括根据任何国际协定或政府间方案指定的满足这些标准的区域”。 |
| (13) A few examples of domestic
legislation referring to the protection of both cultural and environmental
areas can also be mentioned in this context. | (13) 在此，还可以提到国内立法对保护文化和环境区作出规定的几个例子。 |
| For example, Japan’s Act on the Protection of Cultural Property of 29 August 1950,
provides for animals and plants which have a high scientific value to be
listed as “protected cultural property”. | 例如，日本1950年8月29日《文化财产保护法》规定，将有高度科学价值的动植物列为“受保护的文化财产”。 |
| The National Parks and Wildlife Act of
1974 of New South Wales in Australia may apply to any area of natural,
scientific or cultural significance. | 澳大利亚新南威尔士州1974年《国家公园和野生生物法》可适用于任何具有自然、科学或文化意义的区域。 |
| Finally, the Italian Protected Areas Act
of 6 December 1991 defines “nature parks” as areas of natural and environmental value constituting
homogeneous systems characterised by their natural components, their
landscape and aesthetic values and the cultural tradition of the local
populations. | 最后，意大利1991年12月6日《保护区法》对“自然公园”的定义为：由以自然元素、地貌景观和审美价值以及当地居民的文化传统为特征的同质系统组成的具有自然和环境价值的区域。 |
| Part Two | 第二部分 |
| Principles applicable during armed
conflict | 适用于武装冲突期间的原则 |
| Draft principle 9 [II-1] | 原则草案9[2-1] |
| General protection of the natural
environment during armed conflict | 武装冲突期间对自然环境的总体保护 |
| 1. The natural environment shall be respected
and protected in accordance with applicable international law and, in
particular, the law of armed conflict. | 1. 应按照适用的国际法，特别是武装冲突法，尊重和保护自然环境。 |
| 2. Care shall be taken to protect the
natural environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage. | 2. 应注意保护自然环境免遭广泛、长期和严重的损害。 |
| 3. No part of the natural environment may
be attacked, unless it has become a military objective. | 3. 除非自然环境成为军事目标，否则任何一部分都不得受到攻击。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 9 [II-1] comprises
three paragraphs which broadly provide for the protection of the natural
environment during armed conflict. | (1) 原则草案9[2-1]由三款组成，对武装冲突期间的自然环境保护作了大体上的规定。 |
| It reflects the obligation to respect and
protect the natural environment, the duty of care and the prohibition of
attacks against any part of the environment, unless it has become a military
objective. | 这一原则体现的是尊重和保护自然环境的义务、加以注意的责任及除非自然环境成为军事目标，否则禁止攻击其中任何一部分的规定。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 sets out the general
position that in relation to armed conflict, the natural environment shall be
respected and protected in accordance with applicable international law and,
in particular, the law of armed conflict. | (2) 第1款规定的是，在武装冲突中应按照适用的国际法特别是武装冲突法尊重和保护自然环境这一一般立场。 |
| It is recalled that the Commission has
not yet decided whether a definition of the term “environment” should be included in the text of the draft principles, and if
so, whether the term to be defined should be the “natural
environment” or simply the “environment” . | 应当指出的是，关于是否应当在原则草案的案文中列入“环境”一词的定义，而如果列入，这个词的定义应是“自然环境”还是简单的“环境”，委员会尚未决定。 |
| It should be noted that Part II, where
draft principle 9 [II-1] is placed, addresses situations during armed
conflict, and that treaties on the law of armed conflict often refer to the “natural environment” as distinct from the “environment”. | 应指出，包含原则草案9[2-1]在内的第二部分处理的是武装冲突期间的局势，而关于武装冲突法的条约中使用的提法往往是“自然环境”，不同于“环境”。 |
| (3) The words “respected” and “protected”
were considered fitting for use in this draft principle as they have been
used in several international environmental law and international human
rights law instruments to date. | (3) “尊重”和“保护”用在这一原则草案中被认为是恰当的，因为在迄今为止的若干国际环境法和国际人权法文书中使用的都是这两个词。 |
| The International Court of Justice in its
advisory opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons held
that “respect for the environment is one of the
elements that go to assessing whether an action is in conformity with the
principle of necessity” and that States have a duty “to take environmental considerations into account in assessing
what is necessary and proportionate in the pursuit of legitimate military
objectives”. | 国际法院在关于“以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性”的咨询意见中认为，“对环境的尊重是评估某项行动是否符合必要性原则的要素之一”，各国有义务“在评估谋求合法军事目标的必要和相称代价时考虑到环境因素”。 |
| (4) As far as the use of the term “law of armed conflict” is concerned, it
should be emphasized that traditionally there was a distinction between the
terms “law of armed conflict”
and “international humanitarian law”. | (4) 至于“武装冲突法”一语的使用，应当强调，“武装冲突法”与“国际人道主义法”这两个用语在传统上是有区别的。 |
| International humanitarian law could be
viewed narrowly as only referring to part of the law of armed conflict which
aims at protecting victims of armed conflict; whereas the law of armed
conflict can be seen as more of an umbrella term covering the protection of
victims of armed conflict as well as regulating the means and methods of war. | 国际人道主义法可被看作是狭义的，仅指武装冲突法中以保护武装冲突受害者为目的的部分内容，而武装冲突法可被看作是更为宽泛的总括用语，既包括保护武装冲突的受害者，也包括对战争手段和方法的规范。 |
| The terms are increasingly seen as
synonyms in international law. | 这两个用语在国际法中越来越被视为同义词。 |
| However, the term “law of armed conflict” was preferred due
to its broader meaning and to ensure consistency with the Commission’s previous work on the draft articles on effects of armed conflict
on treaties, in which context it was pointed out that the law of armed
conflict also clearly includes the law of occupation and the law of
neutrality. | 但是，比较倾向使用的是“武装冲突法”，因为这个用语的含义较广，也是为了确保与委员会此前关于武装冲突对条约的影响的条款草案工作保持一致，关于这方面的工作，委员会指出，武装冲突法显然也包括占领法和中立法。 |
| The relationship between the present
topic and the topic on the effects of armed conflict on treaties should be
emphasized. | 本专题与武装冲突对条约的影响专题之间的关系应予以强调。 |
| (5) As far as the term “applicable international law” is
concerned, it must be noted that the law of armed conflict is lex specialis
during times of armed conflict, but that other rules of international law
providing environmental protection remain relevant. | (5) 关于“适用的国际法”这一用语，必须指出，武装冲突法是武装冲突期间的特别法，但规定保护环境的其他国际法原则的相关性保持不变。 |
| Paragraph 1 of draft principle 9 [II-1]
is therefore relevant during all three phases (before, during and after armed
conflict) to the extent that the law of armed conflict applies. | 因此，在适用武装冲突法的所有三个阶段(武装冲突之前、期间和之后)，原则草案9[2-1]第1款都始终相关。 |
| This paragraph highlights the fact that
the draft principles are intended to build on existing references to the
protection of the environment in the law of armed conflict together with
other rules of international law in order to enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflict overall. | 该款突出反映的事实是，原则草案的目的是结合国际法的其他规则巩固武装冲突法中关于保护环境的现有提法，以便从整体上加强武装冲突期间对环境的保护。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 is inspired by article 55
of Additional Protocol I, which provides the rule that care shall be taken to
protect the environment against widespread, long term and severe damage in
international armed conflicts. | (6) 第2款受到了《第一附加议定书》第五十五条的启发，该条规定的规则是，武装冲突期间应注意保护自然环境不受广泛、长期和严重地损害。 |
| The term “care
shall be taken” should be interpreted as indicating
that there is a duty on the parties to an armed conflict to be vigilant of
the potential impact that military activities can have on the natural
environment. | 对于“应注意”一语，应当解释为表示武装冲突当事各方有义务对军事活动可能对自然环境造成的潜在影响保持警觉。 |
| (7) Similar to article 55, draft
principle 9 [II-1] also adopts the use of the word “and” which indicates a triple cumulative standard. | (7) 与第五十五条相似，原则草案9[2-1]也使用了“和”一词，表示三重叠加标准。 |
| However, draft principle 9 [II-1] differs
from article 55 as regards applicability and generality. | 但是，原则草案9[2-1]在适用性和普遍性方面与第五十五条不同。 |
| First, draft principle 9 [II-1] does not
make a distinction between international and non-international armed
conflicts, with the understanding that the draft principles are aimed at
applying to all armed conflicts. | 首先，原则草案9[2-1]对国际武装冲突和非国际武装冲突未作区分，对此的理解是，原则草案的目标是适用于所有武装冲突。 |
| This includes international armed
conflicts, understood in the traditional sense of an armed conflict fought
between two or more States, as well as armed conflicts in which peoples are
fighting against colonial domination, alien occupation and against racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination; as
well as non-international armed conflicts, which are fought either between a
State and organized armed group(s) or between organized armed groups within the
territory of a State (thus without the involvement of a State). | 其中包括国际武装冲突，即传统地理解为两个或更多国家之间的武装冲突，以及人民行使自决权反抗殖民统治、外来占领和种族主义制度的武装冲突，也包括一国领土内国家与有组织武装集团之间或有组织武装集团相互之间(因而没有国家的卷入)的非国际武装冲突。 |
| (8) The terms “widespread”, “long-term” and “severe” are not defined in Additional
Protocol I. | (8) 《第一附加议定书》中没有界定“广泛”、“长期”和“严重”的含义。 |
| The same terms are used in the Convention
on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental
Modification Techniques (ENMOD). | 《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》(《改变环境技术公约》)使用了同样的用语。 |
| However, it must be kept in mind that
ENMOD does not contain the triple cumulative requirement as required by
Additional Protocol I, as it uses the word “or” instead of “and”,
and also that the context of the ENMOD is far narrower than Additional Protocol
I. | 但是，必须考虑到，《改变环境技术公约》中没有《第一附加议定书》规定的三重叠加标准，而是用“或”代替了“和”，而且，《改变环境技术公约》的范围远比《第一附加议定书》狭隘。 |
| (9) Second, draft principle 9 [II-1]
differs from article 55 of Additional Protocol I in that it is of a more
general nature. | (9) 第二，原则草案9[2-1]与《第一附加议定书》第五十五条不同，具有更强的概括性。 |
| Unlike article 55, draft principle 9 [II-
1] does not explicitly prohibit the use of methods or means of warfare which
are intended or may be expected to cause damage to the natural environment
and thereby prejudice the health or survival of the population. | 原则草案9[2-1]不像第五十五条，没有明确禁止使用旨在或可能预期对自然环境造成损害从而妨害居民健康或生存的作战方法或手段。 |
| At the time of drafting, concerns were
raised that this exclusion may weaken the text of the draft principles. | 起草过程中提出的关切是，这种排除可能会削弱原则草案案文。 |
| However, the general nature of the draft
principles needs to be stressed. | 但是，需要强调原则草案的概括性。 |
| The draft principles do not aim to
reformulate rules and principles which already exist and are recognized by
the law of armed conflict. | 原则草案的目标并不是改写已经存在并得到武装冲突法承认的规则和原则。 |
| In addition, paragraph 2 should be read
together with draft principle 10 [II-2], which deals with the application of
principles and rules of the law of armed conflict to the natural environment
with the aim of providing environmental protection. | 另外，应当结合原则10[2-2]阅读第二款，该条原则处理的是以保护环境为目标对自然环境适用武装冲突法原则和规则的问题。 |
| (10) It must also be stressed here that
article 36 of Additional Protocol I requires States to review new weapons and
means and methods of warfare to ensure that they do not contravene existing
rules of international law, and is applicable to all weapons. | (10) 在此必须强调，《第一附加议定书》第三十六条要求各国审查新的武器和作战手段以确保这些武器和手段不违背现有的国际法规则，该条适用于所有武器。 |
| This requirement could be addressed in
connection with a forthcoming draft principle. | 可结合以后的某一原则草案处理这项规定。 |
| (11) Paragraph 3 of draft principle 9
[II-1] seeks to treat the natural environment in the same way as a civilian
object during armed conflict. | (11) 原则草案9[2-1]第3款力求以武装冲突期间对待民用物体的同样方式对待自然资源。 |
| This paragraph is based on the
fundamental rule that a distinction must be made between military objectives
and civilian objects. | 该款以必须区分军事目标和民用物体这一基本规则为依据。 |
| (12) Paragraph 3 of draft principle 9
[II-1] can be linked to article 52(2) of Additional Protocol I, which defines
the term “military objective”
as: | (12) 可以把原则草案9[2-1]第3款与《第一附加议定书》第五十二条第二款相联系，其中“军事目标”一语的定义为： |
| “… [T]hose objects which by their nature,
location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action
and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the
circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.” | “…由于其性质、位置、目的或用途对军事行动有实际贡献，而且在当时情况下其全部或部分毁坏、缴获或失去效用提供明确的军事利益的物体”。 |
| The term “civilian
object” is defined as “all
objects which are not military objectives”. | “民用物体”的定义是，“所有不是军事目标的物体”。 |
| In terms of the law of armed conflict,
attacks may only be directed against military objectives, and not civilian
objects. | 按武装冲突法的用语说就是，只能攻击军事目标，不得攻击民用物体。 |
| There are several binding and non-binding
instruments which indicate that this rule is applicable to the natural
environment. | 有若干约束性和非约束性文书都表明，这条规则适用于自然环境。 |
| (13) Paragraph 3 is, however, temporally
qualified with the words “has become”, which emphasizes that this rule is not absolute: the environment
may become a military objective in certain instances, and could thus be
lawfully targeted. | (13) 不过，第3款用“成为”一词做了时间上的限定，强调这一规则不是绝对性的：在某些情况下环境有可能变成军事目标，因而对之实施攻击也就可能是合法的。 |
| (14) Paragraph 3 is based on the first
paragraph of rule 43 of the ICRC Customary International Law Study. | (14) 第3款以红十字委员会《习惯国际法研究》第43条第1款为基础。 |
| However, the other parts of rule 43 were
not included in its current formulation, which raised some concerns. | 但是，由于第43条的其他部分引起了某些关切，所以没有列入目前的草案措辞。 |
| In this regard, it is once again useful
to reiterate that the draft principles are general in nature and that they do
not aim to reformulate rules and principles already recognized by the law of
armed conflict. | 关于这个问题，再次重申原则草案属于一般性质，目的不是改写武装冲突法已经承认的规则和原则，是有益的。 |
| Accordingly, both paragraph 2 and
paragraph 3 must be read together with draft principle 10 [II-2], which
specifically references the application of the law of armed conflict rules
and principles of distinction, proportionality, military necessity and
precautions in attack. | 因此，第2款和第3款必须同原则草案10[2-2]一并解读，其中具体提到了攻击行动中适用关于区别、相称性、军事必要性和预防措施的武装冲突法规则和原则的问题。 |
| (15) It can be seen that draft principle
9 [II-1] tries to strike a balance between creating guiding principles for
the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict without
reformulating rules and principles already recognized by the law of armed
conflict. | (15) 可以看出，原则9[2-1]力求达成一种平衡，一方面要建立起关于武装冲突期间的环境保护指导原则，另一方面又要不改写已经得到武装冲突法承认的规则和原则。 |
| Draft principle 10 [II-2] | 原则草案10[2-2] |
| Application of the law of armed conflict
to the natural environment | 对自然环境适用武装冲突法 |
| The law of armed conflict, including the
principles and rules on distinction, proportionality, military necessity and
precautions in attack, shall be applied to the natural environment, with a
view to its protection. | 应对自然环境适用武装冲突法，包括关于区分、相称性、军事必要性和攻击中采取预防措施的原则和规则，以期保护环境。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 10 [II-2] is entitled
“Application of the law of armed conflict to the
natural environment” and deals with the application
of principles and rules of the law of armed conflict to the natural
environment with a view to its protection. | (1) 原则草案10[2-2]的标题是“对自然环境适用武装冲突法”，处理的问题是，对自然环境适用武装冲突法的原则和规则，以期保护环境。 |
| Draft principle 10 [II-2] is placed in
Part Two of the draft principles (Principles applicable during armed
conflict), illustrating that it is intended to apply during armed conflict. | 把原则草案10[2-2]放在原则草案的第二部分(适用于武装冲突期间的原则)表明，意图是要在武装冲突期间适用。 |
| The overall aim of the draft principle is
to strengthen the protection of the environment in relation to armed
conflict, and not to reaffirm the law of armed conflict. | 这条原则草案的总体目标是在武装冲突期间加强对环境的保护，并不是要重申武装冲突法。 |
| (2) The words “law
of armed conflict” were chosen instead of “international humanitarian law” for the
same reasons explained in the commentary on draft principle 9 [II-1]. | (2) 选用“武装冲突法”一词而不是“国际人道主义法”，其中的原因与关于原则草案9[2-1]的评注中所作的解释相同。 |
| The use of this term also highlights the
fact that draft principle 10 [II-2] deals exclusively with the law of armed
conflict as lex specialis, and not other branches of international law. | 使用这一用语还突出表明，原则草案10[2-2]处理的仅仅是作为特别法的武装冲突法，而不是国际法的其他分支。 |
| (3) Draft principle 10 [II-2] lists some
specific principles and rules of the law of armed conflict, namely the
principles and rules of distinction, proportionality, military necessity and
precautions in attack. | (3) 原则草案10[2-2]提到了武装冲突法的一些具体原则和规则，即关于区分、相称性、军事必要性和攻击中采取预防措施的原则和规则。 |
| The draft principle itself is of a
general character and does not elaborate as to how the principles and rules
should be interpreted, as they are well-established principles and rules
under the law of armed conflict and it is not the aim of the draft principles
to interpret them. | 这一原则草案本身属于一般性质，并没有阐述应当如何解释这些原则和规则，因为这些都是在武装冲突法之下明确订立的原则和规则，原则草案的目的不是对之加以解释。 |
| They are explicitly included in draft
principle 10 [II-2] because they have been identified as being the most
relevant principles and rules relating to the protection of the environment
in relation to armed conflict. | 将这些原则和规则明文列入原则草案10[2-2]，是因为认为它们是与武装冲突期间保护环境最为相关的原则和规则。 |
| However, their reference should not be
interpreted as indicating a closed list, as all other rules under the law of
armed conflict which relate to the protection of the environment in relation
to armed conflict remain applicable and cannot be disregarded. | 但是，不应当把提及这些原则和规则解释为提出了一个封闭式的清单，因为武装冲突法之下与武装冲突期间保护环境有关的其他规则仍然适用，不得忽视。 |
| (4) One of the cornerstones of the law of
armed conflict is the principle of distinction which obliges parties to an
armed conflict to distinguish between civilian objects and military
objectives at all times, and that attacks may only be directed against
military objectives. | (4) 区分原则是武装冲突法的基石之一， 规定武装冲突当事各方有义务始终将民用物体与军事目标区别开来，只能攻击军事目标。 |
| This is considered a rule under customary
international law, applicable in both international and non-international
armed conflict. | 这被视为习惯国际法下的一条规则，既适用于国际武装冲突，也适用于非国际性武装冲突。 |
| As explained in the commentary on draft
principle 9 [II-1], the natural environment is not intrinsically military in
nature and should be treated as a civilian object. | 如关于原则草案9[2-1]的评注所解释，自然环境并不具备内在的军事性质，应当作为民用物体对待。 |
| However, there are certain circumstances
in which parts of the environment may become a military objective, in which
case such parts may be lawfully targeted. | 然而，在某些情况下，环境的某些部分可能会成为军事目标，在这种情况下对此种部分实施攻击就可能是合法的。 |
| (5) The principle of proportionality
establishes that an attack against a legitimate military target is prohibited
if it may be expected to cause incidental damage to civilians or civilian
objects, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct
military advantage anticipated. | (5) 相称性原则规定，如果可以预期对合法军事目标的攻击会对平民或平民物体造成附带损害，超出预期达到的具体和直接军事优势的范围，则受到限制。 |
| (6) The principle of proportionality is
an important rule under the law of armed conflict also because of its
relation to the rule of military necessity. | (6) 相称性原则是武装冲突法之下的一条重要规则，原因还在于这条规则与军事必要性规则之间的联系。 |
| It is codified in several instruments of
the law of armed conflict, and the International Court of Justice has also
recognized its applicability in its advisory opinion on Legality of the
Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. | 这条规则编纂入了若干武装冲突法文书，国际法院在关于“以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性”的咨询意见中也承认了这条规则的适用性。 |
| It is considered a rule under customary
international law, applicable in both international and non-international
armed conflict. | 这被视为习惯国际法的一条规则，适用于国际武装冲突和非国际武装冲突两者。 |
| (7) As the environment is often
indirectly rather than directly affected by armed conflict, rules relating to
proportionality are of particular importance in relation to the protection of
the natural environment in armed conflict. | (7) 由于环境受到的武装冲突影响往往是间接的而不是直接的，关于相称性的规则在武装冲突期间保护自然环境方面就特别重要。 |
| The particular importance of the
principle of proportionality in relation to the protection of the natural
environment in armed conflict has been emphasized by the ICRC customary law
study, which found that the potential effect of an attack on the environment
needs to be assessed. | 红十字委员会的习惯法研究强调了相称性原则对于武装冲突期间保护自然环境的特殊重要性，认为需要评估攻击行动对环境的潜在影响。 |
| (8) If the rules relating to
proportionality are applied in relation to the protection of the natural
environment, it means that attacks against legitimate military objectives
must be refrained from if such an attack would have incidental environmental
effects that exceed the value of the military objective in question. | (8) 如果在保护自然环境方面适用关于相称性的规则，则意味着，如果对合法军事目标的攻击会对环境造成超出所涉军事目标价值的附带影响，就必须避免实施此种攻击。 |
| On the other hand though, the application
of the rule also means that “if the target is
sufficiently important, a greater degree of risk to the environment may be
justified”. | 但另一方面，适用这条规则也意味着“如果目标足够重要，可能有理由加大对环境构成的风险程度”。 |
| It therefore accepts that “collateral damage” to the natural
environment may be lawful in certain instances. | 因此，对于在某些情况下自然环境受到的“附带损害”可能是合法的这一点，这条规则是接受的。 |
| (9) Under the law of armed conflict,
military necessity allows “measures which are
actually necessary to accomplish a legitimate military purpose and are not
otherwise prohibited”. | (9) 根据武装冲突法的规定，出于军事必要可以采取“确为实现合法军事目的所需、且未以其他方式受到禁止的措施”。 |
| It means that an attack against a
legitimate military objective which may have negative environmental effects
will only be allowed if such an attack is actually necessary to accomplish a
specific military purpose and is not covered by the prohibition against the
employment of methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be
expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural
environment, or does not meet the criteria contained in the principle of
proportionality. | 这意味着对合法军事目标的攻击，如果可能对环境产生不利影响，只有在此攻击确为实现具体军事目的所需，且不在禁止使用旨在或可能对自然环境造成广泛、长期和严重损害的作战方法或手段的禁令的范围内，
或不符合相称性原则所含各项标准的情况下， 才允许实施。 |
| (10) The rule concerning precautions in
attack lays out that care must be taken to spare the civilian population,
civilians and civilian objects from harm during military operations; and also
that all feasible precautions must be taken to avoid and minimize incidental
loss of civilian life, injury to civilians as well as damage to civilian
objects which may occur. | (10) 关于攻击时采取预防措施的规则规定，军事行动中必须注意不损害平民居民、平民和民用物体；还须采取一切可行的预防措施，避免并尽可能减少附带造成平民死亡、受伤以及民用物体受损害的情况。 |
| The rule is codified in several
instruments of the law of armed conflict and is also considered to be a
customary international law rule in both international and non-international
armed conflict. | 此规则已写入若干关于武装冲突的法律文书，而且被视为国际性和非国际性武装冲突中的习惯国际法规则。 |
| (11) The fundamental rule concerning
precautions in attack obliges parties to an armed conflict to take necessary
and active precautions in planning and deciding an attack. | (11) 关于攻击时采取预防措施的基本规则要求武装冲突各方在计划和决定攻击时采取必要的、积极的预防措施。 |
| Therefore in relation to the protection
of the environment, it means that parties to an armed conflict are obliged to
take all feasible precautions to avoid and minimize collateral environmental
damage. | 因此，在环境保护方面，这意味着武装冲突各方必须采取一切可行的预防措施，避免并尽可能减少对环境的附带损害。 |
| (12) Lastly, the words “shall be applied to the natural environment, with a view to its
protection” introduces an objective which those
involved in armed conflict or military operations should strive towards, and
thus it goes further than simply affirming the application of the rules of
armed conflict to the environment. | (12) 最后，“应对[自然]环境适用…，以期保护环境”这段话为卷入武装冲突或军事行动的各方树立了应力争达到的目标，从而比仅仅申明对环境适用武装冲突规则更进了一步。 |
| Draft principle 11 [II-3] | 原则草案11[2-3] |
| Environmental considerations | 环境因素 |
| Environmental considerations shall be
taken into account when applying the principle of proportionality and the
rules on military necessity. | 适用相称性原则和军事必要性规则时，应考虑环境因素。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 11 [II-3] is entitled
“Environmental considerations” and provides that environmental considerations shall be taken
into account when applying the principle of proportionality and the rules on
military necessity. | (1) 原则草案11[2-3]的标题是“环境因素”，规定在适用相称性原则和军事必要性规则时，应考虑环境因素。 |
| (2) The text is drawn from and inspired
by the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on Legality of
the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, which held that: “States must take environmental considerations into account when
assessing what is necessary and proportionate in the pursuit of legitimate
military objectives. | (2) 此案文源自国际法院对“以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性”发表的咨询意见，并受到了它的启发。
该咨询意见认为：“国家在追求合法的军事目标而估量什么手段是必要和相称时，必须考虑到环境因素。 |
| Respect for the environment is one of the
elements that goes into assessing whether an action is in conformity with the
principles of necessity and proportionality”. | 在估量一项行动是否符合必要和相称的原则时，尊重环境是必须考虑的因素之一”。 |
| (3) Draft principle 11 [II-3] is closely linked
with draft principle 10 [II-2]. | (3) 原则草案11[2-3]与原则草案10[2-2]密切相关。 |
| The added value of this draft principle
in relation to draft principle 10 [II-2] is that it provides specificity with
regard to the application of the principle of proportionality and the rules
of military necessity. It is therefore of operational importance. | 这条原则草案较原则草案10[2-2]增加的内容是，它在适用相称性原则和军事必要性规则方面提供了具体说明，因此具有实际操作意义。 |
| However, some members suggested that it
should be deleted altogether. | 然而，有些委员建议应将其完全删除。 |
| (4) Draft principle 11 [II-3] aims to
address military conduct and does not deal with the process of determining
what constitutes a military objective as such. | (4) 原则草案11[2-3]旨在处理军事行为，而不涉及确定何为军事目标的过程本身。 |
| This is already regulated under the law
of armed conflict, and is often reflected in military manuals and domestic
law of States. | 这一过程已由武装冲突法加以规范，军事手册和各国国内法也经常有所反映。 |
| The words “when
applying the principle” were specifically chosen to
make this point clear. | 为明确这一点，特别选用了“适用原则时”的措辞。 |
| Also for purposes of clarity and in order
to emphasize the link between draft principles 10 [II-2] and 11 [II-3], it
was decided to refer explicitly to the principle of proportionality and rules
on military necessity. | 为明确起见，同时为了强调原则草案10[2-2]与原则草案11[2-3]之间的关联，决定明确提及相称性原则和军事必要性规则。 |
| These principles have been discussed in
the commentary to draft principle 10 [II-2] above. | 上文原则草案10[2-2]的评注部分已对这些原则进行了讨论。 |
| (5) Draft principle 11 [II-3] becomes
relevant once the legitimate military objective has been identified. | (5) 一旦确认了合法军事目标，原则草案11[2-3]便具有相关性。 |
| Since knowledge of the environment and
its eco-systems is constantly increasing, better understood and more widely
accessible to humans, it means that environmental considerations cannot
remain static over time, they should develop as human understanding of the
environment develops. | 由于人类对环境及其生态系统的认知不断增加、深入和普及，这意味着随着时间的推移，环境因素不可能一成不变，而应随着人类对环境的认知的发展而发展。 |
| Draft principle 12 [II-4] | 原则草案12[2-4] |
| Prohibition of reprisals | 禁止报复 |
| Attacks against the natural environment
by way of reprisals are prohibited. | 禁止作为报复而对自然环境进行攻击。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 12 [II-4] is entitled
“Prohibition of reprisals”
and is a mirror image of paragraph 2 of article 55 of Additional Protocol I. | (1) 原则草案12[2-4]的标题是“禁止报复”，是《第一附加议定书》第五十五条第二款的再现。 |
| (2) Although the draft principle on the
prohibition of reprisals against the natural environment was welcomed and
supported by some members, other members raised several issues concerning its
formulation and were of the view that it should not have been included in the
draft principles at all. | (2) 虽然禁止报复自然环境的原则草案得到一些委员的欢迎和支持，但另一些委员就其表述方式提出了几个问题，认为根本不应将其纳入原则草案。 |
| The divergent views centred around three
main points: a) the link between draft principle 12 [II-4] and article 51 of
Additional Protocol I; b) whether or not the prohibition of reprisals against
the environment reflected customary law; and c) if so, whether both
international and non-international armed conflicts were covered by such a
customary law rule. | 不同意见主要集中在三点：(a) 原则草案12[2-4]与《第一附加议定书》第五十一条之间的关联；(b) 禁止报复环境是否体现了习惯法；(c) 如果是，那么此习惯法规则是否涵盖了国际性和非国际性武装冲突。 |
| (3) Those who expressed support for the
inclusion of the draft principle stressed the link between draft principle 12
[II-4] and article 51 of Additional Protocol I. | (3) 表示支持纳入这条原则草案的委员强调原则草案12[2-4]与《第一附加议定书》第五十一条之间的关联。 |
| In their view, article 51 (which is
placed under the section “General protection against
effects of hostilities”) is one of the most
fundamental articles of Additional Protocol I. | 他们认为，第五十一条(列在“防止敌对行动影响的一般保护”之下)是《第一附加议定书》最根本的条款之一。 |
| It codifies the customary rule that
civilians must be protected against danger arising from hostilities, and, in
particular, also provides that “attacks against the
civilian population or civilians by way of reprisals are prohibited”. | 这一条阐明了一项习惯法规则，即必须保护平民免遭敌对行动引发的危险，这一条还特别规定“作为报复对平民居民的攻击，是禁止的。” |
| This made the inclusion of draft
principle 12 [II-4] essential. | 因此，必须纳入原则草案12[2-4]。 |
| In their view, if the natural
environment, or part thereof, became an object of reprisals, it would be
tantamount to an attack against the civilian population, civilians or
civilian objects, and would thus violate the laws of armed conflict. | 他们认为，如果自然环境或其一部分成为报复的对象，则相当于攻击平民居民、平民或民用物体，从而违反了武装冲突法。 |
| (4) In this context, some members took
the view that the prohibition of reprisals forms part of customary
international law. | (4) 在这方面，一些委员认为禁止报复构成习惯国际法的部分内容。 |
| However, other members questioned the
existence of this rule, and were of the view that the rule exists only as a
treaty obligation under the Additional Protocol I. | 但是其他委员质疑是否存在这一规则，认为此规则仅作为《第一附加议定书》之下的条约义务存在。 |
| (5) Concerns were raised that including
draft principle 12 [II-4] as a copy of article 55, paragraph 2, of Additional
Protocol I risked the draft principles going against their main aim, which is
to apply generally. | (5) 有人关切地指出，纳入仿效《第一附加议定书》第五十五条第二款的原则草案12[2-4]，有可能使原则草案与其普遍适用的宗旨背道而驰。 |
| Although Additional Protocol I is widely
ratified and thus the prohibition of reprisals against the environment is
recognized by many States, Additional Protocol I is not universally ratified. | 虽然《第一附加议定书》已被广泛批准，从而使禁止报复环境的禁令得到多国承认，但是《第一附加议定书》并未得到普遍批准。 |
| Some members were concerned that
reproducing article 55, paragraph 2, verbatim in draft principle 12 [II-4]
could therefore be misinterpreted as trying to create a binding rule on
non-State parties. | 一些委员感到关切的是，在原则草案12[2-4]中原样照搬第五十五条第二款可被误解为试图为非缔约国设置一条有约束力的规则。 |
| It was also pointed out in this regard
that paragraph 2 of article 55 has been subject to reservations and
declarations by some States parties. | 还有人就此指出，第五十五条第二款受制于一些缔约国的保留和声明。 |
| (6) It is therefore worth summarizing the
position of article 55, paragraph 2 (as a treaty provision), as follows: the
prohibition of attacks against the natural environment by way of reprisals is
a binding rule for the 174 State parties to Additional Protocol I. | (6) 因此，有必要对第五十五条第二款(作为条约条款)的立场做出如下小结：禁止作为报复而对自然环境进行攻击对于《第一附加议定书》174个缔约国是一项具有约束力的规则。 |
| The extent to which States have made
declarations or reservations that are relevant to its application must be
evaluated on a case by case basis, since only a few States have made an
explicit reference to paragraph 2 of article 55. | 各国做出的与其适用有关的声明或保留的范围，必须逐一评价，因为只有几个国家明确提及第五十五条第二款。 |
| (7) Another contentious issue raised
which merits discussion is the fact that there is no corresponding rule to
article 55, paragraph 2, in common article 3 to the four Geneva Conventions
or in Additional Protocol II which explicitly prohibits reprisals in
non-international armed conflicts (including against civilians, the civilian
population, or civilian objects). | (7) 另一个值得讨论的争议问题是，日内瓦四公约共同第三条和《第二附加议定书》中都没有与第五十五条第二款对应的规则，明确禁止在非国际性武装冲突中实施报复(包括报复平民、平民居民或民用物体)。 |
| The drafting history of Additional
Protocol II reveals that at the time of drafting, some States were of the
view that reprisals of any kind are prohibited under all circumstances in
non-international armed conflicts. | 《第二附加议定书》的起草过程显示，起草时有些国家认为，在非国际性武装冲突的所有情况下均禁止任何报复。 |
| There are, however, also valid arguments
that reprisals may be permitted in non-international armed conflicts in
certain situations. | 然而，也存在有效论据，证明在非国际性武装冲突中，某些情况下可能允许报复。 |
| (8) In light of this uncertainty, some
members expressed concern that by not differentiating between the position in
international armed conflicts and non-international armed conflicts, draft
principle 12 would attempt to create a new international law rule. | (8) 鉴于这一不确定性，一些委员关切地指出，原则草案12没有区分国际性武装冲突和非国际性武装冲突中的立场，试图建立一项新的国际法规则。 |
| It was therefore suggested that the
principle be redrafted with appropriate caveats, or excluded from the draft
principles altogether. | 因此，有人建议重新起草这条原则，附带适当的但书说明，或将其完全排除在原则草案之外。 |
| (9) Concerning reprisals against the
natural environment in particular, it is worth mentioning that the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia considered that the
prohibition against reprisals against civilian populations constitutes a
customary international law rule “in armed conflicts
of any kind”. | (9) 关于报复自然环境，值得一提的是，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭认为，“在任何类型的武装冲突中”，禁止报复平民人口均构成一条习惯国际法规则。 |
| As the environment should be considered
as a civilian object unless parts of it becomes a military objective, some
members expressed the view that reprisals against the natural environment in
non-international armed conflicts are prohibited. | 由于环境应被视为民用物体，除非环境中的一部分成为军事目标，一些委员认为，应在非国际性武装冲突中禁止报复环境。 |
| (10) Given the controversy surrounding
the formulation of this draft principle, various suggestions were made
regarding ways in which the principle could be rephrased to address the
issues in contention. | (10) 考虑到围绕这条原则草案的表述方式存在的争议，委员们就如何重新表述这条原则以解决争议的问题提出了各种建议。 |
| However, it was ultimately considered
that any formulation other than the one adopted was simply too precarious, as
it could be interpreted as weakening the existing rule under the law of armed
conflict. | 然而，委员们最终认为，除了已通过的案文，其他任何表述方式都过于危险，可能被解释为削弱了武装冲突法之下的现有规则。 |
| This would be an undesirable result,
given that the existing rule is fundamental to the law of armed conflict. | 这样的结果并不可取，因为现有规则对于武装冲突法至关重要。 |
| Despite the concerns raised during
drafting, including a draft principle on the prohibition of reprisals against
the natural environment was viewed as being particularly relevant and
necessary, given that the overall aim of the draft principles is to enhance
environmental protection in relation to armed conflict. | 尽管起草期间出现了令人关切的问题，但是委员们认为，纳入一项禁止报复自然环境的原则草案尤为重要和必要，因为原则草案的总体目标是加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| In light of the comments made above, the
inclusion of this draft principle can be seen as promoting the progressive development
of international law, which is one of the mandates of the Commission. | 鉴于上述意见，可将纳入这条原则草案视为促进国际法的逐渐发展，而这是委员会的任务之一。 |
| Draft principle 13 [II-5] | 原则草案13[2-5] |
| Protected zones | 受保护区 |
| An area of major environmental and
cultural importance designated by agreement as a protected zone shall be
protected against any attack, as long as it does not contain a military
objective. | 以协议指定为受保护区的具有重大环境和文化意义的地区，只要不包含军事目标，应保护其不受任何攻击。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) This draft principle corresponds with
draft principle 5 [I-(x)]. It provides that an area of major environmental
and cultural importance designated by agreement as a protected zone shall be
protected against any attack, as long as it does not contain a military
objective. | (1) 这条原则草案与原则草案5[1-(x)]相呼应，规定以协议指定为受保护区的具有重大环境和文化意义的地区，只要不包含军事目标，应保护其不受任何攻击。 |
| Unlike the earlier draft principle, it
only covers areas that are designated by agreement. | 不同于此前的原则草案，这条草案仅涵盖以协议指定的地区。 |
| There has to be an express agreement on
the designation. | 必须有明确的指定协议。 |
| Such an agreement may have been concluded
in peacetime or during armed conflict. | 此协议可在和平时期或武装冲突期间缔结。 |
| The reference to the term “agreement” should be understood in its
broadest sense as including mutual as well as unilateral declarations
accepted by the other party, treaties and other types of agreements, as well
as agreements with non-State actors. | “协议”一词应按最广泛的含义理解，包括共同声明和被另一方接受的单方面声明、条约和其他类型的协议，以及与非国家行为者的协议。 |
| Such zones are protected from attack
during armed conflict. | 此类地区得到保护，在武装冲突期间不受攻击。 |
| The reference to the word “contain” in the phrase “as long as it does not contain a military objective” is intended to denote that it may be the entire zone, or only
parts thereof. | 在“只要不包含军事目标”中使用“包含”一词，目的是表示它既可以是整个地区，也可以仅为其中的部分地区。 |
| Moreover, the protection afforded to a
zone ceases if one of the parties commits a material breach of the agreement
establishing the zone. | 此外，如果其中一方严重违反了设立保护区的协议，则终止对该地区的保护。 |
| (2) As mentioned above, a designated area
established in accordance with draft principle 5 [I-(x)] may lose its
protection if a party to an armed conflict has military objectives within the
area, or uses the area to carry out any military activities during an armed
conflict. | (2) 如上文所述，如果武装冲突一方在按照原则草案5[1-(x)]设立的指定地区内设有军事目标，或在武装冲突期间利用该地区开展任何军事活动，该地区则可能失去保护。 |
| The term “military
objective” in the present draft principle frames the
description of military objectives as “so long as it
does not contain a military objective”, which is
different from draft principle 9 [II-1], paragraph 3, which stipulates “unless it has become a military objective”. | 这条原则草案中“军事目标”一词出现的背景是“只要不包含军事目标”，有别于原则草案9[2-1]第3款中规定的“除非成为军事目标”。 |
| The relationship between these two
principles is that principle 13 [II-5] seeks to enhance the protection
established in draft principle 9 [II-1], paragraph 3. | 这两条原则之间的关系是，原则13[2-5]旨在加强原则草案9[2-1]第3款中确立的保护。 |
| (3) The conditional protection is an
attempt to strike a balance between military, humanitarian, and environmental
concerns. | (3) 有条件的保护是试图平衡处理军事、人道主义和环境关切。 |
| This balance mirrors the mechanism for
demilitarized zones as established in article 60 of Additional Protocol I to
the Geneva Conventions. | 这种平衡体现了日内瓦公约《第一附加议定书》第六十条中设立的非军事化地带机制。 |
| Article 60 states that if a party to an
armed conflict uses a protected area for specified military purposes, the
protected status shall be revoked. | 第六十条规定，如果武装冲突一方将受保护地带用于具体的军事目的，则应取消该地带的受保护地位。 |
| (4) Under the 1954 Hague Convention
referred to above, State parties are similarly under the obligation to not
destroy property that has been identified as cultural property in accordance
with article 4 of the Convention. | (4) 根据上文提到的1954年《海牙公约》，缔约国同样有义务避免破坏已依照《公约》第四条确定为文化财产的财产。 |
| However, the protection can only be
granted as long as the cultural property is not used for military purposes. | 然而，只有文化财产不被用于军事目的时，才能给予保护。 |
| (5) The legal implications of designating
an area as a protected area will depend on the origin and contents, as well
as the form, of the proposed protected area. | (5) 指定某地区为受保护区所产生的法律影响，取决于拟议受保护区的来源和内容，以及形式。 |
| For example, the pacta tertiis rule will
limit the application of a formal treaty to the parties. | 例如，“条约不约束第三国”原则将限制正式条约对各方的适用。 |
| As a minimum, the designation of an area
as a protected zone could serve to alert parties to an armed conflict that
they should take this into account when applying the principle of
proportionality or the principle of precautions in attack. | 指定一个地区为受保护区至少可以警示武装冲突各方，在适用相称性或攻击时采取预防措施的原则时，应考虑到这一点。 |
| In addition, preventive and remedial
measures may need to be tailored so as to take the special status of the area
into account. | 此外，还可能需要调整预防和补救措施，以便照顾该地区的特殊地位。 |
| Chapter XI | 第十一章 |
| Immunity of State officials from foreign
criminal jurisdiction | 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 190. 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. | 190. 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”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。 |
| 191. The Special Rapporteur submitted
three reports. | 191. 特别报告员提交了三次报告。 |
| 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). | 委员会第六十一届会议(2009年)和第六十二届会议(2010年)未能审议本专题。 |
| 192. The Commission, at its sixty-fourth
session (2012), appointed Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández as Special Rapporteur to replace Mr. Kolodkin, who was no
longer a member of the Commission. | 192. 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不再是委员会委员的科洛德金先生担任特别报告员。 |
| The Commission received and considered
the preliminary report of the Special Rapporteur at the same session (2012),
her second report during the sixty-fifth session (2013), her third report
during the sixty-sixth session (2014) and her fourth report during the
sixty-seventh session (2015). | 委员会同届会议(2012年)收到并审议了特别报告员提交的初步报告，第六十五届会议(2013年)收到了她的第二次报告，第六十六届会议(2014年)收到了她的第三次报告，第六十七届会议(2015年)收到了她的第四次报告。 |
| On the basis of the draft articles
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in the second, third and fourth reports,
the Commission has thus far provisionally adopted six draft articles and the
commentaries thereto. | 委员会在特别报告员第二、第三和第四次报告提出的条款草案基础上，迄今为止暂时通过了六条条文草案及其评注。 |
| Draft article 2 on the use of terms is
still being developed. | 关于术语的使用的第2条草案案文仍处在拟订过程中。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 193. The Commission had before it the
fifth report of the Special Rapporteur analysing the question of limitations
and exceptions to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction (A/CN.4/701). | 193. 委员会收到了特别报告员的第五次报告，其中分析了国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的限制和例外问题(A/CN.4/701)。 |
| The Commission considered the report at
its 3328th to 3331st meetings, from 26 to 29 July 2016. | 委员会在2016年7月26日至29日的第3328至第3331次会议上审议了该报告。 |
| At the time of its consideration, the
report was available to the Commission only in two of the six official
languages of the United Nations. | 进行审议时，委员会只收到联合国六种正式语文中两种语文的文本。 |
| Accordingly, the debate in the Commission
was preliminary in nature, involving members wishing to speak on the topic,
and would be continued at its sixty-ninth session. | 因此，委员会进行的辩论属于初步性质，愿意就此专题发言的委员参与了辩论。 |
| In these circumstances, it was understood
that the consideration of the report at the present session was exceptional
and was not intended to set a precedent. | 委员会将在第六十九届会议上继续进行辩论。 |
| The Commission underlined that the debate
at the current session was only the beginning of the debate and that the
Commission would provide to the General Assembly a complete basis of its work
on this report only after the debate is finalized at the sixty-ninth session. | 在这些情况下，有一项理解是，本届会议进行的辩论只是辩论的开始，委员会须待第六十九届会议完成辩论之后，才能够就本报告的工作向大会提供完整的基础。 |
| 194. At its 3329th meeting, on 27 July
2016, the Commission provisionally adopted draft articles 2, subparagraph
(f), and 6, provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee and taken note of
by the Commission at its sixty-seventh session (see section C.1, below). | 194. 在2016年7月27日第3329次会议上，委员会暂时通过了经第六十七届会议上起草委员会暂时通过和委员会注意到的第2条草案(f)项和第6条草案(见下文C.1节)。 |
| 195. At its 3345th to 3346th meetings, on
11 August 2016, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft articles
provisionally adopted at the present session (see section C.2, below). | 195. 在2016年8月11日举行的第3345至第3346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)。 |
| 1. Introduction by the Special Rapporteur
of the fifth report | 1. 特别报告员介绍第五次报告 |
| 196. The fifth report analysed the
question of limitations and exceptions to the immunity of State officials
from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 196. 第五次报告分析了国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的限制和例外问题。 |
| It addressed, in particular, the prior
consideration by the Commission of the question of limitations and exceptions
to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction,
offered an analysis of relevant practice, addressed some methodological and
conceptual questions relating to limitations and exceptions, and considered
instances in which the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction would not apply. | 报告特别论述了委员会此前对国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的限制和例外问题的审议情况，分析了相关实践，讨论了有关限制和例外的一些方法和概念问题，并考虑了不适用国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的实例。 |
| It drew the conclusion that it had not
been possible to determine, on the basis of practice, the existence of a
customary rule that allowed for the application of limitations or exceptions
in respect of immunity ratione personae, or to identify a trend in favour of
such a rule. | 报告得出结论：无法在实践的基础上认定存在一条习惯法规则，允许对属人豁免适用限制和例外；也无法找到支持这种规则的趋势。 |
| On the other hand, the report came to the
conclusion that limitations and exceptions to the immunity of State officials
from foreign criminal jurisdiction did apply to State officials in the
context of immunity ratione materiae. | 另一方面，报告还得出结论：在属事豁免方面，国家官员的确适用外国刑事管辖豁免的限制和例外。 |
| As a consequence of the analysis, the
report contained a proposal for draft article 7 concerning “Crimes in respect of which immunity does not apply”. | 作为分析结果，报告载有关于“不适用豁免的罪行”的第7条草案的拟议案文。 |
| The report also noted that the sixth
report of the Special Rapporteur in 2017 would address the procedural aspects
of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 报告还指出，2017年特别报告员的第六次报告将处理国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的程序问题。 |
| 197. In her introduction of the report,
the Special Rapporteur recalled that the topic had been the subject of
recurrent debate over the years in the Commission and in the Sixth Committee
of the General Assembly, eliciting diverse, and often opposing views. | 197. 特别报告员在报告的导言部分回顾指出，这个专题是委员会和大会第六委员会多年来反复辩论的主题，引发了多种意见，而且往往是相反的意见。 |
| The fifth report deals with limitations
and exceptions to immunities after the Commission completed the consideration
of all the normative elements of immunity ratione personae and immunity
ratione materiae. | 第五次报告在委员会结束审议属人豁免和属事豁免的所有规范性要素后，处理豁免的限制和例外。 |
| 198. The Special Rapporteur stated that,
in preparing the report, she had employed the same methodological approaches
of previous reports, consisting of an analysis of judicial (domestic and
international) and treaty practice, taking into account the prior work of the
Commission, noting that the fifth report additionally contained an analysis
of national legislation, as well as information received from Governments in
response to questions posed by the Commission. | 198. 特别报告员称其在编写报告时采用了与前几次报告相同的方法，包括分析(国内和国际)的司法实践和条约实践，同时考虑到委员会以往的工作；她还指出，第五次报告还另外分析了国家立法，以及各国政府就委员会提出的问题做出的答复。 |
| The Special Rapporteur underlined that
the fifth report, like the previous reports, had to be read and understood
together with the prior reports on the topic, as these reports, constituted,
a unitary whole. | 特别报告员强调，第五次报告和前几次报告一样，必须结合此前本专题的各次报告一并阅读和理解，因为这些报告是一个整体。 |
| 199. Addressing the main substantive and
methodological issues reflected in the fifth report, the Special Rapporteur
stated that its aim was: | 199. 谈到第五次报告反映的主要实质性问题和方法问题，特别报告员表示本报告的目标在于： |
| (a) to analyse whether there existed
situations in which the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction was without effect, even where such immunity was potentially
applicable because all normative elements as addressed in draft articles
provisionally adopted were present; | (a) 分析是否存在国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免无效的情况，甚至在此种豁免因具备暂时通过的条款草案中所述所有规范性要素而可能适用的情况下； |
| and (b) to identify, if the answer to (a)
were in the affirmative, the actual instances in which such immunity would be
without effect, addressing in particular: (i) the limitations and exceptions
to immunity; and (ii) the crimes in respect of which immunity did not apply. | (b) 若(a)的答案是肯定的，找出此种豁免无效的实例，特别要讨论：(一) 豁免的限制和例外；(二) 不适用豁免的罪行。 |
| 200. The Special Rapporteur noted that
the phrase “limitations and exceptions” reflected, in her view, a theoretical distinction that suggested
that a “limitation” was
intrinsic to the immunity regime itself, while an “exception” was extrinsic to it. | 200. 特别报告员指出，她认为“限制和例外”的用语反映出理论上的区别：似乎“限制”是豁免制度本身固有的内容，而“例外”则是外来因素。 |
| The distinction had normative
implications, as it had consequences for the systemic interpretation of
immunity, suggested in the report. | 报告中提出，这种区别具有规范性影响，因为它影响到对豁免的系统性解释。 |
| The Special Rapporteur nevertheless
stressed that the distinction between limitations and exceptions had no
practical significance as each led to the same consequence, namely the
non-application of the legal regime of the immunity of State officials from
foreign criminal jurisdiction in the particular case. | 不过特别报告员强调，限制和例外之间的区别不具任何实际意义，因为二者所致后果相同，即国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免这一法律制度在具体案例中不适用。 |
| Accordingly, for the purposes of the
present draft articles, “immunity shall not apply” had been used to cover both limitations and exceptions. | 因此，为本条款草案的目的，使用“不适用豁免”涵盖限制和例外。 |
| 201. Moreover, the report did not
consider waiver of immunity to be a “limitation or an
exception”. | 201. 此外，报告没有将放弃豁免视为“限制或例外”。 |
| Waiver of immunity produced the same
effect as a limitation or an exception. | 放弃豁免与限制或例外产生的效果相同。 |
| However, this was not due to the
existence of autonomous general rules, but rather to the exercise of the
prerogative of the State of the official. | 但这并不是因为存在自成一体的一般规则，而是因为行使了国家官员的特权。 |
| Since waiver is procedural in nature, it
will be examined in the sixth report, which will be devoted to the procedural
aspects of immunity. | 由于放弃在本质上属于程序问题，所以将在专门讨论豁免的程序问题的第六次报告中加以论述。 |
| 202. The report had also taken a broader
perspective than merely considering international crimes. | 202. 报告没有仅仅考虑国际罪行，而是选取了更加广阔的视角。 |
| It also offered an analysis of certain
other crimes, such as corruption, which is of great importance for the
international community. | 报告还分析了某些其他罪行，例如国际社会十分关注的腐败罪。 |
| Moreover, there were instances of State
practice on non-application of immunity in circumstances based on the primacy
of territorial sovereignty in the exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the
forum State (akin to the “territorial tort exception” in relation to the jurisdictional immunity of the State). | 此外，报告还列举了法院地国行使刑事管辖权中领土主权至上(类似于国家管辖豁免的“领土内侵权例外”)的情形下，不适用豁免的国家实践的实例。 |
| 203. The Special Rapporteur also
underlined a number of considerations which had to be taken into account in
the appreciation of the regime for the application of limitations and
exceptions to immunity: | 203. 特别报告员还强调指出在理解对豁免适用限制和例外的制度时必须考虑的若干因素： |
| (a) Immunity and jurisdiction were
inextricably linked. | (a) 豁免与管辖密不可分。 |
| She described the former as an exception
to the exercise of jurisdiction by the courts of the forum State. | 她将前者描述为法院地国法院行使管辖权的一种例外。 |
| Although both were based on the sovereign
equality of States, the exceptional character of immunity had to be taken
into account when defining the possible existence of limitations and
exceptions; | 虽然二者均以国家主权平等为基础，但是在界定何时可能存在限制和例外时，必须考虑到豁免的例外性质； |
| (b) The procedural nature of immunity
meant that it did not absolve a State official from individual criminal
responsibility. | (b) 豁免的程序性质意味着豁免并不免除国家官员的个人刑事责任。 |
| Accordingly, in a formal sense, immunity
could not be equated to impunity. | 因此，从正式意义上讲，豁免不等同于有罪不罚。 |
| However, it was underscored that, under
certain circumstances, immunity could result, in effect, in the impossibility
of determining the individual criminal responsibility of a State official. | 但是她强调指出，某些情况下，豁免实际上可能导致无法裁定国家官员的个人刑事责任。 |
| It was such effect that had to be borne
in mind when analysing limitations and exceptions to immunity; | 在分析豁免的限制和例外时，必须铭记这种影响； |
| (c) The immunity of State officials from
foreign criminal jurisdiction had a bearing on criminal proceedings intended
to determine, as appropriate, the individual criminal responsibility of the
author of certain crimes. | (c) 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免涉及到意图酌情确定某些犯罪责任人的个人刑事责任的刑事诉讼。 |
| Such immunity was different and
distinguishable from State immunity, and was subject to a distinct legal
regime, including with regard to limitations and exceptions to immunity; | 此种豁免有别于国家豁免，也受不同法律制度的管辖，在豁免的限制和例外方面亦是如此； |
| (d) The horizontal application of
immunity between States, the subject of the present topic, was distinct and
separate from the vertical application of immunity before international
criminal courts and tribunals. | (d) 豁免在各国间的横向适用，即本专题讨论的主题，有别于且独立于在国际刑事法院和法庭纵向适用豁免。 |
| At the same time, however, the mere
existence of international criminal courts and tribunals could not always be
considered as an alternative mechanism for determining the criminal
responsibility of State officials. | 但与此同时，不能总是将国际刑事法院和法庭视为确定国家官员刑事责任的替代机制。 |
| Therefore, the existence of international
criminal tribunals cannot be considered as a foundation for the absence of
exceptions. | 因此，国际刑事法庭的存在不能被视为不设例外的依据。 |
| 204. In the treatment of relevant
practice covered by the report, the Special Rapporteur underlined the
relevance of such practice in identifying the limitations and exceptions to
immunity. | 204. 特别报告员在报告中论述相关实践时强调，此类实践对于确定豁免的限制和例外十分重要。 |
| This was supplemented by a systemic
approach to the interpretation of immunity and the limitations and exceptions
thereto. | 报告员还系统阐述了豁免及豁免的限制和例外，以为补充。 |
| Accordingly, although the practice was
varied, it revealed a clear trend towards considering the commission of
international crimes as a bar to the application of the immunity ratione
materiae of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 据此，虽然实践各不相同，但表明了一种明确的趋势，即认为实施国际罪行是不得适用国家官员的外国刑事管辖属事豁免的抗辩事由。 |
| This was on the basis that: | 这一点的依据是： |
| (a) such crimes were not considered
official acts, or were an exception to immunity, owing to the serious nature
of the crime; | (a) 此种罪行不被视为“官方行为”，或因罪行性质严重成为豁免例外； |
| or (b) they undermined the values and
principles recognized by the international community as a whole. | (b) 它们违背了全体国际社会承认的价值观和原则。 |
| 205. On the first point, it was noted
that, even though national courts had sometimes recognized immunity from
foreign criminal jurisdiction for international crimes, they had always done
so in the context of immunity ratione personae, and only in exceptional
circumstances was it in respect of immunity ratione materiae. | 205. 关于第一点，报告员指出，即使各国法院有时承认国际罪行的外国刑事管辖豁免，但都是在属人豁免的范围内，只有在特殊情况下才是属事豁免。 |
| Such practice, coupled with opinio juris,
led to the conclusion that contemporary international law permitted
limitations or exceptions to immunity ratione materiae from foreign criminal
jurisdiction when international crimes were committed. | 基于这种实践，再加上法律确信，可以得出结论：当代国际法在发生国际罪行时允许对外国刑事管辖属事豁免的限制或例外。 |
| Further, although there might be doubt as
to the existence of a relevant general practice amounting to a custom, there
was a clear trend that reflected an emerging custom. | 此外，尽管对于是否存在相当于习惯法的相关一般惯例或许存有疑问，但正在形成习惯法的趋势十分明显。 |
| 206. On the question concerning “values and legal principles”, the report
had sought to address limitations and exceptions to immunity on the basis of
a view of international law as a normative system of which the legal regime
of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction formed
part. | 206. 关于“价值观和法律原则”的问题，报告试图将国际法视为国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免这一法律制度所属的规范性系统，以此为基础，论述豁免的限制和例外。 |
| In order to avert the negative effects
occasioned by the application of an immunity regime, or the nullification of
other components of the contemporary system of international law, it was
underlined that such a systemic approach was necessary. | 为了避免适用豁免制度或废除当代国际法制度中其他组成部分所引发的负面影响，报告中强调指出，有必要采取这样的系统性方法。 |
| This approach also informed the way in
which the report addressed the relationship of immunity to other essential
categories of contemporary international law, such as prohibitions against
peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens), as well as to the
attribution of a legal character to concepts of impunity and accountability,
and to the fight against impunity, the right of access to justice, the right
of victims to reparation, or the obligation of States to prosecute certain
international crimes in a similar vein. | 报告也采用这种方法来论述豁免与当代国际法其他基本范畴(如国际法强制规范(强行法)的禁令)之间的关系，以及豁免与为有罪不罚和问责概念赋予法律特征、打击有罪不罚、诉讼权、受害者获得赔偿权、或国家起诉某些国际罪行的义务之间的关系。 |
| 207. In the view of the Special
Rapporteur such an approach, which better responded to concerns expressed by
some States and members of the Commission in the debates over the years, was
consistent with contemporary international law. | 207. 特别报告员认为，这种方法更好地响应了一些国家和委员会委员多年来在辩论中表达的关切，符合当代国际法。 |
| It did not alter the basic foundations of
international criminal law that had been gradually built since the last
century, especially the principle of individual criminal responsibility for
international crimes and the need to guarantee the existence of effective
mechanisms for the fight against impunity for such crimes. | 这种方法没有改变自上世纪以来逐渐形成的国际刑法的根本基础，尤其是个人为国际罪行承担刑事责任的原则，和确保具备有效机制、打击对此类罪行的有罪不罚现象的需要。 |
| At the same time, it took into account
other important elements of international law, in particular the principle of
sovereign equality of States. | 与此同时，这种方法还考虑到国际法的其他要素，尤其是国家主权平等的原则。 |
| 208. The Special Rapporteur also
introduced the various elements of the proposed draft article 7. | 208. 特别报告员还介绍了第7条草案拟议案文中的多项内容。 |
| She drew the attention to the three
categories of crimes concerning which immunity did not apply, the fact that
limitations and exceptions applied only in respect of immunity ratione
materiae, and on the existence of two particular regimes considered lex
specialis. | 她请大家注意不适用豁免的三类罪行、限制和例外仅适用于属事豁免这一事实、以及存在两种被视为特别法的特殊制度。 |
| 2. Summary of the debate | 2. 辩论摘要 |
| (a) General comments | (a) 一般评论 |
| 209. The debate at the present session
was only the beginning of the discussion of this aspect of the topic. | 209. 本届会议的辩论只是就本专题的这一方面进行讨论的开始。 |
| It will be continued at the sixty-ninth
session of the Commission. | 委员会第六十九届会议将继续辩论。 |
| The summary below should be understood
bearing these considerations in mind. | 解读下面的摘要时应铭记上述因素。 |
| A summary of the full debate, including
the summing up by the Special Rapporteur, will be available after the debate
is concluded in 2017. | 将于2017年辩论结束后提供辩论全程纪要，包括特别报告员的总结。 |
| 210. Those members who spoke generally
welcomed the Special Rapporteur’s fifth report for
its rich, systematic and well-documented examples of State practice as
reflected in treaties and domestic legislation, as well as in international
and national case law. | 210. 发言的委员普遍欢迎特别报告员的第五次报告提供了丰富、系统、有据可查的例子，说明了条约和国家立法以及国际和国家案例法中反映的国家实践。 |
| It was readily recognized that the
subject matter, in particular the question of limitations and exceptions, was
legally complex and raised issues that were politically highly sensitive and
important for States. | 显然，这个主题事项，尤其是限制和例外问题，在法律上是复杂的，提出了对各国来说具有高度政治敏感性和重要性的问题。 |
| It was also recalled that disagreements
within the Commission, and in the views among States, exist, with some
members pointing out that the topic needed to be proceeded with prudently and
cautiously. | 委员们还回顾说，委员会内部存在分歧，各国的意见也不一致，有些委员指出这个专题需要审慎处理。 |
| It was said by some members said that the
Commission should focus on codification rather than progressive development
of new norms of international law in dealing with the issue of limitations
and exceptions. | 有些委员说，委员会应把重点放在处理限制和例外问题的国际法新规范的编纂而不是逐渐发展上。 |
| Others members stated that this issue
should be dealt with taking account both the codification and the progressive
development of international law. | 另一些委员指出，处理这一问题时应考虑到国际法的编纂和逐渐发展两方面。 |
| (b) Comments on methodological and
conceptual issues raised in the fifth report | (b) 关于第五次报告提出的方法和概念问题的评论 |
| 211. In their comments, the members who
spoke addressed the various aspects of the report. | 211. 发言的委员在评论中述及报告各个方面。 |
| They referred to those concerning the
prior consideration by the Commission of the question of limitations and
exceptions, offered comments on the treatment of relevant practice, addressed
some methodological and conceptual questions relating to limitations and exceptions,
tackled questions concerning the legal nature of the immunity regime, and
examined instances in which the immunity of State officials from foreign
criminal jurisdiction did not apply, in the context of the draft article 7,
as proposed by the Special Rapporteur. | 他们提到委员会此前对限制和例外问题的审议情况，就相关实践的处理提出了意见，谈及一些有关限制和例外的方法和概念问题，论述了与豁免制度的法律性质有关的问题，并且根据特别报告员建议的第7条草案，探讨了不适用国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的实例。 |
| While some members expressed support for
the approaches taken, some other members were opposed to them. | 有些委员表示赞同报告采用的方法，也有些委员表示反对。 |
| Prior consideration by the Commission of
the limitation and exceptions | 委员会此前对限制和例外问题的审议情况 |
| 212. Some members expressed their
appreciation for the lucid and balanced approach taken by the Special
Rapporteur in her treatment of limitations and exceptions, for which they
expressed their gratitude. | 212. 一些委员表示赞赏特别报告员采用明确而平衡的方法处理限制和例外问题，并对此表示感谢。 |
| This was achieved through a review of the
practice and relevant case law and careful balance between an adherence to
the immunity of State officials under customary international law and a
prudent examination of the possibilities for progressive development,
consistent with the approach chosen by the Special Rapporteur from the
beginning of her work. | 为做到这一点，特别报告员对相关实践和案例法做了综述，一方面坚持习惯国际法之下国家官员的豁免，另一方面审慎评估逐渐发展的可能性，在两方面之间保持谨慎的平衡；这符合特别报告员自开始工作以来选择的方法。 |
| 213. Some other members recalled with
appreciation the study by the Secretariat, as well as previous work conducted
by the former Special Rapporteur. | 213. 另一些委员赞赏地回顾了秘书处所做的研究，以及前任特别报告员此前开展的工作。 |
| It was suggested that the point of
departure for consideration of the limitations and exceptions should have
been the conclusions by the previous Special Rapporteur, from which it should
have been demonstrated whether or not the conclusions reached in 2008 could
still be justified and maintained in light of the subsequent developments in
international law. | 他们建议，限制和例外的审议工作本应以前任特别报告员的结论为出发点，本应表明，经过国际法后来的发展后，2008年得出的结论是否仍然站得住脚，仍然有效。 |
| These members also indicated that the
Special Rapporteur had made a gradual deviation from her own approaches in
the treatment of the topic, shifting the focus from codification to
progressive development, resulting in a loss of balance. | 这些委员还表示，特别报告员在处理这个专题时逐渐偏离了自己的方法，把重点由编纂转向逐渐发展，造成失衡的结果。 |
| Study of practice | 实研究 |
| 214. Some members were critical of the report
for not faithfully following the analytical process of identification of
customary international law referred to therein. | 214. 一些委员批评报告没有真正贯彻其中所称的识别习惯国际法这一分析过程。 |
| Moreover, the conclusions that were
sometimes reached were often irreconcilable with certain other assertions
made in the report. | 而且有时得出的结论常与报告中做出的其他某些断言无法调和。 |
| In particular, concerns were expressed
regarding the treatment of the case law, which was of varied origin, the
choice of which appeared selective, the reliance in some cases on separate
and dissenting opinions, as well as reliance on limited sample of national
legislation, some of which it was suggested was of limited relevance in the
consideration of the topic. | 委员们尤其对案例法的处理表示关切：这些案例法来源不同，似乎有所选择，在某些案例中依靠个人和不同意见，而且依靠有限的国家法律样本，其中一些与本专题的审议关系不大。 |
| It was further noted that a trend towards
an exception in domestic courts, even if it existed, was not a general
practice for purposes of constituting a rule of customary international law. | 委员们还指出，即使在国家法院中存在例外的趋势，这也不是构成习惯国际法规则的一般实践。 |
| 215. Accordingly, these members
considered that it was not clear whether such approach in the analyses
sufficiently supported the conclusions drawn in the report, and in some
instances, the case law relating to the exercise of international criminal
jurisdiction was unhelpful in determining whether customary international law
recognized the existence of an exception to immunity ratione materiae before
a foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 215. 因此，这些委员认为，分析中采用的这种方法是否足以支持报告中得出的结论不够明确，而且一些实例中，与行使国际刑事管辖有关的案例法无助于确定习惯国际法是否承认存在外国刑事管辖的属事豁免例外。 |
| The consequence of the Special Rapporteur’s approach was the expansion of the limitations and exceptions to
immunity to cover crimes under international law to include even ordinary
crimes. | 特别报告员采用的方法造成的后果是，扩大了国际法之下罪行的豁免限制和例外的范围，使之甚至包含普通罪行。 |
| 216. It was further stated in the same
context that, instead of grounding the report on “values
and legal principles” of the international community,
the focus should have been on following strictly the process of
identification of customary international law, supported by normative
sources. | 216. 委员们还在同一背景下指出，报告不应立足于国际社会的“价值观和法律原则”，而应该把重点放在严格遵循识别习惯国际法的过程，同时以规范性来源为辅助。 |
| The proposals made should have been
clarified as being by way of progressive development of international law. | 应该明确指出，报告提出的建议是为了国际法的逐渐发展。 |
| 217. On the other hand, the members of
the Commission that took part in the debate generally considered that the
report contained an extensive and deep analysis of practice. | 217. 另一方面，参加辩论的委员会委员普遍认为，报告对实践进行了广泛深入的分析。 |
| Moreover, some members considered that
the analysis of practice shows the existence of a clear trend towards
admitting certain limitations and exceptions to immunity, and provided
sufficient basis for the proposals made by the Special Rapporteur. | 此外，一些委员认为，对实践的分析表明有一种明确的趋势，允许豁免的某些限制和例外，而且为特别报告员提出的建议提供了充分的依据。 |
| 218. Furthermore, in the view of some
members, even though there was bound to be a divergence of views on the legal
regime of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction and
its nature, the report would have a significant impact on the understanding
and treatment of such immunity and would assist States and other relevant
actors in the elaboration of an immunity regime that took into account the
various legal interests. | 218. 此外，一些委员认为，即使对于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的法律制度及其性质必然出现意见分歧，但是报告将对此种豁免的理解和处理产生重大影响，还将帮助各国和其他相关行为者制订兼顾各种法律利益的豁免制度。 |
| Accordingly, they expressed support for
the approach pursued by the Special Rapporteur and noted that the analysis
and conclusions on the doctrine were intrinsically linked to practice and
judicial pronouncements, which would give a concrete underpinning for the
proposals on limitations and exceptions. | 因此，他们表示赞同特别报告员采用的方法，并且指出，关于这一法律原则的分析和结论与实践和司法声明具有内在联系，为关于限制和例外的建议提供了牢固的支撑。 |
| The reader of the report would have a
comprehensive and full understanding of the background to the issues
involved, the various positions on the matter, the nuances of immunity at the
international and the national levels, and the policy considerations
involved. | 报告的读者将充分、全面地理解有关问题的背景、关于此事项的各种立场、国际和国家两级豁免的细微差别，以及相关政策考虑。 |
| These members concurred in the conclusion
that the practice analysed in the report showed a trend towards the
recognition that immunity does not apply when international crimes have been
committed. | 这些委员赞成以下结论：报告所做的实践分析表明，存在承认在发生国际罪行时不适用豁免的趋势。 |
| 219. Moreover, it was considered by these
members that providing indisputable proof of the existence of a norm of
international customary law was not necessarily the exclusive way for
addressing the issue of limitations and exceptions. | 219. 此外，这些委员认为，提供不容质疑的证据证明存在国际习惯法准则，不一定是处理限制和例外问题的唯一途径。 |
| Accordingly, the reference to “values and legal principles” was
considered quite useful. | 因此，他们认为提及“价值观和法律原则”是非常有帮助的。 |
| 220. The point was also made that a
commendable effort had been made by the Special Rapporteur to bridge
differences in the Commission on the question of limitations and exceptions
to immunity, while presenting a thoughtful, albeit challenging, approach to
addressing the matter for the Commission to consider. | 220. 委员们还指出，特别报告员做出了可贵努力，弥合委员会内部在豁免的限制和例外问题上的分歧，同时为处理这一事项提出了虽具挑战性但经过深思熟虑的方法，供委员会审议。 |
| By identifying a trend, the Special
Rapporteur had offered a middle ground between those who sought concordance
of the immunity regime at the vertical and horizontal levels, and those who
considered that the Commission should not identify any limitation and
exception because customary international law did not provide for such
exceptions. | 特别报告员确定了一种趋势，藉此在两种观点(一些委员力求实现豁免制度在纵向和横向的一致性，另一些委员认为委员会不应确定任何限制和例外，因为习惯国际法没有规定此种例外)之间提供了一个中间立场。 |
| Legal nature of immunity | 豁免的法律性质 |
| Relationship between immunity and
jurisdiction | 豁免与管辖之间的关系 |
| 221. Some members pointed out, recalling
the decision of the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant of
11 April 2000 case, that immunity and jurisdiction, even though related, were
different regimes. | 221. 一些委员回顾国际法院在2000年4月11日逮捕令案中的判决指出，豁免与管辖虽然相关，却是不同的制度。 |
| The fact that international instruments
seeking to prevent and punish certain serious international crimes required
States parties to establish jurisdiction, to investigate, arrest, prosecute
or extradite and provided for other forms of cooperation, did not affect the
immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction under
customary international law. | 旨在预防和惩处某些严重国际罪行的国际文书要求缔约国确立管辖权，以进行调查、逮捕、起诉或引渡，并规定了其他合作形式；这一事实并不影响习惯国际法之下国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| Such immunities, as noted in the Arrest
Warrant case, remained opposable before the courts of a foreign State, even
where such courts exercised jurisdiction under the instruments in question. | 此种豁免，如逮捕令案中指出的那样，在外国法院仍然是可以反对的，即使是在此类法院按照有关公约行使管辖的情形下。 |
| 222. On the other hand, it was observed
that the quest for accountability was not and should not be regarded as a
mechanism to disturb peace, interfere in the internal affairs of States or
constitute a transgression on the sovereignty of States or the will of their
peoples. | 222. 另一方面，有人指出，寻求问责不是、也不应被视为扰乱和平、干涉各国内政或侵犯国家主权或其人民意愿的机制。 |
| On the contrary, the lack of justice and
prevalence of impunity contributed to tensions in international relations and
undermined the core legal principles for inter-State relations. | 与此相反，正义缺失及有罪不罚盛行诱发国际关系中的紧张局势，削弱国家间关系的核心法律原则。 |
| Accordingly, it was asserted that there
was a need for a balance of the various legitimate interests involved, taking
into account the right of the State to protect its sovereignty, including of
its people and the sovereign equality of States within the confines of
international law. | 因此，委员们主张，需要平衡其中牵涉的各种合法利益，考虑到国家有权在国际法的范围内保护其主权，包括人民的主权以及国家主权平等。 |
| 223. It was equally underlined that the
effect of the Rome Statute on the draft articles being elaborated should not
be underestimated. | 223. 委员们同样强调，不应低估《罗马规约》对正在拟订的条款草案的影响。 |
| In particular, it was observed in
relation to article 27 of the Statute that immunity and individual criminal
responsibility were intrinsically linked, and that viewing immunity as a mere
procedural bar, in absolute terms, divorced it from the question of
individual responsibility, without affording effective redress. | 委员们特别针对《规约》第二十七条指出，豁免与个人刑事责任具有内在联系，将豁免仅视为一种程序性的障碍，从绝对意义上讲，使豁免与个人责任的问题脱节，而且没有提供有效补救。 |
| Relationship between immunity and
responsibility | 豁免与责任之间的关系 |
| 224. Some members recalled that case law,
including that of the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant
and the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State cases showed that immunity did
not absolve a State official of any individual criminal responsibility on the
substance nor was it intended to foster impunity, given that the Arrest
Warrant case offered possible measures to avoid impunity, consisting of
domestic prosecution, waiver of immunity, prosecution after termination of
term of office, and prosecution before an international criminal justice
system. | 224. 一些委员回顾指出，案例法，包括国际法院在逮捕令案和国家的管辖豁免案中的案例法表明，豁免实质上不免除国家官员的个人刑事责任，也不意图助长有罪不罚，因为逮捕令案提供了避免有罪不罚的可能措施，包括国内起诉、放弃豁免、任期终止后起诉和向国际刑事司法制度起诉。 |
| Accordingly, it was inaccurate to equate
impunity with immunity, as the former involved substantive considerations,
addressing issues of individual criminal responsibility, while the latter was
concerned with procedural issues. | 因此，将有罪不罚与豁免划等号，并不准确，因为前者涉及实质性考虑因素，处理个人刑事责任问题，而后者涉及程序问题。 |
| 225. At the same time, some other members
endorsed the approach taken by the Special Rapporteur in the fifth report. | 225. 与此同时，另一些委员赞同特别报告员在第五次报告中采用的方法。 |
| It was noted that immunity ratione
personae was distinct from immunity ratione materiae, which necessitated the
need to take a more nuanced view in order to make progress on the subject. | 他们指出，属人豁免有别于属事豁免，这就需要采取更加细致入微的观点，来推进这个主题。 |
| While a State establishing criminal
jurisdiction over persons enjoying status-based immunity ratione personae
would impair the ability of the State of which those persons are the agents
in its functioning and exercise of its sovereignty, such was not always the
case with immunity ratione materiae, given its conduct-based nature. | 虽然一国对享受基于身份的属人豁免的人员确定刑事管辖权，会损害这些人员作为其代理人的国家的运转及其行使主权的能力，但属事豁免由于在本质上是基于行为的，所以并非总是如此。 |
| The fact that, immunity ratione materiae
as reflected in draft article 6, provisionally adopted at the present
session, was enjoyed only with respect to acts performed in an official
capacity, meant that there was no automaticity to its application as a
procedural bar. | 本届会议暂时通过的第6条草案反映的属事豁免，只有在以官方身份行事时方能享有，这一事实意味着属事豁免不能自动作为程序性障碍适用。 |
| Relationship between State immunity and
immunity of a State official | 国家豁免与国家官员豁免之间的关系 |
| 226. Some members stated that the
immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction was rooted in
State immunity, which reflected the principle par in parem non habet
imperium. | 226. 一些委员指出，国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的根源在于体现“平等者之间无统治权”原则的国家豁免。 |
| Any suggestion that norms of jus cogens
or rules on combating serious international crimes conflicted with basic
rights of States, was tantamount to subordinating the principle of sovereign
equality of States, a cornerstone of inter-State relations, to other rules,
and risked gradually eroding it. | 关于强行法规范或打击严重国际罪行的规则与国家基本权利冲突的任何暗示，均相当于将国家间关系的基石――国家主权平等原则置于其他规则之下，而且可能逐渐削弱这项原则。 |
| Moreover, any exceptions to immunity were
likely to undermine the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs,
with potential risks for politically motivated prosecutions of a Head of
State or other high-ranking State officials by States, and would lead to
abuse of universal jurisdiction. | 此外，任何豁免例外都有可能损害不干涉内政的原则，还存在国家出于政治动机起诉国家元首或其他高级别国家官员的潜在风险，而且会导致滥用普遍管辖权。 |
| Instead of contributing to combating
crimes and providing the protection of human rights, such developments, it
was suggested, would undermine the stability of inter-State relations and
defeat the course of international justice. | 委员们建议说，这种发展不能促进打击犯罪和保护人权，反而会破坏国家间关系的稳定，妨碍国际司法进程。 |
| 227. On the other hand, some members
observed that developments in the last century in civil jurisdictional
matters had witnessed a departure from the concept of absolute immunity of
the State. | 227. 另一方面，一些委员评论说，民事司法管辖事项在上个世纪的发展中，逐渐抛开了国家绝对豁免的概念。 |
| Moreover, Sovereign (State) immunity was
not the same as the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 而且主权(国家)豁免与国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免也不一样。 |
| Additionally, although a State was
responsible for internationally wrongful acts, including for acts committed
by its officials, a State as such could not commit a crime under the law of
State responsibility. | 此外，虽然国家对国际不法行为，包括其官员实施的行为负责，但是国家本身不能实施违反国家责任法的罪行。 |
| Its responsibility was not criminal,
whereas its officials, based also on developments in the last century, were
capable of being held criminally responsible. | 国家的责任不是刑事责任，而同样根据国际法在上个世纪的发展，能够追究国家官员的刑事责任。 |
| These distinctions should be borne in
mind when addressing the immunity of State officials, its possible
limitations and exceptions and the overall scheme of balancing legitimate
legal interests. | 在处理国家官员的豁免、可能的豁免限制和例外，以及兼顾合法的法律利益的总体方案时，应铭记上述区别。 |
| Relationship between national and
international jurisdiction | 国家管辖与国际管辖之间的关系 |
| 228. The point was made that an
appreciation of the issues canvassed in the fifth report under contemporary
principles of international law required a balancing of interests, starting
with the scheme under the Charter of the United Nations, which reflected
certain aspirations for humanity, including protection of human rights, the
pursuit of justice and respect for obligations consistent with international
law, based on certain fundamental principles, not least the sovereign
equality of States. | 228. 委员们指出，要理解第五次报告中根据当代国际法原则讨论的问题，需要从《联合国宪章》规定的制度出发，平衡兼顾各种利益；这一制度体现了人类的某些理想，包括在某些基本原则，尤其是国家主权平等原则的基础上保护人权、追求正义和尊重与国际法一致的义务。 |
| 229. On this understanding, it was argued
that protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms was not peripheral to
sovereign equality; nor was justice incompatible with the respect of
obligations arising from international law. | 229. 基于这一理解，委员们指出，保护人权和基本自由与主权平等之间不无关系，正义与尊重国际法之下的义务也并不冲突。 |
| The report as presented, as read together
with previous reports, had strived to demonstrate that the operation of the
principles were not intended to be mutually exclusive, as they complemented
each other and ought to be applied in a manner that ensured that one interest
did not adversely impact another. | 此次提出的报告与前几次报告作为一个整体，努力表明各项原则的运用不是要相互排斥，因为它们相互补充，运用原则的方法应确保一种利益不会对另一种利益产生不利影响。 |
| 230. Moreover, even though the immunity
of officials from international criminal jurisdiction was not at issue in
relation to this topic, there were legal policy considerations that required
to be taken into account, as part of the balancing of interests, including
the interest, on the one hand, of the international community as a whole in
protecting itself from the commission of international crimes, as well as
from violations of jus cogens norms and, on the other, of preserving the
integrity of the cooperation obligations between national and international
courts. | 230. 此外，即使官员的国际刑事管辖豁免不是本专题所讨论的问题，但仍有需要考虑的法律政策因素，以兼顾各种利益，其中包括一方面整个国际社会要保护自己，避免出现实施国际罪行和违反强行法规范的情况，另一方面要维护国家法院和国际法院之间合作义务的完整性。 |
| 231. A reference was also made supporting
the existence of a close relationship between the exercise of immunity before
national courts and before international courts necessitating a systemic
interpretation of the systems. | 231. 还有人提出赞成这种看法，即在国家法院行使豁免和在国际法院行使豁免之间存在密切联系，所以这些制度必须得到系统的解释。 |
| In this context a reference was made to
the system of complementarity under the Rome Statute, which should not be
impeded by the rules of immunity. | 有人就此提到《罗马规约》之下的互补制度，这一制度不应受到豁免规则的妨碍。 |
| 232. On the other hand, it was recalled
that the relationship between a State and an international criminal
jurisdiction, such as that of the International Criminal Court, was different
from the horizontal inter-State relationship implicated in the present topic. | 232. 另一方面，有人回顾指出，国家与国际刑事法院等国际刑事管辖机构之间的关系，有别于本专题涉及的横向的国家间关系。 |
| While article 27 of the Rome Statute had
established the irrelevance of official capacity under which State party
officials did not enjoy procedural immunity before the International Criminal
Court, this provision could not be cited as evidence of the existence of an
exception in a horizontal inter-State relationship, which was preserved under
article 98 of the same Statute. | 《罗马规约》第二十七条确立了官方身份的无关性，规定缔约国官员在国际刑事法院不享有程序豁免，不能引用这一规定证明在横向的国家间关系中存在同一《规约》第九十八条保留的例外。 |
| 233. Moreover, it was recalled by some
members that a treaty did not create obligations or rights for a third State
without its consent. | 233. 此外，一些委员回顾指出，未经第三国同意，条约不为其创设义务或权利。 |
| Accordingly, the inapplicability of
immunity agreed upon among States through treaties only applied to States
parties or the cases provided by the Convention, and such exceptions if they
arose in a vertical relationship with an international criminal jurisdiction
would not be appropriate to be cited as evidence of a customary rule in a horizontal
relationship among States. | 因此，各国通过条约商定的不适用豁免仅适用于各缔约国或《公约》中规定的情况，而且此种例外若出现在与国际刑事管辖机构的纵向关系中，不宜引用它来证明横向的国家间关系的习惯法规则。 |
| 234. It was nevertheless observed that
instead of disregarding the practice of international criminal tribunals as
having no impact on horizontal relations, developments needed to be
considered carefully, in the context of each case. | 234. 不过委员们指出，不应认为国际刑事法庭的实践对横向关系不具影响，从而不予重视，需要结合每个案例的具体情况仔细考虑这方面的发展。 |
| For example, in some instances the
question submitted to the domestic court was not the question of immunity
under international law but that of immunity under the domestic law. | 例如，在有些案例中，向国内法院提出的问题并不是国际法之下的豁免，而是国内法之下的豁免问题。 |
| (c) Comments on draft article 7 | (c) 关于第7条草案的评论 |
| 235. Several members supported the
proposal to identify crimes in respect of which immunity ratione materiae did
not apply. | 235. 几名委员赞同确定不适用属事豁免的罪行这一建议。 |
| In this context, some members supported
the methodological approaches pursued by the Special Rapporteur in viewing
immunity on the basis of a view of international law as a complete normative
system, in order to ensure that the regime of immunity did not produce
negative effects on, or nullify, other components of the contemporary system
of international law as a whole. | 在这方面，一些委员支持特别报告员采用的方法，在审视豁免问题时将国际法视为一种完整的规范体系，以确保豁免制度不会对整个当代国际法体系的其他组成部分产生负面影响，或使其他组成部分无效。 |
| Further, some members agreed with the
analysis of the Special Rapporteur that the attribution of ultra vires acts
of State officials to a State for the purpose of State responsibility was
different from the issue of ultra vires acts which do not entitle the
official concerned to immunity ratione materiae. | 此外，一些委员同意特别报告员所做的分析，即为国家责任之目的将国家官员的越权行为归咎于国家，有别于当事官员无权得到属事豁免的越权行为问题。 |
| 236. Moreover, the view was expressed
that the finding by the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant
case that no customary law exception for the rule according immunity from
criminal jurisdiction and inviolability to incumbent Ministers for Foreign
Affairs, where they were suspected of having committed war crimes or crimes
against humanity, ought to be construed narrowly, as the determination was
specific to immunity ratione personae. | 236. 此外，有人认为，国际法院在逮捕令案中认定，如果现任外交部长有犯下战争罪或危害人类罪的嫌疑，对于赋予他们以刑事管辖豁免和不可侵犯性的规则，习惯法中没有任何例外――对国际法院的这一结论应作狭义解释，因为这项裁定仅涉及属人豁免。 |
| 237. The observation was also made that
existing State practice showed that immunity ratione materiae was irrelevant
when a forum State exercised its legitimate territorial criminal
jurisdiction. | 237. 还有人指出，现有国家实践表明，在法院地国行使合法的领土内刑事管辖权时，属事豁免与之无关。 |
| When a crime was committed in a forum
State, it affected such a State which, therefore, had a legitimate interest
to prosecute. | 当罪行是在法院地国实施时，影响到这个国家，因此，该国有起诉的合法权益。 |
| Further, practice indicated that there
was no customary rule granting immunity to State’s
officials for all acts performed in an official capacity. | 另外，实践表明，不存在任何为国家官员以官方身份实施的一切行为赋予豁免的习惯法规则。 |
| 238. Some other members disagreed with
the Special Rapporteur’s conclusion that an exception
to immunity ratione materiae existed in respect of certain crimes, recalling,
that the former Special Rapporteur, had concluded that there was no exception
to immunity other than the situation where criminal jurisdiction was
exercised by a State in whose territory an alleged crime had taken place and
certain conditions were met. | 238. 另一些委员不同意特别报告员关于对某些罪行存在属事豁免例外的结论，他们回顾指出，前任特别报告员已经得出结论，除了由发生被指控罪行的国家行使刑事管辖权，同时又符合某些条件的情形，豁免没有例外。 |
| These members reiterated that immunity
was procedural in nature, and was not intended to resolve the substantive
question of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of particular conduct, even if a
particular act was a prohibition of a jus cogens norm. | 这些委员重申，豁免具有程序性，目的并不在于解决特定行为是合法还是非法这个实质性问题，即使特定行为是强行法规范所禁止的行为。 |
| It was recalled that the International
Court of Justice in the Jurisdictional immunities of the State case had noted
that State immunity and norms of jus cogens were different categories of
international law. | 他们回顾称，国际法院在国家的管辖豁免案中曾指出，国家豁免和强行法规范是国际法的不同范畴。 |
| Consequently, a violation of a jus cogens
norm did not entail the absence of a plea of State immunity. | 因此，违反强行法规范并不意味着不会请求国家豁免。 |
| Moreover, it was noted any
differentiation based on the severity of the offence was not tenable, as
immunity would apply equally to serious and to ordinary crimes. | 此外，他们指出，依据罪行的严重程度加以区分也不合理，因为豁免对于严重罪行和普通罪行同样适用。 |
| Given that immunity from foreign criminal
jurisdiction was preliminary in nature and decided in limine litis, it would
be odd to consider that its invocation would depend on a determination of
whether a crime was serious or had actually been committed. | 鉴于外国刑事管辖豁免具有前期性质，而且是在诉讼开始时做出决定，那么要根据一项罪行是否严重或是否真正实施过的裁定来行使豁免，这种想法有些奇怪。 |
| 239. As regards paragraph 1, some members
commended the Special Rapporteur for taking the courageous step of presenting
a proposed draft article on limitations and exceptions, which was a balanced
and unambiguous proposal, while some other members found it unconvincing. | 239. 关于第1款，一些委员称赞特别报告员采取大胆步骤，就限制和例外提出了平衡而明确的拟议条款草案，而另一些委员认为拟议案文难以令人信服。 |
| 240. Concerning paragraph 1, subparagraph
(a), some members expressed their support for the specific reference to
genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, torture and enforced
disappearances, as international crimes to which immunity did not apply. | 240. 关于第1款第(一)项，一些委员表示赞同其中专门提出种族灭绝、危害人类罪、战争罪、酷刑和强迫失踪是不适用豁免的国际罪行。 |
| The specific references to “torture” and “enforced
disappearance”, even though they formed part of
crimes against humanity, were considered useful. | 他们认为，虽然“酷刑”和“强迫失踪”也属于危害人类罪，但专门提到这两项罪行是有益的。 |
| There was also support expressed for the
inclusion of the crime of apartheid, which was mentioned in the report among
the other crimes included in the present proposal. | 还有人表示赞同加上种族隔离，报告在提到拟议案文所列其他罪行时也提到了种族隔离。 |
| 241. The reasons advanced by the Special
Rapporteur for the exclusion of the crime of aggression from the list were
found unconvincing by some members who considered that it would be remiss
were the Commission to exclude it as an exception to immunity in terms of
draft article 7. | 241. 一些委员认为，特别报告员提出的排除侵略罪的理由难以令人信服。
他们认为，如果委员会不将侵略罪纳入第7条草案的豁免例外，将是一种疏忽。 |
| These members would have preferred to
include this crime, given that States were already enacting domestic
implementing legislation upon ratification of the Kampala Amendments
criminalizing it. | 这些委员原本希望纳入这一罪行，因为各国批准制裁侵略罪的《坎帕拉修正案》时已经在颁布国内的执行法律。 |
| Moreover, the crime of aggression,
considered the most serious and dangerous form of the illegal use of force, was
committed by State officials as an act performed in an official capacity. | 此外，被视为非法使用武力最严重、最危险形式的侵略罪，是由国家官员以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| 242. Some other members, however,
supported the non-inclusion of the crime of aggression since it was closely
related to and dependent on the acts of the aggressor State, with
implications for sovereignty and immunity of States. | 242. 然而，另一些委员支持不纳入侵略罪，因为侵略罪密切关系到并取决于侵略国的行为，影响国家主权和国家豁免。 |
| It was also noted that the Kampala
amendments modifying the Rome Statute, on definition of the crime of
aggression, had not yet entered into force. | 他们还指出，对《罗马规约》中侵略罪的定义做出修订的《坎帕拉修正案》尚未生效。 |
| 243. Regarding “crimes
of corruption” referred to in paragraph 1,
subparagraph (b), while some members supported their inclusion, other members
expressed reservation as to their inclusion since this category of crimes was
of a character different from serious international crimes. | 243. 关于第1款第(二)项所指“与腐败有关的罪行”，一些委员赞同纳入这些罪行，而其他委员对此表示了保留意见，因为此类罪行的性质有别于严重的国际罪行。 |
| It was considered important in deciding
whether acts of corruption constituted exceptions to immunity, to determine
primarily whether the acts of corruption were “acts
performed in an official capacity”, and it was
doubted that such acts as such fell within the scope of immunity ratione
materiae. | 委员们认为，要决定腐败行为是否构成豁免例外，首先必须确定腐败行为是否是“以官方身份实施的行为”，人们也怀疑此种行为本身可归入属事豁免的范畴。 |
| It also was noted that there was no
practice indicating the inapplicability of immunity ratione materiae in
respect of acts of corruption. | 还有人指出，没有任何实践表明腐败行为不适用属事豁免。 |
| 244. Some reservations were expressed
regarding crimes referred to in subparagraph (c), and some members considered
the term “territorial tort exception” not to be entirely felicitous for situations involving criminal
jurisdiction. | 244. 关于第(三)项所指罪行，委员们表达了一些保留意见。 一些委员认为，“领土内侵权例外”一词并不完全切合涉及刑事管辖的情况。 |
| Although it was relevant in respect of
the jurisdictional immunities of the State, there was limited State practice
to warrant its inclusion with respect to the immunity of State officials from
foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 尽管它与国家管辖豁免相关，但这方面的国家实践有限，不足以支持将其纳入国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| The point was also made that the
subparagraph was couched in absolute terms, which risked encompassing all
kinds of activities carried out by State officials in the forum State,
including conceivably acts of military forces of the State. | 委员们还指出，这一项的措辞有些绝对，有可能涵盖国家官员在法院地国实施的所有类型的行为，可以想象也有可能包括国家军队的行动。 |
| Nevertheless, some members expressed the
view that it was interesting to consider this proposal. | 然而，一些委员认为这项建议颇值得考虑。 |
| Other members only accepted the more
limited exception identified by the former Special Rapporteur in his second
report. | 另一些委员只接受前任特别报告员在第二次报告中确定的更有限的例外。 |
| 245. Several members expressed support
for the formulation of paragraph 2, viewing it as setting out an
uncontroversial proposition and reflecting State practice. | 245. 几名委员表示赞同第2款的表述方式，认为它提出了不可争议的主张，而且反映了国家实践。 |
| However, some reservation was expressed
as it was perceived to be an “exception to
limitations and exceptions” in paragraph 2, and its
deletion was sought. | 然而，委员们提出了一些保留意见，认为第2款中是“限制和例外的例外”，要求将其删除。 |
| It was suggested that any formulation
should be in line with article 27 of the Rome Statute, and that a clear link
should be established between draft article 7 and draft articles 4 and 6
already provisionally adopted. | 委员们建议，任何表述均应符合《罗马规约》第二十七条，还应该在第7条草案和已经暂时通过的第4条和第6条草案之间建立明确的联系。 |
| An additional suggestion was made to
revisit the limitation in draft article 4 on scope of immunity ratione
personae provisionally adopted by the Commission. | 另外提出的一条建议是重新考虑委员会暂时通过的关于属人豁免的范围的第4条草案中的限制。 |
| 246. Some members considered the “without prejudice” clause reflecting a
duty to cooperate arising from other regimes in paragraph 3 acceptable. | 246. 一些委员认为，第3款中的“不妨碍”条款反映了其他制度产生的合作义务，可以接受。 |
| (d) Future work | (d) 今后的工作 |
| 247. As regards future work, the link
between limitations and exceptions and the procedural aspects of immunity was
emphasized. | 247. 关于今后的工作，委员们强调了限制和例外与豁免的程序问题之间的联系。 |
| In this connection, several members
underlined the importance, for next year, of procedural guarantees to take
into account the need to avoid proceedings which were politically motivated
or an illegitimate exercise of jurisdiction. | 几名委员就此强调，明年在讨论程序性保障时必须考虑到，需要避免出现因政治动机提起诉讼或非法行使管辖权的情况。 |
| 248. The debate on the fifth report will
be continued and completed at the next session of the Commission in 2017. | 248. 委员会将在2017年下一届会议上继续并完成关于第五次报告的辩论。 |
| 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 |
| 249. The text of the draft articles
provisionally adopted so far by the Commission is reproduced below. | 249. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的条款草案案文载录于下。 |
| Immunity of State officials from foreign
criminal jurisdiction | 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免 |
| Part One | 第一部分 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| Article 1 | 第1条 |
| Scope of the present draft articles | 本条款草案的范围 |
| 1. The present draft articles apply to
the immunity of State officials from the criminal jurisdiction of another
State. | 1. 本条款草案适用于国家官员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。 |
| Article 2 | 第2条 |
| Definitions | 定义 |
| For the purposes of the present draft
articles: | 为本条款草案的目的： |
| (e) “State
official” means any individual who represents the
State or who exercises State functions; | (e) “国家官员”是指代表国家或行使国家职能的任何个人； |
| (f) an “act
performed in an official capacity” means any act
performed by a State official in the exercise of State authority; | (f) “以官方身份实施的行为”指国家官员在行使国家权力时实施的任何行为； |
| Part Two | 第二部分 |
| Immunity ratione personae | 属人豁免 |
| Article 3 | 第3条 |
| Persons enjoying immunity ratione
personae | 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 | 第4条 |
| Scope of immunity ratione personae | 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期间或任职之前的所有行为，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。 |
| Part Three | 第三部分 |
| Immunity ratione materiae | 属事豁免 |
| Article 5 | 第5条 |
| Persons enjoying immunity ratione materiae | 享有属事豁免的人员 |
| State officials acting as such enjoy
immunity ratione materiae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 国家官员在以此种身份行事时，对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属事豁免。 |
| Article 6 | 第6条 |
| Scope of immunity ratione materiae | 属事豁免的范围 |
| 1. State officials enjoy immunity ratione
materiae only with respect to acts performed in an official capacity. | 1. 国家官员只有在以官方身份实施的行为方面享有属事豁免。 |
| 2. Immunity ratione materiae with respect
to acts performed in an official capacity continues to subsist after the
individuals concerned have ceased to be State officials. | 2. 对以官方身份实施的行为的属事豁免在所涉个人不再担任国家官员后继续存在。 |
| 3. Individuals who enjoyed immunity
ratione personae in accordance with draft article 4, whose term of office has
come to an end, continue to enjoy immunity with respect to acts performed in
an official capacity during such term of office. | 3. 根据第4条草案享有属事豁免的个人在任期届满后继续就任期之内以官方身份实施的行为享有豁免。 |
| 2. Text of the draft articles and
commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its
sixty-eighth session | 2. 委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的条款草案案文及其评注 |
| 250. The text of the draft articles, and
commentaries thereto, provisionally adopted by the Commission at its
sixty-eighth session, is reproduced below. | 250. 委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的条款草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Immunity of State officials from foreign
criminal jurisdiction | 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免 |
| Article 2 | 第2条 |
| Definitions | 定义 |
| For the purposes of the present draft
articles: | 为本条款草案的目的： |
| (f) An “act
performed in an official capacity” means any act
performed by a State official in the exercise of State authority. | (f)“以官方身份实施的行为”指国家官员在行使国家权力时实施的任何行为。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 2 (f) defines the
concept of an “act performed in an official capacity” for the purposes of the present draft articles. | (1) 第2条草案(f)项为本条款草案的目的界定“以官方身份实施的行为”这一概念。 |
| Despite the doubts expressed by some
members as to whether this provision was necessary, the Commission thought it
would be useful to include the definition in the draft articles given the
centrality of the concept of an “act performed in an
official capacity” in the regime of immunity ratione
materiae. | 虽然一些委员对是否需要这一条款表示怀疑，但委员会认为，因为“以官方身份实施的行为”这一概念是属事豁免机制的核心，所以应当在条款草案中纳入其定义。 |
| (2) The Commission has included in the
definition contained in draft article 2 (f) the elements that make it
possible to identify a particular act as being an “act
performed in an official capacity” for the purposes
of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | (2) 委员会在第2条草案(f)项所载定义中包括了一些要素，以便能够出于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的目的，确定某项特定行为是“以官方身份实施的行为”。 |
| In so doing, it has essentially followed
the Commission’s previous work on the topic. | 与此同时，委员会主要与以往就此专题开展的工作保持一致。 |
| For example, the term “act” is used in the definition as it was
in draft articles 4 and 6. | 例如，定义中“行为”一词的用法与第4条和第6条草案一致。 |
| As noted at the time, the term was
previously used by the Commission to refer to both actions and omissions, and
it is also the term generally used to refer to the conduct of individuals in
the context of international criminal law. | 正如当时所指出的，这个词曾被委员会用于表示行为和不作为，在国际刑法背景下，该词也被用于泛指个人的行为。 |
| (3) The Commission has used the
expression “in the exercise of State authority” to reflect the need for a link between the act and the State. | (3) 委员会使用了“行使国家权力”的表述，以便体现出在行为和国家之间建立联系的需要。 |
| In other words, the aim is to highlight
that it is not sufficient for a State official to perform an act in order for
it automatically to be considered an “act performed
in an official capacity”. | 换句话说，该做法旨在强调，并非由国家官员实施的行为就足以被自动视为“以官方身份实施的行为”。 |
| On the contrary, there must also be a
direct connection between the act and the exercise of State functions and
powers, since it is this connection that justifies the recognition of
immunity in order to protect the principle of sovereign equality of States. | 在该行为和行使国家职能与权力之间还必须存在直接联系，因为这种联系是承认豁免的合理基础，以便保护国家主权平等原则。 |
| (4) In this regard, the Commission
believes that, in order for an act to be characterized as an “act performed in an official capacity”, it
must first be attributable to the State. | (4) 在这方面，委员会认为，为了确定一项行为具备“以官方身份实施的行为”的特征，该行为首先应归于国家。 |
| However, this does not necessarily mean
that only the State can be held responsible for the act. | 但是，这不一定意味着只有国家可对此行为负责。 |
| The attribution of the act to the State
is a prerequisite for an act to be characterized as having been performed in
an official capacity, but does not prevent the act from also being attributed
to the individual, in accordance with the “single
act, dual responsibility” model (double attribution)
that the Commission already applied in its 1996 draft Code of Crimes against
the Peace and Security of Mankind (article 4), the articles on responsibility
of States for internationally wrongful acts (article 58) and the articles on
the responsibility of international organizations (article 66). | 根据委员会在1996年“危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案”(第4条)、“关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款”(第58条)以及“关于国际组织的责任条款”(第66条)中使用的“单一行为，双重责任”模式(双重归属)，将行为归于国家是确定一项行为具备“以官方身份实施的行为”的特征的先决条件，但这并不妨碍该行为也可归于个人。
根据上述模式，一项单独的行为可能同时涉及国家责任和行为人的个人责任，特别是在刑事事件中。 |
| Under the model, a single act can engage
both the responsibility of the State and the individual responsibility of the
author, especially in criminal matters. | (5) 出于将一项行为归于国家的目的，作为出发点，有必要考虑委员会在第五十三届会议上通过的关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款所载规则。 |
| (5) For the purpose of attributing an act
to a State, it is necessary to consider, as a point of departure, the rules
included in the articles on responsibility of States for internationally
wrongful acts adopted by the Commission at its fifty-third session.
Nonetheless, it must be borne in mind that the Commission established those
rules in the context and for the purposes of State responsibility. | 然而，必须铭记，委员会是在国家责任范围内并为国家责任之目的而确立了这些规则，其最终目标是为了对尽可能广泛的责任情况作出规定，以确保仅仅援引没有直接联系的第三方行为的国家无法因此以欺诈方式逃避自身责任。 |
| Consequently, the application of the
rules to the process of attributing an act of an official to a State in the
context of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction
should be examined carefully. | 因此，对在国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免背景下将某行为归于国家官员的进程适用这些规则时应进行仔细审查。 |
| For the purposes of immunity, the
criteria for attribution set out in articles 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the
articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts do not
seem generally applicable. | 出于豁免目的，关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款中第7、8、9、10和第11条规定的责任标准似乎并不普遍适用。 |
| In particular, the Commission is of the
view that, as a rule, acts performed by an official purely for their own
benefit and in their own interest cannot be considered as acts performed in
an official capacity, even though they may appear to have been performed
officially. | 具体而言，委员会认为，作为一项规则，官员纯粹为了自己的好处和利益实施的行为不能被视为以官方身份实施的行为，即便这些行为也许看起来是以正式身份实施的。 |
| In such cases, it is not possible to
identify any self-interest on the part of the State, and the recognition of
immunity, whose ultimate objective is to protect the principle of the
sovereign equality of States, is not justified. | 在这种情况下，国家不可能发现任何自身利益，承认豁免没有合理理由，因为承认豁免的最终目标是为了保护国家主权平等原则。 |
| It does not mean, however, that an
unlawful act as such cannot benefit from immunity ratione materiae. | 但这并不意味着非法行为不能享有属事豁免。 |
| Several courts have concluded that
unlawful acts are not exempt from immunity simply because they are unlawful,
even in cases when the act is contrary to international law. | 若干法院认为，非法行为不受豁免，仅仅是因为这种行为是非法的，甚至在所涉行为违反国际法的案件中也是如此。 |
| The question whether or not acts ultra
vires can be considered as official acts for the purpose of immunity from
foreign criminal jurisdiction will be addressed at a later stage, together
with the limitations and exceptions to immunity. | 越权行为能否为了外国刑事管辖豁免目的被视为官方行为，这一问题稍后将与豁免的限制和例外一起讨论。 |
| (6) In order for an act to be
characterized as having been “performed in an
official capacity”, there must be a special
connection between the act and the State. | (6) 为了确定一项行为具备“以官方身份实施的行为”的特征，在行为和国家之间就必须有一种特殊联系。 |
| Such a link has been defined in draft
article 2 (f) using the formulation “State authority”, which the Commission considered sufficiently broad to refer
generally to acts performed by State officials in the exercise of their
functions and in the interests of the State, and is to be understood as
covering the functions set out in draft article 2 (e), which refers to any
individual who “represents the State or who exercises
State functions”. | 第2条草案(f)项使用“国家权力”的措辞对这一联系作了界定，委员会认为该措辞足够宽泛，可泛指国家官员为行使其职能和从国家利益出发实施的行为，因此可将其理解为包含了第2条草案(e)项中规定的职能，其中提及“代表国家或行使国家职能”的任何个人。 |
| (7) This formulation was considered
preferable to the one initially proposed (“exercising
elements of the governmental authority”) and to
others that were successively considered by the Commission, in particular “governmental authority” and “sovereign authority”. | (7) 与开始提出的措辞(“行使政府权力要素”)以及委员会后来讨论的另一些措辞，特别是与“政府权力”和“主权权力”相比，上述措辞被认为更加可取。 |
| Although they all equally reflect the
requirement that there must be a special connection between the act and the
State, there is the difficulty that they may be interpreted as referring
exclusively to a type of State activity (governmental or executive), or give
rise to the added problem of having to define the elements of governmental
authority or sovereignty, which would be extremely difficult and is not
considered part of the Commission’s mandate. | 虽然所有这些措辞都同样体现出在行为和国家之间必须存在一种特殊联系的要求，但存在一个问题，即它们可能被解释为特指某一种国家活动(政府或行政活动)，或导致必须对政府权力要素或主权进行界定的问题，该工作的难度极大，而且不被视为委员会任务的组成部分。 |
| In addition, it was considered preferable
not to use the expression “State functions”, which is used in draft article 2 (e), in order to make a clear
distinction between the definitions contained in paragraphs (e) and (f) of
the draft article. | 此外，为了明确区分第2条草案(e)项和(f)项提出的定义，不使用(e)项中使用的“国家职能”这一表述被认为更加适当。 |
| In this regard, it should be recalled
that the expression “State functions”, together with representation of the State, was used in draft
article 2 (e) as a neutral term to define the link between the official and
the State, without making any judgment as to the type of acts covered by immunity. | 在这方面，应当回顾，第2条草案(e)项将“国家职能”的表述及“代表国家”作为一个中性词，用于界定官员和国家之间的联系，但没有对豁免包括的行为种类作任何判断。 |
| The use of the term “authority” rather than “functions” also has the advantage of
avoiding the debate on whether or not international crimes are “State functions”. | 使用“权力”而非“职能”一词，还有利于避免有关国际犯罪是否是“国家职能”的辩论。 |
| However, one member was of the view that
it would have been more appropriate to use the expression “State functions”. | 但是，有一名委员认为，使用“国家职能”的表述更为贴切。 |
| (8) The Commission did not consider it
appropriate to include in the definition of an “act
performed in an official capacity” a reference to the
fact that the act must be criminal in nature. | (8) 委员会认为，在“以官方身份实施的行为”的定义中纳入所涉行为必须具有刑事性质是不适当的。 |
| In so doing, the aim was to avoid a
possible interpretation that any act performed in an official capacity is, by
definition, of a criminal nature. | 这样做意在避免可能在定义上将以官方身份实施的任何行为视为刑事行为的解释。 |
| In any case, the concept of an “act performed in an official capacity”
must be understood in the context of the present draft articles, which is
devoted to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction. | 无论如何，“以官方身份实施的行为”的概念必须结合专门讨论国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的本条款草案来理解。 |
| (9) Lastly, although the definition
contained in draft article 2 (f) concerns an “act
performed in an official capacity”, the Commission
considered it necessary to include in the definition an explicit reference to
the author of the act, in other words, the State official. | (9) 最后，虽然第2条草案(f)项所载定义指的是一项“以官方身份实施的行为”，但委员会认为，有必要在定义中明确提及行为人，换句话说，即国家官员。 |
| It thereby draws attention to the fact
that only a State official can perform an act in an official capacity, thus
reflecting the need for a link between the author of the act and the State. | 这一点提请注意一个事实，即只有国家官员能够以官方身份实施一项行为，进而体现出在行为人和国家之间建立联系的需要。 |
| In addition, the reference to the State
official creates a logical continuity with the definition of “State official” in draft article 2 (e). | 此外，提及国家官员是对第2条草案(e)项中“国家官员”定义的逻辑延续。 |
| (10) The Commission does not believe that
it is possible to draw up an exhaustive list of acts performed in an official
capacity. | (10) 委员会认为，列出一份以官方身份实施的行为的详尽无遗的清单是不可能的。 |
| Such acts must be identified on a
case-by-case basis, taking into account the criteria examined previously,
namely that the act in question has been performed by a State official, is
generally attributable to the State and has been performed in “the exercise of State authority”. | 这类行为只能一件一件确定，考虑以往经过审查的标准，即所涉行为是由一名国家官员实施、基本上可归于国家，而且是在“行使国家权力”时实施的。 |
| However, there are examples from judicial
practice of acts or categories of acts that may be considered as having been performed
in an official capacity, regardless of how the courts specifically refer to
them. | 但是，不论法院对行为的具体称谓如何，司法惯例中存在一些可能被视为以官方身份实施的行为或行为类别。 |
| Such examples can help judges and other
national legal practitioners to identify whether a particular act falls into
the category. | 这些实例可帮助法官和其他的国家法律从业者确定某项具体行为是否属于这一类别。 |
| (11) In general, national courts have
found that the following acts fall into the category of acts performed in an
official capacity: military activities or those related to the armed forces,
acts related to the exercise of police power, diplomatic activities and those
relating to foreign affairs, legislative acts (including nationalization),
acts related to the administration of justice, administrative acts of
different kinds (such as the expulsion of aliens or the flagging of vessels),
acts related to public loans and political acts of various kinds. | (11) 总体而言，国家法院认为以下行为属于以官方身份实施的行为类别：军事活动或与武装部队相关的活动、与行使政治权力相关的行为、外交活动和与外交事务相关的活动、立法行为(包括国有化)、与司法相关的行为、不同种类的行政行为(如驱逐外国人或舰船悬旗)、与公债相关的行为，以及不同种类的政治行为。 |
| (12) Moreover, the immunity of State
officials has been invoked before criminal courts in relation to the
following acts that were claimed to be committed in an official capacity:
torture, extermination, genocide, extrajudicial executions, enforced
disappearances, forced pregnancy, deportation, denial of prisoner-of-war
status, enslavement and forced labour, and acts of terrorism. | (12) 此外，已要求刑事法院对据称以官方身份实施的以下行为给予豁免：酷刑、灭绝、灭绝种族、法外处决、强迫失踪、强迫怀孕、驱逐、剥夺战俘地位、奴役和强迫劳动，以及恐怖主义行为。 |
| Such crimes are sometimes mentioned eo
nomine, while in other cases the proceedings refer generically to crimes
against humanity, war crimes, and serious and systematic human rights
violations. | 有时提及这些罪行时采用具体罪名，而在其他案件中则笼统地提及危害人类罪、战争罪以及系统性地严重侵犯人权行为。 |
| Second, the courts have considered other
acts committed by members of the armed forces or security services that do
not fall into the aforementioned categories; such acts include ill-treatment,
abuse, illegal detention, abduction, offences against the administration of
justice and other acts relating to policing and law enforcement. | 其次，法院也审理由武装部队或安全机构成员实施、不属于上述类别的其他行为，包括虐待、滥用权力、非法拘留、绑架、无视司法的行为以及与警务和执法有关的其他行为。 |
| (13) In a number of cases, a contrario
sensu, national courts have concluded that the act in question exceeded the
limits of official functions, or functions of the State, and was therefore
not considered an act performed in an official capacity. | (13) 在一些案件中情况相反，国家法院认为，所涉行为超越了公务职能或国家职能的界限，因此不被视为以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| For example, courts have concluded that
the assassination of a political opponent or acts linked to drug trafficking
do not constitute official acts. | 例如，法院认为，谋杀政治对手或与贩毒有关的行为不构成官方行为。 |
| Similarly, national courts have generally
denied immunity in cases linked to corruption, whether in the form of
diversion or misappropriation of public funds or money-laundering, or any
other type of corruption, on the grounds that such acts “are distinguishable from the performance of State functions
protected by international custom in accordance with the principles of
sovereignty and diplomatic immunity” and “by their nature, do not relate to the exercise of sovereignty or
governmental authority, nor are they in the public interest”. | 同样，在与腐败有关的案件中，无论是转用或挪用公款、洗钱还是任何其他类型的腐败行为，国家法院一般都拒绝给予豁免权，理由是这类行为“有别于按照主权原则和外交豁免原则受到国际惯例保护的履行国家职能的行为”，而且“性质上与行使主权和政府权力无关，也不符合公共利益。” |
| Following the same logic, courts have not
accepted that acts performed by State officials that are closely linked to a
private activity and for the official’s personal
enrichment, not the benefit of the sovereign, are covered by immunity. | 根据同样的逻辑，法院认为不可接受的是，国家官员从事的与私人活动密切联系、谋求官员个人致富而非主权利益的行为可以得到豁免。 |
| The factual reminder of those various
examples is without prejudice to the position that the Commission may take on
the subject of exceptions to immunities. | 这些例子所提醒注意的事实并不影响委员会可能就豁免的例外问题采取的立场。 |
| (14) With regard to the examples of
possible acts performed in an official capacity, special mention should be
made of the way in which national courts have dealt with international
crimes, especially torture. | (14) 关于可能以官方身份实施的行为的实例，应特别提及国家法院处理国际犯罪，特别是处理酷刑的方式。 |
| While in some cases they have been
considered acts performed in an official capacity (although illegal or
aberrations), in others they have been qualified as ultra vires acts or acts
that are not consistent with the nature of State functions, and should
therefore be excluded from the category of acts defined in this paragraph. | 虽然在有些案件中这类行为被视为以官方身份实施的行为(但其实是非法和异常的行为)，但在另一些案件中，它们被归类为越权行为或不符合国家职能性质的行为，因此应排除在本项界定的行为类别以外。 |
| Moreover, attention should be drawn to
the fact that such different treatment of international crimes has arisen
both in cases in which national courts have recognized immunity and in those
in which they have rejected it. | 此外，应提请注意一个事实：这种对国际犯罪的不同处理方式既出现在国家法院承认豁免、也发生在国家法院拒绝豁免的案件中。 |
| (15) In any case, it should be borne in
mind that the definition of an “act performed in an
official capacity” set out draft article 2 (f) refers
to the distinct elements of this category of acts and is without prejudice to
the question of limits and exceptions to immunity that will be addressed
elsewhere in the draft articles. | (15) 无论如何，应当牢记，第2条草案(f)项中规定的“以官方身份实施的行为”的定义指的是这种行为类别的独特要素，这并不妨碍将在条款草案其他地方处理的对豁免的限制和例外问题。 |
| Article 6 | 第6条 |
| Scope of immunity ratione materiae | 属事豁免的范围 |
| 1. State officials enjoy immunity ratione
materiae only with respect to acts performed in an official capacity. | 1. 国家官员只有在以官方身份实施的行为方面享有属事豁免。 |
| 2. Immunity ratione materiae with respect
to acts performed in an official capacity continues to subsist after the
individuals concerned have ceased to be State officials. | 2. 对以官方身份实施的行为的属事豁免在所涉个人不再担任国家官员后继续存在。 |
| 3. Individuals who enjoyed immunity
ratione personae in accordance with draft article 4, whose term of office has
come to an end, continue to enjoy immunity with respect to acts performed in
an official capacity during such term of office. | 3. 根据第4条草案享有属事豁免的个人任期届满后，继续就任期之内以官方身份实施的行为享有豁免。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft article 6 is intended to define
the scope of immunity ratione materiae, which covers the material and
temporal elements of this category of immunity of State officials from
foreign criminal jurisdiction. | (1) 第6条草案旨在界定属事豁免的范围，其中包括这一类国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的实质要素和时间要素。 |
| Draft article 6 complements draft article
5, which refers to the beneficiaries of immunity ratione materiae. | 第6条草案对第5条草案形成补充，后者涉及属事豁免的受益人。 |
| Both draft articles determine the general
regime applicable to this category of immunity. | 这两条草案确定了适用于这一类豁免的一般制度。 |
| (2) Draft article 6 has a parallel
content to that used by the Commission for draft article 4 on the scope of
immunity ratione personae. | (2) 第6条草案的内容与委员会拟订的关于属人豁免范围的第4条草案的内容相类似。 |
| In draft article 6, the order of the
first two paragraphs has been changed, with the reference to the material
element appearing first (acts covered by immunity) and the reference to the
temporal element (duration of immunity) afterwards. | 在第6条草案中，改变了前两款的顺序，首先提及实质要素(豁免所包括的行为)，随后才提到时间要素(豁免的时限)。 |
| In so doing, the intent is to place
emphasis on the material element and on the functional dimension of immunity
ratione materiae, thus reflecting that acts performed in an official capacity
are central to this category of immunity. | 这样做是为了突出属事豁免的实质要素和职能层面，从而反映出以官方身份实施的行为对这一类豁免具有核心意义。 |
| Even so, it should be borne in mind that
the scope of such immunity must be understood by looking at the material
aspect (paragraph 1) in conjunction with the temporal aspect (paragraph 2). | 尽管如此，应当铭记，要理解这类豁免的范围，必须将实质要素(第1款)和时间要素(第2款)结合起来看。 |
| Furthermore, draft article 6 contains a
paragraph on the relationship between immunity ratione materiae and immunity
ratione personae, in similar fashion to draft article 4, which it
complements. | 此外，第6条草案还包括关于属事豁免和属人豁免之间的关系的一款，这与第4条草案类似。 第6条草案对第4条草案形成补充。 |
| (3) The purpose of paragraph 1 is to
indicate that immunity ratione materiae applies exclusively to acts performed
in an official capacity, as the concept was defined in draft article 2 (f). | (3) 第1款的目的是指出，正如第2条草案(f)项所规定的那样， 属事豁免仅适用于以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| Consequently, acts performed in a private
capacity are excluded from this category of immunity, unlike immunity ratione
personae, which applies to both categories of acts. | 因此，这类豁免不包括以私人身份实施的行为，这有别于属人豁免，因为属人豁免对这两类行为均适用。 |
| (4) Although the purpose of paragraph 1
is to emphasize the material element of immunity ratione materiae, the
Commission decided to include a reference to State officials to highlight the
fact that only such officials may perform one of the acts covered by immunity
under the draft articles. | (4) 尽管这一款的目的是突出属事豁免的实质要素，但委员会决定在其中提及国家官员，以便强调只有这些官员能够实施本条款草案下的豁免所包括的行为。 |
| This makes clear the need for the two
elements (subjective and material) to be present in order for immunity to be
applied. | 这就明确表明，必须同时满足两个要素(主体要素和实质要素)，方可适用豁免。 |
| It was not considered necessary, however,
to make reference to the requirement that the officials be “acting as such”, since the status of the
official does not affect the nature of the act, but rather the subjective
element of immunity and was already provided for in draft article 5. | 不过，委员会认为没有必要提及这些官员须“以此种身份行事”，因为官员的身份不影响此类行为的性质，而影响此类豁免的主体要素，并且第5条草案 已经涵括了这一点。 |
| Nevertheless, these provisions were
provisionally adopted on the understanding that it might be necessary, at a
later date, to formulate more clearly draft article 5, which uses the
expression “acting as such”,
as well as draft article 6, paragraph 1, which does not use it. | 然而，这一规定获得暂时通过时达成的理解是，今后某个阶段可能有必要更清晰地表述第5条草案和第6条草案第1款，前者使用了“以此种身份行事”的说法，而后者则没有。 |
| (5) The material scope of immunity
ratione materiae as set out in draft article 6, paragraph 1 does not prejudge
the question of exceptions to immunity, which will be dealt with elsewhere in
the present draft articles. | (5) 第6条草案第1款所规定的属事豁免的实质范围不预先判断适用于豁免的例外情况问题。 这一问题将在本条款草案的其他部分加以处理。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 refers to the temporal
element of immunity ratione materiae, by placing emphasis on the permanent
character of such immunity, which continues to produce effects even when the
official who has performed an act in an official capacity has ceased to be an
official. | (6) 第2款涉及属事豁免的时间要素，重点强调了时间要素的永久性，并不会因为以官方身份实施某一行为的官员不再担任官员而失效。 |
| Such characterization of immunity ratione
materiae as permanent derives from the fact that its recognition is based on
the nature of the act performed by the official, which remains unchanged
regardless of the position held by the author of the act. | 属事豁免的永久性特征源于这样一个事实，即承认属事豁免是因为官员实施的行为的性质，这种性质并不会随着实施上述行为者所担任的职务而改变。 |
| Thus, although it is necessary for the
act to be performed by a State official acting as such, its official nature
does not subsequently disappear. | 因此，虽然只有当国家官员以此种身份实施行为时方可称得上“官方”，但其官方性质并不会随后消失。 |
| Consequently, for the purposes of
immunity ratione materiae it is irrelevant whether the official who invokes
immunity holds such a position when immunity is claimed, or, conversely, has
ceased to be a State official. | 因此，援引属事豁免的官员在提出豁免要求时是担任此种职务，抑或相反已经不再担任国家官员，对于属事豁免而言是不相关的。 |
| In both cases, the act performed in an
official capacity will continue to be such an act and the State official who
performed the act may equally enjoy immunity whether or not he or she
continues to be an official. | 在这两种情况下，以官方身份实施的行为将依然是以官方身份实施的行为，无论实施这种行为的国家官员是否继续担任国家官员，均可援引属事豁免。 |
| The permanent character of immunity
ratione materiae has already been recognized by the Commission in its work on
diplomatic relations, has not been challenged in practice and is generally
accepted in the literature. | 属事豁免的永久性此前已在关于外交关系的工作中得到委员会承认， 在实践中未遭质疑，在文献中广为接受。 |
| (7) The Commission chose to define the
temporal element of immunity ratione materiae by stating that such immunity “continues to subsist after the individuals concerned have ceased
to be State officials”, following the model used in
the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the 1946 Convention on
the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. | (7) 委员会选择界定属事豁免的时间要素，申明“属事豁免在所涉个人不再担任国家官员后继续存在”，沿袭了1961年《维也纳外交关系公约》 和1946年《联合国特权和豁免公约》
所采用的模式。 |
| The expressions “continues
to subsist” and “have ceased
to be State officials” are drawn from those treaties. | “继续存在”和“不再担任国家官员”的说法源自这两项条约。 |
| Furthermore, the Commission used the term
“individuals” to reflect the
definition of “State official” in draft article 2 (e). | 此外，委员会使用了“所涉个人”这一术语，以反映第2条草案(e)项中“国家官员”的定义。 |
| (8) Lastly, it should be noted that
although paragraph 2 deals with the temporal element of immunity, the
Commission considered it appropriate to include an explicit reference to acts
performed in an official capacity, bearing in mind that such acts are central
to the issue of immunity ratione materiae and in order to avoid a broad
interpretation of the permanent character of this category of immunity which
could be argued to apply to other acts. | (8) 最后，应当指出，尽管第2款涉及豁免的时间要素，但委员会认为，宜在其中明确提及以官方身份实施的行为，同时铭记这些行为对于属事豁免问题具有核心意义，也是为了避免对这类豁免的永久性做出宽泛的解释，有人可能辩称它也适用于其他行为。 |
| (9) The purpose of paragraph 3 is to
define the model of the relationship that exists between immunity ratione
materiae and immunity ratione personae, on the basis that they are two
distinct categories. | (9) 第3款旨在界定属事豁免和属人豁免之间存在的关系的模式，其依据是它们是两类截然不同的豁免。 |
| As a result, draft article 6, paragraph
3, is closely related to draft article 4, paragraph 3, which also deals with
that relationship, albeit in the form of a “without
prejudice” clause. | 因此，第6条草案第3款与第4条草案第3款有着密切的联系。 后者也涉及二者之间的关系，不过仅仅以“不妨碍”条款的形式作了规定。 |
| (10) Pursuant to draft article 4,
paragraph 1, immunity ratione personae has a temporal aspect, since the
Commission considered 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”. | (10) 根据第4条草案第1款，属人豁免具有临时性，因为委员会认为，“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。” |
| However, such “cessation
… is without prejudice to the application of the
rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae …” (draft article 4, paragraph 3). | 不过，“[…]停止不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用”(第4条草案第3款)。 |
| As the Commission stated in the commentary
to the paragraph “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”. | 正如委员会在本款评注中所指出的那样，“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官方身份做出一些行为，这些行为不因任期结束而失去其官方性质，因此可能属于属事豁免的范围。” |
| The Commission also stated: “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. | 委员会还指出，“这并不意味着属人豁免延续到享有豁免者任期结束后，因为那样不符合该条草案第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官方身份实施的行为适用属事豁免。” |
| (11) This is precisely the situation
referred to in paragraph 3 of draft article 6. | (11) 这正是第6条草案第3款所述的情况。 |
| The paragraph proceeds on the basis that,
during their term of office, Heads of State, Heads of Government and
Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy broad immunity known as immunity ratione
personae which, in practical terms, includes the same effects as immunity
ratione materiae. | 本款的依据是，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长在任期内享有广泛的豁免，通称“属人豁免”，实际上，这和属事豁免的效力相同。 |
| It does not prevent the State officials,
after their term in office has ended, from enjoying immunity ratione
materiae, stricto sensu. | 这并不妨碍国家官员在结束任期之后享有严格意义上的属事豁免。 |
| This reflects the understanding of the
Commission in the commentary to draft article 5, in which it states: “Even though the Commission considers that the Head of State, Head
of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione
materiae stricto sensu only once they have left office, there is no need to
mention this in draft article 5. | 第5条草案评注中也是这样理解的。 该评注确认：“尽管委员会认为国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长只在离任后才享有严格意义上的属事豁免，但没有必要在第5条草案中提到这一点。 |
| The matter will be covered more fully in
a future draft article on the substantive and temporal scope of immunity
ratione materiae, to be modelled on draft article 4.” | 将在今后一条关于属事豁免实质范围和时间范围的草案中对这一问题予以更广泛的讨论，该条草案将仿照第4条草案拟订。” |
| (12) To this end the requirements for
immunity ratione materiae will need to be fulfilled, namely: that the act was
performed by a State official acting as such (Head of State, Head of
Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs in this specific case), in an
official capacity and during their term of office. | (12) 为此，需要满足属事豁免的标准，亦即：行为由国家官员(在这一具体情况下，包括国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长)以此种官方身份在其任期内实施。 |
| The purpose of draft article 6, paragraph
3, is precisely to state that immunity ratione materiae is applicable in such
situations. | 第6条草案第3款的目标恰恰是，申明属事豁免适用于这种情况。 |
| The paragraph therefore complements draft
article 4, paragraph 3, which the Commission said “does
not prejudge the content of the immunity ratione materiae regime, which will
be developed in Part III of the draft articles”. | 因此，本款对第4条草案第3款形成补充。
委员会曾表示，“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”。 |
| (13) However, regarding the situation
described in draft article 6, paragraph 3, some members of the Commission
considered that, during their term of office, Heads of State, Heads of
Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy both immunity ratione
personae and immunity ratione materiae. | (13) 不过，关于第6条草案第3款涉及的情况，一些委员认为，在任期间，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长同时享有属人豁免和属事豁免。 |
| Other members of the Commission
emphasized that, for the purposes of these draft articles, immunity ratione
personae is general and broader in scope and encompasses immunity ratione
materiae, since it applies to both private and official acts. | 相反，其他委员则认为，为本条款草案的目的，属人豁免具有普遍性、范围更广，包括属事豁免，因为属人豁免既适用于以私人身份实施的行为，也适用于以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| For these members, such officials enjoy
only immunity ratione personae during their term of office, and only after
their term of office has come to an end will they enjoy immunity ratione
materiae, as provided for draft article 4 and reflected in the commentaries
to draft articles 4 and 5. | 这些委员认为，正如第4条草案所规定以及第4条和第5条草案评注所体现的那样，这类官员在任职期间仅享有属人豁免，任期结束后将享有属事豁免。 |
| While favouring one or other option might
have consequences before the national courts of certain States (in particular
with regard to the conditions for invoking immunity before these tribunals),
such consequences would not extend to all national legal systems. | 尽管倾向于一种或另一种选择可能对某些国家的国内法院造成后果(尤其是在向这些法院援引豁免的条件方面)，但此类后果不会扩大到所有国家法律体系之中。 |
| During the debate, some members of the
Commission expressed the view that it was not necessary to include paragraph
3 in draft article 6, and that it was sufficient to refer to the matter in
the commentaries thereto. | 辩论期间，一些委员表示认为，无需在第6条草案中加入第3款，只需在该条草案评注中提及这一问题即可。 |
| (14) Although the Commission took account
of this interesting debate, which mainly concerned theoretical and
terminological issues, it decided to retain draft article 6, paragraph 3,
particularly in view of the practical importance of the paragraph, whose
purpose is to clarify, in operational terms, the regime applicable to
individuals who enjoyed immunity ratione personae, after their term of office
has ended (Head of State, Head of Government and Minister of Foreign
Affairs). | (14) 委员会考虑到这一有趣的辩论，其中主要涉及理论和术语，但委员会决定保留第6条草案第3款，特别是鉴于该款的切实重要性，其目的是在操作层面说明此前曾享受属人豁免的个人(国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长)任期结束后适用何种法律制度。 |
| (15) The wording of paragraph 3 is
modelled on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (article 39,
paragraph 2) and the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United
Nations (article IV, section 12), which governed similar situations to those
covered in the paragraph in question, namely: the situation of persons who
enjoyed immunity ratione personae, after the end of their term of office,
with respect to acts performed in an official capacity during such term of
office. | (15) 第3款的措辞仿照了《维也纳外交关系公约》(第三十九条第二款)和《联合国特权和豁免公约》(第四条第十二节)，这两项公约所涉的情况与本款所涉的情况类似，亦即：曾享有属人豁免的人员任期结束后对于在上述任期内以官方身份实施的行为的处境。 |
| The Commission has used the expression “continue to enjoy immunity” in order to
reflect the link between the moment when the act occurred and when immunity
is invoked. | 委员会使用了“继续享有豁免”的说法，以体现行为发生的时刻与援引豁免的时刻之间存在的联系。 |
| Like the treaties on which it is based,
draft article 6, paragraph 3 does not qualify immunity, but confines itself to
the use of the generic term. | 如同本款所参考的两项公约一样，第6条草案第3款没有对豁免一词定性，而仅仅使用了笼统的说法。 |
| Yet although the term immunity is used
without any qualification whatsoever, the Commission understands that the
term is used to refer to immunity ratione materiae, since it is only in this
context that it is possible to take into consideration the acts of State
officials performed in an official capacity after their term of office has
ended. | 不过，虽然没有对“豁免”一词进行任何限定，但委员会理解，这个词是指“属事豁免”，因为只有在这种情况下，才可能在任期结束后考虑国家官员以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| Chapter XII | 第十二章 |
| Provisional application of treaties | 条约的暂时适用 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 251. At its sixty-fourth session (2012),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Provisional
application of treaties” in its programme of work and
appointed Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez-Robledo as Special
Rapporteur for the topic. | 251. 委员会在第六十四届会议(2012年)上，决定将“条约的暂时适用”专题列入工作方案，并任命胡安 •曼努埃尔 •戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生为专题特别报告员。 |
| At the same session, the Commission took
note of an oral report, presented by the Special Rapporteur, on the informal
consultations held on the topic under his chairmanship. | 在同一届会议上，委员会注意到特别报告员就他主持进行的关于这一专题的非正式磋商情况所作的口头报告。 |
| The General Assembly subsequently, in
resolution 67/92 of 14 December 2012, noted with appreciation the decision of
the Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会后来在2012年12月14日第67/92号决议中赞赏地注意到委员会决定将此专题列入其工作方案。 |
| 252. At its sixty-fifth session (2013),
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. | 252. 委员会在第六十五届会议(2013年)上，收到了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/664)，该报告旨在通过探讨如何从理论角度处理这一专题以及简要回顾现有的国家惯例，设法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 (A/CN.4/658), which traced the negotiating
history of article 25 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
(hereinafter, the “1969 Vienna Convention”), both in the Commission and at the Vienna Conference in 1968 and
1969, and included a brief analysis of some of the substantive issues raised
during its consideration. | 委员会还收到了秘书处编写的一份备忘录(A/CN.4/658)，其中叙述了1968和1969年委员会和维也纳会议对1969年《维也纳条约法公约》(以下简称1969年《维也纳公约》)第二十五条的谈判情况，并简要分析了审议期间提出的一些实质性问题。 |
| 253. At its sixty-sixth session (2014),
the Commission considered the second report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/675), which sought to provide a substantive analysis of the legal
effects of the provisional application of treaties. | 253. 委员会在第六十六届会议(2014年)上，审议了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/675)，该报告试图对暂时适用条约的法律效力作出实质性分析。 |
| 254. At its sixty-seventh session (2015),
the Commission considered the third report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/687), which continued the analysis of State practice, and considered
the relationship of provisional application to other provisions of the 1969
Vienna Convention, as well as the question of provisional application with
regard to international organizations. | 254. 委员会在第六十七届会议(2015年)上，审议了特别报告员继续分析国家惯例的第三次报告(A/CN.4/687)，并审议了暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》其他规定的关系以及对国际组织的暂时适用问题。 |
| The Commission also had before it a
memorandum (A/CN.4/676), prepared by the Secretariat, on provisional
application under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States
and International Organizations or between International Organizations of
1986. | 委员会还收到了秘书处就1986年《关于国家与国际组织间或国际组织相互间条约法的维也纳公约》之下暂时适用问题编写的一份备忘录(A/CN.4/676)。 |
| The Commission referred six draft
guidelines, proposed by the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 委员会将特别报告员提出的六条准则草案提交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission subsequently received an
interim oral report for information only, presented by the Chairperson of the
Drafting Committee, on draft guidelines 1 to 3, which had been provisionally
adopted by the Drafting Committee. | 委员会随后收到了起草委员会主席提出的仅供参考的临时口头报告， 涉及该委员会暂时通过的准则草案1-3。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 255. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/699 and Add.1), which continued the analysis of the relationship of
provisional application to other provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention and
of the practice of international organizations with regard to provisional
application. | 255. 在本届会议上，委员会收到了特别报告员的第四次报告(A/CN.4/699和Add.1)，报告继续分析了暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》其他规定的关系以及对国际组织的暂时适用问题。 |
| The addendum contained examples of recent
European Union practice on provisional application of agreements with third
States. | 增编载有近来欧洲联盟暂时适用与第三国协定的例子。 |
| The report included a proposal for a draft
guideline 10 on internal law and the observation of provisional application
of all or part of a treaty. | 报告包括一项提议，涉及关于国际法的准则草案10和对暂时适用条约的全部和部分问题的评论意见。 |
| 256. The Commission considered the fourth
report at its 3324th to 3329th meetings, held from 20 to 27 July 2016. | 256. 委员会在2016年7月20日至27日举行的第3324至3329次会议上，审议了第四次报告。 |
| At its 3229th meeting, on 27 July 2016,
the Commission referred draft guideline 10, as contained in the fourth report
of the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 在2016年7月27日第3329次会议上，委员会将特别报告员第四次报告中所载准则草案10提交起草委员会。 |
| 257. At its 3342th meeting, on 9 August
2016, the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee presented the report of the
Drafting Committee on “Provisional application of
treaties”, containing draft guidelines 1 to 4 and
draft guidelines 6 to 9, as provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee
at the sixty-seventh and sixty-eighth sessions of the Commission,
respectively (A/CN.4/L.877). | 257. 起草委员会主席在2016年8月9日第3342次会议上，提交了起草委员会关于“条约的暂时适用”的报告，其中载有起草委员会在国际法委员会第六十七和六十八届会议上分别暂时通过的准则草案1-4和准则草案6-9 (A/CN.4/L.877)。 |
| The Commission took note of the draft
guidelines as presented by the Drafting Committee. | 委员会注意到起草委员会提交的准则草案。 |
| It is anticipated that the Commission
will take action on the draft guidelines and commentaries thereto at the next
session. | 预期委员会将在下届会议上就准则草案及评论意见采取行动。 |
| 258. At its 3347th meeting, held on 12
August 2016, the Commission decided to request from the Secretariat a
memorandum analysing State practice in respect of treaties (bilateral and
multilateral), deposited or registered in the last 20 years with the
Secretary-General, which provide for provisional application, including
treaty actions related thereto. | 258. 在2016年8月12日第3347次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份谅解备忘录，对过去20年向秘书长交存或登记的规定暂时适用的条约(双边和多边)、包括相关条约行动方面的国家惯例进行分析。 |
| 1. Introduction by the Special Rapporteur
of the fourth report | 1. 特别报告员介绍第四次报告 |
| 259. The Special Rapporteur, in
introducing his fourth report, began by providing a recapitulation of the
previous work undertaken on this topic. | 259. 特别报告员在介绍其第四次报告时，首先重点回顾了以往在这一专题上的工作。 |
| He also drew attention to the interest
that States have shown for the topic, referring both to the debate in the
Sixth Committee and to States’ submission of
information in response to the questions contained in chapter III of the
Commission’s report. | 他谈及第六委员会的辩论以及各国就委员会报告第三章中所载问题提交的资料，提请注意各国在这一专题上显示的兴趣。 |
| 260. The fourth report continued the
analysis of the relationship between provisional application of treaties and
other provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention, with the aim of shedding more
light on the legal regime of the former. | 260. 第四份报告继续分析了暂时适用条约与1969年《维也纳公约》其他规定的关系，目的是阐明前者的法律制度。 |
| The focus was placed on analysing the
relationship between provisional application and the provisions on
reservations, invalidity of treaties, termination or suspension of the
operation of a treaty as a consequence of its breach under article 60, State
succession, State responsibility, and an outbreak of hostilities under
article 73. | 重点是分析暂时适用与保留问题规定的关系、条约之失效、第六十条之下的因违约而终止或停止施行条约，以及第七十三条之下的国家继承、国家责任及发生敌对行为的问题。 |
| 261. As regards reservations, the Special
Rapporteur observed that he had not found any treaty that provided for the
formulation of reservations as from the time of provisional application, nor
any provisional application provision that referred to the possibility of formulating
reservations. | 261. 关于保留问题，特别报告员称，他没有看到任何条约规定了自暂停适用之时起提出保留，或任何暂停适用规定提及提出保留的可能性。 |
| The question was whether it was possible
for a State to formulate reservations at the time of agreeing to provisional
application in cases in which the treaty was silent thereon. | 问题在于如果条约未曾涉及这一问题，一国是否有可能在同意暂停适用时提出保留。 |
| In the Special Rapporteur’s view, nothing seemed to prevent a State from formulating
reservations from the moment it decided to provisionally apply a treaty for
two reasons. | 特别报告员认为，似乎没有什么事情会阻止一国在决定暂时适用时提出保留，这里有两个原因。 |
| First, provisional application of
treaties produces legal effects. | 第一，暂时适用条约会产生法律效力。 |
| Second, the purpose of reservations was
precisely to exclude or modify the legal effects of certain provisions for a
State. | 第二，保留的目的完全是为了排除或限制某些条款的法律效力。 |
| 262. The Special Rapporteur observed that
he had decided to analyse the relationship that may exist between provisional
application and the regime of invalidity of treaties, taking into account the
suggestion made by both States and Commission members. | 262. 特别报告员表示，他已决定分析暂时适用与条约生效制度可能存在的关系，同时考虑到各国和委员会委员提出的建议。 |
| He focused on the relationship between
provisional application and article 46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, in
light of article 27, which he had addressed in his third report. | 他根据第二十七条，将重点放在第三次报告中处理的暂时适用与1969年《维也纳条约》第四十六条的关系上。 |
| He concluded, first, that the principle
that a State cannot invoke its internal law as a justification for its
failure to perform a treaty also applied with respect to treaties that were
provisionally applied. | 他得出结论认为，首先，一国不可援引其国内法作为理由不履行条约的原则，这一点同样适用于暂时适用的条约。 |
| Thereafter, he proceeded to examine the
limits of provisional application under internal law in light of article 46. | 随后，他根据第四十六条，着手审查国内法对暂时适用的限制。 |
| He recalled that this issue had been
raised in the arbitral awards of the Yukos and Kardassopoulos cases, but
noted that it would be premature to draw any conclusions, considering, in
particular, that there could be more developments in the Yukos case. | 他回顾说，这一问题是在对Yukos 和Kardassopoulos 案的裁决中提出的，但指出因此得出任何结论还为时尚早，尤其是考虑到Yukos一案可能会有新的发展。 |
| Nevertheless, from the point of view of
international law, the Special Rapporteur considered it possible to conclude
that, in addition to the regime established under article 27 of the 1969
Vienna Convention, States should make sure that there were no limitations
relating to their competence to conclude treaties in accordance with article
46, when agreeing to provisional application, in order to give legal
certainty to such provisional application. | 无论如何，特别报告员认为，从国际法的角度来看，或可断言，除了根据1969年《维也纳公约》第二十七条确立的制度外，各国应保证，同意暂时适用对其根据第四十六条缔约的权限没有任何限制，以使此类暂时适用具有法律确定性。 |
| 263. Concerning the termination or
suspension of a treaty as a result of a material breach, the Special
Rapporteur reiterated his view that provisionally applied treaties produce
legal effects as if the treaties were in force, thus producing obligations
that needed to be complied with under the principle of pacta sunt servanda. | 263. 关于条约因重大违约情事而终止或停止施行，特别报告员重申，他认为暂时适用的条约产生法律效力，一如条约已在生效，因此根据条约必须遵守原则产生需要履行的义务。 |
| As such, the circumstances concerning
termination or suspension of a treaty as provided for in article 60 of the
1969 Vienna Convention were also relevant for provisionally applied treaties. | 据此，关于1969年《维也纳公约》第六十条中规定的终止或停止施行条约的情形与暂时适用条约也是相关的。 |
| 264. Turning to the question of the
succession of States and provisional application of treaties, the Special
Rapporteur noted that the articles on the provisional application of treaties
contained in the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of
Treaties (hereinafter, the “1978 Vienna Convention”), illustrated the practical utility of such provisions in
enhancing legal certainty in situations of political instability. | 264. 关于国家继承和暂时适用条约问题，特别报告员指出，1978年《关于国家在条约方面的继承的维也纳公约》(以下称1978年《维也纳公约》) 表明了此类条款对加强政治动荡局势下的法律确定性的实际效用。 |
| He therefore concluded that this issue
did not merit a different treatment for the purpose of the current topic. | 因此，他认为无须为本专题目的对此一问题作出不同处理。 |
| 265. Section III of the report contained
information on the practice of international organizations in relation to
provisional application of treaties. | 265. 报告的第三节载有一些资料，显示了国际组织暂时适用条约的惯例。 |
| The Special Rapporteur described the
depositary practice of the United Nations and the registration of treaties
under Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations with regard to
provisional application. | 特别报告员描述了在暂时适用问题上联合国的交存做法和《联合国宪章》第一〇二条中条约的登记。 |
| Noting the relevance of such practice in
obtaining a clearer understanding of provisional application on the basis of
State practice, the Special Rapporteur suggested that the Commission might
wish to recommend to the Sixth Committee that the 1946 regulations on
registration of treaties be updated to better reflect contemporary practice. | 特别报告员注意到此类做法在加深对国家惯例基础上的暂时适用的理解上的相关性，建议委员会不妨向第六委员会建议，对1946年的登记条例 加以修订，以更好地反映当代实践。 |
| 266. The fourth report contained one
draft guideline on internal law and the observation of provisional
application of all or parts of a treaty, and reflected article 27 of the 1969
Vienna Convention. | 266. 第四份报告载有关于国内法的准则草案，以及对暂时适用条约的全部或局部问题的评论意见，体现了1969年《维也纳公约》第二十七条。 |
| It aimed to complete the previously
proposed guideline on the legal effects of provisional application, while
also taking into account article 46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 其目的是完成以往关于暂时适用的法律效力的拟议准则，同时考虑到1969年《维也纳公约》第四十六条。 |
| 267. Concerning future work on the topic,
the Special Rapporteur observed that he intended to address certain pending
issues, such as the provisional application of treaties that enshrine the
rights of individuals, and propose model clauses. | 267. 关于今后在这一专题上的工作，特别报告员表示，他准备处理某些悬而未决的问题，例如维护个人权利的条约的暂时适用以及拟议的示范条款。 |
| 2. Summary of the debate | 2. 辩论摘要 |
| (a) General comments | (a) 一般评论 |
| 268. Generally, members reiterated that
the provisional application of treaties constituted an important aspect of
the law of treaties, and the topic was of great practical significance for
States. | 268. 委员们普遍重申，条约的暂时适用构成了条约法的一个重要方面，这一专题对各国都具有重大的现实意义。 |
| Some members observed that the
information and analysis in the report were interesting and served to shed
further light on the regime of provisional application. | 一些委员认为，报告中的信息和分析引人注意，进一步阐明了暂时适用制度。 |
| However, other members were of the view
that more examples of practice were needed in order to substantiate the
conclusions drawn. | 然而，其他委员认为，需要更多的实例，以证实所得出的结论。 |
| Furthermore, recognizing that the aim of
section II of the report had been to address questions raised by Member
States, which was important, several members nevertheless stressed that the
Commission needed to approach the topic in a comprehensive and systematic
manner. | 此外，一些委员承认该报告第二节的目的是解决会员国提出的问题，这是重要的，但强调，委员会需要以综合和系统的方式处理这一专题。 |
| 269. Concerning methodology, some members
welcomed the analysis of the relationship between provisional application and
other provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 269. 关于方法问题，一些委员欢迎对暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》其他规定的关系的分析。 |
| They noted, however, that, while agreeing
in general with the conclusions, many of them were reached by way of analogy,
while the practice behind them was not always clear. | 不过，他们指出，虽然总的来说，他们同意这些结论，但其中许多结论是通过类比得出的，而其背后的做法往往并不明确。 |
| In addition, it was pointed out that it
was not clear in what way the analysis undertaken by the Special Rapporteur
would be reflected in the outcome of the topic: for example, whether there
would be one guideline regarding each article analysed or an overarching
guideline regarding the relationship between article 25 and other articles of
the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 此外，有人指出，不清楚特别报告员所进行的分析将如何反映在这一专题的结果中：例如，是否所分析的每一条款都有一个准则，还是有一个关于第二十五条与1969《维也纳公约》其他规定的关系的总括性准则。 |
| Doubts were also expressed by several
members concerning the value of this methodological approach. | 还有若干委员对这种方法的价值表示怀疑。 |
| In this regard, the view was expressed
that it would be useful to analyse whether article 25 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention was partly or wholly a self-contained regime within the
Convention. | 在这一方面，有人认为，需要分析1969年《维也纳公约》第二十五条是否部分或整个构成公约内一个完备的制度。 |
| It was recalled that various proposals
considered at the Vienna Conference, in particular with regard to the
question of termination of provisional application, seemed to support such a
proposition. | 人们回顾，在维也纳会议上审议的各种建议，特别是关于暂时适用的终止问题，似乎支持这种主张。 |
| If it were to be concluded that article
25 was a wholly self-contained regime, the other articles, while not being of
direct relevance, could provide some guidance by analogy. | 如果得出结论认为，第二十五条是一个非常完备的制度，那么，其他条款，尽管并非直接相关，也可以通过类比提供一些指导。 |
| 270. Other members were of the view that
the direction of the topic depended on whether or not the 1969 Vienna
Convention applied to provisional application. | 270. 其他委员认为，该专题的方向取决于1969年《维也纳公约》是否适用于暂时适用问题。 |
| They did not agree with the assumption
that article 25 constituted, in whole or in part, a self-contained regime,
with the possible exception of paragraph 2 governing the termination of
provisional application. | 他们不同意这样一个假设，即第二十五条的全部或局部构成了一个完备的制度，制约终止暂时适用的第二款则是一个可能的例外。 |
| They stressed that provisional
application of a treaty, although provisional, was nonetheless an application
of a treaty. | 他们强调，暂时适用一项条约，虽然是临时性的，但仍然是对一个条约的适用。 |
| In their view, it was therefore futile to
analyse the relationship between provisional application and the provisions
of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 在他们看来，分析暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》的规定的关系是徒劳的。 |
| To the extent that the provisions of the
1969 Vienna Convention applied to a treaty in force, they were also
applicable to a treaty being applied provisionally, with one important
qualification — the rights and obligations of a State
provisionally applying the treaty depended on the terms of the agreement
providing for provisional application. | 如果1969年《维也纳公约》的规定适用于生效的条约，则它们也同样适用于暂时适用的条约，但有一个重要条件，即暂时适用该条约的国家的权利和义务取决于规定了暂时适用的协定条款。 |
| However, the view was also expressed that
it could not simply be presumed that the legal effects of the provisional
application of a treaty were exactly the same as those deriving from a treaty
that was in force. | 然而，也有人表示，不能简单地假定条约的暂时适用的法律效力与已生效条约的法律效力完全相同。 |
| It was suggested that a comparative
analysis of conventional practice would assist in clarifying the matter. | 据认为，对常规做法的比较分析将有助于澄清这件事。 |
| 271. In addition, while it was observed
that several of the provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention could be of
relevance for the topic, caution was expressed by some members against
reaching conclusions by simple analogy without taking account of State
practice. | 271. 此外，有人指出，1969年《维也纳公约》的若干规定与此一专题可能是相关的，但一些委员就通过简单的类比而不考虑国家惯例即得出结论表示了谨慎态度。 |
| It was regretted that no comprehensive
overview of conventional practice regarding provisional application had been
provided, without which it was difficult to fully understand the intricacies
of the topic. | 遗憾的是，没有提供对暂时适用方面常规做法的全面概述，舍此就很难全面理解这一专题的复杂性。 |
| While it was acknowledged that it was not
the Commission’s task to codify the entire
conventional practice that existed in relation to provisional application,
which seemed to be both wide-ranging and diverse, the Commission could
usefully contribute to the topic by addressing the circumstances when the
treaty or agreement providing for provisional application was silent. | 虽然人们承认，委员会的任务不是编纂在暂时适用问题上的全部常规做法，因为这些做法非常广泛，多种多样，但委员会可以通过分析规定了暂时适用的条约或协定保持沉默的情况，对此一专题作出有益贡献。 |
| 272. Some members observed further that
it was important, when considering provisional application, to take into
account the different nature and characteristics of each treaty. | 272. 一些委员进一步表示，在审议暂时适用问题时，必须考虑到每项条约的不同性质和特征。 |
| Open and closed multilateral treaties and
bilateral agreements might raise different issues that needed to be carefully
examined. | 开放性和封闭性多边条约和双边协定可能会产生不同问题，需要认真加以审查。 |
| That was equally true for treaties
establishing international organizations. | 建立国际组织的条约，情况也同样如此。 |
| (b) Reservations | (b) 保留 |
| 273. Concerning the relationship between
provisional application and the reservation regime under the 1969 Vienna
Convention, some members reiterated that provisional application of a treaty
produced the same legal effects as if the treaty were in force. | 273. 关于暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》下的保留制度的关系，一些委员重申，暂时适用的条约产生了与生效条约同样的法律效力。 |
| Consequently, they agreed with the
Special Rapporteur’s assertion that nothing would
prevent a State, in principle, from formulating reservations as from the time
of its agreement to the provisional application of a treaty. | 因此，他们同意特别报告员的断言，即原则上，没有什么事情会阻止一个国家自同意暂时适用条约之时起提出保留。 |
| In addition, it was observed that it
could be presumed that a State that had formulated a reservation intended it
to apply not only when the treaty entered into force, but also to the
provisional application of the treaty. | 此外，据认为，可以假定提出保留的国家，不仅有意将之适用于已经生效的条约，还有意将之适用于暂时适用的条约。 |
| It was suggested that such presumption be
reflected in the draft guidelines. | 人们建议在草案准则中体现这一假定。 |
| In terms of another view, article 19 of
the 1969 Vienna Convention, which stipulated when reservations could be
formulated, did not refer to provisional application. | 也有人认为，1969年《维也纳公约》规定了可提出保留的第十九条，没有提及暂时适用。 |
| Accordingly, formulating a reservation as
from the time of the agreement to provisionally apply a treaty would be
inconsistent with article 19 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 因此，自同意暂时适用条约之时起提出保留与1969《维也纳公约》第十九条将产生不一致。 |
| 274. Furthermore, some understood the report
as examining the question of reservations to an agreement to apply a treaty
provisionally rather than addressing reservations to the treaty itself. | 274. 此外，按照一些人的理解，报告是审查了对同意暂时适用条约的保留，而不是处理对条约本身的保留。 |
| It was suggested that it would have been
better to have examined whether a reservation to a treaty could exclude or
modify the treaty, not only after its entry into force but also during its
provisional application. | 据建议，最好审查对条约的保留是否可以排除或修改该条约，不仅在其生效时，而且也在其暂时适用期间。 |
| It was also pointed out that declarations
whereby a State agreed to apply a treaty provisionally within the limits of
its internal law, in cases where the treaty was silent on such limiting
provisions, could be considered to constitute reservations. | 人们还指出，声明国家同意在国内法限制范围内暂时适用条约，在条约对此类限制保持沉默的情况下，可以被视为构成了保留。 |
| 275. Some members observed that the
analysis on reservations had been limited to article 19 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention and expressed the hope that the Special Rapporteur would examine
the other relevant rules under the Convention. | 275. 一些成员指出，对保留的分析仅限于1969年《维也纳公约》的第十九条，希望特别报告员将审查《公约》下的其他有关规则。 |
| It was also noted that the formulation of
reservations in relation to provisional application raised other complex but
practical questions that merited further consideration, including regarding
the form, nature and effects of such reservations. | 也有人指出，就暂时适用提出保留引起了其他复杂但实际的问题，需要加以深入考虑，包括此类保留的形式、性质和效力。 |
| In addition, some members considered that
the question of reservations in relation to provisional application was not
devoid of practical examples, and several references were made to
reservations formulated in the context of multilateral commodity agreements. | 此外，一些委员认为，与暂时适用有关的保留问题不乏实际的例子，并数次提及针对多边初级商品协定提出的保留。 |
| Attention was also drawn to the Guide to
practice on reservations to treaties, which also contained, together with its
commentaries, some useful elements, in particular guidelines 2.2.1, 2.2.2 and
2.6.11. | 人们还提请关注《对条约的保留实践指南》， 其中，连同它的评论意见，也包含一些有用的要点，特别是指南2.2.1、2.2.2和2.6.11。 |
| It was recommended that the question on
reservations in the context of provisional application be further examined
and possibly reflected in the draft guidelines. | 建议保留问题应在暂时适用的背景下进一步审查，最好反映在准则草案中。 |
| (c) Invalidity of treaties | (c) 条约失效 |
| 276. Some members welcomed the
examination of the question of the relevance of internal law for provisional
application. | 276. 一些委员欢迎审视国内法对暂时适用的相关性问题。 |
| They observed that in doing so, the
Special Rapporteur had focused on one aspect of the 1969 Vienna Convention,
namely on article 46 concerning the provisions of internal law regarding
competence to conclude treaties. | 他们注意到，特别报告员在研究这一问题时，侧重于1969年《维也纳公约》的一个方面，即第四十六条：国内法关于缔约权限的规定。 |
| They also found the discussion in the
report on the Yukos case timely and agreed with the Special Rapporteur that
the Commission should not attempt to reach any conclusions with respect to
the case, on the one hand, because it was ongoing, and, on the other, because
it was based on a treaty regime that could not be generalized. | 他们还认为报告中讨论尤科斯案的时机恰到好处，并同意特别报告员的观点，即委员会不应试图就该案作出任何结论，一方面是因为该案正在审理中，另一方面是因为，它基于的是一种特殊的条约制度。 |
| Several members, however, pointed out
that the Special Rapporteur had not, in his analysis concerning internal law,
fully clarified the different situations involved or the legal consequences
that resulted therefrom. | 但是，若干委员指出，特别报告员在其关于国内法的分析中没有充分说明涉及的不同情况，也没有充分说明这些情况导致的法律后果。 |
| In that regard, it was observed that
while article 46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention was an important part of the
topic, articles 27 and 46 therein constituted an integral whole and provided
evidence that internal rules of fundamental importance were integrated in the
proper appreciation of the law of treaties. | 在这方面，有人表示，虽然1969年《维也纳公约》第四十六条是本专题的一个重要部分，但第二十七和第四十六条是一个整体，并且证明了对条约法的妥善评估离不开具有基本重要性的国内规则。 |
| In order to fully appreciate the
interplay between international law and internal law in the context of provisional
application, it was suggested that three different situations needed to be
distinguished. | 为了充分评估在暂时适用方面国际法和国内法的相互作用，建议对三种不同情况予以区分。 |
| The first was where an agreement on
provisional application itself qualified provisional application by reference
to internal law, in which case the latter was relevant for understanding the
scope of the agreement on provisional application. | 第一种情况是，暂时适用协定本身通过提到国内法而对暂时适用加以限定，在这种情况下，国内法关乎于对暂时适用协定范围的理解。 |
| The question was not about validity or
invalidity of a treaty or of primacy of international or internal law but one
of treaty interpretation. | 问题并不在于条约是否有效，也不在于国际法或国内法孰先孰后，而是在于对条约的解释。 |
| The second situation was analogous to
article 46, that is where a State argued that its consent to be bound by the
agreement was invalid because of a provision of its internal law regarding
its competence to conclude international agreements. | 第二种情况与第四十六条类似，即有一国认为其受该协定约束的同意因其关于缔结国际协议权限的国内法规定而失效。 |
| The third situation was equivalent to
article 27 and concerned the situation where a State sought to invoke its
internal law as a justification for its failure to perform its international
obligations. | 第三种情况与第二十七条相同，涉及的情况是，一国试图援引其国内法，以此作为不履行其国际义务的理由。 |
| Some members stressed that it was the
first scenario that was often the most important, and contentious, aspect of
provisional application. | 一些委员强调，第一种情况往往是暂时适用问题最重要和最有争议的方面。 |
| It was therefore considered essential
that the issue be reflected in the draft guidelines, on the basis of further
analysis. | 因此，认为必须在进一步分析的基础上，在准则草案中反映这一问题。 |
| 277. In addition, several members were of
the view that articles 27 and 46 applied to provisional application and
should also be reflected in the draft guidelines. | 277. 此外，若干委员认为，第二十七和第四十六条适用于暂时适用问题，也应反映在准则草案中。 |
| However, the view was also expressed that
it was necessary to analyse the relevance of internal law in relation to
provisional application differently from when a treaty was in force, while
taking into account the question whether provisional application produced
legal effects that other States relied on. | 然而，还有意见认为，有必要分析国内法在暂时适用方面的相关性，与条约生效时予以区分，同时考虑暂时适用是否会产生其他国家所依赖的法律效力的问题。 |
| It was suggested that the question of
whether or not the term “manifest” in article 46 should be interpreted in a more flexible manner in
the case of provisional application be examined, taking into account State
practice. | 有人建议，应研究以下问题：在暂时适用的情况下，对第四十六条中“显明”这一术语是否应当考虑国家惯例，予以更灵活的解释。 |
| Furthermore, some members observed that
applying procedural guarantees and limitations concerning the consent to be
bound by a treaty mutatis mutandis to provisional application would render
the regime of provisional application meaningless. | 此外，一些委员注意到，若将同意缔约所涉及的程序保障和限制比照适用于暂时适用，就会使暂时适用制度失去意义。 |
| In many cases, provisional application
was resorted to precisely because the constitutional procedures to be bound
by the treaty had not yet been completed. | 在许多情况下，之所以采用暂时适用，就是因为缔约宪法程序尚未完成。 |
| Only if a decision to provisionally apply
a treaty contradicted an internal rule of fundamental importance concerning
the competence to be bound by a treaty would it be possible to talk about
invalidity. | 只有在暂时适用某条约的决定与具有基本重要性的关于缔约权限的国内规则冲突的情况下，才可能谈及失效问题。 |
| (d) Termination or suspension of the
operation of a treaty as a consequence of its breach | (d) 条约因违约而终止或停止施行 |
| 278. Regarding termination of provisional
application, some members agreed with the conclusion of the Special
Rapporteur that article 60 could apply to provisional application on the
basis that it produced the same legal effects as if the treaty were in force. | 278. 关于暂时适用的终止，一些委员同意特别报告员的结论，即第六十条可适用于暂时适用，依据是暂时适用与条约生效时具有相同的法律效力。 |
| At the same time, however, the view was
expressed that it was unlikely that a State would make use of the procedure
that was envisaged in article 60, when article 25, paragraph 2, provided a
less burdensome alternative. | 但是，同时也有意见认为，一国不太可能利用第六十条所设想的程序，因为第二十五条第二款提供了较为便利的替代方法。 |
| 279. Some members pointed out that
article 25, paragraph 2, implied a different and more flexible regime than
the one set forth in the 1969 Vienna Convention with regard to treaties that
were in force. | 279. 一些委员指出，第二十五条第二款暗示了一种与1969年《维也纳公约》所载的关于已生效条约的制度不同且更为灵活的机制。 |
| It was recalled that the diplomatic
conference leading to the 1969 Vienna Convention incorporated the termination
clause in article 25 rather than relying on the general termination
provisions included in the Convention. | 有人回顾，催生了1969年《维也纳公约》的外交会议在第二十五条中加入了终止条款，而不是在《公约》载入一般性终止规定。 |
| The view was expressed that article 25,
paragraph 2, established the exclusive means by which a State could, on its
own initiative, end its obligation to apply the treaty provisionally. | 有意见认为，第二十五条第二款设立了一种专门的途径，一国可借此自行终止其暂时适用条约的义务。 |
| In that respect, at least with regard to
termination, provisional application constituted a self-contained regime. | 在这方面，至少在终止方面，暂时适用构成了一项完备的制度。 |
| It was nevertheless also observed that
unlike the other termination rules in the 1969 Vienna Convention, article 60
was also relevant with regard to provisional application since the two
articles operated in different ways. | 但是，也有人注意到，第六十条不同于1969年《维也纳公约》的其他终止规则，与暂时适用也是相关的，因为这两条条款发生作用的方式不同。 |
| While article 25, paragraph 2, would
bring to an end any effects which the treaty had with respect to the State
notifying the termination in its relations with the notified States, article
60 could be invoked as a ground for suspending or terminating the provisional
application of a treaty only in relation between the affected State and the
defaulting State. | 第二十五条第二款会终止条约在通知终止国与各被通知国的关系中的任何效力，第六十条则可被用作仅在受影响国和违约国之间停止或终止暂时适用条约的依据。 |
| 280. Regarding the analysis of the
relationship between provisional application and article 60 of the 1969
Vienna Convention, it was recalled that its paragraph 3 provided for
conditions under which a material breach of a treaty occurred after its entry
into force. | 280. 关于对暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》第六十条的关系的分析，有人回顾称，第六十条第三款规定了条约生效后发生重大违约的条件。 |
| It was pointed out that the Special
Rapporteur should therefore have addressed the question whether a material
breach of a treaty that was provisionally applied could occur under the same
circumstances as those provided for in article 60. | 有人指出，如此一来，特别报告员本应讨论的问题是，对暂时适用的条约的重大违约是否会在与第六十条规定相同的情况下发生。 |
| In addition, it was observed that the
report had not distinguished between the termination of the treaty as such
and the termination of provisional application, the latter resulting in the
suspension of a treaty provided for in the same provision. | 此外，有人注意到，报告并没有区分终止条约本身和终止暂时适用，终止暂时适用会导致第六十条所规定的停止施行条约。 |
| As a consequence, the question whether a
material breach of a treaty that was provisionally applied entitled the
parties to invoke the breach as a ground for not only suspending the
provisional application of the treaty but also for terminating the treaty
itself had not been addressed. | 结果是，以下问题没有得到讨论：对暂时适用的条约的重大违约是否会使缔约方不仅可以将违约作为停止暂时适用条约的依据，还可将其作为终止条约本身的依据？ |
| It was suggested that the analysis of
articles 25 and 60 be further elaborated on the basis of State practice, with
a view to formulating draft guidelines reflecting both the issue of
termination and that of suspension, thereby clarifying how the relationship
among the various parties was affected. | 有人建议，应以国家实践为基础对第二十五条和第六十条作进一步阐述，以拟订出既反映终止问题又反映停止施行问题的准则草案，说明各缔约方之间的关系将如何受到影响。 |
| 281. Furthermore, concerning the question
of what type of violation constituted a material breach for the purpose of
article 60, paragraph 3, it was pointed out that the Special Rapporteur’s conclusion that a trivial violation of a provision that was considered
essential could constitute such a breach was not entirely correct. | 281. 此外，关于何种违约构成第六十条第三款所指的重大违约的问题，有人指出，特别报告员的结论是，对被视为必要条款的轻微违反也可构成重大违约，这一结论并不完全正确。 |
| Attention was drawn to a recent award in
which an Arbitral Tribunal had concluded that termination of a treaty due to
a material breach was warranted only if the breach defeated the object and
purpose of the treaty. | 有人提请注意近期的一项裁决，一个仲裁庭在该裁决中认定，只有在违约行为妨碍了条约的目的和宗旨的情况下，方能以重大违约为由终止条约。 |
| It was, however, also suggested that the
question of whether or not the term “material breach” in article 60 should be interpreted in a more flexible manner in
the case of provisional application be examined. | 但是，有人建议，应当研究在暂时适用的情况下是否应以更灵活的方式解释第六十条所载的“重大违约”这一术语。 |
| In addition, the view was expressed that
it was not possible to talk about material breach in the context of
provisional application but rather of non-performance of treaty obligations
and that the effects of a material breach under article 60 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention were not applicable since no contractual treaty relationship
existed at that time. | 此外，有意见认为，在暂时适用的情况下，不可能谈及重大违约，只能谈及未履行条约义务，1969年《维也纳公约》第六十条规定的重大违约的效果并不适用，因为在这一时刻并不存在契约式条约关系。 |
| The view was also expressed that the
relationship between provisional application and other forms of termination
provided for in the 1969 Vienna Convention also merited consideration. | 还有意见认为，暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》所规定的其他形式的终止之间的关系也是值得审议的内容。 |
| (e) Cases of succession of States, State
responsibility and outbreak of hostilities | (e) 国家继承、国家责任及发生敌对行为问题 |
| 282. Some members agreed with the Special
Rapporteur that while the information contained in the fourth report on State
succession was important, it was not necessary to address such questions
further, for the purpose of the topic. | 282. 一些委员同意特别报告员的意见，即虽然关于国家继承的第四次报告所载的资料具有重要意义，但为本专题的目的，没有必要对这些问题作进一步讨论。 |
| Attention was nevertheless drawn by some
other members to the relevant articles in the 1978 Vienna Convention, which
took into account the nature and the characteristics of the treaty, in
particular whether it was a bilateral agreement or an open or closed
multilateral treaty, and whether the treaty in question was in force. | 不过，其他一些委员提请注意1978年《维也纳公约》的有关条款，这些条款将条约的性质和特征纳入了考虑，尤其是考虑了所涉条约是属于双边协定，还是属于开放性或封闭性多边条约，以及是否生效等因素。 |
| It was also suggested that an examination
of State practice would be valuable. | 还有人建议，对国家惯例进行研究将不乏益处。 |
| Furthermore, some members supported
addressing the question of succession in the draft guidelines. | 此外，一些委员支持在准则草案中论及继承问题。 |
| (f) Draft guideline 10 | (f) 准则草案10 |
| 283. Concerning draft guideline 10, some
members recognized that it was based on article 27 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention and therefore unobjectionable as such. | 283. 关于准则草案10，一些委员注意到该准则立足于1969年《维也纳公约》第二十七条，因此其本身并不存在争议。 |
| Others were of the view that the draft
guideline needed to be broadened to take into account situations in which the
agreement to provisionally apply a treaty limits the provisional application
by referring to internal law. | 其他委员认为，需要扩大该准则草案的范围，以便将以下情况考虑在内，即暂时适用条约的协定因提及国内法而限制了暂时适用的情况。 |
| 284. Some members, however, expressed
regret that the report did not fully substantiate the content of the draft
guideline. | 284. 然而，一些委员对该准则草案的内容没有在报告中得到充分证实表示遗憾。 |
| For example, it was unclear whether the
draft guideline reflected the rule set forth in article 27 that a State may
not invoke its internal law to justify a failure to perform a treaty, or
whether it concerned provisions of internal law regarding the competence to
agree to apply a treaty provisionally, as the reference to article 46 seemed
to indicate. | 例如，以下问题尚不明确：该准则草案是否反映了第二十七条所载规定，即一国不得援引其国内法规定为理由而不履行条约；该准则草案是否涉及国内法中关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的条款，一如提及第四十六条之处似乎表明的。 |
| Some members noted that the draft
guideline could be understood to imply that internal law was always
irrelevant and ignored the fact that States may limit the provisional
application of treaties by making reference to internal law. | 一些委员指出，该准则草案可被理解为暗示国内法总是无关的，忽视了以下事实，即国家可通过提及国内法来限制对条约的暂时适用。 |
| This was distinct from the impermissible
invocation of internal law as provided for in article 27 and it was
considered important that the issue be reflected in the draft guidelines. | 这与第二十七条所载的不得援引国内法的规定不同，有人认为该准则草案必须反映这一问题。 |
| The view was also expressed that article
46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention should be further elaborated in the draft
guideline and that it was not sufficient to limit it to a clause without
prejudice. | 还有意见认为，应在准则草案中进一步阐述1969年《维也纳公约》第四十六条，仅在一不妨碍条款中提及该条是不够的。 |
| Consequently, the draft guideline should
address situations analogous to both articles 27 and 46. | 因此，该准则草案应当论及类似第二十七条的情况，又论及类似第四十六条的情况。 |
| 285. Some members expressed the view that
instead of incorporating certain provisions from the 1969 Vienna Convention
into the draft guidelines, as draft guideline 10 attempted to do, it might be
more appropriate to have a general guideline indicating that unless excluded
by the agreement providing for provisional application, the provisions of the
1969 Vienna Convention, to the extent relevant, applied to the provisional
application of a treaty. | 285. 一些委员认为，准则草案10试图将1969年《维也纳公约》的某些条款纳入准则草案，而更为适宜的做法可能是，拟订一条一般性准则，指明除非暂时适用协定不允许，否则1969年《维也纳公约》的条款，只要是相关的，即可适用于暂时适用条约的情况。 |
| (g) Practice of international
organizations in relation to application of treaties | (g) 关于条约适用的国际组织惯例 |
| 286. Several members found the
information in the report pertaining to the practice of international
organizations interesting. | 286. 若干委员认为报告中关于国际组织惯例的资料颇有意义。 |
| The Special Rapporteur was encouraged to
expand the section on regional organizations, in particular regarding the
African Union, to ensure a more inclusive approach. | 鼓励特别报告员扩充关于区域组织特别是关于非洲联盟的章节，确保采取更具包容性的方法。 |
| However, they observed that it was
unclear what conclusions could be drawn from the information provided. | 但也有委员注意到，尚不清楚能从特别报告员提供的资料中得出哪些结论。 |
| Other members considered that the
information provided was pertinent for the purpose of better understanding
State practice. | 其他委员认为，所提供的资料与更好地理解国家惯例这一目标相关。 |
| It was also pointed out that two very
different forms of practice were discussed. | 还有人指出，报告中讨论了两种非常不同的惯例形式。 |
| Some members were of the view that
whereas the information concerning the practice related to registration,
depository and publication of treaties did not seem relevant for the topic,
the information on treaties to which an organization was a party was highly
pertinent. | 一些委员认为，虽然关于登记、交存和公布条约所涉及的惯例的资料似乎与本专题无关，但是，一些条约的缔约方为一组织，关于此类条约的资料即具有高度相关性。 |
| It was this latter category that should
be further elaborated. | 应当对后一类情况作进一步阐述。 |
| In that regard, some members called for a
more in-depth comparative study on the provisional application of treaties
involving States, on the one hand, and those involving international
organizations, on the other hand. | 在这一方面，一些委员呼吁对以下两种情况进行深入的比较研究：一种情况为涉及各国的条约的暂时适用，另一种情况为涉及国际组织的条约的暂时适用。 |
| 287. Concerning the proposal for a
recommendation to revise regulations and manuals of the Secretariat with
regard to its registration and depository functions, some members doubted
that the matter fell within the scope of the topic. | 287. 有人提议，应建议修正秘书处在登记和保存职能方面的条例和手册，对此，一些委员提出质疑，认为该事项不属于本专题的范围。 |
| While the view was also expressed that
such a revision would be of value, it was suggested that the question could
be considered at a later stage. | 虽然有意见认为，这种修正是有价值的，但也有人建议在较后阶段再审议这一问题。 |
| (h) Future work | (h) 今后的工作 |
| 288. Regarding future work on the topic,
it was suggested that an exhaustive treatment of treaty provisions providing
for provisional application was essential in order to gain a more in-depth
understanding of the topic. | 288. 关于本专题今后的工作，有人建议，为深入理解本专题，必须对规定暂时适用的条款作出详尽讨论。 |
| It was observed that there seemed to be
extensive State practice relevant for the topic and undertaking a comparative
analysis of relevant treaty provisions could assist in understanding
provisional application and its relationship with the full application of a
treaty. | 有人注意到，与本专题有关的国家惯例似乎很多，对有关的条约条款进行比较分析可能有助于理解暂时适用，以及暂时适用与充分适用条约之间的关系。 |
| In addition, it was pointed out that a
comparison of provisions in agreements providing for provisional application
that condition such application on internal law would be particularly useful. | 另外有人指出，若能比较各协议中规定暂时适用应满足国内法条件的条款，将会尤为有用。 |
| 289. The view was expressed that future
work should also provide conclusions of the analysis already undertaken in
respect of the relationship between provisional application and other
provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 289. 有意见认为，对于暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》的其他规定的关系问题，已经进行了分析，今后的工作还应就这些分析得出结论。 |
| It was further suggested that the
questions of interpretative declarations made by States provisionally
applying a treaty and declarations made by States purporting not to apply a
treaty provisionally could be examined in future reports. | 还有人建议，应在今后的报告中研究各国作出的暂时适用条约的解释性声明以及宣称不暂时适用条约的声明的问题。 |
| 290. Concerning the Special Rapporteur’s proposal to examine the question of application of treaties that
enshrine the rights of individuals, the view was expressed that the matter
should be addressed with great care, taking into account State practice. | 290. 特别报告员提议，应研究维护个人权利的条约的适用问题，对此，有意见认为，应考虑国家惯例，极其谨慎地处理这一事项。 |
| 291. Several members welcomed the Special
Rapporteur’s intention to prepare model clauses. | 291. 若干委员对特别报告员准备编写示范条款表示欢迎。 |
| Caution was nevertheless advised against
attempting to analyse the meaning of each clause, which could affect the
meaning already ascribed by States to such clauses in existing treaties. | 但是，也有人提醒，不应试图分析每项条款的含义，这会影响各国在现有条约中已经赋予此类条款的含义。 |
| It was also pointed out that it may be
more appropriate to develop an indicative list of model clauses. | 还有人指出，拟订一份示范条款的指示性清单可能更为适宜。 |
| 3. Concluding remarks of the Special
Rapporteur | 3. 特别报告员的结论性意见 |
| 292. The Special Rapporteur recalled
that, from the outset of the Commission’s
consideration of the topic, a majority of the members had stressed the need
to examine the relationship between article 25 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
and its other provisions. | 292. 特别报告员回顾称，早在委员会刚开始审议本专题之时，大多数委员就已经强调，有必要审视1969年《维也纳公约》第二十五条与其他条款的关系。 |
| Some members had indicated which
provisions, in their view, were particularly relevant for this purpose,
including articles 46 and 60. | 一些委员说明了他们认为与此目的相关的条款，包括第四十六和第六十条。 |
| Such an analysis had been considered
pertinent in order to shed more light on the regime of provisional
application. | 当时认为，这种分析有助于更清楚地理解暂时适用制度。 |
| It had been on this basis that the
Special Rapporteur had prepared his fourth report. | 特别报告员正是以此为基础编写了第四次报告。 |
| He indicated that this exercise would be
completed in the fifth report, in which he would possibly address the
relationship between provisional application and article 34 of the 1969
Vienna Convention, concerning third States. | 他表示，将在第五次报告中完成这一工作，他可能在该次报告中论及暂时适用与1969年《维也纳公约》关于条约与第三国的第三十四条的关系。 |
| While he did not intend to propose a
draft guideline for every provision of the Convention that had been examined,
he stressed that, together, the reports would serve to provide a better understanding
of which articles were most relevant for the provisional application regime
and, ultimately, provide the wider context in which article 25 operates. | 他不打算为研究的每一条《公约》条款都提出一条准则草案，但他强调，这些报告作为一个整体将有助于更好地理解哪些条款与暂时适用制度最为相关，并最终说明施行第二十五条的更广泛的背景。 |
| 293. The Special Rapporteur observed that
several members had emphasized the practical value of this topic to States. | 293. 特别报告员注意到，若干委员强调了本专题对各国的实用价值。 |
| While he agreed that the topic had to be
treated systematically, he also considered it important to take into account
and reflect the views and concrete proposals of States in developing the
topic. | 他同意，应当系统地处理本专题，但他认为在拟订本专题的过程中必须考虑并反映各国的意见和具体提议。 |
| 294. The Special Rapporteur did not agree
with the suggestion that article 25 may constitute a self-contained regime since
such a proposition may negatively affect the notion of the universality of
international law and limit the legal effects that had been identified with
regard to provisional application. | 294. 特别报告员不同意第二十五条可构成一项完备制度的意见，因为这一论点可能对国际法普遍性的概念产生不利影响，并限制已确认的暂时适用所具备的法律效力。 |
| The Commission should not address the
topic as a matter of lex specialis. | 委员会不应将本专题作为特别法处理。 |
| If, instead, it was recognized that a
provisionally applied treaty produced legal effects as if the treaty were in
force, as it had indeed been acknowledged, the task would then be to identify
the rules under general international law that would apply in concrete
situations and thereby provide guidance to States. | 如果确认条约在被暂时适用时与生效时具有相同的法律效力(这一点曾得到承认)，则必须确认在具体情况下适用的一般性国际法规则，从而向各国提供指导。 |
| In this regard, the Special Rapporteur
found the proposal of elaborating a general draft guideline that would
provide that the 1969 Vienna Convention applied mutatis mutandis to
provisionally applied treaties interesting. | 在这方面，特别报告员感兴趣的提议是，拟订一条一般性准则草案，规定1969年《维也纳公约》比照适用于暂时适用的条约。 |
| 295. The Special Rapporteur further noted
that in considering the topic, drawing conclusions based on analogy had been
warranted in the circumstances since, according to him, practice had been
scarce or inaccessible. | 295. 特别报告员还指出，在审议本专题时，曾允许通过类比得出结论，他说这是由于惯例缺少或不得而知。 |
| This methodology was not unusual. | 这种方法并不罕见。 |
| 296. While the Special Rapporteur fully
agreed that it would be useful to undertake a comparative analysis of
treaties providing for provisional application, he recalled the difficulties
he had encountered in obtaining the relevant information. | 296. 特别报告员完全同意，对规定暂时适用的条约进行比较分析会有所裨益，但他回顾，自己在获取相关资料的过程中遇有许多困难。 |
| He elaborated on the relevance of the
information provided by the Treaty Section of the Office of Legal Affairs in
this regard. | 他详细介绍了法律事务厅条约科在这方面提供的资料的作用。 |
| He explained that the Treaty Section had
had to develop a specific tool in order to conduct the search that led to the
identification of treaties that contain provisional application clauses, but
clarified that such information is not accessible to external users. | 他解释称，条约科不得不开发一个专门的工具来搜索识别包含暂时适用条款的条约，但他澄清说，这种资料并不对外界用户开放。 |
| Likewise, he underscored that it was very
difficult to identify all actions regarding provisional application given the
limitations of the search criteria of the Treaty Series. | 他同时强调，由于《条约汇编》搜索条件的局限，要想识别出暂时适用方面的所有行动是非常困难的。 |
| The added value of the information
provided in the fourth report was that it showed that there was a large
number of treaties apparently containing provisional application clauses, as
well as registration of actions linked to provisional application; at the
same time, it revealed the difficulty of obtaining such information. | 第四次报告所载资料的附加值在于，这些资料证明有许多条约显然包含了暂时适用条款，并载有暂时适用方面的各种行动；与此同时，这些资料也显示了获取此类资料的难度。 |
| This was why it had not yet been possible
to obtain a picture of practice on the subject. | 这就是为什么一直无法掌握有关这一主题的惯例情况的原因。 |
| 297. The Special Rapporteur further
underlined that the Commission seemed to be overlooking the fact that the
regulations for the registration of treaties, the Repertory of Practice of
United Nations Organs and the manuals on treaty law and practice were
developed, not on the basis of the legal regime established by article 25,
but on criteria that predated the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 297. 特别报告员进而强调，委员会似乎忽视了以下事实，即条约登记条例、《联合国各机关惯例汇编》
以及条约法与惯例手册 不是在第二十五条所建立的法律制度，而是在1969年《维也纳公约》诞生之前就存在的标准基础上制定的。 |
| This had an impact on the practice of
States since they used such documents as a guide when referring to
provisional application. | 这对各国的惯例产生了影响，因为各国在提到暂时适用时是以这些文件作为指引的。 |
| Moreover, since advice given by the
Treaty Section to States upon request also followed those criteria, it had
the potential of misleading them. | 此外，条约科应各国请求向其提供的建议也遵循这些标准，从而有可能对各国产生误导。 |
| Therefore, State practice may very well
deviate from the legal regime established under article 25. | 因此，国家惯例很可能偏离第二十五条所建立的法律制度。 |
| 298. As regards information reflecting
the practice of regional organizations, the Special Rapporteur agreed that it
would be useful to expand this section to include the African Union. | 298. 关于反映区域组织惯例的资料，特别报告员同意，有必要扩充这一章节以加入非洲联盟的资料。 |
| 299. As regards the discussion on
reservations, the Special Rapporteur reiterated that he had not, in the
debate or in the research, come across any provision that specifically
addressed the possibility of formulating a reservation in relation to provisional
application. | 299. 关于保留方面的讨论，特别报告员重申，他在辩论和研究中均未见过任何条款明确论及拟订一项关于暂时适用的保留的可能性。 |
| While some of the examples referred to
during the debate merited further examination, others did not, in his view,
constitute reservations as such. | 虽然辩论期间提到的一些例子值得进一步研究，但他认为其他例子本身不属于保留。 |
| He further reiterated that the guide on
reservations is silent regarding provisional application and that paragraph
(5) of the commentary to guideline 2.2.2 vaguely addressed this issue, as a
hypothetical possibility, without referring to any practice on the matter. | 他还重申，关于保留的指南没有提到暂时适用，而准则2.2.2的评注第(5)段只是模糊地谈到了这一问题，将之视作一种假设的可能性，而没有提到这方面的任何惯例。 |
| 300. The Special Rapporteur reiterated
that articles 27 and 46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, while referring to the
internal law of States, indeed referred to two different aspects but that
they created a complementary regime. | 300. 特别报告员重申，1969年《维也纳公约》第二十七和第四十六条在提及各国的国内法时其实提到了两个不同的方面，但这两条产生了一种互补的制度。 |
| He then concurred with those members who
considered that both articles 27 and 46 should be reflected in the draft
guidelines and noted that this had been his intention with draft guideline
10. | 他随之赞同一些委员提出的在准则草案中反映第二十七和第四十六条的意见，并指出这就是他编写准则草案10的意图所在。 |
| Furthermore, he also agreed that future
draft guidelines should address situations in which the agreement to provisionally
apply a treaty limited the provisional application of a treaty by referring
to internal law. | 此外，他还同意，今后的准则草案应论及以下这种情况，即暂时适用条约的协定因提及国内法而限制了暂时适用的情况。 |
| Chapter XIII | 第十三章 |
| Other decisions and conclusions of the
Commission | 委员会的其他决定和结论 |
| A. Requests by the Commission for the
Secretariat to prepare studies on two topics in the Commission’s agenda | A. 委员会请秘书处就委员会议程上的两个专题编写研究报告 |
| 301. At its 3303rd meeting, on 24 May
2016, the Commission decided to request from the Secretariat a memorandum on
ways and means for making the evidence of customary international law more
readily available, which would survey the present state of the evidence of
customary international law and make suggestions for its improvement. | 301. 在2016年5月24日第3303次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份备忘录，说明以何方式和方法能使习惯国际法的证据更容易获得。
备忘录将调查习惯国际法的证据的现状，并提出改进建议。 |
| 302. At its 3347th meeting, held on 12
August 2016, the Commission decided to request from the Secretariat a
memorandum analysing State practice in respect of treaties (bilateral and
multilateral), deposited or registered in the last 20 years with the
Secretary-General, which provide for provisional application, including
treaty actions related thereto. | 302. 在2016年8月12日第3347次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份备忘录，分析与过去20年向秘书长交存或登记的对暂时适用作了规定的(双边和多边)条约有关的国家实践，包括与这些条约有关的条约行动。 |
| B. Programme, procedures and working
methods of the Commission and its documentation | B. 委员会的方案、程序和工作方法以及文件 |
| 303. At its 3300th meeting, on 18 May
2016, the Commission established a Planning Group for the current session. | 303. 在2016年5月18日第3300次会议上，委员会设立了本届会议规划组。 |
| 304. The Planning Group held four
meetings. | 304. 规划组举行了4次会议。 |
| It had before it Section H, entitled “Other decisions and conclusions of the Commission”, of the Topical Summary of the discussion held in the Sixth
Committee of the General Assembly during its seventieth session; document
A/71/6 (Prog. 6) Proposed strategic framework for the period 2018-2019:
Programme 6, Legal affairs; General Assembly resolution 70/236 of 23 December
2015 on the Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its sixty-seventh
session; and General Assembly resolution 70/118 of 14 December 2015 on the
rule of law at the national and international levels. | 规划组收到的文件有：题为“委员会的其他决定和结论”的大会第七十届会议第六委员会讨论情况专题摘要H节；A/71/6(Prog.6)号文件，2018-2019年期间拟议战略框架：方案6, 法律事务；大会2015年12月23日关于国际法委员会第六十七届会议工作报告的第70/236号决议；和大会2015年12月14日关于国内和国际法治的第70/118号决议。 |
| 305. At its 2nd meeting, on 8 June 2016,
the Planning Group took note of the proposed Strategic Framework for the
period 2018-2019 (A/71/6), covering subprogramme 3 (Progressive development
and codification of international law) of programme 6 (Legal affairs). | 305. 规划组在2016年6月8日第2次会议上注意到2018-2019年期间拟议战略框架(A/71/6)方案6(法律事务)次级方案3(国际法的逐渐发展和编纂)。 |
| 1. Working Group on the Long-term
Programme of Work | 1. 长期工作方案工作组 |
| 306. At its 1st meeting, on 3 June 2016,
the Planning Group decided to reconstitute for the present session the
Working Group on the Long-term Programme of Work, under the chairmanship of
Mr. Donald M. McRae. | 306. 在2016年6月3日第1次会议上，规划组决定为本届会议重新设立长期工作方案工作组，由唐纳德•麦克雷先生担任主席。 |
| The Working Group submitted its report on
the work of the quinquennium to the Planning Group, at its 4th meeting, on 29
July 2016. | 在规划组2016年7月29日第4次会议上，工作组就五年期的工作向规划组提交了报告。 |
| 307. The Commission noted that it had
already recommended during the present quinquennium the inclusion in its
long-term programme of work of the topics (a) Crimes against humanity; and
(b) Jus cogens. | 307. 委员会指出，委员会在本五年期内已经建议将下列两个专题纳入委员会的长期工作方案：(a) 危害人类罪；(b) 强行法。 |
| These two topics were already on the
current programme of work of the Commission, included, respectively, at the
sixty-fifth (2013) and sixty-sixth (2014) sessions of the Commission. | 这两个专题已经在委员会目前的工作方案中，是分别于委员会第六十五届会议(2013年) 和第六十六届会议(2014年) 纳入的。 |
| 308. At the present session, the
Commission, on the recommendation of the Working Group, decided to recommend
the inclusion of the following topics in the long-term programme of work of
the Commission: | 308. 在本届会议上，委员会根据工作组的建议，决定将下列专题纳入委员会的长期工作方案： |
| (a) The settlement of international
disputes to which international organizations are parties; and | (a) 国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决；和 |
| (b) Succession of States in respect of
State responsibility. | (b) 国家责任方面的国家继承。 |
| 309. In the selection of the topics, the
Commission was guided by its recommendation at its fiftieth session (1998)
regarding the criteria for the selection of the topics, namely: | 309. 委员会在选择专题时遵循了委员会第五十届会议(1998年)关于专题选择标准的建议，即： |
| (a) the topic should reflect the needs of
States in respect of the progressive development and codification of
international law; | (a) 专题应反映各国在逐渐发展和编纂国际法方面的需要； |
| (b) the topic should be sufficiently
advanced in stage in terms of State practice to permit progressive
development and codification; | (b) 专题在国家实践方面应足够成熟，从而允许逐渐发展和编纂； |
| and (c) the topic should be concrete and
feasible for progressive development and codification. | 和(c) 专题应具体且可行，以供进行逐渐发展和编纂。 |
| The Commission further agreed that it
should not restrict itself to traditional topics, but could also consider
those that reflect new developments in international law and pressing
concerns of the international community as a whole. | 委员会还同意，它不应自限于传统专题，也可审议那些反映国际法新发展和整个国际社会紧迫关切的专题。 |
| The Commission considered that these two
topics constitute useful contributions to the progressive development of
international law and its codification. | 委员会认为，上述两个专题可对国际法的逐渐发展和编纂作出有益的贡献。 |
| The syllabuses of the two topics selected
appear as annexes A and B to the present report. | 所选择的这两个专题的大纲载于本报告的附件A和B。 |
| 310. The Commission recalls that five
other topics remain inscribed in the long-term programme of work from
previous quinquennia, namely: | 310. 委员会回顾，长期工作方案中还有从上一个五年期遗留下来的其他五个专题，即： |
| (a) Ownership and protection of wrecks
beyond the limits of national maritime jurisdiction; | (a) 国家海事管辖范围以外的沉船的所有权及保护； |
| (b) Jurisdictional immunity of
international organizations; | (b) 国际组织的管辖豁免； |
| (c) Protection of personal data in
trans-border flow of information; | (c) 信息跨界流动的个人数据保护问题； |
| (d) Extraterritorial jurisdiction; | (d) 域外管辖权； |
| and (e) The fair and equitable treatment
standard in international investment law. | 和(e) 国际投资法律中的公正和公平待遇标准。 |
| 311. The Commission noted that the
Working Group on the Long-term programme of work considered its methods of
work, at the beginning of the current quinquennium, taking into account its
long-standing practice in the selection of topics. | 311. 委员会注意到，长期工作方案工作组在本五年期开始时考虑到长期以来在选择专题方面的做法，审议了工作组的工作方法。 |
| The Commission noted that the Working
Group on the Long-term Programme of Work had found that the established
three-phase process, consisting of (a) identification of possible topics; (b)
preparation of a short paper on a given topic; and (c) preparation of a more
detailed syllabus, was a good basis for its work. | 委员会注意到，长期工作方案工作组断定，分三个阶段进行的现有做法为开展工作提供了良好的基础，这三个阶段是：(a) 确定可能的专题；(b) 就特定专题编写篇幅很短的文件；和(c) 编写较详细的大纲。 |
| This process allowed for a broad exchange
of views on a given topic and, at the same time, provided a good means of ensuring
a topic’s feasibility. | 按照这一程序，可就特定专题广泛交流意见，同时有助于保证专题的可行性。 |
| Moreover, while aware that the decision
to place new topics on the Long-term Programme of Work had usually been taken
at the end of the quinquennium, the Working Group considered it appropriate
to make such decisions during the course of the present quinquennium. | 此外，虽然意识到通常是在五年期快结束时就长期工作方案的新专题作出决定，但工作组认为宜在本五年期内作出此类决定。 |
| 312. The Commission also noted that it
had identified the need to conduct a systematic review of the work of the
Commission and a survey of possible future topics for consideration. | 312. 委员会还指出，委员会确定有必要对自己的工作进行一次系统审查并对委员会未来可能审议的专题进行调查。 |
| To this end, in 2014, it had requested
the Secretariat to review the illustrative general scheme of topics prepared
by the Commission in 1996, in the light of subsequent developments and to
prepare a list of potential topics for the Commission, accompanied by brief
explanatory notes, by the end of the present quinquennium. | 为此目的，委员会于2014年请秘书处在本五年期结束前根据嗣后的情况发展审查1996年委员会编订的说明性专题大纲以及编写一份委员会可能审议的专题清单并附以简短的解释性说明。 |
| In response to that request, the
Secretariat had prepared two memorandums, the first in 2015 which reviewed
the list of topics established in 1996 in the light of subsequent
developments (A/CN.4/679), and the second for the present session concerning “Possible topics for consideration taking into account the review
of the list of topics established in 1996 in the light of subsequent
developments” (A/CN.4/679/Add.1), which contains six
working papers setting out brief explanatory notes on potential topics for
the Working Group’s consideration. | 依照这一请求，秘书处编写了两份备忘录。 第一份备忘录是2015年编写的，其中根据嗣后情况发展审查了1996年编订的专题清单(A/CN.4/679)。 第二份备忘录是为本届会议编写的，题为“考虑到根据嗣后情况发展对1996年编订的专题清单的审查结果提出的可能审议的专题”(A/CN.4/679/Add.1)，其中载有六份工作文件，对可供工作组审议的专题作了简要的解释性说明。 |
| 313. The Commission welcomed the two
memorandums prepared by the Secretariat, and took note of the six potential
topics as proposed by the Secretariat, namely | 313. 委员会欢迎秘书处编写的两份备忘录，并注意到有六个可能的专题，即： |
| (a) “General
principles of law”; | (a) “一般法律原则”； |
| (b) “International
agreements concluded with or between subjects of international law other than
States or international organizations”; | (b) “与国家或国际组织以外的国际法主体或此类主体相互间缔结的国际协定”； |
| (c) “Recognition
of States”; | (c) “国家的承认”； |
| (d) “Land
boundary delimitation and demarcation”; | (d) “陆地边界的划定和标定”； |
| (e) “Compensation
under international law”; | (e) “国际法下的补偿”； |
| and (f) “Principles
of evidence in international law”. | 和(f) “国际法中的证据原则”。 |
| The Commission recommended that the six
potential topics be further considered by the Working Group on the Long-term
Programme of Work at the sixty-ninth session of the Commission (2017). | 委员会建议长期工作方案工作组在委员会第六十九届会议上(2017年)进一步审议这六个可能的专题。 |
| 2. Consideration of General Assembly
resolution 70/118 of 14 December 2015 on the rule of law at the national and
international levels | 2. 审议大会2015年12月14日关于国内和国际法治的第70/118号决议 |
| 314. The General Assembly, in resolution
70/118 of 14 December 2015 on the rule of law at the national and
international levels, inter alia, reiterated its invitation to the Commission
to comment, in its report to the General Assembly, on its current role in
promoting the rule of law. | 314. 大会2015年12月14日关于国内和国际法治的第70/118号决议特别重申，请委员会在提交大会的报告中就其目前在促进法治方面发挥的作用发表评论。 |
| Since its sixtieth session (2008), the
Commission has commented annually on its role in promoting the rule of law. | 自第六十届会议(2008年)以来，委员会每年均对其在促进法治方面的作用作出评论。 |
| The Commission notes that the comments
contained in paragraphs 341 to 346 of its 2008 report (A/63/10) remain
relevant and reiterates the comments made at its previous sessions. | 委员会指出，2008年报告(A/63/10)第341至第346段所载的评论依然适用，并重申了其后各届会议所作的评论。 |
| 315. The Commission recalls that the rule
of law is of the essence of its work. | 315. 委员会回顾，法治是其工作的精髓。 |
| The Commission’s
purpose, as set out in article 1 of its Statute, is to promote the
progressive development of international law and its codification. | 委员会的宗旨一如其《章程》第1条所申明的，是促进国际法的逐渐发展及其编纂。 |
| 316. Having in mind the principle of the
rule of law in all its work, the Commission is fully conscious of the
importance of the implementation of international law at the national level,
and aims at promoting respect for the rule of law at the international level. | 316. 委员会在其所有工作中都铭记法治原则，充分意识到在国家层面实施国际法的重要性，并以在国际层面促进尊重法治为追求的目标。 |
| 317. In fulfilling its mandate concerning
the progressive development of international law and its codification, the
Commission will continue to take into account, where appropriate, the rule of
law as a principle of governance and the human rights that are fundamental to
the rule of law, as reflected in the preamble and in Article 13 of the
Charter of the United Nations and in the Declaration of the High-level
Meeting of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and
International Levels. | 317. 委员会在履行其逐渐发展和编纂国际法这项任务的同时，将继续在适当时考虑到法治即为一项治理原则，并考虑到人权对于法治具有根本意义，正如《联合国宪章》第十三条和《国内和国际的法治问题大会高级别会议宣言》
所反映的那样。 |
| 318. In its current work, the Commission
is aware of “the interrelationship between the rule
of law and the three pillars of the United Nations (peace and security,
development, and human rights)”, without emphasizing
one at the expense of the other. | 318. 在其目前的工作当中，委员会意识到“法治与联合国三大支柱(和平与安全、发展、人权)之间的相互关系”， 不会顾此失彼。 |
| In this context the Commission is
cognizant that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development recognizes the
need for an effective rule of law and good governance at all levels. | 为此，委员会深知，2030年可持续发展议程中确认有必要在各级实行有效的法治和良政。 |
| In fulfilling its mandate concerning the
progressive development and codification of international law, the Commission
is conscious of current challenges for the rule of law. | 委员会在履行其关于国际法的逐渐发展和编纂的任务时，认识到法治当前面临的挑战。 |
| 319. Recalling that the General Assembly
has stressed the importance of promoting the sharing of national best
practices on the rule of law, the Commission wishes to recall that much of
its work consists in collecting and analysing national practices related to
the rule of law with a view to assessing their possible contribution to the
progressive development and codification of international law. | 319. 鉴于大会强调必须促进分享各国在法治方面的最佳做法， 委员会希望回顾，其大部分工作就是收集和分析各国与法治有关的实践，以评估这些实践对国际法的逐渐发展和编纂可能作出的贡献。 |
| 320. Bearing in mind the role of multilateral
treaty processes in advancing the rule of law, the Commission recalls that
the work of the Commission on different topics has led to several
multilateral treaty processes and to the adoption of a number of multilateral
treaties. | 320. 铭记多边条约进程对推进法治的作用， 委员会回顾，委员会围绕不同专题开展过的工作已促成了若干多边条约进程，并使一些多边条约获得通过。 |
| 321. In the course of the present session
the Commission has continued to make its contribution to the rule of law,
including by working on the topics “Protection of
persons in the event of disasters” (adopted on second
reading at the present session), “Immunity of state
officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction”, “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties” (adopted on first reading
at the present session), “Provisional application of
treaties”, “Identification of
customary international law” (adopted on first
reading at the current session), “Protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflicts”, “Protection of the atmosphere”, “Crimes against humanity” and “Jus cogens”. | 321. 在本届会议过程中，委员会继续为法治作出自己的贡献，包括围绕下列专题开展工作：“发生灾害时的人员保护”(在本届会议上二读通过)、“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”、“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”(在本届会议上一读通过)、“条约的暂时适用”、“习惯国际法的识别”(在本届会议上一读通过)、“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”、“保护大气层”、“危害人类罪”和“强行法”。 |
| 322. The Commission reiterates its commitment
to the rule of law in all of its activities. | 322. 委员会重申在其全部活动中致力于促进法治。 |
| 3. Consideration of paragraphs 9 to 12 of
resolution 70/236 of 23 December 2015 on the Report of the International Law
Commission on the work of the sixty-seventh session | 3. 审议大会2015年12月23日关于国际法委员会第六十七届会议工作报告的第70/236号决议第9至第12段 |
| 323. The Commission took note of
paragraphs 9 to 12 of resolution 70/236 of 23 December 2015. | 323. 委员会注意到大会2015年12月23日第70/236号决议第9至第12段。 |
| By the terms of paragraph 10 and 11 of
the resolution, the Assembly noted that the Commission had affirmed its wish
that consideration be given to the possibility of holding one half session in
the next quinquennium in New York and had indicated that, taking into account
the estimated costs and relevant administrative, organizational and other
factors, such a possibility could be anticipated during the first segment of
a session in either the first year (2017) or the second year (2018) of the
next quinquennium. | 在该决议第10和第11段中，大会注意到，委员会申明希望考虑在下个五年期在纽约举行半届会议的可能性并指出可以在下个五年期第一年(2017年)或第二年(2018年)届会第一期会议上预先考虑这种可能性，同时考虑到估计费用以及相关行政因素、组织因素和其他因素。 |
| The Assembly took note of the
recommendation made by the Commission in paragraph 298 of its 2015 report
that preparatory work and estimates proceed on the assumption that the first
segment of its seventieth session (2018) would be convened at United Nations
Headquarters in New York, as well as of the request of the Commission that
the Secretariat proceed to make the necessary arrangements for that purpose
so as to facilitate the taking of the appropriate decision by the Commission
at its sixty-eighth session, in 2016. | 大会注意到，委员会在其报告(2015年)第298段中建议基于委员会第七十届会议(2018年)第一期会议将在纽约联合国总部举行的假设而开展筹备工作和作出估计，还注意到委员会请秘书处为此作出必要安排，以便委员会在2016年第六十八届会议上作出适当决定。 |
| 324. Upon being afforded further
information by the Secretariat that, taking into account the estimated costs
and relevant administrative, organizational and other factors, it would be
feasible to hold one half session in the first year (2017) or the second year
(2018) of the next quinquennium in New York, the Commission considered that
holding such a half session during its seventieth session in 2018 would be
the most convenient. | 324. 秘书处提供的进一步信息表明，在考虑到估计费用以及相关行政因素、组织因素和其他因素后，在下个五年期第一年(2017年)或第二年(2018年)在纽约举行半届会议是可行的。 有鉴于此，委员会认为，2018年第七十届会议期间在纽约举行半届会议最为方便。 |
| 325. It was noted that 2017 would be the
first year of the quinquennium for the membership of the Commission to be
elected during the seventy-first session of the General Assembly. | 325. 应指出，对大会第七十一届会议将选举出的委员会委员来说，2017年将是五年期的第一年。 |
| A session at its seat at the United
Nations Office at Geneva would be optimal for new members as they transition
into the work of the Commission. | 在新委员忙于熟悉委员会工作之时，届会最好在委员会所在地联合国日内瓦办事处举行。 |
| In addition, it was recognized that the
Commission would be commemorating its seventieth anniversary session in 2018,
and having part of its session in New York could serve the endeavours of
further enhancing the dialogue between the Commission and the Sixth
Committee. | 此外，委员会认识到，2018年的届会正逢委员会成立七十周年，在纽约举行部分届会将可有助于进一步加强委员会与第六委员会之间的对话。 |
| 326. Accordingly, the Commission
recommends that it holds the first part of its seventieth session in New
York, and requests the Secretariat to proceed with the necessary
administrative and organizational arrangements to facilitate the holding of
such a session in New York. | 326. 因此，委员会建议其第七十届会议第一期会议在纽约举行，并请秘书处着手进行必要的行政和组织安排，以便在纽约举行这一会议。 |
| Particular attention was drawn to the
need to ensure access to library facilities at Headquarters, and electronic
access to the resources and research assistance of the Library of the United
Nations Office at Geneva. | 特别要注意的是，需确保能够使用总部图书馆的设施，同时保证能够以电子方式使用联合国日内瓦办事处图书馆的资源和研究协助。 |
| The need to ensure access and sufficient
space for assistants to members of the Commission to attend meetings of the
Commission was also emphasized. | 还要强调，需确保委员会委员助理能够参加会议并为他们提供足够的座位。 |
| 4. Seventieth anniversary session of the
International Law Commission | 4. 国际法委员会七十周年届会 |
| 327. The Commission recommends that a
seventieth anniversary event be held during its seventieth session in 2018. | 327. 委员会建议在其2018年第七十届会议期间举办纪念七十周年的活动。 |
| The anniversary event could be held in
two parts, the first during the first part of its seventieth session in New
York, and the second during the second part of its seventieth session in
Geneva. | 周年纪念活动可分两部分举行，第一部分于第七十届会议第一期会议期间在纽约举行，第二部分于第七十届会议第二期会议期间在日内瓦举行。 |
| 328. The Commission recommends that
during the first part of its seventieth session that is recommended to be
held in New York: | 328. 委员会建议，在建议于纽约举行的第七十届会议第一期会议期间： |
| (a) a solemn half day meeting of the
Commission be held at which would be invited high-level dignitaries; | (a) 委员会举行庄严的半天会议，并邀请高官参加； |
| (b) an informal half day meeting be held
with delegates to the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly to exchange
views on the work of the Commission, the relationship between the Commission
and the Sixth Committee, and the role of both bodies in the promotion of the
progressive development and codification of international law. | (b) 与出席大会第六委员会的代表们举行半天非正式会议，以便就委员会的工作、委员会与第六委员会之间的关系和两个机构在促进国际法的逐渐发展和编纂方面发挥的作用交流看法。 |
| 329. The Commission recommends that
during the second part of its seventieth session in Geneva, a one and a half
day conference be held with legal advisers of States and international
organizations, academics and other distinguished international lawyers,
dedicated to the work of the Commission. | 329. 委员会建议，在日内瓦举行第七十届会议第二期会议期间召开一次为期一天半的专门讨论委员会工作的会议，并请各国及各国际组织的法律顾问、学术界人士和其他声誉卓著的国际法学家参加。 |
| 330. The Commission also recommends that
a report of these meetings shall be presented and discussed in an appropriate
form at the annual meeting of the Legal Advisers in New York. | 330. 委员会还建议，应编写这些会议的报告，以供在纽约举行法律顾问年度会议期间在适当的论坛进行讨论。 |
| 331. The Commission further recommends
that the anniversary event leads to a publication. | 331. 委员会又建议，周年纪念活动的一个成果是随后出版一本出版物。 |
| 332. The Commission requests the
Secretariat, in consultation with the Chairperson of the Commission and the
Chairperson of the Planning Group, to commence making arrangements for the
holding of the commemorative event. | 332. 委员会请秘书处与委员会主席和规划组主席磋商，着手为纪念活动的举行进行安排。 |
| 5. Honoraria | 5. 酬金 |
| 333. The Commission reiterates its views
concerning the question of honoraria, resulting from the adoption by the
General Assembly of its resolution 56/272 of 27 March 2002, which has been
expressed in the previous reports of the Commission. | 333. 委员会重申了对大会通过2002年3月27日第56/272号决议所引起的酬金问题的意见，委员会以前的报告表明了这些意见。 |
| The Commission emphasizes that resolution
56/272 especially affects Special Rapporteurs, as it compromises support for
their research work. | 委员会强调，第56/272号决议尤其影响到特别报告员，因为该决议缩减了对他们研究工作的支持。 |
| 6. Documentation and publications | 6. 文件和出版物 |
| 334. The Commission reiterated its
recognition of the particular relevance and significant value to the work of
the Commission of the legal publications prepared by the Secretariat. | 334. 委员会再次确认，秘书处编写的法律出版物对委员会工作特别有用并很有价值。 |
| It once more recalled that the
Codification Division had previously been able to expedite significantly the
issuance of its publications through its highly successful desktop publishing
initiative which had greatly enhanced the timeliness and relevance of those
publications to the Commission’s work for more than a
decade. | 委员会再次回顾，十多年来，编纂司通过非常成功的桌面出版计划，得以大幅度加快出版物的印发，极大地提高了这些出版物的及时性和对委员会工作的作用。 |
| The Commission expressed its strong
concern at the curtailment and discontinuation of that initiative due to lack
of resources, and its deep regret that consequently no new legal publications
were distributed at its current session. | 委员会对该计划因资源不足而受到缩减和终止极表关切，并对本届会议因此没有分发任何新的法律出版物深感遗憾。 |
| 335. The Commission expressed its strong
view that the resumption of this initiative was essential to ensure the
timely issuance of these legal publications, in particular The Work of the
International Law Commission, the early availability of which in the various
official languages was a vital tool in the Commission’s work, and accordingly the Commission called for the resumption of
the desktop publishing initiative. | 335. 委员会强烈表示，恢复该计划对于确保及时印发这些法律出版物特别是《国际法委员会的工作》十分关键。
委员会及早获得这些出版物的各正式语文本对委员会的工作极有助益，因此委员会要求恢复桌面出版计划。 |
| The Commission again reiterated the
particular relevance and significant value of the legal publications prepared
by the Codification Division to its work, and reiterated its request that the
Codification Division continue to provide it with those publications. | 委员会再次重申，编纂司编写的法律出版物对其工作特别有用并很有价值，再次请编纂司继续为其提供这些出版物。 |
| 336. The Commission reiterated its
satisfaction that the summary records of the Commission, constituting crucial
travaux préparatoires in the progressive development
and codification of international law, would not be subject to arbitrary
length restrictions. | 336. 委员会满意地重申，委员会的简要记录是国际法逐渐发展和编纂过程中的重要准备工作文件，将不受任意的篇幅限制。 |
| The Commission once more noted with
satisfaction that the measures introduced at its sixty-fifth session (2013)
to streamline the processing of its summary records had resulted in their
more expeditious transmission to members of the Commission for timely
correction and prompt release. | 委员会再次满意地注意到，第六十五届会议(2013年)开始实行简化委员会简要记录处理程序的措施，使得临时记录可以更快地发给委员会委员作及时更正和随后迅速印发。 |
| The Commission called on the Secretariat
to continue its efforts to sustain the measures in question, in order to
ensure the expeditious transmission of the provisional records to members of
the Commission. | 委员会要求秘书处继续努力推行这些措施，以保证临时记录可以很快地发给委员会委员。 |
| The Commission also welcomed the fact
that these working methods had led to the more rational use of resources and
called on the Secretariat to continue its efforts to facilitate the
preparation of the definitive records in all languages, without compromising
their integrity. | 委员会还对这些工作方法能够更合理地利用资源表示欢迎，并要求秘书处继续努力，方便各语文简要记录定本的编制，而又不致影响其完整性。 |
| 337. The Commission expressed its
gratitude to all Services involved in the processing of documents, both in
Geneva and in New York, for their efforts in seeking to ensure timely and
efficient processing of the Commission’s documents,
often under narrow time constraints. | 337. 委员会感谢日内瓦和纽约参与文件处理的各个部门经常在时间紧迫的情况下及时高效地处理委员会的文件。 |
| In particular, the Commission noted with
satisfaction that a number of experimental measures to streamline the editing
of the Commission’s documents were introduced
following exchanges between the secretariat of the Commission and the Editing
Section of the United Nations Office at Geneva. | 特别是，委员会满意地注意到，在委员会秘书处与联合国日内瓦办事处交流意见后，采取了一些简化委员会文件编辑工作的试验性措施。 |
| The new arrangements contributed to the
improvement of the document considered by the Commission and facilitated its
work. | 这些新安排有助于改进秘书处审议的文件，并便利其工作。 |
| 338. The Commission expressed concern,
however, that the issuance in all official languages of some reports of
Special Rapporteurs had been delayed, thereby disrupting its programme of
work. | 338. 但委员会感到关切的是，某些特别报告员的报告的所有正式语文本迟迟不能印发，从而打乱了工作方案。 |
| It noted that timely and efficient
processing was essential for the smooth conduct of the Commission’s work. | 委员会指出，及时高效的处理对委员会顺利开展工作至为重要。 |
| 339. The Commission reaffirms its
commitment to multilingualism and recalls the paramount importance to be
given in its work to the equality of the six official languages of the United
Nations, which has been emphasized in General Assembly resolution 69/324 of
11 September 2015. | 339. 委员会重申其对使用多种语文的承诺，并回顾，大会2015年9月11日第69/324号决议中强调联合国六种正式语文地位平等至关重要，因此委员会在其工作中极其重视六种正式语文的地位平等。 |
| This commitment is reflected, inter alia,
in the established practice of the Commission to debate in plenary the
reports of the Special Rapporteurs after they have been published in all
official languages. | 委员会的这一承诺除其他外，反映在委员会要等所有正式语文本都印发之后才在全体会议上辩论特别报告员的报告这一惯例中。 |
| In this regard, the Commission wishes to
emphasize that the measures of a very exceptional character which have been
resorted to during the present session with regard to the debate on the topic
“Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction” (see Chap. XI) will not constitute, in
any respect, a precedent. | 在这方面，委员会希望强调，本届会议期间对“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”专题的辩论所采取的性质非常特殊的措施(见第十一章)在任何方面均不构成先例。 |
| 340. In this respect, the Commission (a)
requests the Secretariat to continue to ensure that official documents of the
Commission are published in due time in the six official languages of the
United Nations; and (b) requests Special Rapporteurs to submit their reports
within the time limits specified by the Secretariat. | 340. 在这方面，委员会：(a)
要求秘书处继续确保及时印发委员会正式文件的联合国六种正式语文本；和(b) 请特别报告员在秘书处订明的时限内提交报告。 |
| 341. The Commission expressed its warm
appreciation to the United Nations Office at Geneva Library, which continued
to assist members of the Commission very efficiently and competently. | 341. 委员会表示热烈赞赏联合国日内瓦办事处图书馆十分高效和称职地向委员们提供了协助。 |
| 7. Yearbook of the International Law
Commission | 7. 《国际法委员会年鉴》 |
| 342. The Commission reiterated that the
Yearbook of the International Law Commission was critical to the
understanding of the Commission’s work in the
progressive development of international law and its codification, as well as
in the strengthening of the rule of law in international relations. | 342. 委员会重申，《国际法委员会年鉴》对于了解委员会在逐渐发展和编纂国际法以及加强国际关系中法治方面的工作具有关键意义。 |
| The Commission took note that the General
Assembly, in its resolution 70/236, expressed its appreciation to governments
that had made voluntary contributions to the Trust Fund on the backlog
relating to the Yearbook, and encouraged further contributions to the Trust
Fund. | 委员会注意到，大会第70/236号决议赞赏有关国家政府为帮助解决《年鉴》工作积压问题的信托基金自愿捐款，并鼓励各方进一步为该信托基金捐款。 |
| 343. The Commission recommends that the
General Assembly, as in its resolution 70/236, express its satisfaction with
the remarkable progress achieved in the last few years in catching up with
the backlog of the Yearbook in all six languages, and welcome the efforts
made by the Division of Conference Management, especially the Editing Section
of the United Nations Office at Geneva, in effectively implementing relevant
resolutions of the General Assembly calling for the reduction of the backlog;
and encourage the Division of Conference Management to continue providing all
necessary support to the Editing Section in advancing work on the Yearbook. | 343. 委员会建议大会如在第70/236号决议中所说，对过去几年在减少所有六种语文版《年鉴》积压工作方面取得显著进展表示满意，并欢迎联合国日内瓦办事处会议管理司、特别是编辑科作出努力，切实执行大会要求减少积压工作的有关决议；并鼓励会议管理司继续向编辑科提供一切必要支持，推动《年鉴》的相关工作。 |
| 8. Assistance of the Codification
Division | 8. 编纂司的协助 |
| 344. The Commission expressed its
appreciation for the valuable assistance of the Codification Division of the
Secretariat in its substantive servicing of the Commission and, the ongoing
assistance provided to Special Rapporteurs and the preparation of in-depth
research studies pertaining to aspects of topics presently under
consideration, as requested by the Commission. | 344. 委员会表示赞赏秘书处编纂司在向委员会提供实质性服务方面给予的宝贵协助，特别是一直向特别报告员提供协助，并应委员会的要求，就目前审议的议题的各方面编写深入的研究报告。 |
| In particular, the Commission expressed
its appreciation to the Secretariat for its preparation of memorandums on the
Role of decisions of national courts in the case law of international courts
and tribunals of a universal character for the purpose of the determination
of customary international law (A/CN.4/691), and on Information on existing
treaty-based monitoring mechanisms which may be of relevance to the future
work of the International Law Commission (A/CN.4/698), and also in preparing
six working papers on potential future topics for the Commission’s long-term programme of work (A/CN.4/679/Add.1). | 特别是，委员会赞赏秘书处编写了两份备忘录，一份是关于“就确定习惯国际法而言国家法院的判决在普遍性国际法院和法庭的案例法方面发挥的作用”(A/CN.4/691)，另一份是关于“可能与国际法委员会今后工作有关的现有条约监督机制的资料”(A/CN.4/698)。 委员会还赞赏秘书处编写了六份关于委员会长期工作方案未来可能纳入的各个专题的工作文件(A/CN.4/679/Add.1)。 |
| 9. Websites | 9. 网站 |
| 345. The Commission expressed its deep
appreciation to the Secretariat for the website on the work of the
Commission, and called on it to continue updating and managing the website. | 345. 委员会表示深为赞赏秘书处建立的关于委员会工作的网站，并吁请其继续更新和管理该网站。 |
| The Commission reiterated that the
website and other websites maintained by the Codification Division constitute
an invaluable resource for the Commission and for researchers of the work of
the Commission in the wider community, thereby contributing to the overall
strengthening of the teaching, study, dissemination and wider appreciation of
international law. | 委员会重申，该网站以及由编纂司维持的其他网站 是委员会和研究委员会工作的广大学者的宝贵资源，有助于全面加强国际法的教学、研究、传播以及对国际法的广泛理解。 |
| The Commission welcomed the fact that the
website on the work of the Commission included information on the current
status of the topics on the agenda of the Commission, as well as advance
edited versions of the summary records of the Commission. | 委员会欣见，关于委员会工作的网站还介绍了委员会议程上各个专题的现状，并收录了经过初步编辑的委员会简要记录。 |
| 10. United Nations Audiovisual Library of
International Law | 10. 联合国国际法视听图书馆 |
| 346. The Commission once more noted with
appreciation the extraordinary value of the United Nations Audiovisual
Library of International Law in promoting a better knowledge of international
law and the work of the United Nations in this field, including the
International Law Commission. | 346. 委员会再次赞赏地指出，联合国国际法视听图书馆对于增进对国际法和对联合国在该领域的工作包括国际法委员会的工作的了解，意义非凡。 |
| C. Date and place of the sixty-ninth
session of the Commission | C. 委员会第六十九届会议的日期和地点 |
| 347. The Commission decided that the
sixty-ninth session of the Commission be held in Geneva from 1 May to 2 June
and 3 July to 4 August 2017. | 347. 委员会决定，委员会第六十九届会议于2017年5月1日至6月2日和7月3日至8月4日在日内瓦举行。 |
| D. Cooperation with other bodies | D. 与其他机构的合作 |
| 348. At the 3317th meeting, on 8 July
2016, Judge Abraham, President of the International Court of Justice,
addressed the Commission and briefed it on the recent judicial activities of
the Court. | 348. 国际法院院长亚伯拉罕法官在委员会2016年7月8日第3317次会议上发言，通报了国际法院最近的司法活动。 |
| An exchange of views followed. | 随后交换了意见。 |
| 349. The Inter-American Juridical
Committee was represented at the present session of the Commission by a
member of the Inter-American-Juridical Committee, Mr. Gélin Imanès Collot, who addressed the
Commission at the 3305th meeting, on 26 May 2016. | 349. 美洲司法委员会派该委员会的委员Gélin Imanès
Collot先生代表该组织出席了委员会本届会议，并在2016年5月26日第3305次会议上发言。 |
| He gave an overview of the activities of
the Committee on various legal issues concerning which the Committee was
engaged, focusing in particular on the period 2015-2016. | 他概述了该委员会在过去，尤其是在2015/2016年期间就其处理的种种法律问题开展的活动。 |
| An exchange of views followed. | 随后交换了意见。 |
| 350. The Committee of Legal Advisers on
Public International Law (CAHDI) of the Council of Europe was represented at
the present session of the Commission by the Chair of the Committee of Legal
Advisers on Public International Law, Mr. Paul Rietjens, and the Head of
Public International Law Division and Treaty Office of the Directorate of Legal
Advice and Public International Law, Ms. Marta Requena, both of whom
addressed the Commission at the 3316th meeting, on 7 July 2016. | 350. 欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会主席Paul Rietjens先生和国际公法司司长兼法律咨询和国际公法局条约处处长Marta
Requena女士代表国际公法法律顾问委员会出席了委员会本届会议，并都在2016年7月6日第3316次会议上发言。 |
| They focused on the current activities of
CAHDI in the field of public international law, as well of the Council of
Europe. | 他们着重介绍了国际公法法律顾问委员会目前在国际公法领域开展的工作，以及欧洲委员会目前的活动。 |
| An exchange of views followed. | 随后交换了意见。 |
| 351. On 20 July 2016, an informal exchange
of views was held between members of the Commission and the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on topics of mutual interest. | 351. 2016年7月20日，委员会委员与红十字国际委员会(红十字会)就共同关心的问题非正式地交换了意见。 |
| Following statements were made by the
Director of International Law and Policy, ICRC and the Chairperson of the
Commission, presentations were made on the topics “Crimes
against Humanity” and “Protection
of the environment in relation to armed conflicts”. | 在红十字会国际法和政策主任与委员会主席讲话之后，对下列两个专题作了介绍：“危害人类罪”和“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”。 |
| Further presentations were made on “Outcomes of the 32nd International Conference of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement”, and “Interaction
between IHL and the legal framework addressing counter-terrorism”. | 还对下列两个题目作了介绍：“国际红十字和红新月运动第32届国际会议的结果情况”和“国际人道主义法与处理反恐问题的法律框架的互动关系”。 |
| These presentations were followed by
discussion. | 介绍之后进行了讨论。 |
| E. Representation at the seventy-first
session of the General Assembly | E. 出席大会第七十一届会议的代表 |
| 352. The Commission decided that it
should be represented at the seventy-first session of the General Assembly by
its Chairperson, Mr. Pedro Comissário Afonso. | 352. 委员会决定由主席佩德罗 •科米萨里奥 •阿丰索先生代表委员会出席大会第七十一届会议。 |
| F. International Law Seminar | F. 国际法讲习班 |
| 353. Pursuant to General Assembly
resolution 70/236 of 23 December 2015, the fifty-second session of the
International Law Seminar was held at the Palais des Nations from 4 to 22
July 2016, during the present session of the Commission. | 353. 依照2015年12月23日大会第70/236号决议，在国际法委员会本届会议期间，第五十二届国际法讲习班于2016年7月4日至22日在万国宫举行。 |
| The Seminar is intended for young jurists
specializing in international law, young professors or government officials
pursuing an academic or diplomatic career in posts in the civil service of
their countries. | 讲习班的对象是专长于国际法的年轻法学家、年轻教师以及在其本国公务员系统任职的从事学术或外交工作的政府官员。 |
| 354. Twenty-two participants of different
nationalities, from all regional groups, took part in the session. | 354. 来自世界各个地区分属不同国籍的22名学员参加了这届讲习班。 |
| The participants attended plenary
meetings of the Commission, specially arranged lectures, and participated in
working groups on specific topics. | 学员们列席了委员会的全体会议，参加了特别安排的专题演讲和关于特定专题的工作组。 |
| 355. Mr. Pedro Comissário Afonso, Chairperson of the Commission, opened the Seminar. Mr.
Markus Schmidt, Senior Legal Adviser to the United Nations Office at Geneva
(UNOG), was responsible for the administration, organization and conduct of
the Seminar and served as Director of the International Law Seminar. | 355. 委员会主席佩德罗 •科米萨里奥 •阿丰索先生主持开幕，联合国日内瓦办事处高级法律顾问马库斯•施密特先生负责讲习班的行政管理、组织事宜和活动的进行，同时担任讲习班主任。 |
| The University of Geneva ensured the
scientific coordination of the Seminar. | 日内瓦大学负责讲习班的专业协调。 |
| Mr. Vittorio Mainetti, international law
expert from the University of Geneva, acted as coordinator, assisted by Mr.
Lorris Beverelli, Ms. Yusra Suedi, Legal assistants, and Ms. Alexandra
Borgeaud, intern in the Legal Liaison Office of UNOG. | 日内瓦大学国际法专家维托利奥•曼内蒂先生担任协调员，法律助理Lorris
Beverelli先生和Yusra Suedi女士以及联合国日内瓦办事处法律联络处实习生Alexandra Borgeaud女士从旁协助。 |
| 356. The lectures were given by members
of the Commission as follows: Mr. Ernest Petrič, “The Work of
the International Law Commission”; | 356. 委员会委员作了以下演讲：埃内斯特•彼得里奇先生：“国际法委员会的工作”； |
| Mr. Mathias Forteau, “Selection of new topics by the ILC”; | 马蒂亚斯 •福尔托先生：“国际法委员会如何选择新专题”； |
| Mr. Dire Tladi, “Jus
cogens”; | 迪雷•特拉迪先生：“强行法”； |
| Sir Michael Wood, “Identification of customary international law”; | 迈克尔 •伍德先生：“习惯国际法的识别”； |
| Mr. Shinya Murase, “Protection of the atmosphere”; | 村濑信也先生：“保护大气层”； |
| Ms. Concepción
Escobar Hernández, “Immunity
of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction”; | 康塞普西翁•埃斯科瓦尔 •埃尔南德斯女士：“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”； |
| Mr. Pavel Šturma,
“State succession in relation to State responsibility”; | 帕维尔 •斯图尔马先生：“与国家责任有关的国家继承”； |
| Mr. Georg Nolte, “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to
treaty interpretation”; | 格奥尔格 •诺尔特先生：“与条约解释有关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”； |
| Mr. Sean D. Murphy, “Crimes against humanity”; | 肖恩•墨菲先生：“危害人类罪”； |
| and Ms. Marie Jacobsson, “Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict”. | 玛丽 •雅各布松女士：“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”。 |
| 357. A lecture was given by Mr. Ove
Bring, Emeritus Professor, Stockholm University and Swedish Defence
University and former Principal Legal Adviser on International Law to the
Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, on “Legal
aspects of cultural heritage disputes: the Parthenon syndrome in
international relations”. | 357. 斯德哥尔摩大学和瑞典国防大学荣誉退休教授、瑞典外交部原国际法法律顾问Ove Bring先生作了演讲，题目是，“文化遗产争端的法律问题：国际关系中的帕特农综合症”。 |
| 358. A round table was organized on “Protection of persons in the event of disasters” with the following speakers: Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Special
Rapporteur on the Protection of persons in the event of disasters; Mr. Giulio
Bartolini, Professor, University of “Roma Tre”; Ms. Tessa Kelly, Senior Disaster Law Officer, International
Federation of Red Crescent and Red Cross Societies; Mr. Arnold Pronto,
Principal Legal Officer, Codification Division, Office of Legal Affairs,
United Nations; and Mr. Marco Toscano-Rivalta, Chief, Office of the UN
Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction
at United Nations. | 358. 围绕“发生灾害时的人员保护”专题举行了一次圆桌讨论会，在讨论会上发言的有：发生灾害时的人员保护问题特别报告爱德华多
•巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生；罗马第三大学教授Giulio Bartolini先生；红十字会与红新月会国际联合会灾害法律事务高级干事Tessa Kelly女士；联合国法律事务厅编纂司特等法律干事阿诺德 •普龙托先生；联合国秘书长减灾事务特别代表办公室主任Marco Toscano-Rivalta先生。 |
| 359. Seminar participants also attended a
workshop organized by the University of Geneva, on the topic: “Sharing of benefits and natural resources in international law”. | 359. 讲习班学员还参加了日内瓦大学组织的关于“国际法中的分享惠益与自然资源问题”的研讨会。 |
| The following speakers made statements:
Ms. Danae Azaria, Lecturer, University College of London; Ms. Laurence
Boisson de Chazournes, Professor, University of Geneva; Mr. Lucius Caflisch,
member of the International Law Commission); Mr. Komlan Sangbana, Researcher,
University of Geneva; Ms. Raya Stephan, Consultant, Expert in Water Law; and
Ms. Mara Tignino, Senior Lecturer, University of Geneva. | 下列人士作了发言：伦敦大学学院讲师Danae Azaria女士；日内瓦大学教授Laurence Boisson de Chazournes女士；国际法委员会委员卢修斯 •卡弗利施先生；日内瓦大学研究员Komlan Sangbana先生；水务法律专家兼顾问Raya Stephan女士；日内瓦大学高级讲师Mara Tignino女士。 |
| They also attended the annual Lalive
Lecture at the invitation of the Graduate Institute of International and
Development Studies. | 他们还应日内瓦国际和发展研究院的邀请，参加了一年一度的拉里夫讲座。 |
| The lecture on “Choosing
between Arbitration and a Permanent Court — Lessons
from Inter-State Cases” was given by Sir Michael
Wood. | 迈克尔•伍德先生作了关于“在仲裁与永久法院之间作选择：从国家间安例得出的教训”的演讲。 |
| The Seminar participants also visited the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Museum, as well as the ICT Discovery
of the International Telecommunication Union. | 讲习班学员还参观了国际红十字会和红新月会博物馆以及国际电信联盟的信息与通信技术探索博物馆。 |
| They also visited the World Trade
Organization and attended a presentation on “WTO
Dispute settlement and public International law” by
Mr. Juan Pablo Moya Hoyos and Mr. Geraldo Vidigal, Legal Affairs Division,
WTO. | 他们还参观了世界贸易组织，听取了世贸组织法律事务司的Juan Pablo Moya
Hoyos先生和Geraldo Vidigal先生关于“世贸组织争端解决程序与国际公法”的介绍。 |
| 360. Two Seminar working groups on “Identifying new topics for the International Law Commission” and “Consequences of Jus cogens in treaty
law beyond invalidity” were organized and Seminar
participants were assigned to one of the two groups. | 360. 围绕“为国际法委员会确定新专题”和“强行法在条约法中超出无效性的后果”组织了两个讲习班工作组。
每名参加讲习班的学员都被分配到其中一个工作组。 |
| Two members of the Commission, Mr.
Mathias Forteau and Mr. Dire Tladi, supervised and provided guidance to the
working groups. | 委员会的两位委员马蒂亚斯 •福尔托先生和迪雷 •特拉迪先生为工作组提供了督导和指导。 |
| Each group prepared a report and
presented its findings during the last working session of the Seminar. | 每个工作组写了一份报告，并在讲习班最后一次工作会议上介绍了心得。 |
| The reports were compiled and distributed
to all participants, as well as to the members of the Commission. | 报告编辑成册，发给了所有学员和委员会委员。 |
| 361. The Republic and Canton of Geneva
offered its traditional hospitality at the Geneva Town Hall where the Seminar
participants visited the Alabama room and attended a reception. | 361. 日内瓦共和国和州政府一如既往在日内瓦市政厅热情接待了讲习班学员，带学员们参观了阿拉巴马厅，并举行了招待会。 |
| 362. The Chairperson of the Commission,
the Director of the International Law Seminar, and Mr. Humberto Cantù Rivera, on behalf of the Seminar participants, addressed the
Commission during the closing ceremony of the Seminar. | 362. 讲习班闭幕式上，国际法委员会主席、国际法讲习班主任和讲习班学员代表Humberto Cantù Rivera先生向委员会致辞。 |
| Each participant was presented with a
diploma. | 每名学员都获颁一份参加讲习班的证书。 |
| 363. The Commission noted with particular
appreciation that since 2014 the Governments of Argentina, Austria, Brazil,
China, Finland, India, Ireland, Mexico, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom had
made voluntary contributions to the United Nations Trust Fund for the
International Law Seminar. | 363. 委员会特别感谢地指出，自2014年以来，阿根廷、奥地利、巴西、中国、芬兰、印度、爱尔兰、墨西哥、瑞士和联合王国等国政府向联合国国际法讲习班信托基金提供了自愿捐款。 |
| The Circolo di diritto internazionale
(CIDIR), a private association for the promotion of international law based
in Rome (Italy), also contributed to the Seminar. | 总部设在罗马(意大利)的一个致力于促进国际法的私人社团“国际法界”也向讲习班提供了捐助。 |
| Though the financial crisis of the last
years seriously affected the finances of the Seminar, the situation of the
Fund still allowed the granting of a sufficient number of fellowships to
deserving candidates, especially from developing countries, in order to
achieve adequate geographical distribution of participants. | 尽管近年的金融危机严重影响了讲习班的财务状况，但信托基金还可以提供足够份数的研究金，使优秀学员特别是来自发展中国家的优秀学员得以参加，从而实现了学员的适当地域分布。 |
| This year, 11 fellowships (8 for travel
and living expenses, 2 for living expenses only and 1 for travel expenses
only) were granted. | 今年，向11名学员颁发了研究金(8名获得旅费和生活津贴，2名只获得生活津贴，1名只获得旅费津贴)。 |
| 364. Since the inception of the Seminar
in 1965, 1,185 participants, representing 171 nationalities, have taken part
in the Seminar. Seven hundred twenty-four have received a fellowship. | 364. 自1965年创设讲习班以来，分属171个不同国籍的1,185名学员参加了讲习班，其中724人获得了研究金。 |
| 365. The Commission stresses the
importance it attaches to the Seminar, which enables young lawyers,
especially from developing countries, to familiarize themselves with the work
of the Commission and the activities of the many international organizations
based in Geneva. | 365. 委员会强调，它十分重视讲习班。讲习班使年轻法律工作者、特别是发展中国家的年轻法律工作者能够熟悉委员会的工作和总部设在日内瓦的众多国际组织的活动。 |
| The Commission recommends that the
General Assembly should again appeal to States to make voluntary
contributions in order to secure the organization of the Seminar in 2017 with
as broad participation as possible. | 委员会建议大会再度向各国发出呼吁，请它们提供自愿捐款，以保证在2017年能够继续举办讲习班，并让尽可能多的学员参加。 |
| Annexes | 附件 |
| A. The settlement of international
disputes to which international organizations are parties | A. 国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决 |
| Sir Michael Wood | 迈克尔 •伍德爵士 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 1. The present syllabus for a possible
topic flows from earlier work of the Commission. | 1. 这份提纲可能采用的一个专题，源自委员会之前的工作。 |
| It will be recalled that in 2011, the
Commission adopted on second reading articles on the responsibility of
international organizations, of which the General Assembly has taken note. | 大家记得，2011年委员会二读通过了关于国际组织责任的条款， 大会也注意到委员会的工作。 |
| Already in 2002, the Commission’s Working Group on the Responsibility of International
Organizations had mentioned “the widely perceived
need to improve methods for settling … disputes” concerning the responsibility of international organizations. | 早在2002年，委员会关于国际组织责任的工作组便提到，关于国际组织的责任问题，“人们普遍认为必须改进解决这些争端的办法”。 |
| In 2010 and 2011, the Commission held a
general debate on the peaceful settlement of disputes, at which various
suggestions for future topics were considered. | 2010和2011年，委员会就和平解决争端问题举行了辩论，对今后可能考虑的专题提出了各种建议。 |
| 2. The proposed topic would be limited to
the settlement of disputes to which international organizations are parties.
This would include disputes between international organizations and States
(both member and non-member States), and disputes between international
organizations. It would not cover disputes to which international
organizations are not parties, but are involved in some other way. | 2. 拟议的专题应限于国际组织为当事方的争端的解决， 其中包括国际组织与国家之间的争端(包括成员国和非成员国)，和国际组织之间的争端，但不包括国际组织不是当事方，而只是以某种方式介入其中的争端。 |
| In that sense, dispute settlement under
the auspices of an international organization (as in, for example, the United
Nation’s involvement in a dispute among Member States
through measures taken pursuant to Chapter VI of the Charter) would be
excluded. | 在这个意义上，将不包括由一个国际组织主持解决的争端(例如联合国根据《宪章》第六章采取措施，参与解决会员国之间的争端)。 |
| Similarly, disputes in which an
international organization merely has an interest, such as a dispute among
Member States over the interpretation of the organization’s constituent instrument, would fall outside the topic. | 同样，国际组织仅仅有某种关系，如成员国对该组织的章程的争端， 也不在此专题范围之内。 |
| 3. The present paper focuses primarily on
disputes that are international, in the sense that they arise from a relationship
governed by international law. | 3. 本文件的主要侧重点是国际性争端，即争端关系到国际法。 |
| It does not cover disputes involving the
staff of international organizations (“international
administrative law”). | 它不涵盖涉及国际组织工作人员的争端(国际行政法)。 |
| Nor does it cover questions arising out
of the immunity of international organizations. | 它也不涵盖有关国际组织豁免权产生的问题。 |
| It would be for future decision whether
certain disputes of a private law character, such as those arising under a
contract or out of a tortious act by or against an international organization,
might also be covered. | 至于是否可包括一些带有私法性质的争端，如因合同引起的，或国际组织的侵权行为或对国际组织的侵权行为产生的争端，可留待以后做出决定。 |
| 4. The question of the possible output of
a topic in this field would need careful consideration. | 4. 这个领域如何选题，需要仔细斟酌。 |
| It could include proposals for developing
existing and new procedures for the settlement of disputes to which
international organizations are parties, and/or for model clauses for
inclusion in relevant instruments or treaties. | 可以提出建议，对国际组织为当事方的争端，发展已有的和制定新的解决争端程序，和/或制定示范条款，收入相关的文书或条约。 |
| In addition, the Commission might wish to
review the Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International
Disputes of 1982, to see how far its provisions might apply to international
organizations. | 此外，委员会不妨研究1982年《关于和平解决国际争端的马尼拉宣言》，
看该宣言的条款可在多大程度上适用于国际组织。 |
| Issues that might be considered within
the proposed topic | 拟议的专题内可能考虑的问题。 |
| 5. There are some obvious difficulties
common to the resolution of all international disputes to which international
organizations are parties. | 5. 有一些显而易见的困难，是解决所有国际组织作为当事方的国际争端所共有的。 |
| These stem from the restricted access
that international organizations have to the traditional methods of
international dispute resolution, as well from barriers to the admissibility
of claims brought both by and against international organizations. | 这是由于国际组织在利用传统的国际争端解决办法上渠道有限，也因为由国际组织提出的和对国际组织提出的要求，在可否受理方面的障碍。 |
| On the other hand, there are policy
issues involved in an extension of traditional inter-State dispute settlement
mechanisms to international organizations. | 另一方面，将传统的国家间解决争端机制用于国际组织，还有一些政策方面的问题。 |
| International organizations are not
States. | 国际组织不是国家。 |
| 6. Access: There are various obstacles to
the submission of disputes to which international organizations are parties
to the dispute settlement mechanisms available to States. Most obviously,
international organizations may not appear as applicants or respondents in
contentious cases before the International Court of Justice, though certain
other permanent courts and tribunals established in specific fields are open
to them. | 6. 渠道：将国际组织作为当事方的国际争端提交各国可以利用的争端解决机制，存在各种困难，
最明显的是，国际组织不能在国际法院的抗辩性案件中作为请求人或被告人，尽管在一些特定领域，其他一些常设法院和法庭向他们开放。 |
| Arbitration remains an option, but little
practice exists to date to guide the procedure and international
organizations are rarely bound by jurisdictional clauses. | 仲裁仍是一个选项，但现有的实践十分有限，国际组织也很少受到管辖权条款的约束。 |
| Resort may be had to non-legal methods
like mediation, conciliation and enquiry, but, unlike States, international
organizations often do not belong to institutions that may facilitate these
processes. | 可以采用法律以外的方法，如调解、和解和调查等，但国际组织不同于国家，往往不属于方便进入该类程序的机构。 |
| Member States of the United Nations or a
regional organization, for example, may raise their disputes in a political
forum so as to settle them with the aid of multilateral political input and
procedures such as fact-finding missions. | 例如，联合国或区域组织的成员国可将他们的争端提到一个政治论坛，从而借助多边政治力量和程序解决问题，如真相调查团。 |
| With such barriers to access before
third-party dispute resolution mechanisms, the settlement of disputes to
which international organizations are parties relies primarily on negotiation
or mechanisms internal to the organization itself. | 由于在第三方解决冲突机制方面存在这些障碍，解决国际组织作为当事方的冲突，主要依靠谈判或组织内部的机制。 |
| 7. Admissibility: Difficulties facing the
admissibility of claims by and against international organizations are most
prominent in regards to the right of diplomatic protection and the
corresponding requirement of the exhaustion of local remedies. | 7. 可受理性。 由国际组织提出的和对国际组织提出的诉讼，在可否受理上所面临的困难，主要在于行使外交保护的权利和相应的用尽当地补救办法的要求。 |
| Can international organizations, for
example, assert the rights of their staff members in a manner analogous to
the way that a State may assert the rights of its nationals? | 比如，国际组织能像国家维护其国民的权利一样，维护本组织工作人员的权利吗？ |
| Alternatively, does the requirement of
exhaustion of local (internal) remedies apply when a State is asserting the
right of one of its nationals against an international organization? | 再者，如果国家为维护其国民的权利向国际组织求偿，用尽当地(国内)补救办法的要求适用吗？ |
| (a) International Court of Justice and
other permanent courts and tribunals | (a) 国际法院及其他常设法院和法庭 |
| 8. Article 34, paragraph 1 of the Statute
of the International Court of Justice limits locus standi before the Court to
States. | 8. 《国际法院规约》第三十四条第一款将法院的出庭权限于国家。 |
| Although paragraphs 2 and 3 provide for a
certain level of cooperation between the Court and “public
international organizations”, such organizations are
unable to appear as parties in contentious cases. | 尽管第二和第三款对法院和国际公共组织之间某种程度的合作作了规定， 但这类组织仍不能在诉讼案件中作为当事方出庭。 |
| Nevertheless, the United Nations and
authorised specialised agencies may seek advisory opinions on legal
questions. | 然而，联合国和授权的专门机构可以在法律问题上寻求咨询意见。 |
| 9. In light of these limitations in the
Statute, the desire to utilise the Court in the settlement of international
disputes to which international organizations are parties has manifested
itself in two ways: the so-called “binding” advisory opinion, and calls for the amendment of the Statute. | 9. 鉴于法院规约中的这些限制，希望利用国际法院解决国际组织作为当事方的国际冲突，表现在两个方面――所谓“具有约束力”的咨询意见，和要求修改规则。 |
| 10. Although an advisory opinion as such
is non-binding, certain agreements stipulate the use of the advisory opinion
procedure to settle disputes with “decisive” effect. | 10. 虽然咨询意见本身是不具有约束力的，但一些协定规定，采用咨询意见程序解决冲突具有“决定性”作用。 |
| A classic example is found in the
Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (1946): | 一个典型的例子是1946年的《联合国特权和豁免公约》： |
| “If a difference arises between the
United Nations on the one hand, and a Member on the other hand, a request
shall be made for an advisory opinion on any legal question involved in
accordance with Article 96 of the Charter and Article 65 of the Statute of
the Court. | “如联合国与一个会员国间发生争议，应依照宪章第九十六条及法院规约第六十五条请法院就所牵涉的任何法律问题发表咨询意见。 |
| The opinion given by the Court shall be
accepted as decisive by the parties.” | 当事各方应接受法院所发表的咨询意见为具有决定性效力。” |
| 11. The Headquarters Agreement between
the United Nations and the United States of America envisages a somewhat
similar procedure in the context of binding arbitration as provided for in
that agreement: either party may ask the General Assembly to request an
advisory opinion on a legal question arising in the course of arbitral
proceedings, to which the arbitral tribunal will “have
… regard” in rendering its
final decision. | 11. 联合国和美利坚合众国之间的总部协定，在有约束力的仲裁方面设想了一个大体类似的程序，该协定规定：任何一方均可请求大会对仲裁过程中产生的法律问题提出咨询意见，仲裁法庭在作出最后裁决时“应予以考虑”。 |
| 12. There are obvious difficulties,
however, in using the advisory jurisdiction of the Court for what are in reality
contentious matters. Critics of the binding advisory procedure see it as a
poor substitute for direct access to the Court by international
organizations. | 12. 然而，在现实中具有争议的问题上采用法院的咨询管辖权，存在明显的困难，对具有约束力的咨询程序持批评意见的人认为，它不能替代国际组织直接诉诸法院。 |
| The jurisdictional rules applicable to
advisory procedures are too permissive. | 对咨询程序适用的管辖权规则过于宽泛。 |
| They are, however, also too limiting in
other ways that both upset the equality of access among the parties as well
as privilege the settlement of certain disputes over others. | 但又在其他方面过于狭窄，既破坏了当事方之间诉讼渠道的平等，又破坏了在解决某些争端上相对于其他方式的优先。 |
| 13. Both of these undesirable results
follow from the fact that only the United Nations and its specialised
agencies may request an advisory opinion from the Court. | 13. 这两个不理想的结果都是因为只有联合国和它的专门机构能够要求法院提供咨询意见。 |
| Thus, in a dispute between one of these
bodies and a State, only that body will be able to initiate a “claim”. | 也就是说，在一个此类机构和国家之间发生冲突的情况下，只有该机构能够提出“要求”。 |
| Of course, where a treaty obligation
requires the submission of a dispute to the advisory procedure, the United
Nations or specialised agency would be bound to do so. | 当然，如果条约义务要求将争端提交咨询程序，联合国和专门机构都必须那样做。 |
| Even here, however, the relationship
among the parties is asymmetrical, as “the question
to be submitted to the Court is in the hands of a particular organ without
the member state concerned [or other party] being able to control the
drafting process”. | 然而，即使在这种情况下，当事各方之间的关系也是不对称的，因为“将问题提交法院要由一个具体的组织来决定，有关的成员国[或其他当事方]都不能掌控提交程序”。 |
| 14. Similarly, the fact that only the
United Nations and its authorised specialised agencies may request an
advisory opinion means that the use of advisory procedures to settle disputes
involving an international organization is primarily limited to disputes to
which one of those international organizations is a party. | 14. 同样，只有联合国和它授权的专门机构能够要求提供咨询意见，意味着利用咨询程序解决涉及国际组织的争端，将主要局限于这类国际组织作为当事方的争端。 |
| Other disputants may of course petition
the General Assembly or some other authorised body to request an opinion, but
they could not be sure that an opinion would indeed by sought, or in the form
desired. | 当然，其他争端的当事方也可以请求大会或其他某个授权机构提出咨询意见，但他们无法确定将确实寻求咨询意见，或者以他们所希望的方式寻求咨询意见。 |
| As the Commission itself has previously
noted, an advisory opinion of this sort would be “imperfect”, “uncertain” and “fraught with too many uncertainties for a binding character to be
attached to the opinion thus attained”. | 正如委员会自己之前已经指出的，这类咨询意见将是“不完美的”、“不确定的”，“让由此获得的咨询意见具有约束力，也将充满不确定因素”。 |
| 15. In light of the limitations on the
Court’s ability to settle disputes to which an
international organization is party, over the years a large number of
proposals have been put forward to amend the Statute. | 15. 考虑到国际法院对解决有国际组织作为当事方的冲突能力有限， 在过去的几年里，曾经提出过很多修改规约的建议。 |
| In 1970, a discussion on the “Review of the Role of the International Court of Justice” took place in the General Assembly, which was followed up by
survey including a question on “the possibility of
enabling intergovernmental organizations to be parties before the Court”. | 1970年，大会举行了“审议国际法院作用”的讨论，之后进行过一项调查，包括一个问题――“允许国际组织作为法院当事方的可能性”。 |
| Of the 31 responses to the survey (out of
130 parties to the Statute at the time), fifteen members replied positively
to this question (Argentina, Austria, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland,
Guatemala, Iraq, Madagascar, Mexico, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK
and the US), and one replied negatively (France). | 在对调查作出的31份答复中(当时法院规约有130个缔约国)，15个成员国作了肯定答复(阿根廷、奥地利、加拿大、塞浦路斯、丹麦、芬兰、危地马拉、伊拉克、马达加斯加、墨西哥、新西兰、瑞典、瑞士、联合王国和美国)，一个否定答复(法国)。 |
| In 1997-1999, the General Assembly’s Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on
the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization considered proposals by
Guatemala and Costa Rica to provide access to the Court to international
organizations. | 1997-1999年，大会关于联合国宪章和加强国际组织作用的特别委员会审议了危地马拉
和哥斯达黎加的提案 ――允许国际组织诉诸国际法院。 |
| Guatemala’s
proposal was withdrawn in 1999, “its adoption in the
foreseeable future [appearing] most unlikely”. | 危地马拉在1999年收回了提案，因为“在可预见的将来，提案获得通过的可能性十分渺茫”。 |
| 16. Quite apart from the political
difficulties of amending the Statute, the various proposals have drawn
attention to the questions of scope ratione personae and ratione materiae
that must be addressed in any amendment to the Statute to confer standing
before the Court on international organizations. | 16. 各种提案回避了修订《规约》所带来的政治难题，而侧重对《规约》作任何修订给予国际组织请求国际法院咨询意见资格，在属人理由和属物理由范围方面的问题。 |
| 17. By contrast with the International
Court of Justice, certain other permanent courts and tribunals operating
under particular treaties are open to international organizations parties to
the treaty concerned. | 17. 与国际法院不同的是，在一些具体条约下运作的其他常设法院和法庭对相关的条约而言，对国际组织开放。 |
| This is the case, for example, with the
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), established by the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982, as well as the
Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization. | 例如，根据1982年《联合国海洋法公约》设立的海洋法国际法庭便是这种情况，
世界贸易组织的上诉机构也是如此。 |
| (b) International arbitration | (b) 国际仲裁 |
| 18. Arbitration is potentially a useful
tool for the settlement of international disputes to which international
organizations are parties. | 18. 仲裁是解决国际组织作为当事方的国际冲突的一个有用的手段。 |
| It not only avoids the difficulties of
standing that arise before the International Court of Justice, but it also
presents the parties with a flexible system that, if needed, can maintain
confidentiality. | 它不仅可以避免在国际法院资格问题上的困难，而且还为当事方提供了一套灵活的制度，如有必要，能够保守秘密。 |
| 19. Previous efforts to encourage the use
of arbitration to settle disputes involving an international organization
date back to the International Law Association’s 1964
resolution on international arbitration, which: | 19. 以往也曾鼓励利用仲裁解决涉及国际组织的冲突，这种努力可以追溯到1964年国际法协会关于国际仲裁的决议，该决议： |
| “Draws the attention of all States to the
availability of international arbitral tribunals for the settlement of a
variety of international disputes, including: (a) International disputes
which cannot be submitted to the International Court of Justice … (c) Disputes between States and international organizations.” | “提请所有国家注意利用国际仲裁庭解决各种国际性冲突，包括(a) 不能提交国际法院的国际冲突，…(c) 国家与国际组织之间的冲突。 ” |
| 20. Similarly, the Sixth Committee’s Working Group on the United Nations Decade of International Law
in 1992 entertained a “proposal urging a wider use of
the Permanent Court of Arbitration for the settlement of disputes between
States as well as disputes between States and international organizations. ” | 20. 同样，第六委员会关于联合国国际法十年的工作组在1992年也提出一项建议，“敦促更广泛的利用常设法院和法庭解决国家间的冲突和国家与国际组织之间的冲突。” |
| The main question that arises is the
extent to which international organizations are or indeed can be bound to
submit their international disputes with States and other international
organizations to arbitration. | 这里的主要问题是，国际组织在多大程度上必须或实际上能够将它们与国家或与其他国际组织之间的国际性冲突提交仲裁。 |
| Unlike with States, there is at present
no general treaty open to international organizations under which they could
accept the obligation to submit such disputes to arbitration. | 与国家不同的是，目前没有对国际组织开放的一般性条约，使国际组织能够接受将这类冲突提交仲裁的义务。 |
| There is no doubt a number of bilateral
agreements containing such clauses. | 可以肯定一些双边协定中载有此类条款。 |
| But no general survey exists of
arbitration clauses in international agreements to which an international
organization is a party, or of arbitration pursuant to such clauses. | 但是没有对国际协定中有关国际组织作为当事方如何提交仲裁的条款，或根据这类条款作出仲裁的情况进行过普遍调查。 |
| To date, there seem to be only four
arbitrations between an international organization and a State that are in
the public domain. | 到目前为止，在公共领域，好像只有四起国际组织与国家之间的仲裁。 |
| 21. A related issue is how arbitration
clauses are drafted. | 21. 一个相关的问题是，仲裁条款如何起草。 |
| Current practice is to include an
arbitration clause reading as follows: | 现行的做法是包含以下行文的仲裁条款： |
| “Any dispute between the Parties arising
out of, or relating to this Agreement, which is not settled by negotiation or
another agreed mode of settlement, shall, at the request of either Party, be
submitted to a Tribunal of three arbitrators. | “当事方之间因本协定产生的或与本协定有关的任何冲突，未能通过谈判和其他商定的解决方式得到解决，应在任何一方的请求下，提交一个由三名仲裁人组成的法庭。 |
| Each Party shall appoint one arbitrator,
and the two arbitrators so appointed shall appoint a third, who shall be the
chairperson of the Tribunal. | 每个当事方应任命一名仲裁人，由此任命的两名仲裁人应任命第三位仲裁人，该人将担任仲裁庭的主席。 |
| If, within thirty days of the request for
arbitration, a Party has not appointed an arbitrator, or if, within fifteen
days of the appointment of two arbitrators, the third arbitrator has not been
appointed, either Party may request the President of the International Court
of Justice to appoint the arbitrator referred to. | 如果在提出仲裁请求的30天内，一个当事方未能任命仲裁人，或如果在任命两名仲裁人之内的15天内尚未任命第三位仲裁人，任何一个当事方均可要求国际法院院长任命所说的仲裁人。 |
| The Tribunal shall determine its own
procedures, provided that any two arbitrators shall constitute a quorum for
all purposes, and all decisions shall require the agreement of any two
arbitrators. | 仲裁庭应确定本庭的程序，条件是任何两位仲裁人即构成对一切问题上的法定人数，所有决定均须得到任何两位仲裁人的同意。 |
| The expenses of the Tribunal shall be
borne by the Parties as assessed by the Tribunal. | 仲裁庭的开支将由当事方按仲裁庭的摊派承担。 |
| The arbitral award shall contain a
statement of the reasons on which it is based and shall be final and binding
on the Parties.” | 仲裁结果将包含一份说明其理由的声明，并且将是最终的，对当事方具有约束力。” |
| 22. Questions could also arise in regards
to procedure. | 22. 也可能会对程序提出问题。 |
| Insofar these questions pertain to
arbitral rules, however, they have largely been dealt with by the Permanent
Court of Arbitration’s Optional Rules for Arbitration
Involving International Organizations and States (1996). | 鉴于这些问题涉及仲裁规则，因此在常设仲裁法院对涉及国际组织和国家的仲裁任择规则(1996)基本上都已经作了规定。 |
| As those rules have been drawn up in
light of “the public international law character of
disputes involving international organizations and States, and diplomatic
practice appropriate to such disputes”, there might
be little value in the Commission, for example, adapting its Model Rules on
Arbitral Procedure of 1958 to disputes involving an international
organization. | 由于制定这些规则时已经考虑到涉及国际组织和国家的争端带有国际公法的性质，以及与这类争端相适应的外交惯例， 因此委员会将1958年的仲裁程序范本规则加以修改用于涉及国际组织的争端或许还是有益的。 |
| (c) Non-legal mechanisms | (c) 非法律机制 |
| 23. In keeping with its remedial focus,
the International Law Association’s Final Report on
Accountability of International Organisations draws attention to the “preventive potential” of “less formal action by an IO”. | 23. 国际法协会《关于国际组织责任问题的最后报告》出于对救济问题的侧重，提请人们注意“国际组织较不非式的行为”的“预防潜力”。 |
| Accordingly, its recommendations centre,
in the first instance, on the creation of standing mechanisms internal to the
international organization itself, including ombudsman offices and bodies
along the lines of the World Bank Inspection Panel. | 相应地，其建议首先集中于在国际组织自身内部建立常设机制，包括监察员办公室，以及类似世界银行监察组的机构。 |
| For present purposes, such mechanisms are
likely to be relevant only where a State is exercising diplomatic protection
on behalf of its nationals (as to which, see the next section). | 对本专题而言，这种机制很可能仅在一国为其国民行使外交保护的情况下才有意义(相关论述，见下节)。 |
| 24. If the Commission’s work focuses on dispute settlement in regards to disputes
arising under international law, the relevant non-legal mechanisms will
primarily be third-party mechanisms, such as enquiry, mediation and
conciliation. | 24. 如果委员会的工作侧重于解决国际法之下所产生的争端，则相关的非法律机制主要是第三方机制，例如调查、调解与和解。 |
| The Commission could consider ways of
encouraging recourse to such mechanisms. | 委员会可考虑如何鼓励各方采用这种机制。 |
| Although they are non-legal in form,
these mechanisms may play an important role in settling legal disputes. | 这些机制虽然形式上属于非法律机制，但可在解决法律争端方面发挥重要作用。 |
| (d) Admissibility of claims: functional
protection | (d) 主张的可受理性：职能保护 |
| 25. The previous sections have dealt with
questions regarding access to dispute settlement mechanisms. | 25. 之前几节已经论述了利用争端解决机制的渠道问题。 |
| Even where access exists, however, issues
are likely to arise as to how customary rules relating to admissibility of
claims apply to international organizations. | 但是，即便存在渠道，仍然很可能产生与主张的可受理性有关的习惯规则如何对国际组织适用的问题。 |
| One particularly problematic area relates
to the transferability of customary rules relating to diplomatic protection
and exhaustion of local remedies. | 一个颇具争议的领域是，如何套用有关外交保护和用尽当地救济的习惯规则。 |
| 26. According to the Reparation for
Injuries advisory opinion, an international organization has the capacity “to exercise a measure of functional protection of its agents”, broadly analogous to the right of a State to exercise diplomatic
protection on behalf its nationals. | 26. 依照损害赔偿案的咨询意见，国际组织能够“为其代理人采取某种形式的保护措施”，
大体上与一国为其国民行使外交保护的权利相似。 |
| As a result of this analogy, it has been
suggested that the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies applies in the
context of “functional protection” as it does in the context of diplomatic protection. | 由于这一类比，有人提出，用尽当地救济的要求 也应适用于“职能保护”，一如其适用于外交保护。 |
| 27. Yet a closer look shows that the
comparison may not be exact. | 27. 然而，更仔细的分析显示，这一比较可能并不确切。 |
| The Court’s
reasoning in the Reparation for Injuries opinion is actually quite different
from the rationale underlying diplomatic protection. | 国际法院在损害赔偿案意见中的推理与外交保护的理论基础颇为不同。 |
| On the one hand, diplomatic protection
derives from a State’s “right
to ensure, in the person of its subjects, respect for the rules of
international law”. | 一方面，外交保护源自国家“代表其臣民确保国际法规则得到尊重的权利”。 |
| It is a general right that the State
holds, deriving from the link of nationality. | 这是一项国家享有的一般性权利，源自国籍的联系。 |
| Functional protection, on the other hand,
arises as an implied power of the organization necessary for the fulfilment
of the organization’s functions. | 而职能保护则是一项隐含的权力，是该组织履行自身职能的需要。 |
| As such, it is a limited power extending
only insofar as it is required to allow the agent to perform his or her duties
successfully. | 因此它是一项有限的权力，范围仅限于代理人成功履行职责所需。 |
| 28. Another question posed in relation to
the exercise of functional protection by an international organization is
whether it may be used to bring a claim against the staff member’s State of nationality. | 28. 与国际组织行使职能保护有关的另一个问题是，职能保护能否被用于向工作人员的国籍国提出主张。 |
| The distinction between diplomatic
protection arising from nationality and functional protection arising from
functional considerations might suggest an affirmative answer. | 外交保护源自国籍，而职能保护源自职能方面的考虑，有鉴于这一差异，上述问题的答案可能是肯定的。 |
| In this regard, it should be mentioned
that the Mazilu and Cumaraswamy advisory opinions both concerned disputes
between the United Nations and the officials’ States
of nationality. | 在这方面，应当指出，马齐卢案和坎马拉斯瓦米案的咨询意见均涉及联合国与官员国籍国之间的争端。 |
| 29. Different concerns arise when
diplomatic protection is asserted against an international organization. | 29. 若外交保护所针对的对象是国际组织，则会产生不同的关切。 |
| In principle, the requirement of
exhaustion of local remedies could apply mutatis mutandis; in this connection
it would be better to speak of internal remedies, rather than local remedies. | 原则上，用尽当地补救的要求可以比照适用；在这方面，宜当谈及内部救济而非当地救济。 |
| However, the Institut de Droit
international, in a 1971 resolution, expressed a presumption against the
requirement for exhaustion in the exercise of diplomatic protection against
international organizations. | 然而，国际法学会在1971年的一项决议中表示了一种推定，即针对国际组织行使外交保护的，不作用尽要求。 |
| It has been further suggested that the
rule is inapplicable, as it derives from the “jurisdictional
connection between the individual and the respondent state. ” | 还有人进一步提出，该规则源自“个人与应诉国之间的管辖权联系”，因此并不适用。 |
| An instance where States seem to have
exercised their right to diplomatic protection can be found in the 1965 and
1966 settlement agreements between the United Nations and Belgium, Greece,
Italy Luxembourg and Switzerland. | 在1965年和1966年联合国与比利时、希腊、意大利、卢森堡和瑞士之间的解决协定中，可以找到各国似乎行使了外交保护权的实例。 |
| In those agreements, the United Nations
agreed to pay compensation for damages caused by its operations in the Congo
to nationals of the concerned States. | 在这些协定中，联合国同意向所涉国家的国民支付赔偿金，以补偿其在刚果的行动所造成的损害。 |
| Select Bibliography | 参考文献选编 |
| B. Succession of States in respect of
State responsibility | B. 国家责任方面的国家继承 |
| Pavel Šturma | 帕维尔•斯图尔马 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 1. The International Law Commission
agreed in 1998 that the selection of topics for the long-term programme of
work should be guided by the following criteria: “the
topic should reflect the needs of the States in respect of the progressive
development and codification of international law; the topic should be
sufficiently advanced in stage in terms of State practice to permit
progressive development and codification; that the topic is concrete and
feasible for progressive development and codification. ” | 1. 国际法委员会于1998年商定，为长期工作方案选择专题应遵循以下标准：“专题应反映各国在逐渐发展和编纂国际法方面的需要；专题在国家实践方面应足够成熟，从而允许逐渐发展和编纂；专题为逐渐发展的目的应当是具体和可行的。” |
| The proposed topic seems to meet all the
criteria. | 拟议专题似乎符合上述所有标准。 |
| 2. The International Law Commission
completed its work on Responsibility of States for internationally wrongful
acts in 2001. | 2. 国际法委员会于2001年完成了关于“国家对国际不法行为的责任”的工作。 |
| However, it did not address situations
where a succession of States occurs after the commission of a wrongful act. | 然而，委员会没有处理实施不法行为后发生国家继承的情况。 |
| This succession may occur by a
responsible State or by an injured State. | 继承国既可以是责任国，也可以是受害国。 |
| In both cases, succession gives rise to
rather complex legal relationships, and in this regard it is worth noting a
certain development in views at the ILC and elsewhere. | 此两种情况下，继承均会引发相当复杂的法律关系。 在这个问题上需要指出，国际法委员会和其他有关方面的看法经历了某些发展。 |
| While in the 1998 report the Special Rapporteur,
James Crawford, wrote that there was a widely accepted opinion that a new
State generally does not succeed to any State responsibility of the
predecessor State, the Commission’s commentary to the
2001 Articles reads differently. | 特别报告员詹姆斯 •克劳福德在1998年的报告中写道，各方普遍接受的观点是新国家一般不继承被继承国的任何国家责任，
而委员会在2001年条款评注中的说法与此不同。 |
| It says that “in
the context of State succession, it is unclear whether a new State succeeds
to any State responsibility of the predecessor State with respect to its
territory. ” | 评注中说道：“在国家继承的情况下，新国家是否继承被继承国在领土方面的任何国家责任，并不明确”。 |
| The development of the practice, case law
and doctrinal views from the negative succession rule to its partial rebuttal
is succinctly described by J. Crawford. | J •克劳福德简要描述了实践、案例法和学说观点对继承规则由否定到部分否定的发展过程。 |
| 3. The ILC touched on this problem in the
context of its work on State succession in the 1960s. | 3. 1960年代，国际法委员会在讨论国家继承的过程中涉及了这个问题。 |
| In 1963, Prof. Manfred Lachs, the
Chairman of the ILC’s Sub-Committee on Succession of
States and Governments, proposed including succession in respect of
responsibility for torts as one of possible sub-topics to be examined in
relation with the work of the ILC on question of succession of States. | 1963年，国际法委员会国家和政府的继承问题小组委员会主席曼弗雷德 •拉赫斯教授提议，将“继承侵权行为的责任”列为在国际法委员会国家继承问题上的工作方面可以审议的一个分专题。 |
| Because of a divergence of views on its
inclusion, the Commission decided to exclude the problem of torts from the
scope of the topic. | 由于在是否将其列入分专题方面存在不同意见，委员会决定不将侵权问题列入该专题的范围。 |
| Since that time, however, State practice
and doctrinal views have developed. | 但是自那时起，国家实践和学说观点经历了发展。 |
| 4. It is a normal and largely successful
method for the ILC, after completing one topic, to work on other related
subjects from the same area of international law. | 4. 完成一个专题后着手研究国际法同一领域的相关专题，是国际法委员会的常规工作方法，而且这种方法相当成功。 |
| The ILC took this approach, inter alia,
in two topics in the field of international responsibility by completing
first its Articles on State Responsibility (2001) and then its Articles on
Responsibility of International Organizations (2011), and in three topics in
the field of succession of States, by completing draft articles for what
later became the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of
Treaties (1978) and the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect
of State Property, Archives and Debts (1983), as well as its Articles on
Nationality of Natural Persons in relation to the Succession of States
(1999). | 除其他外，国际法委员会在国际责任领域的两个专题中也采取了这种做法，首先完成了关于国家责任的条款(2001年)，然后完成了关于国际组织责任的条款(2011年)。 委员会还在国家继承领域的三个专题中采取了同样的做法，完成了后来成为《关于国家在条约方面的继承的维也纳公约》(1978年)和《关于国家对国家财产、档案和债务的继承的维也纳公约》(1983年)的条款草案，以及《国家继承涉及的自然人国籍问题条款》(1999年)。 |
| Although the two Vienna Conventions did
not receive a high number of ratifications, it does not mean that the rules
codified therein did not influence the State practice. | 尽管这两项维也纳公约没有得到多国批准，但并不意味着其中编纂的规则没有影响国家实践。 |
| On the contrary, in particular the States
in Central Europe applied such rules to their own succession. | 相反，尤其是中欧国家，它们在本国的继承中适用此类规则。 |
| In the same vein, non-binding documents
such as Articles on State Responsibility or Articles on Nationality of
Natural Persons have been largely followed in practice. | 同样，各国在实践中也大量遵循了关于国家责任的条款或关于自然人国籍的条款等不具约束力的文件。 |
| 5. In principle, the question of
succession in respect of State responsibility arises mainly in certain cases
of succession of States, where the State that committed a wrongful act has
ceased to exist, namely in cases of dissolution and unification of States. | 5. 原则上，国家责任方面的继承问题主要出现在国家继承的某些情形中：曾实施不法行为的国家已停止存续，即国家解体或统一的情形。 |
| However, other cases, such as secession,
may also profit from an in-depth analysis to confirm or to negate three
hypotheses. First, the continuing State should, in principle, succeed not
only to the relevant primary obligations of the predecessor State but also to
its secondary (responsibility) obligations. | 然而，深入分析以证实或否定以下三种假设，对于国家分裂等其他情形也有好处：第一，延续国原则上不仅应继承被继承国的相关主要义务，而且应继承其次级(责任)义务。 |
| Second, a newly independent State should
benefit from the principle of clean slate (tabula rasa), but it could freely
accept its succession with respect to State responsibility. | 第二，新独立的国家应享受白板(tabula rasa)原则，但可自愿接受与国家责任有关的继承。 |
| Third, in case of a separation
(secession), the successor State or States also may assume responsibility, in
particular circumstances. | 第三，如果是脱离(分裂)，在特殊情况下，继承国也得承担责任。 |
| Development of State practice and
doctrine in the past | 过去的国家实践和学说的发展 |
| 6. Traditionally, neither State practice
nor doctrine gave a uniform answer to the question whether and in what
circumstances a successor State may be responsible for an internationally
wrongful act of its predecessor. | 6. 长久以来，对于继承国是否及在何种情形下可以为被继承国的国际不法行为承担责任，国家实践和学说均没有给出统一的答案。 |
| In some cases of State practice, however,
it is possible to identify division or allocation of responsibility between
successor states. | 然而，在国家实践的某些案例中，可以看到在各继承国之间划分或分配责任。 |
| 7. Early decisions held that the
successor State has no responsibility in international law for the
international delicts of its predecessor. | 7. 早期的判决认为，继承国不为被继承国的国际侵权行为承担国际法责任。 |
| In Robert E. Brown Claim, the claimant
sought compensation for the refusal of local officials of the Boer Republics
to issue licenses to exploit a goldfield. | 在Robert E. Brown求偿案中， 申诉人因为布尔共和国的地方官员拒绝发放采金许可证而寻求赔偿。 |
| The tribunal held that Brown had acquired
a property right and that he had been injured by a denial of justice, but
this was a delict responsibility that did not devolve on Britain. | 法庭判决称，Brown已经获得产权，并因司法不公而受到伤害，但此侵权行为的责任不由英国继承。 |
| Similarly, in Frederick Henry Redward
Claim, the claimants had been wrongfully imprisoned by the Government of the
Hawaiian Republic, which was subsequently annexed by the United States. | 同样，在Frederick Henry Redward求偿案中， 申诉人被后来并入美国的夏威夷共和国政府非法监禁。 |
| The tribunal held that “legal liability for the wrong has been extinguished” with the disappearance of the Hawaiian Republic. | 法庭判决称：“不法行为的法律责任”已随夏威夷共和国的消失而“勾销”。 |
| However, if the claim had been reduced to
a money judgment, which may be considered a debt, or an interest on the part
of the claimant in assets of fixed value, there would be an acquired right in
the claimant, and an obligation to which the successor State had succeeded. | 然而，如果将诉求缩小为金钱判决(可视为债务或申诉人一方对固定价值资产的债权)，这将成为申诉人拥有的既得权利，也是继承国已经继承的义务。 |
| 8. However, with respect to the Brown and
Redwards awards, it has been observed that “These
cases date from the age of colonialism when colonial powers resisted any rule
that would make them responsible for delicts of states which they regarded as
uncivilized. | 8. 然而，关于Brown案和Redwards案的裁决，有评论指出：“这些案件发生在殖民主义时代，当时的殖民势力抵制所有要求为其视为未开化国家的侵权行为负责的判决。 |
| The authority of those cases a century
later is doubtful. | 上述案件在一个世纪后的权威性存疑。 |
| At least in some cases, it would be
unfair to deny the claim of an injured party because the state that committed
the wrong was absorbed by another state.” | 至少在某些案件中，因实施不法行为的国家被另一国家吞并而驳回受害方的申诉，有失公允”。 |
| 9. The early practice also includes the
dissolution of the Union of Colombia (1829-1831) after which the United
States invoked the responsibility of the three successor States (Colombia,
Ecuador and Venezuela), leading to the conclusion of agreements on
compensation for illegal acquisition of American ships. | 9. 早期实践还包括，哥伦比亚联盟(1829-1831)解体后，美国援引三个继承国(哥伦比亚、厄瓜多尔和委内瑞拉)的责任，导致各方就非法获取美国船只缔结了赔偿协定。 |
| After the independence of India and
Pakistan, prior rights and liabilities (including liabilities in respect of
an actionable wrong) associated with Great Britain were allocated to the
State in which the cause of action arose. | 印度和巴基斯坦独立后，此前与英国有关的权利和责任(包括关于可起诉的侵权行为的责任)被分配给诉讼事由发生的国家。 |
| Many devolution agreements concluded by
the former dependent territories of the United Kingdom also provide for the
continuity of delictual responsibility of the new States. | 联合王国前附属领土缔结的多项移交协定也规定，由新国家继续承担侵权责任。 |
| 10. Although decisions of arbitral
tribunals are not uniform, in Lighthouses Arbitration the tribunal found that
Greece was liable, as successor State to the Ottoman Empire, for breaches of
the concession contract between that Empire and a French company after the
union of Crete with Greece in 1913. | 10. 尽管仲裁法庭的判决并不统一，但是在灯塔仲裁案中，法庭认定，希腊作为奥斯曼帝国的继承国，对于1913年克里特与希腊合并之后，违反奥斯曼帝国与某法国公司之间的特许合同的行为负有责任。 |
| According to this award, “the Tribunal can only come to the conclusion that Greece, having
adopted the illegal conduct of Crete in its recent past as autonomous State,
is bound, as successor State, to take upon its charge the financial
consequences of the breach of the concession contract. ” | 该裁决指出：“法庭仅能得出以下结论：希腊接受了克里特不久前作为自治国的非法行为，因此，作为继承国有义务承担违反特许合同的经济后果。” |
| Some authors, however, take position that
Greece was found liable for its own acts committed both before and after the
cession of territory to Greece. | 然而，有些著述者的立场是，希腊对于这片领土割让给希腊之前和之后自己实施的行为均负有责任。 |
| The Lighthouses decision is also
important for its critique of absolutist solutions both for and against
succession with respect to responsibility: “It is no
less unjustifiable to admit the principle of transmission as a general rule
than to deny it. | 灯塔案判决的重要意义还在于，它对完全支持和彻底反对责任继承的两种绝对主义办法做出了评论：“承认责任转移原则为一般规则，与拒绝接受这一原则同样缺乏正当理由。 |
| It is rather and essentially a question
of a kind the answer to which depends on a multitude of concrete factors.” | 更确切地说，这个问题在根本上属于那种答案取决于多种具体因素的问题。” |
| 11. There are also some other cases
outside Europe concerning the State responsibility in situations of
unification dissolution and secession of States. | 11. 在欧洲以外，也有其他一些案例涉及国家统一、解体和分裂情形下的国家责任。 |
| One example was the United Arab Republic
(UAR), created as result of the unification of Egypt and Syria in 1958. | 一个例子是1958年埃及和叙利亚联合组成的阿拉伯联合共和国(阿联)。 |
| There are three examples where the UAR as
successor State took over the responsibility for obligations arising from
internationally wrongful acts committed by the predecessor States. | 在三个案例中，阿联作为继承国，就被继承国实施的国际不法行为引起的义务承担了责任。 |
| All these cases involved actions taken by
Egypt against Western properties in the context of the nationalization of the
Suez Canal in 1956 and the nationalization of foreign-owned properties. | 所有案例均涉及埃及在1956年苏伊士运河国有化和外国财产国有化的背景下对西方的财产采取的行动。 |
| The first case deals with the
nationalization of the Société Financière de Suez by Egypt, which was
settled by an agreement between the UAR and the private corporation (1958). | 第一起案例处理的是埃及将苏伊士财务公司(Société Financière de
Suez)收归国有的问题，这个问题通过阿联和该私营企业之间的协定(1958年)得到解决。 |
| In other words, the new State paid compensation
to the shareholders for the act committed by the predecessor State. | 换言之，新国家就被继承国实施的行为向股东支付赔偿。 |
| Another example is an agreement between
the UAR and France resuming cultural, economic and financial relations
between the two States (1958). | 另一例是阿联与法国之间签署协定，恢复了两国之间的文化、经济和财政关系(1958年)。 |
| The agreement provided that the UAR, as
the successor State, would restore the goods and property of French nationals
taken by Egypt and that compensation would be paid for any goods and property
not restituted. | 协定规定，阿联作为继承国，将返还被埃及占有的法国国民的财物，还要就未归还的任何财物支付赔偿。 |
| A similar agreement was also signed in
1959 by the UAR and the United Kingdom. | 1959年，阿联和英国也签署了类似协定。 |
| 12. The UAR lasted only until 1961 when
Syria left the united State. | 12. 阿联仅存续至1961年，这一年叙利亚脱离了联合体。 |
| After the dissolution, Egypt, as one of
the two successor States, entered into agreements with other States (e.g.
Italy, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States) on compensation to
foreign nationals whose property had been nationalized by the UAR (the
predecessor State) during the period 1958-1961. | 阿联解体后，埃及作为两个继承国之一，与其他国家(如意大利、瑞典、英国、美国)就赔偿1958年至1961年期间财产被阿联(被继承国)收归国有的外国国民一事签署了协定。 |
| 13. More complicated situations arise in
case of secession. | 13. 国家分裂时会出现更复杂的局面。 |
| After Panama seceded from Colombia in
1903, Panama refused to be held responsible for damage caused to the US
nationals during a fire in the city of Colon in 1855. | 巴拿马1903年脱离哥伦比亚之后，拒绝为1855年科隆市一起火灾为美国国民造成的损失负责。 |
| However, in 1926 the United States and
Panama signed the Claims Convention. | 然而，1926年，美国与巴拿马签署了《索赔公约》。 |
| The treaty envisaged future arbitration
proceedings with respect to the consequences of the 1855 fire in Colon,
including the question whether, “in case there should
be determined in the arbitration that there is an original liability on the
part of Colombia, to what extent, if any, the Republic of Panama has
succeeded Colombia in such liability on account of her separation from
Colombia on November 3, 1903. ” | 该条约拟订了此后处理1855年科隆市火灾后果的仲裁程序，包括以下问题：“若仲裁确定哥伦比亚负有原始责任，那么巴拿马共和国于1903年11月3日脱离哥伦比亚，它是否因此继承了哥伦比亚的责任，如果是，继承到何种程度”。 |
| Although no arbitration ever took place,
this example shows, at least implicitly, that both States had recognized the
possibility of succession in respect of State responsibility. | 尽管此后从未进行过仲裁，但此例至少含蓄地表明，两国均已承认，国家责任可以继承。 |
| 14. Another example relates to the India’s independence. | 14. 另外一例涉及印度独立。 |
| Both India and Pakistan became
independent States on 15 August 1947. | 印度和巴基斯坦均于1947年8月15日成为独立国家。 |
| The 1947 Indian Independence (Rights,
Property and Liabilities) Order deals issues of succession of States. | 1947年《印度独立(权利、财产和责任)法令》处理了国家继承的问题。 |
| Section 10 of the Order provides for the “transfer of liabilities for actionable wrong other than breach of
contract” from the British Dominion of India to the
new independent State of India. | 法令第10条规定，由英属印度自治领向新独立的印度国“移交可起诉的侵权行为的责任、而非违约的责任”。 |
| In many cases Indian courts have
interpreted Section 10 of the Order, finding that India remains responsible
for internationally wrongful acts committed before the date of succession. | 印度法院在多起案例中解释了该法令第10条， 认为印度对于继承日之前实施的国际不法行为依然负有责任。 |
| Cases of succession in Central and
Eastern Europe in 1990s | 1990年代中东欧的继承案例 |
| 15. More recent cases concern situations
of State succession in the second half of the 20th century, some of which
gave rise to the question of responsibility. | 15. 更近的案例涉及20世纪下半叶的国家继承，其中一些继承引发了责任的问题。 |
| They include in particular the cases of
succession in the Central and Eastern Europe in 1990s, such as the
dissolution of the Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, as well
as the unification of Germany. | 这些案例包括1990年代中东欧的继承，例如捷克斯洛伐克、南斯拉夫和苏联的解体，以及德国的统一。 |
| It is worth noting that according to
Opinion No. 9 of the Badinter Commission, the successor States of the SFRY
had to settle by way of agreements all issues relating to their succession
and to find an equitable outcome based on principles inspired by the Vienna
Conventions of 1978 and 1983 and by the relevant rules of customary
international law. | 值得注意的是，根据巴丹泰委员会第九号意见，南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的继承国需通过协定解决所有与继承有关的问题，并依据自1978年和1983年《维也纳公约》及习惯国际法相关规则中衍生的原则，找出公平的结果。 |
| Some cases also relate to Asia, and,
although more rarely, to Africa, where a few cases of succession took place
outside the context of decolonization (Eritrea, South Sudan). | 有些案例还涉及亚洲和非洲；尽管非洲的案例更少，但有几个继承案例发生在去殖民化的背景之外(厄立特里亚、南苏丹)。 |
| Relevant findings concerning these
developments may be found in the jurisprudence of the International Court of
Justice, other judicial bodies, treaties and other State practice. | 与上述发展有关的研究结果，可见于国际法院和其他司法机构的判例、条约和其他国家实践。 |
| 16. The most important decision may be
that of the ICJ in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros case (Hungary/Slovakia). | 16. 最重要的裁决也许是国际法院对Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros案(匈牙利/斯洛伐克)的裁决。 |
| It is true that the dissolution of
Czechoslovakia was based on agreement and even done in conformity with its
constitution. | 不错，捷克斯洛伐克的解体确实是依据协定，甚至是按照本国宪法的规定进行的。 |
| Yet both Czech and Slovak national
parliaments declared before the dissolution their willingness to assume the
rights and obligations arising from the international treaties of the
predecessor State. | 然而，捷克和斯洛伐克两国国民议会均在解体前宣布，愿意承担被继承国的国际条约产生的权利和义务。 |
| Art. 5 of the Constitutional Act No.
4/1993 even stated that “The Czech Republic took over
rights and obligations which had arisen from international law for the Czech
and Slovak Federal Republic at the day of its end, except of the obligations
related to the territory which had been under the sovereignty of the Czech
and Slovak Federal Republic, but not being under the sovereignty of the Czech
Republic. | 第4/1993号宪法法案第5条甚至宣称：“捷克共和国继承捷克和斯洛伐克联邦共和国终止日之前自国际条约产生的权利和义务，与捷克和斯洛伐克联邦共和国主权领土但非捷克共和国主权领土有关的义务除外。
” |
| 17. The ICJ said concerning international
responsibility of Slovakia: | 17. 关于斯洛伐克的国际责任，国际法院指出： |
| “Slovakia … may
be liable to pay compensation not only for its own wrongful conduct, but also
for that of Czechoslovakia, and it is entitled to be compensated for the
damage sustained by Czechoslovakia as well as by itself as a result of the
wrongful conduct by Hungary.” | “斯洛伐克…可能不仅有责任为本国的不法行为支付赔偿，还要为捷克斯洛伐克的不法行为支付赔偿，而且有权就捷克斯洛伐克以及本国因匈牙利的不法行为遭受的损失接受赔偿。” |
| Notwithstanding the special agreement
between Hungary and Slovakia, the Court thus seems to recognize the
succession in respect of secondary (responsibility) obligations and secondary
rights resulting from wrongful acts. | 因此，尽管匈牙利和斯洛伐克之间有特别协议，法院也似乎承认可以继承因不法行为产生的次级责任(义务)和次级权利。 |
| 18. The issues of State succession after
the collapse of the former Yugoslavia were more complex than in the case of
Czechoslovakia. | 18. 前南斯拉夫解体后的国家继承问题较捷克斯洛伐克的情况更为复杂。 |
| One of the reasons was that, in 1992, the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) declared itself to be
a continuator of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. | 其中一个原因是，1992年南斯拉夫联盟共和国(塞尔维亚和黑山)宣布本国成为南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国(南斯拉夫)的延续国。 |
| However, the other former Yugoslav
republics did not agree. | 然而，其他前南斯拉夫共和国并不同意。 |
| The UN Security Council and General
Assembly also refused to recognize the FRY as continuing State by resolutions
of September 1992. | 联合国安全理事会和大会也在1992年9月通过决议，拒绝承认南联盟为延续国。 |
| The Arbitration Commission (the Badinter
Commission) took the same position. | 仲裁委员会(巴丹泰委员会)持有同一立场。 |
| Finally, the FRY changed its position in
2000, when it applied for admission to the UN as a new State. | 最后，南联盟于2000年改变立场，以新国家的身份申请加入联合国。 |
| 19. On the basis of recommendation of the
Badinter Commission, the successor States to the former Yugoslavia had to
resolve all issues relating to succession of States by agreement. | 19. 根据巴丹泰委员会的建议，前南斯拉夫的继承国需通过协定解决所有与国家继承有关的问题。 |
| The Agreement on Succession issues was
concluded on 29 June 2001. | 2001年6月29日，缔结了《继承问题协定》。 |
| According to its Preamble, the Agreement
was reached after negotiations “with a view to
identifying and determining the equitable distribution amongst themselves of
rights, obligations, assets and liabilities of the former Socialist Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia”. | 协定的序言指出，缔结协定前经过谈判，“以便查明和决定如何在各方之间公平分配前南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的权利、义务、财产和责任”。 |
| It must be pointed out that Article 2 of
Annex F of the Agreement deals with the issues of internationally wrongful
acts against third States before the date of succession: | 必须指出，《协定》附件F第2条处理的是继承日之前对第三国实施的国际不法行为的问题： |
| “All claims against the SFRY which are
not otherwise covered by this Agreement shall be considered by the Standing
Joint Committee established under Article 4 of this Agreement. | “所有本协定中未以其他方式处理的对南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的申诉，均应由根据本协定第4条设立的常设联合委员会审议。 |
| The successor States shall inform one
another of all such claims against the SFRY.” | 各继承国应相互告知对南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的所有此类申诉。” |
| 20. It can be assumed from this text that
the obligations of the predecessor State do not simply disappear as a result
of the SFRY. | 20. 从上述案文中可以推断，被继承国的义务不单纯因南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的解体而消失。 |
| In addition, Art. 1 of the Annex F refers
to the transfer of claims from the predecessor State to the successor State. | 此外，附件F第1条提到，申诉由被继承国转给继承国。 |
| 21. The first “Yugoslav” case where the ICJ touched upon the issue of succession in
respect of responsibility, though in indirect way, is Genocide case (Bosnia
and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro). | 21. 国际法院首次涉及(尽管是间接涉及)责任继承问题的第一个“南斯拉夫”案例，是灭绝种族案(波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那诉塞尔维亚和黑山)。 |
| The Court was not called upon to resolve
the question of succession but rather to identify the Respondent Party: | 法院并不需要解决继承问题，而是要确定应诉方： |
| “The Court observes that the facts and
events on which the final submissions of Bosnia and Herzegovina are based
occurred at a period of time when Serbia and Montenegro constituted a single
State. | “法院认为，波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那最终提交材料所依据的事实和事件，发生在塞尔维亚和黑山构成单一国家的时期。 |
| … The Court thus notes that the Republic
of Serbia remains a respondent in the case, and at the date of the present
Judgment is indeed the only Respondent. … | …法院因此指出，塞尔维亚共和国仍然是本案中的一个应诉方，而且在本判决做出之日，实际上是唯一的应诉方。 |
| That being said, it has to be borne in
mind that any responsibility for past events determined in the present
Judgment involved at the relevant time the State of Serbia and Montenegro.” | …尽管如此，必须铭记，本判决就过往事件确定的一切责任，在相关的时间内均涉及塞尔维亚和黑山一国。 ” |
| 22. The same solution was adopted by the
ICJ in the parallel Genocide dispute between Croatia and Serbia in 2008. | 22. 国际法院在2008年克罗地亚与塞尔维亚之间相似的灭绝种族争端中采取了同样的解决办法。 |
| However, this is only the recent final
judgment in the case Croatia v. Serbia that dealt more in details with the
issues of succession to State responsibility. | 然而，法院在近期这项克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚案的最终判决中，更详细地处理了国家责任继承的问题。 |
| In spite of the fact that the Court
rejected Croatia’s claim and Serbia’s counter-claim on the basis that the intentional element of
genocide (dolus specialis) was lacking, the judgment seems to be the most
recent pronouncement in favour of the argument that the responsibility of a
State might be engaged by way of succession. | 虽然法院以缺少灭绝种族的蓄意要素(心理要件)为由，驳回了克罗地亚的申诉和塞尔维亚的反诉，但此项判决似乎是最近的声明，赞成可通过继承的方式承担国家责任的论点。 |
| 23. The ICJ recalled that, in its
Judgment of 18 November 2008, it found that it had jurisdiction to rule on
Croatia’s claim in respect of acts committed as from
27 April 1992, the date when the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) came
into existence as a separate State and became party, by succession, to the
Genocide Convention, but reserved its decision on its jurisdiction in respect
of breaches of the Convention alleged to have been committed before that
date. | 23. 国际法院回顾称，法院在2008年11月18日的判决中认定：南斯拉夫联盟共和国(南联盟)于1992年4月27日成为一个独立国家，并通过继承成为《灭绝种族罪公约》的缔约国。
对于克罗地亚就南联盟在此之后实施的行为提起的申诉，法院拥有管辖权，可进行裁决；但对于据称在此之前实施的违反《公约》的行为，法院保留关于管辖权的决定。 |
| In its 2015 judgment, the Court begins by
stating that the FRY could not have been bound by the Genocide Convention
before 27 April 1992, even as a State in statu nascendi, which was the main
argument of Croatia. | 法院在2015年的判决中首先指出，南联盟在1992年4月27日前不可能受到《灭绝种族罪公约》的约束，即使作为一个处于萌芽状态的国家也是如此，而这一点原是克罗地亚的主要论点。 |
| 24. The Court takes note, however, of an
alternative argument relied on by the Applicant during the oral hearing in
March 2014, namely that the FRY (and subsequently Serbia) could have
succeeded to the responsibility of the SFRY for breaches of the Convention
prior to that date. | 24. 然而，法院注意到申诉方在2014年3月的口头听证会中提出了另一个论点，即南联盟(后来是塞尔维亚)原本可以继承南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国为在此日期前违反公约所负的责任。 |
| In fact, Croatia advanced two separate
grounds on which it claimed the FRY had succeeded to the responsibility of
the SFRY. | 事实上，克罗地亚分别提出两个理由，据以声称南联盟已经继承了南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的责任。 |
| First, it claimed that this succession
came about as a result of the application of the principles of general
international law regarding State succession. | 首先，克罗地亚声称，继承是适用有关国家继承的一般国际法原则的结果。 |
| It relied upon the award of the
arbitration tribunal in the Lighthouses Arbitration (1956), which stated that
the responsibility of a State might be transferred to a successor if the
facts were such as to make the successor State responsible for the former’s wrongdoing. | 克罗地亚依据1956年仲裁法庭在灯塔仲裁案中的裁决，其中指出，如果事实情况要求继承国为被继承国的错误行为负责，那么可将一国的责任转给继承国。 |
| Secondly, Croatia argued that the FRY, by
declaration of 27 April 1992, had indicated “not only
that it was succeeding to the treaty obligations of the SFRY, but also that
it succeeded to the responsibility incurred by the SFRY for the violation of
those treaty obligations”. | 其次，克罗地亚辩称，南联盟在1992年4月27日的宣言中表示：“它不仅继承南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的条约义务，而且继承南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国为违反这些条约义务而承担的责任”。 |
| 25. Serbia maintained, in addition to the
arguments relating to jurisdiction and admissibility (a new claim introduced
by Croatia, no legal basis in Article IX or other provisions of the Genocide
Convention), that there was no principle of succession to responsibility in
general international law. | 25. 除了涉及管辖权和可否受理(克罗地亚提出的新主张，在《灭绝种族罪公约》第九条或其他条款中不存在法律依据)的论点外，塞尔维亚坚称在一般国际法中没有责任继承原则。 |
| Quite interestingly, Serbia also
maintained that all issues of succession to the rights and obligations of the
SFRY were governed by the Agreement on Succession Issues (2001), which lays
down a procedure for considering outstanding claims against the SFRY. | 十分有趣的是，塞尔维亚还坚称，所有关于继承南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的权利和义务的问题，均由《继承问题协定》(2001年)决定，该协定规定了审议对南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的未决申诉的程序。 |
| 26. It is worth mentioning that the Court
did not refuse and thus accepted the alternative argument of Croatia as to
its jurisdiction over acts prior to 27 April 1992. | 26. 值得一提的是，法院没有驳回、从而接受了克罗地亚关于法院对1992年4月27日前的行为是否具有管辖权的另一个论点。 |
| The ICJ stated that, in order to
determine whether Serbia is responsible for violations of the Convention, | 国际法院宣称，要确定塞尔维亚是否对违反《公约》的行为负责， |
| “the Court would need to decide: | “法院需要决定： |
| (1) whether the acts relied on by Croatia
took place; and if they did, whether they were contrary to the Convention; | (1) 克罗地亚据以申诉的行为是否发生过；若发生过，这些行为是否与《公约》相悖； |
| (2) if so, whether those acts were
attributable to the SFRY at the time that they occurred and engaged its
responsibility; and | (2) 如果是，这些行为在发生时是否可归咎于南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国，使之承担责任； |
| (3) if the responsibility of the SFRY had
been engaged, whether the FRY succeeded to that responsibility.” | (3) 若由南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国承担责任，南联盟是否继承这一责任。 |
| 27. It is important to note that the
Court considers the rules on succession that may come into play in the
present case fall into the same category as those on treaty interpretation
and responsibility of States. | ” 27. 必须指出，法院认为，能在本案中发挥作用的继承规则与关于条约解释和国家责任的规则同属一类。 |
| However, not all the Judges of the ICJ
shared the majority view. | 然而，国际法院的法官并不是都同意多数意见。 |
| As it stays in the Declaration of Judge
Xue, “to date, in none of the codified rules of
general international law on treaty succession and State responsibility,
State succession to responsibility was ever contemplated… Rules of State responsibility in the event of succession remain
to be developed.” | 在薛法官的声明中写道：“迄今为止，关于条约继承和国家责任的一般国际法成文规则，没有任何一条考虑过国家对责任的继承…关于发生继承时的国家责任的规则，仍有待发展。
” |
| 28. Another interesting case is the
investment arbitration Mytilineos Holdings SA. | 28. 另一个有趣的案例是Mytilineos
Holdings SA投资仲裁案。 |
| In this case, the arbitral tribunal noted
that, after the commencement of the dispute, the declaration of independence
of Montenegro took place. | 该案中，仲裁法庭指出，出现争端后，黑山宣布独立。 |
| Although the tribunal was not called upon
to decide on legal issues of State succession, it noted that it was
undisputed that the Republic of Serbia would continue in the legal status of
Serbia and Montenegro on international level. | 虽然法庭无需裁决国家继承的法律问题，但法庭指出，在国际层面，塞尔维亚共和国将继承塞尔维亚和黑山的法律地位，这一点毋庸置疑。 |
| 29. Numerous examples providing evidence
of State succession relate to German unification. | 29. 为国家继承提供证据的大量例子都涉及德国的统一。 |
| After re-unification, the Federal
Republic of Germany (FRG) assumed the liabilities arising from the delictual
responsibility of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR). | 统一后，德意志联邦共和国(联邦德国)承担了因前德意志民主共和国(民主德国)的侵权责任而产生的责任。 |
| One of the unsettled issues existing at
the time of unification concerned compensation for possessions expropriated
in the territory of the former GDR. | 统一时尚未解决的一个问题，涉及对前民主德国境内征用财产的赔偿。 |
| Except for a few lump sum agreements, the
GDR had always refused to pay compensation. | 除了几项一次性付清的协定，民主德国一直拒绝支付赔偿。 |
| It was only in the last period before the
unification when the GDR adopted an act on settlement property issues (29
June 1990). | 只是到了统一前的最后阶段，民主德国才通过了一项关于解决财产问题的法案(1990年6月29日)。 |
| In connection with this development the
governments of FRG and GDR adopted the Joint declaration on the settlement of
outstanding issues of property rights (15 June 1990). | 与这个情况有关的是，联邦德国和民主德国两国政府通过了一项关于解决未决财产权问题的联合声明(1990年6月15日)。 |
| According to Section 3 of the Joint
declaration, the property confiscated after 1949 should be returned to the
original owners. | 联合声明第3节宣布，1949年之后没收的财产，应归还原所有人。 |
| This may be mostly interpreted as the
matter of delictual liability (torts) rather than that of State
responsibility. | 这也许通常被解释为侵权责任(侵权行为)事项，而不是国家责任事项。 |
| 30. However, it is worth noting that the
FRG Federal Administrative Court dealt with the issue of State succession in
respect of aliens. | 30. 然而，值得一提的是，联邦德国联邦行政法院处理了与外国人有关的国家继承问题。 |
| Although the Court refused to accept the
responsibility of the FRG for an internationally wrongful act (expropriation)
committed by the GDR against a Dutch citizen, it recognized that the
obligations of the former GDR to pay compensation transferred to the
successor State. | 尽管法院拒绝认可联邦德国因民主德国对一名荷兰公民实施国际不法行为(征用)而负有责任，但它承认，前民主德国支付赔偿的义务转由继承国承担。 |
| 31. Another example of the transfer of
responsibility of the predecessor State to the successor State is the
Agreement between the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany and the
United States of America concerning the Settlement of Certain Property Claims
(1992). | 31. 被继承国的责任转由继承国承担的另一个例子是德意志联邦共和国与美利坚合众国《关于解决某些财产索赔的协定》(1992年)。 |
| This agreement covers claims of the US
nationals resulting from nationalization, expropriation and other measures
committed by the GDR between 1949 and 1976. | 该协定涵盖了1949至1976年美国国民就民主德国实施的国有化、征用和其他措施提出的索赔。 |
| Views of the doctrine | 学说观点 |
| 32. In the past, the doctrine mostly
denied the possibility of the transfer of responsibility to the successor
State. | 32. 以往的学说大多否认责任可以转由继承国承担。 |
| Later, mostly during the past 20 years,
however, the views have evolved, including some nuanced or critical views on
the thesis of non-succession, or even admitting succession in certain cases. | 但是后来，主要是近20年间，观点发生了演变，对不可继承的论点出现了一些微妙或批评的意见，甚至在某些情况下允许继承。 |
| According to some authors, when the
successor State takes over all rights of the predecessor State (such as the
case of unification), it should also assume the obligations arising from the
internationally wrongful acts. | 一些著述者指出，继承国继承被继承国的所有权利(例如在国家统一的情形下)时，也应该继承国际不法行为产生的义务。 |
| In these cases delictual obligations
should be treated as contractual debts. | 这种情况下，应将侵权引发的义务作为契约债务处理。 |
| 33. It is worth noting that the issue was
treated by the International Law Association (2008) and the Institute of
International Law (2013). | 33. 值得注意的是，国际法委员会(2008年) 和国际法学会(2013年)讨论了这个问题。 |
| The lastly mentioned Institute (IDI) has
established one of its thematic commissions to deal with the issue. | 国际法学会设立了一个专题委员会来研究这个问题。 |
| The Tallinn Session of the IDI (2015)
finally adopted, on the basis of the Report of the Special Rapporteur (Prof.
Marcelo G.Kohen), its Resolution on State Succession in Matters of State
Responsibility, consisting of Preamble and 16 articles. | 国际法学会塔林会议(2015年)最终依据特别报告员(马塞洛G •科恩教授)的报告，通过了《关于国家责任事项中的国家继承问题的决议》，决议包括序言和16项条款。 |
| The resolution rightly stresses the need
for the codification and progressive development in this area. | 决议正确地强调，这一领域需要编纂和逐渐发展。 |
| Chapter I consists of two articles,
namely Use of terms (Art. 1), building on the terms used in the Vienna
Conventions of 1978 and 1983, and Scope of the present Resolution (Art. 2). | 决议第一章包含两项条款，即“用语”(第1条)(以1978年和1983年的维也纳公约所使用的术语为依据)和“本决议之范围”(第2条)。 |
| Chapter II includes common rules
applicable to all categories of succession of States (Articles 3 to 10). | 第二章载列了所有类型的国家继承均适用的共同规则(第3条至第10条)。 |
| First, Art. 3 stresses a subsidiary
character of the guiding principles. | 首先，第3条强调了指导原则的从属性。 |
| Articles 4 and 5 govern respectively the
invocation of responsibility for an internationally wrongful act by or
against the predecessor State before the date of succession of States. | 第4条和第5条分别规定了就国家继承发生之日前被继承国实施或遭受的国际不法行为援引责任的问题。 |
| The common point is the continuing
existence of the predecessor State. | 共同点在于被继承国的存续。 |
| It reflects a general rule of
non-succession if the predecessor State continues to exist. | 这部分反映了若被继承国存续则不予继承的一般规则。 |
| The following article deals with
devolution agreements and unilateral declarations. | 后面的条款涉及转移协定和单方面声明。 |
| Chapter III (Articles 11 to 16) includes
provisions concerning specific categories of succession of States, namely
transfer of part of the territory, separation (secession) of parts of a
State, merger of States and incorporation of a State into another existing
State, dissolution of a State, and emergence of newly independent States. | 第三章(第11条至第16条)包括关于特定类别的国家继承的条款，即转让部分领土、一国部分地区脱离(分裂)、国家合并和一国并入另一现存国家、国家解散出现新独立的国家。 |
| Right to reparation in case of State
succession | 国家继承的情形下获得赔偿的权利 |
| 34. One of the principal reasons for
questioning the thesis of non-succession to State responsibility is the “humanization” of international law which
places an emphasis, inter alia, on reparation of damage suffered by
individuals, whether by way of diplomatic protection or by way of other
mechanisms. | 34. 质疑国家责任不予继承这一论点的一个主要原因，是国际法的“人性化”。
“人性化”特别强调赔偿个人遭受的损失，无论是通过外交保护还是通过其他机制。 |
| Therefore, the right to reparation on
behalf of individuals should not disappear in the case of cession,
dissolution or unification but should be transferred to the successor State. | 因此，在割让、解体或统一的情形下，为个人争取赔偿的权利不应消失，而应转移至继承国。 |
| 35. Here the practice seems to be more
robust than in the field of transfer of obligations arising from the
commission of an internationally wrongful act. | 35. 与转移实施国际不法行为产生的义务领域相比，这方面的实践似乎更为活跃。 |
| Therefore, the ILC was able to adopt,
when codifying the Articles on Diplomatic Protection (2006), an exception to
the rule of continuing nationality in cases where a natural person had a
nationality of a predecessor State (see draft Article 5). | 因此，国际法委员会能够在编纂关于外交保护的条款(2006年)时，就自然人具有被继承国国籍的情形下的国籍持续规则采取了一项例外(见第5条草案)。 |
| Similarly, a modified rule of continuing
nationality of corporations was adopted in draft Article 10. | 同样，第10条草案采纳了一项经修订的关于公司国籍持续的规则。 |
| 36. The rules codified in the Articles on
Diplomatic Protection build on a long history of arbitration and other claims
commissions, starting from the period after World War I, which interpreted
inter alia the rules of the Treaty of Versailles. | 36. 关于外交保护的条款中编纂的规则，借鉴了自第一次世界大战结束以来漫长的仲裁史和其他赔偿委员会的做法，
尤其解释了《凡尔赛条约》的规则。 |
| In modern practice, the most important
role belongs to the United Nations Compensation Commission, which addressed
to the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union in its
decision No. 10 in 1992. | 当代实践中，联合国赔偿委员会发挥了最重要的作用，委员会在1992年第10号决定中处理了捷克斯洛伐克、南斯拉夫和苏联解体的问题。 |
| 37. The practice of the UNCC clearly
shows that the UNCC did not follow the rule of continuing nationality. | 37. 联合国赔偿委员会的实践清楚表明，赔偿委员会不遵循国籍持续的规则。 |
| Instead, for example, it allowed successor
States of the former Czechoslovakia to receive compensation on behalf of
their new nationals. | 例如，委员会反而允许前捷克斯洛伐克的继承国代表其新国民接受赔偿。 |
| 38. The rights of individuals are
addressed also in very recent agreements relating to the succession of
States. | 38. 最近，一些与国家继承有关的协定中也涉及个人的权利。 |
| For example, the Agreement between the
Republic of the Sudan and the Republic of South Sudan on Certain Economic
Matters (2012) provides, inter alia, in Article 5.1.1 that “each Party agrees to unconditionally and irrevocably cancel and forgive
any claims of non-oil related arrears and other non-oil related financial
claims outstanding to the other Party …” | 例如，《苏丹共和国与南苏丹共和国关于某些经济事项的协定》(2012年)第5.1.1条特别规定，“双方商定，无条件及不可撤回地取消和免除拖欠对方的任何非石油相关的欠款索偿及其他非石油相关的财务索偿…”。 |
| However, according to Article 5.1.3, “the Parties agree that the provisions of Article 5.1.1 shall not
serve as a bar to any private claimants. ” | 然而，第5.1.3条规定，“双方商定，第5.1.1条的规定不应限制任何私人索偿要求。” |
| In addition, under Article 5.1.4, “ the Parties agree to take such action as may be necessary, including
the establishment of joint committees or any other workable mechanisms, to
assist and facilitate the pursuance of claims by nationals or other legal
persons of either State to pursue claims in accordance with, subject to the
provisions of the applicable laws in each State.” | 此外，第5.1.4条还规定，“双方商定采取必要行动，包括建立联合委员会或任何其他可行机制，协助和方便任何两国国民或其他法人根据各自国家适用法律的规定进行索偿。
” |
| A codification task for the ILC | 国际法委员会的编纂任务 |
| 39. The issue of the succession of States
with respect to State responsibility deserves examination by the ILC. | 39. 国家责任方面的国家继承问题值得国际法委员会加以研究。 |
| This is one of the topics of general
international law where customary international law was not well established
in the past, therefore the ILC did not include it in its programme at an
early stage. | 这是个一般国际法专题，过去在这方面没有确立习惯国际法，因此国际法委员会早期没有将其纳入工作方案。 |
| Now, it is the time to assess new
developments in State practice and jurisprudence. | 现在来评估国家实践和判例中的新发展，正当其时。 |
| This topic could fulfill gaps that remain
after the completion of the codification of succession of States in respect
of treaties (Vienna Convention of 1978) and in respect of State property,
archives and debts (Vienna Convention, 1983), as well as in respect of
nationality (Articles on Nationality of Natural Persons in relation to the
Succession of States, 1999), on the one hand, and that of State
responsibility on the other hand. | 本专题一方面能够填补在完成国家在条约方面的继承(1978年《维也纳公约》)、国家对国家财产、档案和债务的继承(1983年《维也纳公约》)、以及国籍方面的继承(国家继承涉及的自然人国籍问题条款，1999年)等编纂工作后留下的空白，另一方面也能填补国家责任方面的空白。 |
| 40. The work on the topic should follow
the main principles of the succession of States in respect of treaties,
concerning the differentiation of transfer of a part of territory, secession,
dissolution, unification and creation of a new independent State. | 40. 本专题的工作应遵循条约方面国家继承的主要原则，涉及区分部分领土的转移、分裂、解体、统一和建立新的独立国家。 |
| A realistic approach, supported by the
study of case-law and other State practice, warrants a distinction between
cases of dissolution and unification, where the original State has
disappeared, and cases of secession where the predecessor State remains. | 以案例法和其他国家实践研究为基础的现实办法，能保证对原有国家消失后情况下的解体和统一的案例与被继承国存续情况下的分裂的案例作出区分。 |
| The latter usually pose more problems, as
States are far less likely to accept a transfer of State responsibility. | 后一种案例通常会产生更多的问题，因为国家几乎不可能接受国家责任的转移。 |
| It is still important to distinguish
between negotiated and contested (revolutionary) secession. | 区分谈判式分裂和争议式(革命式)分裂，依然十分重要。 |
| Negotiated secession creates better
conditions for agreement on all aspects of succession, including in respect
of responsibility. | 谈判式分裂为就继承的所有方面(包括责任)达成协定创造了更好的条件。 |
| 41. However, the work should focus more
on secondary rules on State responsibility. | 41. 然而，应该把工作重点更多地放在国家责任的次级规则方面。 |
| It is important to point out that the
project aims at both active and passive aspects of responsibility, i.e. the
transfer (or devolution) of both obligations of the acting (wrongdoing) State
and rights (claims) of injured State. | 必须指出，本项目不仅针对责任的积极方面，也针对责任消极方面，即：不仅是行为国(不法行为国)义务的转移(或移交)，也是受害国权利(索赔)的转移(或移交)。 |
| The structure can be as follows: | 项目可以采取以下结构： |
| (a) general provisions on State succession,
stressing in particular the priority of agreement; | (a) 关于国家继承的一般规定，特别强调协定优先； |
| (b) residual (subsidiary) principles on
transfer of obligations arising from State responsibility; | (b) 关于转移由国家责任产生的义务的剩余(次级)原则； |
| (c) principles on the transfer of rights
to reparation; | (c) 关于转移获得赔偿权的原则； |
| (d) miscellaneous and procedural
provisions. | (d) 杂项和程序规定。 |
| 42. One question which deserves further
debate and consideration is whether to include the transfer of obligations
arising from the responsibility of States to international organizations,
including financial institutions. | 42. 需要进一步辩论和审议的问题是，本专题是否纳入将国家责任产生的义务移交给国际组织(包括金融机构)的情况。 |
| Another question concerns the transfer of
obligations from the responsibility of States to individuals. | 另一个问题涉及将国家责任产生的义务移交个人。 |
| Apart from the issues of diplomatic
protection (e.g. exceptions from the continuing nationality rules), which
however remain in the State to State relations, it seems that this question
may be relevant where and to the extent individuals have direct rights
against a State. This is a case of certain treaty regimes, such as the
European Convention on Human Rights. | 除了仍属于国与国关系的外交保护的问题(如国籍持续规则的例外)，这个问题似乎出现在个人对国家直接拥有权利的时候和情况下,《欧洲人权公约》等某些条约制度便是这种情况。 |
| 43. It is for a debate of the Commission
how and when to address the issue. | 43. 委员会需要辩论如何及何时处理这个问题。 |
| Without prejudice to a future decision,
an appropriate form for this topic may be draft articles or principles with
commentaries (following, in particular, the precedent of the Articles on
State Responsibility and those that later became the Vienna Conventions of
1978 and 1983). | 在不影响未来决定的前提下，本专题的适当形式可以是条款草案或带有评注的原则(尤其遵循国家责任条款及后来成为1978年和1983年维也纳公约的条款的先例)。 |
| Select Bibliography | 参考文献选编: |
| Mr. Lucius Caflisch, Mr. Enrique
Candioti, Mr. Maurice Kamto, Mr. Bernd H. Niehaus, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Narinder Singh
and Mr. Nugroho Wisnumurti. | 卢修斯·卡弗利施先生、恩里克·坎迪奥蒂先生、莫里斯·卡姆托先生、贝恩德·尼豪斯先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、纳林德尔·辛格先生和努格罗霍·维斯努穆尔蒂先生。 |
| Ms. Concepción
Escobar Hernández, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez-Robledo, Ms. Marie G. Jacobsson, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean
D. Murphy, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina
and Sir Michael Wood. | 康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生、玛丽·雅各布松女士、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生、爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生和迈克尔·伍德先生。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), para. 34. | 《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第34段。 |
| Ibid., para. 27. | 同上，第27段。 |
| Ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), para. 30. | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第30段。 |
| Ibid., para. 31. | 同上，第31段。 |
| Yearbook … 2007,
vol. II (Part Two), para. 375. | 《2007年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第375段。 |
| At its fifty-eighth session (2006), the
Commission endorsed the recommendation of the Planning Group to include,
inter alia, the topic “Protection of persons in the
event of disasters” in the long-term programme of
work of the Commission. | 委员会第五十八届会议(2006年)核可了规划组的建议，将“发生灾害时的人员保护”等专题列入委员会长期工作方案。 |
| A brief syllabus on the topic, prepared
by the secretariat, was annexed to the report of the Commission in 2006
(Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), annex III). | 秘书处就这一专题编写的一份简要提纲被列为委员会2006年报告附件(《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，附件三)。 |
| In its resolution 61/34 of 4 December
2006, the General Assembly took note of the inclusion of the topic in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission. | 大会2006年12月4日第61/34号决议注意到该专题已列入委员会长期工作方案。 |
| See A/CN.4/598 (preliminary report),
A/CN.4/615 and Corr.1 (second report), A/CN.4/629 (third report), A/CN.4/643
and Corr.1 (fourth report), A/CN.4/652 (fifth report), A/CN.4/662 (sixth
report) and A/CN.4/668 and Corr.1 and Add.1 (seventh report). | 见A/CN.4/598(初步报告)、A/CN.4/615和Corr.1(第二次报告)、A/CN.4/629(第三次报告)、A/CN.4/643和Corr.1(第四次报告)、A/CN.4/652(第五次报告)、A/CN.4/662(第六次报告)以及A/CN.4/668和Corr.1及Add.1(第七次报告)。 |
| A/CN.4/590 and Add.1 to 3. | A/CN.4/590和Add.1至3。 |
| Yearbook … 2008,
vol. II (Part Two), paras. 32-33. | 《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第32至33段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 55-56. | 《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第55至56段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 51-53. | 同上，第51至53段。 |
| See the articles on prevention of
transboundary harm from hazardous activities, General Assembly resolution
62/68 of 6 December 2007, annex, and for the commentary thereto, Yearbook … 2001, vol.II (Part Two), chap. V, sect.E; | 见关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款，大会2007年12月6日第62/68号决议，附件，及相关评注，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第五章，E节； |
| and the articles on the law of
transboundary aquifers, General Assembly resolution 63/124 of 11 December
2008, and for the commentaries thereto, Yearbook …
2008, vol. II (Part Two), chap. IV, sect. E. | 关于跨界含水层法的条款，大会2008年12月11日第63/124号决议，及相关评注，《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第四章，E节。 |
| ASEAN Document Series 2005, p. 157. | 《2005年东盟文件汇编》，第157页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2296,
No. 40906, p. 5. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第2296卷，第40906号，第5页。 |
| The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction 2015-2030, adopted by the Third United Nations World Conference on
Disaster Risk Reduction, and endorsed by the General Assembly in its
resolution 69/283 of 3 June 2015, annex II. | 《2015-2030年仙台减少灾害风险框架》是第三次世界减少灾害风险大会通过的，并由大会在2015年6月3日第69/283号决议附件二中予以认可。 |
| International Federation of Red Cross and
Red Crescent Societies, Guidelines for the Domestic Facilitation and
Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance
(Geneva, 2007). | 红十字会红新月会联会《国内便利和管理国际救灾和初期恢复援助工作导则》(2007年，日内瓦)。 |
| Institute of International Law, Yearbook,
vol. 70, Part II, Session of Bruges (2003), p. 263. | 国际法学会，《年鉴》第70卷，第二部分，布鲁日会议(2003年)，第263页。 |
| International Review of the Red Cross,
vol. 36 (1996), No. 310, annex VI. | 《红十字国际评论》，第36(1996)卷，第310号，附件六。 |
| See IFRC Guidelines (footnote 17 above),
guideline 2, para. 8 (“the State upon whose territory
persons or property are affected by a disaster”). | 见《红十字会红新月会联会导则》(上文脚注17)，导则2, 第8段(“受灾人员或财产所在国家”)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 62/68 of 6
December 2007, annex, art. 2; for the commentary thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, chap. V, sect. E. | 大会2007年12月6日第62/68号决议，附件，第2条；相关评注见《2001年…年鉴》，第五章，E节。 |
| See above, para. (4) of the commentary to
draft art. 3. | 见上文第3条草案的评注第(4)段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2172,
No. 38131, p. 213, art. 1 (f). | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第2172卷，第38131号，第213页，第1条(f)项。 |
| See below para. (4) of the commentary to
draft art. 12. | 见下文第12条草案的评注第(4)段。 |
| See below para. (1) of the commentary to
draft art. 7. | 见下文第7条草案的评注第(1)段。 |
| See also the IFRC Guidelines (footnote 17
above), guideline 2.14 (definition of “assisting
actor”). | 又见《红十字会红新月会联会导则》(上文脚注17)，导则2.14(“援助方”的定义)。 |
| Art. 1, para. 1 (definition of “assisting entity”). | 第1条第1款(“援助实体”的定义)。 |
| See below para. (2) of the commentary to
draft art. 14. | 见下文第14条草案的评注第(2)段。 |
| OCHA, Guidelines on The Use of Foreign
Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster Relief (“Oslo Guidelines”) of 2006, as revised on 1
November 2007. | 人道协调厅2006年《在救灾中使用外国军事和民防资源的准则》(又称《奥斯陆准则》)，2007年11月1日修订。 |
| See art. 1 (d) (definition of “assistance”). | 见第1条(d)项(“援助”的定义)。 |
| See the Oslo Guidelines (footnote 28
above), guideline 5. | 也见《奥斯陆准则》(上文脚注28)，准则5。 |
| Agreement between the Government of the
Hellenic Republic and the Government of the Russian Federation on Cooperation
in the Field of Prevention and Response to Natural and Man-Made Disasters, of
21 February 2000, art. 1 (definition of “team for
providing assistance”). | 《希腊共和国政府与俄罗斯联邦共和国政府关于在预防和应对自然和人为灾害方面开展合作的协定》，2000年2月21日，第1条(“救援队”的定义)。 |
| See articles on the responsibility of
States for internationally wrongful acts, 2001, General Assembly resolution
56/83 of 12 December 2001, annex, arts. 4-9 (for the commentary thereto, see
Yearbook …2001, vol. II (Part Two), and corrigendum,
chap. IV, sect. E), and articles on the responsibility of international
organizations, 2011, General Assembly resolution 66/100 of 9 December 2011,
annex, arts. 6-7 (for the commentary thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two), and corrigendum, chap. V, sect. E). | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款，2001年，大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议，附件，第4-9条(相关评注见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第四章E节)及关于国际组织的责任的条款，2011年，大会2011年12月9日第66/100号决议，附件，第6-7条(相关评注见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第五章E节)。 |
| See below, para. (5) of the commentary to
draft art. 15. | 见下文第15条草案的评注第(5)段。 |
| See footnote 18 above. | 见上文脚注18。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 950,
No. 13561, p. 269, as revised by the Protocol of Amendment to the
International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs
Procedures of 26 June 1999, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2370, No.
13561, p. 27 (definition of “relief consignments”). | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第950卷，第13561号，第269页，后经1999年6月26日《关于简化和协调海关制度的国际公约修正案议定书》修订，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2370卷，第13561号，第27页(“救济物资”的定义)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 217 (III) (A)
of 10 December 1948. | 大会1948年12月10日第217(III)(A)号决议。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999,
No. 14668, p. 171, preambular paragraphs and art. 10, para. 1. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第14668号，第171页，序言部分；第十条第1款。 |
| Ibid., vol. 993 , No. 14531, p. 3,
preambular paragraphs and art. 13, para. 1. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第993卷，第14531号，第3页，序言部分；第十三条第1款。 |
| Ibid., vol.660, No. 9464, p. 195,
preambular paragraphs. | 同上，第660卷，第9464号，第195页，序言部分。 |
| Ibid., vol. 1249, No. 20378, p. 13,
preambular paragraphs. | 同上，第1249卷，第20378号，第13页，序言部分。 |
| Ibid., vol. 1465, No. 24841, p. 85,
preambular paragraphs. | 同上，第1465卷，第24841号，第85页，序言部分。 |
| Ibid., vol. 1577, No. 27531, p. 3,
preambular paragraphs; art. 23, para. 1; | 同上，第1577卷，第27531号，第3页，序言部分；第23条第1款； |
| art. 28, para. 2; art. 37; and arts.
39-40. | 第28条第2款；第37条；第39条和第40条。 |
| Ibid., vol. 2515, No. 44910, p. 3, art.
3. | 同上，第2515卷，第44910号，第3页，第三条。 |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field (Geneva,
12 August 1949), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, No. 970, p. 31 (“Geneva Convention I”); Geneva Convention
for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked
Members of Armed Forces at Sea (Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 971, p.
85 (“Geneva Convention II”);
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War (Geneva, 12
August 1949), ibid., No. 972, p. 135 (“Geneva
Convention III”); and Geneva Convention relative to
the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949),
ibid., No. 973, p. 287 (“Geneva Convention IV”), common art. 3, para. 1 (noting the prohibition on “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and
degrading treatment”). | 《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第75卷，第970号，第31页(《日内瓦第一公约》)；《改善海上武装部队伤者病者及遇船难者境遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第971号，第85页(《日内瓦第二公约》)；《关于战俘待遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第972号，第135页(《日内瓦第三公约》)；及《关于战时保护平民的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第973号，第287页(《日内瓦第四公约》)，共同第三条第一款(注意禁止“损害个人尊严，特别如侮辱与降低身份的待遇”的规定)。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1977, United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3, art. 75, para.2 (b) (noting the
prohibition on “outrages upon personal dignity, in
particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any
form of indecent assault”); art. 85, para. 4 (c)
(noting that when committed wilfully and in violation of the Conventions or
the Protocol, “practices of apartheid and other
inhuman and degrading practices involving outrages upon personal dignity,
based on racial discrimination” are regarded as grave
breaches of the Protocol). | 1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约《关于保护国际性武装冲突受害者的附加议定书》(第一号议定书)，1977年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页，第七十五条第二(二)款，(注意：禁止“对人身尊严的侵犯，特别是侮辱性和降低身份的待遇，强迫卖淫和任何形式的非礼侵犯”)；第八十五条第四(三)款(注意：当行为属故意并违反各公约和本议定书时，“以种族歧视为依据侵犯人身尊严的种族隔离和其他不人道和侮辱性办法”应视为严重破坏议定书的行为)。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), 1977, ibid., No. 17513, p.
609, art. 4, para. 2 (e) (noting the prohibition on “outrages
upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment,
rape, enforced prostitution and any form or indecent assault”). | 1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约《关于保护非国际性武装冲突受害者的附加议定书》(第二号议定书)，1977年，同上，第17513号，第609页，第四条第二(五)款(注意：禁止“对人身尊严的侵犯，特别是侮辱性和降低身分的待遇、强奸、强迫卖淫和任何形式的非礼侵犯”)。 |
| IFRC Guidelines (see footnote 17 above),
guideline 4, para. 1. | 见《红十字会红新月会联会导则》(上文脚注17)，导则4, 第1段。 |
| Preambular paragraph. | 序言段。 |
| Resolution on humanitarian assistance
(see footnote 18 above), art. II, para. 1. | 关于人道主义援助的决议(见上文脚注18)，第二条第1款。 |
| See art. 37 (c) (noting, inter alia,
that: “Every child deprived of liberty shall be
treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human
person”). | 见第37条(c)项(其中指出“所有被剥夺自由的儿童应受到人道待遇，其人格固有尊严应受尊重”)。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-first session, Supplement No. 10 (A/61/10), annex C, para.
28. | 见《大会正式记录，第六十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/61/10)，附件C, 第28段。 |
| Oslo Guidelines (see footnote 28 above),
para. 20 (noting that: “The dignity and rights of all
victims must be respected and protected”). | 《奥斯陆准则》，(见上文脚注28)，第20段(注意：“必须尊重和保护所有受害人的尊严和权利”)。 |
| J. M. Ebersole, “The
Mohonk Criteria for Humanitarian Assistance in Complex Emergencies: Task
Force on Ethical and Legal Issues in Humanitarian Assistance” (“Mohonk Criteria”), Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 17, No. 1 (February 1995), pp.
192-208, p. 196 (“noting that: “The dignity and rights of all victims must be respected and
protected”). | Jon M. Ebersole,“关于复杂紧急情况下提供人道主义援助的莫洪克标准”(“莫洪克标准”)，《人权季刊》，第17卷，第1号(1995年2月)，第192-208页(注意：“必须尊重和保护所有受害人的尊严和权利”)。 |
| E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, annex, principle 26
(noting, inter alia, that: “Persons engaged in
humanitarian assistance, their transport and supplies shall be respected and
protected”). | E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, 附件，原则26(尤其注意：“应尊重并保护参加人道主义援助的人员及其运输手段和物资”。 |
| Adopted by the Council of the
International Institute of Humanitarian Law in April 1993, principle 10
(noting that: “Humanitarian assistance can, if
appropriate, be made available by way of ‘humanitarian
corridors’ which should be respected and protected by
competent authorities of the parties involved and if necessary by the United
Nations authority”). | 国际人道主义法研究所理事会1993年4月通过的《人道主义援助权利指导原则》，原则10(注意：“可酌情通过‘人道主义走廊’提供人道主义援助，有关各方的主管当局应予以尊重和保护，必要时由联合国授权”)。 |
| Inter-Agency Standing Committee, IASC
Operational Guidelines on the Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural
Disasters (Washington, D.C., Brookings-Bern Project on Internal Displacement,
2011). | 机构间常设委员会《自然灾害情况下人员保护业务准则》(Washington,
D.C.，Brookings-Bern Project on Internal Displacement,
2011)。 |
| See footnote 55 above. | 见上文脚注55。 |
| See European Court of Human Rights,
Budayeva and Others v. Russia, nos. 15339/02, 21166/02, 20058/02, 11673/02
and 15343/02, ECHR 2008-II. | 见欧洲人权法院，布达耶娃等人诉俄罗斯，案件号15339/02、21166/02、20058/02、11673/02和15343/02号，ECHR 2008-II。 |
| See, for example, Guiding Principles on
Internal Displacement (footnote 55), annex, principle 5. | 例如，见《关于境内流离失所问题的指导原则》(脚注55)，附件，原则5。 |
| See also the Inter-Agency Standing
Committee Operational Guidelines on Human Rights and Natural Disasters, 2006
(A/HRC/4/38/Add.1, annex). | 又见机构间常设委员会2006年《人权和自然灾害业务准则》(A/HRC/4/38/Add.1, 附件)。 |
| See also paras. (2) and (3) of the
commentary to draft art. 6. | 又见第6条草案评注第(2)和(3)段。 |
| See, for example, paras. (4)-(5) of the
commentary to draft art. 11, below. | 例如，见下文第11条草案的评注第(4)-(5)段。 |
| See discussion in the Memorandum by the
Secretariat (A/CN.4/590), para. 11. | 见秘书处备忘录中的讨论(A/CN.4/590)，第11段。 |
| Annex, para. 2. | 附件，第2段。 |
| See art.3, para. 1 | 见第三条第一款 |
| (noting that: “Persons
taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces
who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness,
wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated
humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion
or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria”). | (注：“不实际参加战事之人员，包括放下武器之武装部队人员及因病、伤、拘留、或其他原因而失去战斗力之人员在内，在一切情况下应予以人道待遇，不得基于种族、肤色、宗教或信仰、性别、出身或财力或其他类似标准而有所歧视”)。 |
| Corfu Channel case, Judgment of April
9th, 1949: I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 4 at p. 22. J. Pictet, The Fundamental
Principles of the Red Cross Proclaimed by the Twentieth International
Conference of the Red Cross, Vienna, 1965: Commentary (Geneva, Henry Dunant
Institute, 1979), pp. 21-27; also available from. | 科孚海峡案，1949年4月9日判决《1949年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第22页。 让 •皮克泰，1965年在维也纳召开的第20届红十字国际会议通过的红十字会基本原则：评注(日内瓦，亨利•杜南学院，1979年)，第21-27页；另可查阅 |
| Oslo Guidelines (see footnote 28 above),
para. 20; Mohonk Criteria (see footnote 54 above), p. 196. Ibid. | 《奥斯陆准则》(见上文脚注28)，第20段；《莫洪克标准》(上文脚注54)，第196页。同上。 |
| See C. Pilloud and others, Commentary on
the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12
August 1949 (Geneva, International Committee of the Red Cross, 1987), paras.
2800-2801 (citing the “Proclamation of the
Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross”, adopted by
resolution VIII of the 20th International Conference of the Red Cross,
Vienna, 1965), and Pictet, Commentary (see footnote 67 above), pp. 33-51. | 见C. Pilloud等人，“对1949年8月12日《日内瓦公约》的1977年6月8日附加议定书的评论”(日内瓦、红十字国际委员会，1987年)，第2800至2801段(引用1965年在维也纳召开的第20次红十字国际会议第九号决议通过的“红十字会基本原则”)，以及皮克泰，评注，第33-51页。 |
| P. MacAlister-Smith, International
Guidelines for Humanitarian Assistance Operations (Heidelberg, Germany, Max
Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, 1991),
para. 6 (a). | P. MacAlister-Smith, 人道主义援助行动国际指南草案(德国海德堡：马克斯•普朗克比较公法和国际法研究所，1991年)，第6(a)段。 |
| See, inter alia, the 1949 Geneva
Conventions, common art. 3, para. 1; Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
art. 2; | 尤其见1949年日内瓦四公约，共同第三条第一款；《世界人权宣言》第二条； |
| International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, art. 2, para. 1; and International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights, art. 2, para. 2. | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》，第二条第一款；《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》，第二条第二款； |
| See also Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, art. 5, and International Convention on the
Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families
(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2220, No. 39481, p. 3), art. 7. | 又见《残疾人权利公约》，第五条，以及《保护所有移徙工人及其家属成员权利国际公约》，(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2220卷，第39481号，第3页)，第7条。 |
| Resolution on humanitarian assistance
(see footnote 18 above), art. II, para. 3. | 关于人道主义援助的决议，(见上文脚注18)，第二条第3款。 |
| IFRC Guidelines (see footnote 17 above),
art. 4, para. 2 (b). | 红十字与红新月会国际联合会《导则》，(见上文脚注17)，第4条第2(b)款。 |
| Ibid., art. 4, para. 3 (a). | 同上，第4条第3(a)款。 |
| Resolution on humanitarian assistance
(see footnote 18 above), art. II, para. 3. | 关于人道主义援助的决议(见上文脚注18)，第二条第3款。 |
| See para. 32. | 见第32段。 |
| A/CONF.206/6 and Corr.1, chap. I,
resolution 2, para. 13 (d): “A gender perspective
should be integrated into all disaster risk management policies, plans and
decision-making processes, including those related to risk assessment, early
warning, information management, and education and training.” | A/CONF.206/6和Corr.1,第一章，第2号决议，第13(d)段：“应将性别观点纳入所有灾害风险管理政策、计划和决策过程中，包括与风险评估、预警、信息管理以及教育和培训”。 |
| Para. 19 (d): “Disaster
risk reduction requires an all-of-society engagement and partnership. | 第19(d)段：“减少灾害风险需要全社会的参与和伙伴关系。 |
| It also requires empowerment and
inclusive, accessible and non-discriminatory participation, paying special
attention to people disproportionately affected by disasters, especially the
poor. | 减少灾害风险还需要增强权能以及包容、开放和非歧视的参与，同时特别关注受灾害影响特别严重的人口，尤其是最贫穷者。 |
| A gender, age, disability and cultural
perspective should be integrated into all policies and practices, and women
and youth leadership should be promoted. | 应将性别、年龄、残疾情况和文化视角纳入所有政策和实践，还应增强妇女和青年的领导能力。 |
| In this context, special attention should
be paid to the improvement of organized voluntary work of citizens.” | 为此，应特别注意改善公民有组织的自愿工作”。 |
| General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV) of
24 October 1970, annex, para. 1. | 大会1970年10月24日第2625(XXV)号决议，附件，第1段。 |
| Arts. 11, 15, 22 and 23. | 第十一、十五、二十二和二十三条。 |
| See, in particular, general comments No. 2
(E/1990/23-E/C.12/1990/3, annex III), No. 3 (E/1991/23-E/C.12/1990/8, annex
III), No. 7 (E/1998/22-E/C.12/1997/10, annex IV), No. 14
(E/2001/22-E/C.12/2000/21) and No. 15 (E/2003/22-E/C.12/2002/13, annex IV). | 具体内容见下列一般性意见：第2号(E/1990/23-E/C.12/1990/3,
附件三)、第3号(E/1991/23-E/C.12/1990/8,
附件三)、第7号(E/1998/22-E/C.12/1997/10,
附件四)、第14号(E/2001/22-E/C.12/2000/21)和第15号(E/2003/22-E/C.12/2002/13, 附件四。 |
| Art. 11. | 第十一条。 |
| Annex, para. 5. | 附件，第5段。 |
| See A/CN.4/590/Add.2 for a comprehensive
list of relevant instruments. | 相关文书的详细一览表见A/CN.4/590/Add.2。 |
| For a further typology of instruments for
the purposes of international disaster response law, see Horst Fischer, “International disaster response law treaties: trends, patterns and
lacunae”, in International Disaster Response Laws,
Principles and Practice: Reflections, Prospects and Challenges (Geneva, IFRC,
2003), at pp. 24-44. | 为国际救灾法目的制订的更多文书类型见H. Fischer,“国际灾害应对法条约：趋势、格局以及缺陷”，载于红十字会与红新月会国际联合会《国际灾害应对法律、原则和实践：思考、前景及挑战》(2003年)，见第24-44页。 |
| Agreement between the Government of the
French Republic and the Government of Malaysia on Cooperation in the Field of
Disaster Prevention and Management and Civil Security, 25 May 1998,
preambular paragraph 4. | 1998年5月25日《法兰西共和国政府与马来西亚政府关于灾害预防及管理和公共安全合作的协定》，序言第4段。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution
46/182, annex, para. 4, and the Hyogo Declaration, A/CONF.206/6 and Corr.1,
chap. 1, resolution 1, para. 4. | 另见大会第46/182号决议，附件，第4段；《兵库宣言》，A/CONF.206/6和Corr.1, 第一章，第1号决议，第4段。 |
| See annex, para. 5. | 附件，第5段。 |
| Para. 7. | 第7段。 |
| See below para. (8) of the commentary to
art. 18. | 见下文第18条评注第(8)段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 63/124 of 11
December 2008, annex (for the commentary thereto, see Yearbook … 2008, vol. II (Part Two), chap. IV, sect. E. | 大会2008年12月11日第63/124号决议，附件(其评注见《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第四章E节。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| ASEAN Documents Series 1976. | 1976年东盟文件汇编。 |
| Annex, para. 27. | 附件，第27段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 62/68 of 6
December 2007, annex (for the commentary thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two), chap. V, sect. E). | 大会2007年12月6日第62/68号决议附件(评注见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第五章E节)。 |
| See above, para. (6) of the commentary to
draft art. 7. | 见上文第7条草案的评注第(6)段。 |
| See, for example, the ASEAN Agreement,
art. 18, para. 1. | 见《东盟协定》)，第18条第1款。 |
| See, for example, the Tampere Convention,
art. 3 (calling for “the deployment of terrestrial
and satellite telecommunication equipment to predict, monitor and provide
information concerning natural hazards and disasters”
and “the sharing of information about natural hazards,
health hazards and disasters among the States Parties and with other States,
non-State entities and intergovernmental organizations, and the dissemination
of such information to the public, particularly to at-risk communities”); and the Oslo Guidelines (see footnote 28 above), para. 54. | 见《坦佩雷公约》第3条(呼吁“部署地面和卫星电信设备来预测和监测各种自然危险、健康危险或灾害以及提供有关的信息”以及“在缔约国之间以及同其他国家、非国家实体和政府间组织分享关于自然危险、健康危险和灾害的信息，并将这种信息传播给公众，特别是传播给面临危险的社区”)；《奥斯陆准则》(见上文脚注28)，第54段。 |
| See also discussion in the Memorandum by
the Secretariat (A/CN.4/590), paras. 158-174. | 另见秘书处备忘录中的讨论(A/CN.4/590)，第158-174段。 |
| See Yokohama Strategy for a Safer World:
Guidelines for Natural Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation and
Plan of Action (A/CONF.172/9), chap. I, resolution I, annex I. | 见《建立更安全的世界的横滨战略：预防、防备和减轻自然灾害的指导方针》及《行动计划》，A/CONF.172/9, 第一章，决议一，附件一。 |
| Geneva, 19-23 May 2013. | 日内瓦，19-2013年5月23日。 |
| See Sendai Declaration in General
Assembly resolution 69/283 of 3 June 2015, annex I (footnote omitted). | 见大会2015年6月3日第69/283号决议中的《仙台宣言》，附件(脚注省略)。 |
| See Sendai Framework, paras. 5-6. | 见《仙台框架》，第5-6段。 |
| See Sendai Framework (guiding
principles), para. 19 (a). | 见《仙台框架》(指导原则)，第19 (a)段。 |
| See Sendai Framework (expected outcome
and goal), para. 16. | 见《仙台框架》(预期成果和目标)，第16段。 |
| See Sendai Framework’s Goal, para. 17. | 见《仙台框架》的目标，第17段。 |
| Öneryildiz v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99,
ECHR 2004-XII. Budayeva and Others v. Russia, nos. | 厄内尔伊尔迪兹诉土耳其案[大审判庭]，案件号48939/99, ECHR 2004-XII。 |
| 15339/02, 21166/02, 20058/02, 11673/02
and 15343/02, ECHR 2008-II. | 布达耶娃等人诉俄罗斯，案件号15339/02、21166/02、20058/02、11673/02和15343/02, ECHR 2008-II。 |
| Report of the conference of the parties
on its twenty-first session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December
2015, addendum: decisions adopted by the conference of the parties
(FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1), decision 1/CP.21, annex. | 2015年11月30日至12月13日在巴黎举行的第二十一届缔约方会议的报告增编：缔约方会议通过的决定(FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1)，第1/CP.21号决定，附件。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 25
September 2015. | 大会2015年9月25日第70/1号决议。 |
| General Assembly resolution 69/313 of 27
July 2015, annex. | 大会2015年7月27日第69/313号决议，附件。 |
| General Assembly resolution 69/15 of 14
November 2014, annex. | 大会2014年11月14日第69/15号决议，附件。 |
| The ASEAN Agreement is the first
international treaty concerning disaster risk reduction to have been
developed after the adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action. | 《东盟协定》是在《兵库行动框架》获得通过之后制订的第一个关于减少灾害风险的国际条约。 |
| Adopted at the Asian Conference on
Disaster Risk Reduction in Asia, which was held in Beijing from 27 to 29
September 2005. Available (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2005年9月27日至29日在北京举行的亚洲减少灾害风险会议通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted at the Second Asian Ministerial
Conference on Disaster Reduction, which was held in New Delhi on 7 and 8
November 2007. Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2007年11月7日和8日在新德里举行的第二届亚洲部长级减灾会议通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted at the Third Asian Ministerial
Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, which was held in Kuala Lumpur from 2
to 4 December 2008. Available from(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2008年12月2日至4日在吉隆坡举行的第三届亚洲部长级减灾会议通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| See (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 见 (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted at the sixth session of the
Pacific Platform for Disaster Risk Management, which was held in Suva from 2
to 4 June 2014. Available from(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2014年6月2日至4日在苏瓦举行的灾害风险管理太平洋论坛第六届会议通过，可查阅 (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted by the Regional Ministerial
Meeting of Disaster Management Authorities of Central Asian and South Caucus
Countries, which was held in Bishkek on 30 January 2015. Available from
(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2015年1月30日在比什凯克举行的中亚和南高加索地区灾害管理部门区域部长级会议通过，可查阅
(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 可查阅 (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Extended Programme of Action for the
Implementation of the Africa Regional Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction
(2006-2015). Available from(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 《执行非洲减少灾害风险区域战略延展行动方案(2006-2015年)》，可查阅 (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 可查阅 (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| United Nations Office for Disaster Risk
Reduction, “Africa seeks united position on disaster
risk reduction”, 13 February 2013. Available from. | 联合国减灾署，“非洲寻求统一的减灾立场”，2013年2月13日，可查阅。 |
| Adopted by the Fourth High-Level Meeting
on Disaster Risk Reduction, which was held in Yaoundé
on 23 July 2015. Available from(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2015年7月23日在雅温得举行的第四次高级别减灾会议通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted by the Council of Arab Ministers
Responsible for the Environment at its twenty-second session, which was held
in Cairo on 19 and 20 December 2010. Available from (accessed on 4 July
2016). | 2010年12月19日至20日在开罗举行的主管环境事务的阿拉伯部长理事会第二十二届会议通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted at the Second Arab Conference on
Disaster Risk Reduction, which was held at Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, from 14 to
16 September 2014. Available from(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2014年9月14日至16日在埃及沙姆沙伊赫举行的第二届阿拉伯减灾会议通过，可查阅 (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted at the 1st meeting of Ministers
and High-Level Authorities on the Implementation of the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 in the Americas, which was held in Asuncion
on 8 and 9 June 2016. Available from(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2016年6月8日至9日在亚松森举行的第一次美洲执行《减少灾害风险仙台框架(2015-2030年)》部长和高级别官员会议通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted at the First Arab Conference for
Disaster Risk Reduction, which was held in Aqaba, Jordon, from 19 to 21
March. Available from(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 3月19日至21日在约旦亚喀巴举行的首届阿拉伯减灾会议通过，可查阅 (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| (accessed on 4 July 2016). | (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| The fourth session was held in Guayaquil,
Ecuador, from 27 to 29 May 2014. Available from. | 2014年5月27日至29日在厄瓜多尔瓜亚基尔举行的第四届会议通过，可查阅。 |
| Adopted at the second session of the
Regional Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction in the Americas, which was held
in Nayarit, Mexico, from 15 to 17 March 2011. | 2011年3月15日至17日在墨西哥纳亚里特州举行的第二届美洲减灾区域论坛通过，可查阅。 |
| Available from. Adopted at the European
Ministerial Meeting in Milan, Italy, on 8 July 2014. Available from (accessed
on 4 July 2016). | 2014年7月8日在意大利米兰举行的欧洲部长级会议通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| The 6th annual meeting took place in
Paris from 7 to 9 October 2015. Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2015年10月7日至9日在巴黎举行的第六届年会通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Adopted by the ministers in Ohrid, the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, on 31 May 2013. Available from
(accessed on 4 July 2016). | 2013年5月31日部长们在前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国奥赫里德通过，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| See Decision No. 1313/2013/EU of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013, Official Journal
of the European Union, L 347. | 见欧洲议会和欧盟理事会2013年12月17日第1313/2013/EU号决定，《欧盟官方公报》，L347。 |
| The conference was held in Geneva from 8
to 10 December 2015. Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 会议于2015年12月8日至10日在日内瓦举行，可查阅
(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| See SWD(2016) 205 of 16 June 2016.
Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 见2016年6月16日SWD(2016)205,可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Hyogo Framework for Action (see footnote
78 above), priority 1, core indicator 1.1. | 《兵库行动框架》，(见上文脚注78)，优先事项1，核心指标1.1。 |
| For a list of States that have adopted
national platforms, see. | 已建立国家平台的国家名单，见。 |
| See Sendai Framework, para. 27 (g). | 《仙台框架》，第27(g)段。 |
| Law No. 04-20 of 25 December 2004 on Risk
Prevention and Disaster Management in the Framework of Sustainable
Development. | 2004年12月25日关于在可持续发展框架内预防风险和灾害管理的第04-20号法律。 |
| Cameroon, Decree No. 037/PM of 19 March
2003 on the Establishment, Organization and Functions of a National
Observatory on Disasters. | 喀麦隆，关于国家灾害观察站建立、组织和运行的2003年3月19日第037/PM号决定。 |
| Emergency Response Law of the People’s Republic of China (2007). | 中国《防灾救灾法》(2007年)，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016).
Law on Disaster Management, NS/RKM/0715/007. Approved by the Senate on 30
June 2015. | 《灾害管理法》，NS/RKM/0715/007,参议院2015年6月30日批准，可查阅 (2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016).
Decree No. 874-09 approving the Regulation for the application of Law No.
147-02 on Risk Management and repealing Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Decree
No. 932-03 (2009). | 多米尼加共和国，第874-09号法令，该法令批准关于风险管理的第147-02号法律实施条例并废除第932-03号法令(2009年)中的第1、2、3、4和5章。 |
| Law on Civil Protection and the
Prevention and Mitigation of Disasters (2005). | 《民防、防灾和减灾法》(2005年)。 |
| Emergency Preparedness Act (2000). | 《防备紧急情况法》(2000年)。 |
| Law No. 2003-699 regarding the Prevention
of Technological and Natural Risks and Reparation of Damages (2003). | 《关于预防技术和自然风险和损害赔偿法》的第2003-699号法律(2003年)。 |
| Law on Public Safety. Document No.
2467-IIს. Available from | 《公共安全法》，第2467-IIს.号，可查阅(2016年7月4日上传)。 |
| (accessed on 4 July 2016). Law No. 109-96
on the National Coordinator for the Reduction of Disasters (1996). | 第109-96号法令，《减轻自然灾害和人为灾害全国协调员法》(1996年)。 |
| National Risk and Disaster Management
Plan (2001). | 《全国风险和灾害管理计划》(2001年)。 |
| Act LXXIV on the Management and
Organization of the Prevention of Disasters and the Prevention of Major Accidents
Involving Dangerous Substances (1999). | 第七十四号法，《预防灾害和预防涉及危险物质重大事故的管理和组织法》(1999年)。 |
| Disaster Management Act, No. 53 (2005). | 第53号灾害管理法(2005年)。 |
| Law No. 24 of 2007 concerning Disaster
Management. | 2007年关于灾害管理的第24号法律。 |
| Decree on Establishing a National Platform
for Disaster Risk Reduction (2008). | 关于建立国家减灾平台的总理令(2008年)。 |
| Decree No. 2005-866 Laying Down the
Procedure for Implementing Law No. 2003-010 of 5 September 2003 on National
Risk and Disaster Management Policy (2005). | 第2005-866号法令，该法令规定了实施2003年9月5日关于全国风险和灾害管理的第2003-010号法律的方式(2005年)。 |
| Disaster Risk Management Act (2012). | 《灾害风险管理法》(2012年)。 |
| National Civil Defence Emergency
Management Plan Order 2005 (SR 2005/295). | 2005年全国民防应急管理计划令(SR
2005/295)。 |
| National Disaster Management Act, 2010. | 《全国灾害管理法》(2010年)。 |
| See also the official statement of the
Government of Pakistan at the third session of the Global Platform for
Disaster Risk Reduction, in 2011, available from. | 也见巴基斯坦政府在2011年第三届全球减灾平台会议上的正式声明，可查阅：。 |
| Law No. 29664 creating the National
System for Disaster Risk Management (2011). | 第29664号法律，该法律创立了全国灾害风险管理系统(2011年)。 |
| Philippine Disaster Risk Management Act
2006. | 《菲律宾灾害风险管理法》(2006年)。 |
| Countermeasures Against National Disaster
Act (1995) and National Disaster Management Act (2010). | 《国家灾害应对法》(1995年)；《国家灾害管理法》(2010年)。 |
| Act on Protection against Natural and
Other Disasters (2006). | 《自然灾害和其他灾害防护法》(2006年)。 |
| Disaster Management Act No. 57 of 2002. | 2002年第57号灾害管理法。 |
| Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act
(2007). | 《预防和减轻灾害法》(2007年)。 |
| Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. | 《减灾法》(2000年)。 |
| See. | 见。 |
| The Commission is conscious of the
discrepancy in the concordance between the English and French versions of the
official United Nations’ use of the term “mitigation”. | 委员会意识到在联合国正式英文和法文本中对“mitigation”(减轻)一词的使用存在着差别。 |
| Charter of the United Nations, Art. 2,
paras. 1 (“The Organization is based on the principle
of the sovereign equality of all its Members”) and 7
(“Nothing contained in the present Charter shall
authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially
within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to
submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this
principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under
Chapter VII”). | 《联合国宪章》，第二条第一款(“本组织系基于各会员国主权平等之原则”)；和第二条第七款(“本宪章不得认为授权联合国干涉在本质上属于任何国家国内管辖之事件，且并不要求会员国将该项事件依本宪章提请解决；但此项原则不妨碍第七章内执行办法之适用”)。 |
| See, for example, the Declaration on
Principles on International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation
among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, General
Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV) (noting, inter alia, that: “All States enjoy sovereign equality. | 例如见《关于各国依照联合国宪章建立友好关系和合作的国际法原则宣言》，大会第2625(XXV)号决议(其中指出：“各国一律享有主权平等。 |
| They have equal rights and duties and are
equal members of the international community”; “The use of force to deprive peoples of their national identity
constitutes a violation of their inalienable rights and of the principle of
non-intervention”; and “States
shall conduct their international relations in the economic, social,
cultural, technical and trade fields in accordance with the principles of
sovereign equality and non-intervention”). | 它们均有平等权利与责任，并为国际社会之平等会员国”；“使用武力剥夺各民族之民族特性构成侵犯其不可移让之权利及不干涉原则之行为”；以及“各国应依照主权平等及不干涉原则处理其在经济、社会、文化、技术及贸易方面之国际关系”)。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
held that: “Between independent States, respect for
territorial sovereignty is an essential foundation of international relations” (see Corfu Channel case (footnote 66 above), at p. 35). | 国际法院称，“在各个独立国家间，尊重领土主权是国际关系的一个重要基础”：(见科孚海峡案(以上脚注66)第35页)。 |
| Annex, para. 3. | 附件，第3段。 |
| Corfu Channel case (see footnote 66
above), Individual Opinion by Judge Alvarez, p. 39, at p. 43. | 科孚海峡案(见以上脚注66)，阿尔瓦雷斯法官的个别意见，第39页起，见第43页。 |
| See also the opinion expressed by Max
Huber, Arbitrator, in the Island of Palmas case (the Netherlands/United
States of America), Award of 4 April 1928, Reports of International Arbitral
Awards, vol. II, p. 839 (“Territorial sovereignty, as
has already been said, involves the exclusive right to display the activities
of a State. | 另参阅仲裁官Max Huber在帕尔马斯岛仲裁案(荷兰/美利坚合众国)中表达的意见，1928年4月4日裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二卷，第839页(“领土主权，正如已经说过的，涉及一国展示其活动的专属权。 |
| This right has as corollary a duty: the
obligation to protect within the territory the rights of other States …”). | 这一权利必要产生一项义务：有义务保护在该领土内其他国家的权利…”)。 |
| Annex, para. 4. | 附件，第4段。 |
| Tampere Convention (noting that: “Nothing in this Convention shall interfere with the right of a
State Party, under its national law, to direct, control, coordinate and
supervise telecommunication assistance provided under this Convention within
its territory”). | 《坦佩雷公约》(其中指出：“本公约的任何规定不应干涉缔约国根据本国法律拥有的指导、协调和监督依本公约在其领土上提供的电信援助的权力”)。 |
| See, for example: the ASEAN Agreement,
art. 3, para. 2 (noting that: “The Requesting or
Receiving Party shall exercise the overall direction, control, co-ordination
and supervision of the assistance within its territory”);and the Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear
Accident or Radiological Emergency, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1457,
No. 24643, p. 133, art. 3 (a) (noting, inter alia, that unless otherwise
agreed: “The overall direction, control,
co-ordination and supervision of the assistance shall be the responsibility
within its territory of the requesting State”). | 例如见《东盟协定》，第3条第2款(其中指出：“请求或接受援助的缔约国应全面指导、控制、协调和监督其境内的援助”)；《核事故或辐射紧急情况援助公约》，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1457卷，第24643号，第133页，第3(a)条(其中指出：除另有协定，“请求援助国应在其境内负责援助的全盘指导、控制、协调和监督”)。 |
| See the examples listed in Yearbook … 2008, vol. II (Part One), document A/CN.4/598, para. 26. | 见《2008年…年鉴》第二卷第一部分中A/CN.4/598号文件第26段所列的例子。 |
| Report of the Human Rights Committee,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 40 (A/37/40), annex V, para. 5. | 人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第三十七届会议，补编第40号》(A/37/40)，附件五，第5段。 |
| See art. 4, para. 1. | 见第四条第一款。 |
| Report of the Human Rights Committee,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-sixth Session, Supplement No.
40 (A/56/40), vol. I, | 人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第五十六届会议，补编第40号》(A/56/40)，第一卷， |
| annex VI, para. 5. | 附件六，第5段。 |
| See art. 11. | 见第十一条。 |
| Official Records of the Economic and
Social Council, Twentieth and Twenty-first Sessions, Supplement No. 2
(E/2000/22-E/C.12/1999/11), annex V, p. 102, para. 17. | 《经济及社会理事会正式记录，第二十一届会议，补编第2号》(E/2000/22-E/C.12/1999/11)，附件五，第102页，第17段。 |
| Human Rights: A Compilation of
International Instruments, vol. II, Regional Instruments (United Nations
publication, Sales No. E.97.XIV.1), sect. C, No. 39. | 《人权：国际文书汇编》，第二卷，《区域文书》(联合国出版物，出售品编号E.97.XIV.1)， C节，第39号。 |
| Ibid., art. 11. | 同上，第十一条。 |
| Corfu Channel case (see footnote 66
above), at p. 22 (noting that: “The obligations
incumbent upon the Albanian authorities consisted in notifying, for the
benefit of shipping in general, the existence of a minefield in Albanian
territorial waters and in warning the approaching British warships of the
imminent danger to which the minefield exposed them. | 科孚海峡案(见以上脚注66)，第22页(其中指出：“阿尔巴尼亚当局义不容辞的义务包括为了一般航行，通知在阿尔巴尼亚领海有一个雷区和警告接近的英国军舰注意雷区使它们暴露在迫在眉睫的危险之中。 |
| Such obligations are based, not on the
Hague Convention of 1907, No. VIII, which is applicable in time of war, but
on certain general and well-recognized principles, namely: elementary
considerations of humanity, even more exacting in peace than in war …”). | 这些义务不是根据适用于战争时期的《1907年第八号海牙公约》的规定，而是根据某些普遍和公认的原则，即：基本的人道考虑，在和平时期比战争时期还要严格…”)。 |
| Resolution on humanitarian assistance
(see footnote 18 above), art. III, para. 3. | 关于人道主义援助的决议(见以上脚注18)，第三条，第3段。 |
| IFRC Guidelines (see footnote 17 above),
guideline 3, para. 2. | 红十字与红新月联合会《导则》(见以上脚注17)，导则3第2段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 46/182,
annex, para. 5. | 大会第46/182号决议，附件，第5段。 |
| Oslo Guidelines (see footnote 28 above),
para. 58. | 《奥斯陆准则》(见以上脚注28)，第58段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV),
annex. | 大会第2625(XXV)号决议，附件。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Institute of International Law, Yearbook,
vol. 63, Part II, Session of Santiago de Compostela (1989), p. 339, at p.
345, art. 5. | 国际法学会，《年鉴》，第63卷第二部分，圣地亚哥德孔波斯特拉会议(1989年)，第339页起，见第345页，第5条。 |
| See, for example, Geneva Convention I,
art. 3, para. 2. | 例如见《日内瓦公约》，第三条第(二)款。 |
| See art. 18, para. 1. | 见第十八条第一款。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 43/131,
paras. 4-5. | 见大会第43/131号决议，第4-5段。 |
| See also the ASEAN Agreement, art.4 (c) (“In pursuing the objective of this Agreement, the Parties shall … promptly respond to a request for assistance from an affected
Party”); and the SAARC [South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation] Agreement on Rapid Response to Natural Disasters (Malé, 26 May 2011), art. 4. | 另见《东盟协定》第4条(c)项(“为实现本协定的目标，缔约方应…对受灾缔约方的援助请求迅速作出反应”)；和《南亚区域合作联盟快速应对自然灾害协定》(2011年5月26日，马莱)，第4条。 |
| General Assembly resolution 62/67 of 6
December 2007, and for the commentary thereto, see Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), chap. IV, sect. E. | 大会2007年12月6日第62/67号决议(其评注见《2006年…年鉴》第二卷第二部分，第四章，E节)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 46/182,
annex, para. 3. | 大会第46/182号决议，附件，第3段。 |
| See art. 4, para. 5. | 见第4条第5款。 |
| See art.3, para. 1. | 见第3条第1款。 |
| See International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, art. 6, para. 1. | 见《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第六条第一款。 |
| General comment No. 6 (see footnote 177
above), para. 5 (“The expression ‘inherent right to life’ cannot properly be
understood in a restrictive manner, and the protection of this right requires
that States adopt positive measures”). | 第6号一般性意见(见以上脚注177)，第5段：“‘固有生命权’一语不能以狭隘的方式加以理解，保护这一权利要求各国采取积极措施。
” |
| General Assembly resolution 43/131,
preambular paragraph 8; and General Assembly resolution 45/100, preambular
paragraph 6. | 大会第43/131号决议，第8序言段；大会第45/100号决议，第6序言段。 |
| E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, annex. | E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, 附件。 |
| A/59/2005, para. 210. | A/59/2005, 第210段。 |
| E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, annex, principle 25,
para. 2. | E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2，附件，原则25, 第2段。 |
| Institute of International Law, Yearbook,
vol. 63, Part II (deliberations of the Institute during Plenary Meetings),
Session of Santiago de Compostela (1989), p. 339, at p. 345. | 国际法学会，《年鉴》第63卷第二部分(国际法学会全体会议议事情况)，圣地亚哥德孔波斯特拉会议(1989年)，第339页起，见第345页。 |
| The French text is presented in mandatory
language, while the English translation reads: “States
in whose territories these emergency situations exist should not arbitrarily
reject such offers of humanitarian assistance. ” | 法文本中使用强制性语言，而英文译文是：“States in whose
territories these emergency situations exist should not arbitrarily reject
such offers of humanitarian assistance”(在其领土上存在这些紧急情况的国家不应该任意拒绝此种人道主义援助的提议)。 |
| The explanatory text, “où la population est gravement menacée dans sa vie ou sa santé”, is drawn from
art. 5, para. 1, of that resolution. | 解释性文字“où la
population est gravement menacée dans sa vie ou sa
santé(人民的生命或健康受到严重威胁)”摘自该决议第5条第1段。 |
| Resolution on humanitarian assistance
(see footnote 18 above), art. VIII, para. 1. | 关于人道主义援助的决议(见以上脚注18)，第八条第1款。 |
| In relation to northern Iraq, by Security
Council resolution 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991; in relation to Bosnia and
Herzegovina, by resolution 770 (1992) of 13 August 1992 and resolution 781
(1992) of 9 October 1992; and in relation to Somalia, by resolution 794
(1992) of 3 December 1992. | 关于伊拉克北部，见安全理事会1991年4月5日第688(1991)号决议；关于波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那，见1992年8月13日第770(1992)号决议和1992年10月9日第781(1992)号决议；关于索马里，见1992年12月3日第794(1992)号决议。 |
| Security Council resolution 2139 (2014)
of 22 February 2014, preambular para. 10. | 安全理事会2014年2月22日第2139(2014)号决议，第10序言段。 |
| Security Council resolution 2165 (2014)
of 14 July 2014, operative para. 2. | 安全理事会2014年7月14日第2165(2014)号决议，第2执行段。 |
| Preambular paras. 9-10. | 第9和第10序言段。 |
| Preambular paras. 8-9. | 第8和第9序言段。 |
| Framework Convention on Civil Defence
Assistance, art. 3 (e), also quoted in para. (7) of the commentary to draft
art. 12. | 《民防援助框架公约》，第3条(e)项，第12条草案评注第(7)段中也曾引述。 |
| D. Akande and E. Gillard, Oxford Guidance
on the Law Regulating Humanitarian Relief Operations in Situations of Armed
Conflict, commissioned and to be published later in 2016 by the United
Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. See, for
example, Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly
Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the
United Nations, General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV), annex, para. 1
(noting, inter alia, that “[e]very State has the duty
to fulfil in good faith” obligations assumed by it “in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations”, “obligations under the generally
recognized principles and rules of international law”
and “obligations under international agreements valid
under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law”). | D. Akande和E.
Gillard, “Oxford Guidance on the Law Regulating
Humanitarian Relief Operations in Situations of Armed Conflict(武装冲突情况下人道主义救济行动法牛津准则)”，联合国人道主义事务协调厅约请编写，将于2016年较后的时间出版。
例如见《关于各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系和合作的国际法原则宣言》，大会第2625(XXV)号决议，附件，第1段(其中指出：“每一国家有义务诚意履行”、“按照《联合国宪章》”承担的义务、“普遍承认的国际法原则和规则下的义务”和“根据普遍承认的国际法原则和规则缔结的有效国际协定所规定的义务”)。 |
| Admission of a State to the United Nations
(Charter, Art. 4), Advisory Opinion: I.C.J. Reports 1948, p. 57, at pp.
63-64; Case concerning rights of nationals of the United States of America in
Morocco, Judgment of August 27th, 1952: I.C.J. Reports 1952, p. 176, at p.
212; Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v.
France), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2008, p. 177, at p. 229, para. 145; and The
North Atlantic Coast Fisheries Case (Great Britain, United States of
America), Reports of International Arbitral Awards, 7 September 1910, vol.
XI, at p. 188. | 接纳一国加入联合国(《宪章》第四条)，咨询意见：《1948年国际法院案例汇编》，第57页起，引文见第63-64页；美利坚合众国国民在摩洛哥的权利一案，1952年8月27日裁决，《1952年国际法院案例汇编》，第176页起，引文见第212页；刑事事项互助的若干问题案(吉布提诉法国)，裁决，《2008年国际法院案例汇编》，第177页起，见第229页，第145段；以及北大西洋沿岸渔业一案(大不列颠，美利坚合众国)，1910年9月7日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十一卷，第188页。 |
| See, for example, the Inter-American
Convention to Facilitate Disaster Assistance, OAS Official Records
(OEA/Ser.A/49 (SEPF), p. 15, arts. VIII and XI, para. d; and the Convention
on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency,
art. 8, para. 7. | 例如，见《美洲便利灾难援助公约》。 《美洲国家组织正式记录》(OEA/Ser.A/49
(SEPF) )，英文第15页，第八条和第十一条d款，以及《核事故或辐射紧急情况援助公约》第8条第7款。 |
| Ibid.; and the Agreement among the
Governments of the Participating States of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation
(BSEC) on Collaboration in Emergency Assistance and Emergency Response to
Natural and Man-made Disasters (1998), arts. 5 and 9. | 同上，以及《黑海经济合作组织(黑海经合组织)参加国政府关于就自然灾害和人为灾害提供紧急援助做出紧急反应的合作协定》(1998年)第5条和第9条。 |
| Available from (accessed on 4 July 2016). | 见(2016年7月4日查阅)。 |
| See, for example, the Convention on the
Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents, 17 March 1992, United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 2105, No. 36605, p. 457, annex X, para. 1) (“The personnel involved in the assisting operation shall act in
accordance with the relevant laws of the requesting Party”). | 例如，见《关于工业事故越境影响的公约》，1992年3月17日，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2105卷，第36605号，英文第457页，附件十，第1款(“参加援助行动的人员需依据求助国家的相关法律开展活动”)。 |
| See, for example, the ASEAN Agreement,
art. 13, para. 2 (“The Head of the assistance
operation shall take all appropriate measures to ensure observance of
national laws and regulations”). | 例如，见《东盟协定》第13条第2款(“援助行动负责人应采取一切适当措施，确保遵守国内法律和规章”)。 |
| See, for example, MacAlister-Smith,
International Guidelines (footnote 71 above), para. 22 (b) (“At all times during humanitarian assistance operations the
assisting personnel shall … [c]ooperate with the
designated competent authority of the receiving State”). | 例如，见MacAlister-Smith著，《国际指南》(上文脚注71)，第22(b)段(“在人道主义援助行动的任何时候，援助人员都应…与受援国的指定主管部门合作”)。 |
| See, for example, the Tampere Convention,
art. 4, para. 2) (“[a] State Party requesting
telecommunication assistance shall specify the scope and type of assistance
required”). | 例如，见《坦佩雷公约》第4条第2款([a]“请求提供电信援助的缔约国应具体说明所需援助的范围和类型”)。 |
| Elaborated by IFRC, the Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2013. | 由红十字会与红新月会国际联合会、人道主义事务协调厅和各国议会联盟拟定，2013年。 |
| See, for example, the Framework
Convention, art.4, para. 5 (“[t]he Beneficiary State
shall, within the framework of national law, grant all privileges, immunities,
and facilities necessary for carrying out the assistance”). | 例如，见《框架公约》第4条第5款(“受益国应在国家法律的框架之内，提供实施援助所必需的所有特权、豁免和便利”)。 |
| The League of Red Cross Societies has
long noted that “the obtaining of visas for disaster
and relief delegates and teams remains a time-consuming procedure, which
often delays the dispatch of such delegates and teams”, thus delaying the vital assistance the affected State has a duty
to provide. | 红十字会协会早就指出，“救灾代表和团队获得签证的程序仍然十分耗时，往往延误了派遣这些代表和团队的时间”，因此延误受灾国有义务提供的重要援助。 |
| Resolution 13 adopted by the League of
Red Cross Societies Board of Governors at its 33rd session, Geneva, 28
October-1 November 1975. | 1975年10月28日至11月1日在日内瓦举行的红十字会协会理事会第三十三届会议通过的第13号决议。 |
| See M. El Baradei, and others, Model
Rules for Disaster Relief Operations, Policy and Efficacy Studies No. 8
(United Nations publication, Sales No. E.82.XV.PE/8), annex A, rule 16, which
states that an affected State must permit assisting “personnel
freedom of access to, and freedom of movement within, disaster stricken areas
that are necessary for the performance of their specifically agreed functions”. | 见M. El Baradei等著，《救灾行动示范规则》，政策和效能研究丛书第8号(联合国出售品编号E.82.XV.PE/8)，附件A规则16称，受灾国必须允许援助“人员自由进入履行其专门商定的职责而必须进入的灾区，并在灾区内自由通行”。 |
| This is stressed in various international
treaties. | 各项国际条约都强调了这一点。 |
| See, for example, the Tampere Convention,
art. 9, para. 4; and the ASEAN Agreement, art. 14, para. b. | 例如，见《坦佩雷公约》第9条第4款以及《东盟协定》第14条b项。 |
| Endorsed by the Inter-agency Standing
Committee on 27 February 2013. | 经机构间常设委员会2013年2月27日核可。 |
| See above para. (2) of the commentary to
draft art. 14. | 见上文第14条草案的评注第(2)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1989,
vol. II (Part Two), para. 72. | 《1989年…年鉴》第二卷第二部，第72段。 |
| Ibid., para. (4) of the commentary to
draft art. 9. | 同上，第9条草案评注第(4)段。 |
| See, for example, sect. 5, art.F, of the
annex to the 1965 Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime
Traffic (modified in 1978), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1110, No.
8564, p. 318, at p. 320. | 例如，见1965年《便利国际海上运输公约》(1978年修订)附件第5节F小节，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1110卷，第8564号，英文第318和第320页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155,
No. 18232, p. 331. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，英文第331页。 |
| See above para. (10) of the commentary to
draft art. 3, subparagraph (a). | 还见第3条(a)项草案评注第(10)段。 |
| At its 3132nd meeting, on 22 May 2012
(Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 157). | 在2012年5月22日举行的第3132次会议上(《大会正式记录，第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第157段)。 |
| The General Assembly, in paragraph 7 of
its resolution 67/92 of 14 December 2012, noted with appreciation the
decision of the Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会在2012年12月14日第67/92号决议第7段中赞赏地注意到委员会决定将该专题列入工作方案。 |
| The topic had been included in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission during its sixty-third session
(2011), on the basis of the proposal contained in annex A to the report of
the Commission (ibid., Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), pp.
305-314). | 委员会第六十三届会议(2011年)按照委员会报告附件A所载的建议(《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第305-314页)将该专题列入长期工作方案。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 157-202. | 《大会正式记录，第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第157-202段。 |
| Ibid., para. 159. | 同上，第159段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), para. 64. | 《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第64段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/69/10), para. 135. | 《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第135段。 |
| Ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), para. 60. | 《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第60段。 |
| Ibid., para. 61. | 同上，第61段。 |
| See fourth report on identification of
customary international law (A/CN.4/695), annex (Proposed amendments to draft
conclusion 3 (Assessment of evidence for the two elements), draft conclusion
4 (Requirement of practice), draft conclusion 6 (Forms of practice), draft
conclusion 9 (Requirement of acceptance as law (opinio juris)) and draft
conclusion 12 (Resolutions of international organizations and
intergovernmental conferences)). | 见关于习惯国际法的识别的第四次报告(A/CN.4/695)，附件结论草案3(评估两个要素的证据)、结论草案4(惯例的要求)、结论草案6(惯例的形式)、结论草案9(被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求)和结论草案12(国际组织和政府间会议的决议)的拟议修正案)。 |
| As is always the case with the Commission’s output, the draft conclusions are to be read together with the
commentaries. | 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本结论草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| Some important fields of international
law are still governed essentially by customary international law, with few if
any applicable treaties. | 国际法的一些重要领域因几乎没有适用的条约，仍然主要由习惯国际法加以规范。 |
| Even where there is a treaty in force,
the rules of customary international law continue to govern questions not
regulated by the treaty and continue to apply in relations with and among
non-parties to the treaty. | 即便有时存在着有效条约，但对条约没有规范到的问题仍然执行习惯国际法规则；在涉及条约非缔约方时以及在非缔约方之间，习惯国际法规则也仍然适用。 |
| In addition, treaties may refer to rules
of customary international law; and such rules may be taken into account in
treaty interpretation in accordance with article 31, paragraph 3 (c), of the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1155, No. 18232, p. 331 (hereinafter “1969 Vienna
Convention”)). | 此外，条约可能会提到习惯国际法规则；在按照《维也纳条约法公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页(下称“1969年《维也纳公约》”))第三十一条第三款(c)项解释条约时，也可将这种规则纳入考虑。 |
| It may sometimes be necessary, moreover,
to determine the law applicable at the time when certain acts occurred (“the intertemporal law”), which may be
customary international law even if a treaty is now in force. | 另外，有时候，即便现在已经有了生效的条约，但可能有必要确定在某些行为发生时当时适用的法律(“时际法”)，而这种法律可能属于习惯国际法。 |
| A rule of customary international law may
continue to exist and be applicable, separately from a treaty, even where the
two have the same content and even among parties to the treaty (see Military
and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United
States of America), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 14, at pp.
93-96, paras. 174-179; Application of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), Judgment of the
International Court of Justice, 3 February 2015, para. 88). | 即便习惯国际法的规则与条约具备相同的内容，这种规则也可独立于条约而继续存在和适用，甚至是在条约的缔约方之间继续存在和适用(见尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)，实质问题，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第93-96页，第174-179段；《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚)，国际法院的判决，2015年2月3日，第88段)。 |
| This wording was proposed by the Advisory
Committee of Jurists, established by the League of Nations in 1920 to prepare
a draft Statute for the Permanent Court of International Justice; it was
retained, without change, in the Statute of the International Court of
Justice in 1945. | 1920年，国际联盟设立了法学家咨询委员会以编写《常设国际法院规约》草案，该委员会提出了这一措辞；1945年《国际法院规约》中原样保留了这一措辞。 |
| While the drafting has been criticized as
imprecise, the formula is nevertheless widely considered as capturing the
essence of customary international law. | 虽然这种起草方式曾被批评为不准确，但这一程式化语句仍被广泛视为抓住了习惯国际法的实质所在。 |
| For a bibliography on customary
international law, including sections that correspond to issues covered by
some of the draft conclusions, as well as sections addressing the operation
of customary international law in various fields, see the fourth report of
the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/695/Add.1), annex II. | 习惯国际法方面的文献目录，包括对应一些结论草案所涵盖问题的文献，以及论及习惯国际法在各领域应用情况的文献，见特别报告员的第四次报告(A/CN.4/695/Add.1)，附件二。 |
| Some of these terms may be used in other
senses; in particular, “general international law” is used in various ways (not always clearly specified) including
to refer to rules of international law of general application, whether treaty
law or customary international law or general principles of law. | 其中一些术语可能在使用上具有其他含义；特定是，“一般国际法”有多种不同用法(含义并非始终明确)，包括用于指代通用国际法规则，不论是条约法、习惯国际法，还是一般法律原则。 |
| For a judicial discussion of the term “general international law” see Certain
Activities carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v.
Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River
(Nicaragua v. Costa Rica), Judgment of the International Court of Justice (16
December 2015), Separate Opinion of Judge Donoghue (para. 2), Separate
Opinion of Judge ad hoc Dugard (paras. 12-17). | 有关“一般国际法”这一术语的司法讨论，见尼加拉瓜在边界地区开展的某些活动案(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)和哥斯达黎加圣胡安河沿线修建道路案(尼加拉瓜诉哥斯达黎加)，国际法院判决(2015年12月16日)，多诺霍法官的个别意见(第2段)，杜加尔德专案法官的个别意见(第12-17段)。 |
| See Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary
in the Gulf of Maine Area, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 246, at pp.
288-290, para. 79 (“The association of the terms “rules” and “principles” is no more than the use of a dual expression to convey one and
the same idea, since in this context [of defining the applicable
international law] “principles” clearly means principles of law, that is, it also includes rules
of international law in whose case the use of the term “principles” may be justified because of
their more general and more fundamental character”);
The Case of the S.S. “Lotus”,
P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 10 (1927), p. 16 (“the Court
considers that the words “principles of international
law”, as ordinarily used, can only mean international
law as it is applied between all nations belonging to the community of States”). | 见缅因湾区域海洋边界划界案，判决，《1984年国际法院案例汇编》，第246页起，见第288-290页，第79段(“‘规则’与‘原则’之间的关系只不过是用两个用语表达同一概念，因为在[确定适用的国际法的]背景下，‘原则’显然指的是法律原则，也就是说，它也包括国际法规则，在国际法规则中，使用‘原则’一词可能是合理的，因为原则具有更加通用、更加基本的特点”；“莲花号”案，常设国际法院，A辑，第10号(1927年)，第16页(“本法院认为，‘国际法原则’一词就常用含义而言只能表示属于国际社会的所有国家之间适用的国际法”)。 |
| In this connection it is important to
note that reference is made in these commentaries to particular decisions of
courts and tribunals in order to illustrate the methodology, not for the
substance of the decisions. | 在这方面必须指出，在这些评注中提到各法院和法庭的具体判决是为了说明所用方法，而不是为了介绍判决的实质内容。 |
| The Latin term has been retained
alongside “acceptance as law”
not only because of its prevalence in legal discourse, including the
synonymous use of the term in the jurisprudence of the International Court of
Justice, but also because it may capture better the particular nature of this
subjective element of customary international law as referring to legal
conviction and not to formal consent. | 该拉丁文术语与“被接受为法律”一同保留，这不仅是因为该术语常见于法律话语，这包括国际法院判例将这两个术语作同义词使用，而且是因为该术语可能更好地体现出习惯国际法的这一主观要素的实质在于法律信念而非正式同意。 |
| The shared view of parties to a case as
to the existence and content of what they regard to be a rule of customary
international law is not sufficient; it must be ascertained that a general
practice that is accepted as law indeed exists: Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (see footnote 246 above), at pp. 97-98,
para. 184. | 仅案件当事各方就其认为的习惯国际法规则的存在和内容持一致意见不足以作为识别依据，必须确定确实存在被接受为法律的一般惯例：尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案 (见上文脚注246)，见第97-98页，第184段。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf, Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 1969, p. 3, at p. 44, para. 77. | 北海大陆架案，判决，《1969年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第44页，第77段。 |
| See, for example, Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 99, at pp. 122-123, para. 55; Continental Shelf
(Libyan Arab Jamahiriya/Malta), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1985, p. 13, at pp.
29-30, para. 27; North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 254 above), at p.
44, para. 77. | 例如，见国家的管辖豁免案(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第99页起，见第122-123页，第55段；大陆架案(阿拉伯利比亚民众国/马耳他)，判决，《1985年国际法院案例汇编》，第13页起，见第29-30页，第27段；北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，见第44页，第77段。 |
| For example, in the Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State case, an extensive survey of the practice of States
in the form of national legislation, judicial decisions, and claims and other
official statements, which was found to be accompanied by opinio juris,
served to identify the scope of State immunity under customary international
law (Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (see footnote 255 above), at pp.
122-139, paras. 55-91). | 例如，在国家的管辖豁免案中，对国内法律、司法判决以及主张和其他官方声明等形式的国家惯例进行了广泛的调查，发现这种国家惯例伴有法律确信，从而识别了习惯国际法规定的国家豁免的范围(国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注255)，见第122-139页，第55-91段)。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case, Judgment
of November 20th 1950: I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 266, at p. 277. | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案，1950年11月20日的判决：《1950年国际法院案例汇编》，第266页起，见第277页。 |
| In the Right of Passage case, for
example, the Court found that there was nothing to show that the recurring
practice of passage of Portuguese armed forces and armed police between Daman
and the Portuguese enclaves in India, or between the enclaves themselves
through Indian territory, was permitted or exercised as of right. | 例如，在通行权案中，法院认为没有证据表明，葡萄牙武装部队和武装警察经印度领土在达曼与葡属印度飞地之间以及在两个飞地本身之间反复通行的惯例是依法当然许可或依法当然行使的。 |
| The Court explained that: “Having regard to the special circumstances of the case, this
necessity for authorization before passage could take place constitutes, in
the view of the Court, a negation of passage as of right. | 法院解释称：“考虑到本案的特殊情况，法院认为，通行前必须获得许可的这一情况依法当然构成通行权谈判。 |
| The practice predicates that the
territorial sovereign had the discretionary power to withdraw or to refuse
permission. | 该惯例意味着，领土主权享有撤回或拒绝许可的酌处权。 |
| It is argued that permission was always
granted, but this does not, in the opinion of the Court, affect the legal
position. | 有人辩称，通行一贯可以得到许可，但法院认为这不影响法律立场。 |
| There is nothing in the record to show
that grant of permission was incumbent on the British or on India as an
obligation” (Case concerning Right of Passage over
Indian Territory (Merits), Judgment of 12 April 1960: I.C.J. Reports 1960, p.
6, at pp. 40-43). | 没有任何记录表明，给予许可是英国或印度负有的义务”(在印度领土上的通行权案(实质问题)，1960年4月12日的判决：《1960年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第40-43页)。 |
| In Legality of the Threat or Use of
Nuclear Weapons, the Court considered that: “The
emergence, as lex lata, of a customary rule specifically prohibiting the use
of nuclear weapons as such is hampered by the continuing tensions between the
nascent opinio juris on the one hand, and the still strong adherence to the
practice of deterrence on the other” (Legality of the
Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p.
226, at p. 255, para. 73). | 在以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性一案中，法院认为：“一方面，有了新生的法律确信，而另一方面，仍存在对威慑做法的强烈坚持，这二者之间的关系持续紧张，使专门禁止使用核武器的习惯规则难以作为现行法出现。
”(以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第255页，第73段)。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Sam Hinga Norman,
Special Court for Sierra Leone, Case No. SCSL-2004-14-AR72(E), decision on
preliminary motion based on lack of jurisdiction (child recruitment) of 31
May 2004, p. 13, para. 17. | 另见检察官诉萨姆•辛加 •诺曼案，塞拉利昂特别法庭，案件号SCSL-2004-14-AR72(E)，对以缺乏管辖权为由提出的初步请求所作裁定(招募儿童)，2004年5月31日，第13页，第17段。 |
| This appears to be the approach in Pulp
Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
2010, p. 14, at pp. 55-56, para. 101. | 以下案件看上去就使用了这一方法：乌拉圭河沿岸的纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第55-56页，第101段。 |
| Territorial and Maritime Dispute
(Nicaragua v. Colombia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 624, at p. 674,
para. 139. | 领土争端和海洋划界案(尼加拉瓜诉哥伦比亚)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第624页起，见第674页，第139段。 |
| See conclusions of the work of the Study
Group on fragmentation of international law, Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 251 (1). | 见国际法不成体系问题研究组的工作结论，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第251 (1)段。 |
| See draft conclusion 3, below. | 见下文结论草案3。 |
| The term “evidence” is used here as a broad concept relating to all the materials
that may be considered as a basis for the identification of customary
international law, not in any technical sense as used by particular courts or
in particular legal systems. | 此处使用的“证据”一词为广义，涉及可被视为习惯国际法识别依据的所有材料，而非具体法院或具体法律系统中使用的技术性含义。 |
| See also North Sea Continental Shelf
(footnote 254 above), Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tanaka, at p. 175: “To decide whether these two factors in the formative process of a
customary law exist or not, is a delicate and difficult matter. | 另见北海大陆架案 (上文脚注254)，田中法官的反对意见，见第175页：“要决定在习惯法的形成过程中是否存在这两个因素，是一项棘手和困难的工作。 |
| The repetition, the number of examples of
State practice, the duration of time required for the generation of customary
law cannot be mathematically and uniformly decided. | 对重复的情况、国家惯例例证的数量、习惯法产生所需的时间都无法以数学方法、以统一标准决定。 |
| Each fact requires to be evaluated
relatively according to the different occasions and circumstances.” | 对每项因素，都需要结合不同的场景和情况相对地进行评估。” |
| In the Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State case, the International Court of Justice considered that the customary
rule of State immunity derived from the principle of sovereign equality of
States and, in that context, had to be viewed together with the principle
that each State possesses sovereignty over its own territory and that there
flows from that sovereignty the jurisdiction of the State over events and
persons within that territory (Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (see
footnote 255 above), at pp. 123-124, para. 57). | 在国家的管辖豁免案中，国际法院认为，国家豁免的习惯规则源于国家主权平等原则，在此背景下，审视这一规则时必须结合每个国家对其领土拥有主权的原则；国家法院还认为，源自上述主权，国家对上述领土内的事件和人员享有管辖权(国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注255)，见第123-124页，第57段)。 |
| See also Certain Activities carried out
by Nicaragua in the Border Area and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica
along the San Juan River (footnote 249 above), Separate Opinion of Judge
Donoghue (paras. 3-10). | 另见尼加拉瓜在边界地区开展的某些活动案和哥斯达黎加圣胡安河沿线修建公路案(上文脚注249)，多诺霍法官的个别意见(第3-10段)。 |
| Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
(see footnote 255 above), at p. 123, para. 55. | 国家的管辖豁免案 (见上文脚注255)，见第123页，第55段。 |
| In the Navigational and Related Rights
case, where the question arose whether long-established practice of fishing
for subsistence purposes (acknowledged by both parties to the case) has
evolved into a rule of (particular) customary international law, the
International Court of Justice observed that: “the
practice, by its very nature, especially given the remoteness of the area and
the small, thinly spread population, is not likely to be documented in any
formal way in any official record. | 在航行权利和相关权利案中，一个问题是(案件当事双方均承认)由来已久的自给性捕鱼惯例是否已演变为一项(特别)习惯国际法规则，对此国际法院指出：“就该惯例的性质而言，尤其是考虑到该地区地处偏远、人口较少且分布松散，该惯例不太可能以任何正式形式载入官方记录。 |
| For the Court, the failure of Nicaragua
to deny the existence of a right arising from the practice which had
continued undisturbed and unquestioned over a very long period, is
particularly significant” (Dispute regarding
Navigational and Related Rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 2009, p. 213, at pp. 265-266, para. 141). | 在法院看来，尼加拉瓜未能否认源自长期以来未受扰乱和质疑的惯例的权利之存在，这一点十分重要”(航行权利和相关权利争端案(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)，判决，《2009年国际法院案例汇编》，第213页起，见第265-266页，第141段)。 |
| The Appeals Chamber of the International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has noted the difficulty of
observing State practice on the battlefield: Prosecutor v. Tadić, Case IT-94-1-AR72,
Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction of 2
October 1995, para. 99. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭上诉分庭指出过观察国家战地惯例的难度：检察官诉塔迪奇，案件号IT-94-1-AR72，1995年10月2日对辩方就管辖权问题提出的中间上诉申请作出的裁决，第99段。 |
| On inaction as a form of practice see
draft conclusion 6 and the commentary thereto, para. (3). | 关于不作为这种形式的惯例，见结论草案6及其评注第(3)段。 |
| Case concerning rights of nationals of
the United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th, 1952:
I.C.J. Reports 1952, p. 176, at p. 200. | 摩洛哥境内美利坚合众国国民的权利案，1952年8月27日的判决：《1952年国际法院案例汇编》，第176页起，见第200页。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
254 above), at p. 44, para. 76. | 北海大陆架案(见脚注254)，见第44页，第76段。 |
| In the “Lotus” case, the Permanent Court of International Justice likewise held
that: “Even if the rarity of the judicial decisions
to be found among the reported cases were sufficient to prove in point of
fact the circumstance alleged … it would merely show
that States had often, in practice, abstained from instituting criminal
proceedings, and not that they recognized themselves as being obliged to do
so; for only if such abstention were based on their being conscious of having
a duty to abstain would it be possible to speak of an international custom. | 在“莲花号”案中，常设国际法院也认为：“在报告的案件中，判决十分少见，这一点足以从事实上证明所称的情况，尽管如此，…这只能显示各国在实践中往往不提起刑事诉讼，而非各国承认自己有义务不提起刑事诉讼；因为，除非各国不诉讼的原因是认识到自身有不诉讼的义务，否则谈不上国际习惯。 |
| The alleged fact does not allow one to
infer that States have been conscious of having such a duty” (The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (see footnote 250 above), at p. 28). | 所称的事实无法推断出各国已认识到存在着这种义务”(“莲花号”案 (见上文脚注250)，见第28页)。 |
| See also draft conclusion 10, para. (2),
below. | 另见下文结论草案10，第(2)段。 |
| Sometimes also referred to as usus
(usage), but this may lead to confusion with “mere
usage or habit”, which is to be distinguished from
customary international law: see draft conclusion 9, para. 2, below. | 有时也称“做法”，但这可能与“单纯的常例或习惯”相混淆，后者与习惯国际法不同：见下文结论草案9，第2段。 |
| State practice serves other important
functions in public international law, including in relation to treaty
interpretation (see chap. VI of the present report on “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties”). | 国家惯例在国际公法中还具有其他重要作用，包括与条约解释有关的作用(见关于“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”的本报告第六章)。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 246 above), at p. 97, para. 183. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注246)，见第97页，第183段。 |
| In the Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State case, the Court confirmed that it is “State
practice from which customary international law is derived” (Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (see footnote 255 above),
at p. 143, para. 101). | 在国家的管辖豁免案中，法院证实，“习惯国际法源自国家惯例”(国家的管辖豁免案 (见上文脚注255)，第143页，第101段)。 |
| See also draft conclusions 6, 10 and 12,
below, which refer, inter alia, to the practice (and acceptance as law) of
States within international organizations. | 另见下文结论草案下文结论草案6、10和12，这些草案除其他外，提到了国际组织内部的国家(被接受为法律的)惯例。 |
| See also the draft articles on the
responsibility of international organizations adopted by the Commission in
2011, general commentary, para. (7): “International
organizations are quite different from States, and in addition present great
diversity among themselves. | 另见委员会于2011年通过的关于国际组织责任的条款草案，总评注，第(7)段：“国际组织与国家相当不同，此外国际组织相互之间也有很大的差别。 |
| In contrast with States, they do not
possess a general competence and have been established in order to exercise
specific functions (‘principle of speciality’). | 与国家相对的是，国际组织不具有一般性权能，其建立是为了行使专门的职能(‘特定性原则’)。 |
| There are very significant differences
among international organizations with regard to their powers and functions,
size of membership, relations between the organization and its members,
procedures for deliberation, structure and facilities, as well as the primary
rules including treaty obligations by which they are bound” (Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 88). | 各国际组织在下列方面相互之间有很大的不同：在其权力和职能、成员国数量、该组织与成员的关系、辩论程序、结构和设施以及国际组织受其约束的主要规则包括条约义务等”(《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第88段)。 |
| Practice that is external to the
international organization (that is, practice in its relations with States,
international organizations and others) may be particularly relevant for the
identification of customary international law. | 国际组织外部的惯例(即国际组织与国家、国际组织和其他方面关系中的惯例)可能与习惯国际法的识别尤为相关。 |
| See also Reparation for injuries suffered
in the service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion: I.C.J. Reports 1949,
p. 174, at p. 178 (“The subjects of law in any legal
system are not necessarily identical in their nature or in the extent of
their rights”). | 另见执行联合国职务时所受损害的赔偿，咨询意见：《1949年国际法院案例汇编》，第174页起，见第178页(“在任何法律体系中，各法律主体的性质或权利范围并不一定相同”)。 |
| In the latter capacity their output may
fall within the ambit of draft conclusion 14. | 在发挥后面这种作用时，其成果可能属于结论草案14的范围。 |
| The Commission has considered a similar
point with respect to practice by “non-State actors” under its topic “Subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice in relation to interpretation of treaties”: see chapter VI of the present report, para. 73 (draft conclusion
5, para. 2). | 委员会在“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”这一专题下审议了涉及“非国家行为者”类似论点：见本报告第六章，第73段(结论草案5，第2段)。 |
| See, for example, Dispute regarding
Navigational and Related Rights (footnote 266 above), at pp. 265-266, para.
141. | 例如，见航行权利和相关权利争端案(上文脚注266)，见第265-266页，第141段。 |
| This is without prejudice to the
significance of acts of ICRC in exercise of specific functions conferred upon
it by, in particular, the 1949 Geneva Conventions. | 这不妨碍红十字国际委员会履行尤其由1949年《日内瓦公约》赋予它的特定职责而采取的行动的意义。 |
| Cf. articles 4 and 5 of the articles on
the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, General
Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001, annex. | 参见国家对国际不法行为的责任的第4和第5条，大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议，附件。 |
| For the draft articles adopted by the
Commission and the commentaries thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and Corrigendum, paras. 76-77. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77段。 |
| See also draft conclusion 4, para. 2,
above, and the accompanying commentary. | 另见上文结论草案4第2段及所附评注。 |
| Or, in the case of particular customary
international law, to at least one other State or a group of States (see
draft conclusion 16, below). | 就特别习惯国际法而言，应至少有另一个国家或一组国家知晓(见下文结论草案16)。 |
| For illustrations, see The Case of the
S.S. “Lotus” (footnote 250
above), at p. 28; Nottebohm Case (second phase), Judgment of April 6th, 1955:
I.C.J. Reports 1955, p. 4, at p. 22; Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
(see footnote 255 above), at p. 135, para. 77. | 例证见“莲花号”案(上文脚注250)，见第28页；诺特波姆案(第二阶段)，1955年4月6日的判决：《1955年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第22页；国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注255)，见第135页，第77段。 |
| See also “Ways
and means for making the evidence of customary international law more readily
available”, Yearbook … 1950,
vol. II, document A/1316, Part II, p. 368, para. 31. | 另见“使习惯国际法的证据更易于查考的方法和手段”，《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/1316号文件，第二部分，第368页，第31段。 |
| See para. (3) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 3. | 见结论草案3的评注第(3)段。 |
| See, for example, Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State (footnote 255 above), at pp. 131-135, paras. 72-77;
Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v.
Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 3, at p. 24, para. 58. | 例如，见国家的管辖豁免案(上文脚注255)，见第131-135页，第72-77段；2000年4月11日逮捕令案(刚果民主共和国诉比利时)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第24页，第58段。 |
| The term “national
courts” may also include courts with an international
element operating within one or more domestic legal systems, such as courts
or tribunals with mixed national and international composition. | “各国法院”这一术语也可包括在一个或多个国内法律体系内运作、具备国际要素的法院，例如由本国法官和国际法官混合组成的法院或法庭。 |
| See draft conclusion 13, para. 2, below. | 见下文结论草案13第2段。 |
| Decisions of national courts may also be
evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris), on which see draft conclusion
10, para. 2, below. | 各国法院的判决也可成为被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据，有关内容见下文结论草案10第2段。 |
| Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
(see footnote 255 above), at p. 134, para. 76. | 国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注255)，见第134页，第76段。 |
| See also Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (footnote 246 above), at p. 98, para.
186. | 另见尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(上文脚注246)，见第98页，第186段。 |
| Fisheries case, Judgment of December
18th, 1951: I.C.J. Reports 1951, p. 116, at p. 138. | 渔业案，1951年12月18日的判决：《1951年国际法院案例汇编》，第116页起，见第138页。 |
| See, for example, Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State (footnote 255 above), at p. 136, para. 83 (where the
Court noted that “under Greek law” the view expressed by the Special Supreme Court prevailed over
that of the Hellenic Supreme Court). | 例如，见国家的管辖豁免案(上文脚注255)，见第136页，第83段(国际法院指出，“根据希腊法律”，特别最高法院的意见高于希腊最高法院的意见)。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
254 above), at p. 43, para. 74. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，见第43页，第74段。 |
| A wide range of terms has been used to
describe the requirement of generality, including by the International Court
of Justice, without any real difference in meaning being implied. | 包括国际法院在内，各方使用过许多种术语来描述一般性的要求，这些术语在所指含义上不存在真正的区别。 |
| Ibid., at p. 44, para. 77. | 同上，见第44页，第77段。 |
| See also draft conclusion 3, above. | 另见上文结论草案3。 |
| See also the judgment of 4 February 2016
of the Federal Court of Australia in Ure v. The Commonwealth of Australia
[2016] FCAFC 8, para. 37 (“we would hesitate to say
that it is impossible to demonstrate the existence of a rule of customary
international [law] from a small number of instances of State practice. | 另见澳大利亚联邦法院2016年2月4日的判决，Ure诉澳大利亚联邦
[2016] FCAFC 8，第37段(“我们不愿作出这样的表态，即国家惯例实例数量较少就无法证明习惯国际[法]规则的存在。 |
| We would accept the less prescriptive
proposition that as the number of instances of State practice decreases the
task becomes more difficult”). | 我们接受规范性较弱的立场，即国家惯例实例数量越少，就越难完成这一任务”)。 |
| See, for example, 2 BvR 1506/03, German
Federal Constitutional Court, Order of the Second Senate of 5 November 2003,
para. 59 (“Such practice, however, is not
sufficiently widespread as to be regarded as consolidated practice that
creates customary international law”). | 例如，见2 BvR 1506/03，德国联邦宪法法院，2003年11月5日第二庭的命令，第59段(“但是，这种惯例普及程度不够，不足以被视为产生习惯国际法的统一惯例”)。 |
| A relatively small number of States
engaging in a certain practice might thus suffice if indeed such practice, as
well as other States’ inaction in response, is
generally accepted as law (opinio juris). | 因此，如果某具体惯例以及其他国家在回应方面的不作为确实已被普遍接受为法律(法律确信)，则有较少国家参与这种惯例就足够了。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
said that “an indispensable requirement would be that
within the period in question, short though it might be, State practice,
including that of States whose interests are specially affected, should have
been both extensive and virtually uniform”, North Sea
Continental Shelf (see footnote 254 above), at p. 43, para. 74. | 国际法院曾表示，“一项必要要求是，在所涉时期内，即便该时期较短，国家惯例，包括利益特别受到影响的国家的惯例，必须是既广泛又基本上统一的”，北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，见第43页，第74段。 |
| Fisheries case (see footnote 289 above),
at p. 131. | 渔业案(见上文脚注289)，见第131页。 |
| A chamber of the Court held in the Gulf
of Maine case that where the practice demonstrates “that
each specific case is, in the final analysis, different from all the others …. This precludes the possibility of those conditions arising which
are necessary for the formation of principles and rules of customary law” (Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area
(see footnote 250 above), at p. 290, para. 81). | 国际法院分庭在缅因湾案中认定，若惯例显示“每宗具体案件在最终的分析中都与其他案件不同…就不可能具备形成习惯法原则和规则所必需的条件”(缅因湾区域海洋边界划界案(见上文脚注250)，见第290页，第81段)。 |
| See also, for example, Colombian-Peruvian
asylum case (footnote 257 above), at p. 277 (“The
facts brought to the knowledge of the Court disclose so much uncertainty and
contradiction, so much fluctuation and discrepancy in the exercise of
diplomatic asylum … that it is not possible to
discern in all this any constant and uniform usage …
with regard to the alleged rule of unilateral and definitive qualification of
the offence”); Interpretation of the air transport
services agreement between the United States of America and Italy, Advisory
Opinion of 17 July 1965, United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral
Awards, vol. XVI (Sales No. E/F.69.V.1), pp. 75-108, at p. 100 (“It is correct that only a constant practice, observed in fact and
without change can constitute a rule of customary international law”). | 例如，另见，哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(上文脚注257)，见第277页(“法院所掌握的事实显示，在外交庇护的使用方面，存在太多不确定与矛盾之处，也存在太多变动与差异之处…无法从中观察出任何与所称的单方面确定犯罪性质的规则有关的恒定和统一的做法…”)；对美利坚合众国与意大利航空运输服务协定的解释，1965年7月17日的咨询意见，联合国，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十六卷(出售品编号E/F.69.V.1)，第75-108页，见第100页(“只有在事实上观察到的没有变化的恒定惯例可以构成一项习惯国际法规则，这是正确的”)。 |
| The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (see footnote 250 above), at p. 21. | “莲花号”案(见上文脚注250)，见第21页。 |
| See also North Sea Continental Shelf
(footnote 254 above), at p. 45, para. 79; Special Court for Sierra Leone,
Prosecutor v. Moinina Fofana and Allieu Kondewa, Case No. SCSL-04-14-A,
Judgment (Appeals Chamber) of 28 May 2008, para. 406. | 另见北海大陆架案(上文脚注254)，见第45页，第79段；塞拉利昂特别法庭，检察官诉Moinina Fofana和Allieu Kondewa案，案件号SCSL-04-14-A，判决(上诉分庭)，2008年5月28日，第406段。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 246 above), at p. 98, para. 186. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注246)，见第98页，第186段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See also, for example, Prosecutor v. Sam
Hinga Norman (footnote 258 above), para. 51. | 例如，另见检察官诉萨姆 •辛加 •诺曼案(上文脚注258)，第51段。 |
| The same is true when assessing a
particular State’s practice: see draft conclusion 7,
above. | 在评估具体国家的惯例时同理：见上文结论草案7。 |
| In fields such as international space law
or the law of the sea, for example, customary international law has on a
number of occasions developed rapidly. | 举例而言，在国际空间法或海洋法等领域，习惯国际法在若干场合发展迅速。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
254 above), at p. 43, para. 74. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，见第43页，第74段。 |
| Ibid., at para. 77; see also ibid., at
para. 76 (referring to the requirement that States “believed
themselves to be applying a mandatory rule of customary international law”). | 同上，见第77段；另同上，见第76段(提及一项要求，即各国“相信自己是在适用习惯国际法的一项强制性规则”)。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see
footnote 257 above), at pp. 277 and 286. | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注257)，见第277和第286页。 |
| See also The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (footnote 250 above), at p. 28 (“Even if the rarity of the judicial decisions to be found among the
reported cases were sufficient to prove in point of fact the circumstance
alleged … it would merely show that States had often,
in practice, abstained from instituting criminal proceedings, and not that
they recognized themselves as being obliged to do so; for only if such
abstention were based on their being conscious of having a duty to abstain
would it be possible to speak of an international custom. | 另见“莲花号”案(上文脚注250)，见第28页(“即使在所报告的案件中罕见的司法裁决足以证明实际情形…这也只会表明，各国常常在实践中放弃刑事诉讼，而不是它们认为自己有义务这样做；因为只有此种放弃行为是基于它们意识到有责任放弃，才有可能称得上国际习惯。 |
| The alleged fact does not allow one to
infer that States have been conscious of having such a duty; on the other
hand … there are other circumstances calculated to
show that the contrary is true”); Military and
Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (see footnote 246 above), at
pp. 108-110, paras. 206-209. | 声称的事实无法使人推断国家意识到有此种义务；另一方面…有被认为能够证明情况恰恰相反的其他情形”)；在尼加拉瓜和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注246)；第108-110页，第206-209段。 |
| See, for example, North Sea Continental
Shelf (footnote 254 above), at p. 43, para. 76. | 例如另见北海大陆架案(上文脚注254)；第43页，第76段。 |
| A particular difficulty may thus arise in
ascertaining whether a rule of customary international law has emerged where
a non-declaratory treaty has attracted virtually universal participation. | 在一项非宣誓性条约几乎吸引到普遍参与时，这一点可对确定是否已经形成一项习惯国际法规则造成特别的困难。 |
| See Military and Paramilitary Activities
in and against Nicaragua (footnote 246 above), at p. 109, para. 207 (“Either the States taking such action or other States in a position
to react to it, must have behaved so that their conduct is ‘evidence of a belief that this practice is rendered obligatory by
the existence of a rule of law requiring it’” (citing
the North Sea Continental Shelf Judgment)). | 见在尼加拉瓜和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(上文脚注246)，第109页，第207段(“无论是那些采取这种行动的国家还是那些有能力对其做出反应的国家，其行为方式都必须使它们的行为可以证明这一信念，即这种惯例是由于存在着要求将其付诸实施的法律规则而变得具有强制性”(援引北海大陆架案判决)。 |
| Thus, where “the
members of the international community are profoundly divided” on the question of whether a certain practice is accompanied by
acceptance as law (opinio juris), no such acceptance as law could be said to
exist: see Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (footnote 258
above), at p. 254, para. 67. | 因此，在有关某项惯例是否伴有被接受为法律(法律确信)问题上“国际社会的成员意见极为分歧”时，不能说存在此种被接受为法律：见以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性案(上文脚注258)，第254页，第67段。 |
| In the Right of Passage over Indian
Territory, the International Court of Justice thus observed, with respect to
the passage of armed forces and armed police, that: “The
practice predicates that the territorial sovereign had the discretionary
power to withdraw or to refuse permission. | 在印度领土上的通行权案中，国际法院就武装部队和武装警察通过的问题指出，“该惯例意味着领土主权享有撤销或拒绝许可的酌处权。 |
| It is argued that permission was always
granted, but this does not, in the opinion of the Court, affect the legal
position. | 有人争辩说，这种许可总是可以得到的，但法院认为，这不影响法律立场。 |
| There is nothing in the record to show
that grant of permission was incumbent on the British or on India as an
obligation” (Case concerning Right of Passage over
Indian Territory (see footnote 258 above), at pp. 42-43). | 没有任何记录表明，给予许可是英国或印度负有的义务”(在印度领土上的通行权案(见上文脚注258)，第42-43页)。 |
| In the Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State case, the International Court of Justice similarly held, in seeking to
determine the content of a rule of customary international law, that: “While it may be true that States sometimes decide to accord an
immunity more extensive than that required by international law, for present
purposes, the point is that the grant of immunity in such a case is not
accompanied by the requisite opinio juris and therefore sheds no light upon
the issue currently under consideration by the Court”
(Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (see footnote 255 above), at p. 123,
para. 55). | 在国家的管辖豁免案中，国际法院同样认为，在试图确定一项习惯国际法规则的内容时“虽然各国有时的确可能会决定给予比国际法要求更广泛的豁免，但就当前目的而言，要点是在这一个案例中豁免的给予并不伴有必要的法律确信，因此无助于说明法院目前正在审议的问题(国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注255)，第123页，第55段)。 |
| See also North Sea Continental Shelf
(footnote 254 above), at pp. 43-44, para. 76. | 另见北海大陆架案(上文脚注254)，第43-44页，第76段。 |
| The International Court of Justice
observed that indeed: “There are many international
acts, e.g., in the field of ceremonial and protocol, which are performed almost
invariably, but which are motivated only by considerations of courtesy,
convenience or tradition, and not by any sense of legal duty” (North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 254 above), at p. 44,
para. 77). | 国际法院指出，事实上：“有许多国际行为，例如在礼仪和礼宾方面，几乎总是得到实施，但其动机仅仅是出于礼貌、方便或传统的考虑，而不是出于任何法律义务感”(北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，第44页，第77段)。 |
| See draft conclusion 3, above. | 见上文结论草案3。 |
| At times the practice itself is
accompanied by an express disavowal of legal obligation, such as when States
pay compensation ex gratia for damage caused to foreign diplomatic property. | 有时，惯例本身伴有对法律义务的明确否认，例如国家向对外国外交财产造成的损害支付特惠赔偿的情况。 |
| Fisheries case (see footnote 289 above),
at p. 139. | 渔业案(见上文脚注289)，第139页。 |
| See also The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (footnote 250 above), at p. 29 (“the Court feels called upon to lay stress upon the fact that it
does not appear that the States concerned have objected to criminal
proceedings in respect of collision cases before the courts of a country
other than that the flag of which was flown, or that they have made protests:
their conduct does not appear to have differed appreciably from that observed
by them in all cases of concurrent jurisdiction. | 另见“莲花号”案(上文脚注250)，第29页(“法院认为有强调以下事实的要求：有关国家似乎没有反对在船旗国以外国家的法庭进行有关碰撞案件的刑事诉讼程序，它们似乎也没有提出抗议：它们的行为似乎没有明显不同于它们在所有共同管辖权案件中遵守的行为。 |
| This fact is directly opposed to the
existence of a tacit consent on the part of States to the exclusive
jurisdiction of the State whose flag is flown, such as the Agent for the
French Government has thought it possible to deduce from the infrequency of
questions of jurisdiction before criminal courts. | 这一事实与存在国家对船旗国的专属管辖权的默示同意直接相反，例如法国政府人员认为，从刑事法院很少审理管辖权问题这一事实可以推断出这一点。 |
| It seems hardly probable, and it would
not be in accordance with international practice, that the French Government
in the Ortigia-Oncle-Joseph case and the German Government in the
Ekbatana-West-Hinder case would have omitted to protest against the exercise
of criminal jurisdiction by the Italian and Belgian Courts, if they had
really thought that this was a violation of international law”); Priebke, Erich s/ solicitud de extradición, Case No. 16.063/94, Supreme Court of Justice of Argentina,
Judgment of 2 November 1995, Vote of Judge Gustavo A. Bossert, at p. 40,
para. 90. | 如果它们真的认为这种情况违反了国际法，那么法国政府在Ortigia-Oncle-Joseph案及德国政府在Ekbatana-West-Hinder案中都没有抗议意大利和比利时法院行使刑事管辖权似乎是不可能的，也不符合国际惯例”)；Priebke, Erich s/ solicitud de extradición案，第16.063/94号案件，阿根廷最高法院，1995年11月2日的判决，Gustavo A. Bossert法官的投票，第40页，第90段。 |
| See also, more generally, North Sea
Continental Shelf (footnote 254 above), at p. 27, para. 33. | 另见，从更一般性的意义上，北海大陆架案(上文脚注254)，第27页，第33段。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
observed, in a different context, that: “The absence
of reaction may well amount to acquiescence …. That
is to say, silence may also speak, but only if the conduct of the other State
calls for a response” (Sovereignty over Pedra
Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2008, p. 12, at pp. 50-51, para. 121). | 国际法院曾在不同情况下指出：“没有做出反应很有可能构成默认…换言之，沉默也可表达意思，但只有在其他国家的行为要求做出回应的情形下才会如此”。
白礁岛、中岩礁和南礁的主权归属案(马来西亚/新加坡)，判决，《2008年国际法院案例汇编》，第12页起，见第50-51页，第121段)。 |
| See also Dispute regarding Navigational
and Related Rights (footnote 266 above), at pp. 265-266, para. 141 (“For the Court, the failure of Nicaragua to deny the existence of a
right arising from the practice which had continued undisturbed and
unquestioned over a very long period, is particularly significant”). | 另见航行权利和相关权利争端案(见上文脚注266)，第265-266页，第141段(“在法院看来，尼加拉瓜未能否认源自长期以来未受扰乱和质疑的惯例的权利之存在，这一点十分重要”)。 |
| It may well be that a certain practice
would be seen as affecting all or virtually all States. | 某种惯例很可能被视为影响到所有或几乎所有国家。 |
| See, for example, Gabčikovo-Nagymaros
Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 40,
para. 51; Responsibilities and obligations of States with respect to
activities in the Area, Advisory Opinion, 1 February 2011, ITLOS Reports
2011, p. 10, at p. 56, para. 169; Prosecutor v. Elizaphan Ntakirutimana and Gérard Ntakirutimana, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda,
Cases Nos. ICTR-96-10-A and ICTR-96-17-A, Judgment (Appeals Chamber) of 13
December 2004, para. 518; Dubai-Sharjah Border Arbitration (1981),
International Law Reports, vol. 91, pp. 543-701, at p. 575; 2 BvR 1506/03,
German Federal Constitutional Court, Order of the Second Senate of 5 November
2003, para. 47. | 例如，见加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目(匈牙利/斯洛伐克)，判决书，《1997年国际法院案例汇编》，第7页起，见第40页，第51段；国家关于“区域”内活动的责任和义务，咨询意见，2011年2月1日，《2011年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页起，见第56页，第169段；检察官诉Elizaphan
Ntakirutimana和Gérard
Ntakirutimana,卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭，ICTR-96-10-A号案件和ICTR-96-17-A号案件，判决书(上诉分庭)，2004年12月13日，第518段；迪拜－沙迦边境仲裁(1981年)，《国际法报告》，第91卷，第543-701页，见第575页；2
BvR 1506/03, 德国联邦宪法法院，2003年11月5日第二审判庭的命令，第47段。 |
| See the statute of the International Law
Commission (1947), adopted by the General Assembly in resolution 174 (II) of
21 November 1947. | 见《国际法委员会章程》(1947)，大会1947年11月21日第174(II)号决议通过。 |
| Once the General Assembly has taken
action in relation to a final draft of the Commission, such as by commending
and annexing it to a resolution, the output of the Commission may also fall
to be considered under draft conclusion 12. | 一旦大会已就委员会的一项最终草案采取行动，例如在决议中加以评述或将其作为附件载于一项决议，委员会的工作成果也可在结论草案12下进行考虑。 |
| Continental Shelf (see footnote 255
above), at pp. 29-30, para. 27 (“It is of course
axiomatic that the material of customary international law is to be looked
for primarily in the actual practice and opinio juris of States, even though
multilateral conventions may have an important role to play in recording and
defining rules deriving from custom, or indeed in developing them”). | 大陆架案(见上文脚注255)，第29-30页，第27段(“当然，不言而喻，尽管多边公约在记录和界定，甚至发展源于习惯的规则方面可发挥重要作用，但习惯国际法的材料还是应主要在各国的实际惯例和法律确信中寻找”)。 |
| Article 38 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
refers to the possibility of “a rule set forth in a
treaty … becoming binding upon a third State as a
customary rule of international law, recognized as such”. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十八条提到“条约所载规则成为对第三国有拘束力之公认国际法习惯规则”的可能性。 |
| See Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State (footnote 255 above), at p. 128, para. 66; “Ways
and means for making the evidence of customary international law more readily
available”, Yearbook …1950,
vol. II, document A/1316, Part II, p. 368, para. 29 (“not infrequently conventional formulation by certain States of a
practice also followed by other States is relied upon in efforts to establish
the existence of a rule of customary international law. Even multipartite
conventions signed but not brought into force are frequently regarded as
having value as evidence of customary international law”). | 见国家的司法管辖豁免(上文脚注255)，第128页，第66段；“便利各方利用国际习惯法的证据的方式和方法”，《1950年年鉴》，第二卷，A/1316号文件，第二篇，第368页，第29段，(“若干国家为力求确定国际习惯法中某项法则之存在，辄有将为他国所遵行之惯例订为协约者，甚至有将虽经签字而尚未生效之多边协约视为具有证明国际习惯法之价值者。”)。 |
| It may also be the case that a single
provision is only partly declaratory of customary international law. | 也有可能某单一条款仅部分宣示了习惯国际法。 |
| See, for example, Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims
Commission, Partial Award: Prisoners of War, Ethiopia’s Claim 4, 1 July 2003, United Nations, Reports of International
Arbitral Awards, vol. XXVI (Sales No. E/F.06.V.7), pp. 73-114, at pp. 86-87,
para. 31 (“Certainly, there are important, modern
authorities for the proposition that the Geneva Conventions of 1949 have
largely become expressions of customary international law, and both Parties
to this case agree. | 例如见厄立特里亚－埃塞俄比亚混合索赔委员会，部分裁决：战俘，埃塞俄比亚的第4号索赔，2003年7月1日，联合国，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十六卷(出售品编号E/F.06.V.7)，第73-114页，见第86-97页，第31段(“当然，关于1949年日内瓦四公约已大体上成为习惯国际法表述的主张具有重要的现代效力，并且本案中的双方均赞同这一点。 |
| The mere fact that they have obtained
nearly universal acceptance supports this conclusion”
(footnote omitted)); Prosecutor v. Sam Hinga Norman (see footnote 258 above)
at paras. 17-20 (referring, inter alia, to the “huge
acceptance, the highest acceptance of all international conventions” as indicating that the relevant provisions of the Convention on
the Rights of the Child had come to reflect customary international law);
Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in
Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276
(1970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, at p. 47, para. 94 (“The rules laid down by the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties concerning termination of a treaty relationship on account of breach
(adopted without a dissenting vote) may in many respects be considered as a
codification of existing customary law on the subject”). | 这些公约获得了几乎普遍的接受这一事实本身也支持这项结论”(脚注省略))；检察官诉萨姆•欣加•诺曼案(见上文脚注258)，见第17-20段(除其他外，提到“极大的认可，所有国际文书中程度最高的接受程度”来说明《儿童权利公约》的有关条款已反映习惯国际法)；南非不顾安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第47页，第94段(“《维也纳条约法公约》规定的关于因违约而终止条约关系的各项规则(无反对票，获得通过)可能在许多方面被认为是编纂关于这一主题的现有习惯法”)。 |
| See, for example, Continental Shelf
(footnote 255 above), at p. 30, para. 27 (“it cannot
be denied that the 1982 Convention [on the Law of the Sea — which was not then in force] is of major importance, having been
adopted by an overwhelming majority of States; hence it is clearly the duty
of the Court, even independently of the references made to the Convention by
the Parties, to consider in what degree any of its relevant provisions are
binding upon the Parties as a rule of customary international law”). | 例如，见大陆架案(上文脚注255)，见第30页，第27段(“不可否认，1982年的《公约》[《海洋法公约》――当时尚未生效]已被绝大多数国家通过，具有十分重要的意义；因此，即便当事方没有提到《公约》，法院显然也有义务考虑《公约》任何相关条款作为习惯国际法规则在何种程度上对当事方具有约束力”)。 |
| In the North Sea Continental Shelf cases,
this consideration led to the disqualification of several of the invoked
instances of State practice (North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 254
above), at p. 43, para. 76). | 在北海大陆架案中，这种考虑致使所引述的若干国家惯例被视为不充分的证据(北海大陆架(见上文脚注254)，第43页，第76段)。 |
| See, for example, Application of the
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia
v. Serbia), Judgment of the International Court of Justice, 3 February 2015,
para. 87. | 例如，见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚)，国际法院的判决，2015年2月3日，第87段。 |
| In the 1948 Convention on the Prevention
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (United Nations, Treaties Series,
vol. 78, No. 1021, p. 277), for example, the Parties “confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in
time of war, is a crime under international law”
(art. 1) (emphasis added); and the 1958 Geneva Convention on the High Seas
contains the following preambular paragraph: “Desiring
to codify the rules of international law relating to the high seas” (ibid., vol. 450, No. 6465, at p. 82). | 例如，在1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第78卷，第1021号，第277页)中，各缔约国“确认灭绝种族之行为，不论出于平时或战时，均属国际法下之一种罪行”(第一条)(强调系本文所加)；而1958年《日内瓦公海公约》载有如下序言段落：“深愿编纂关于公海之国际法规则”(同上，第450卷，第6465号，见第82页)。 |
| A treaty may equally indicate that it
embodies progressive development rather than codification; in the
Colombian-Peruvian asylum case, for example, the International Court of
Justice found that the preamble to the Montevideo Convention on Rights and
duties of States of 1933 (League of Nations, Treaty Series, vol. CLXV, No.
3802, p. 19), which states that it modifies a previous convention (and the
limited number of States that have ratified it), runs counter to the argument
that the Convention “merely codified principles which
were already recognized by … custom” (Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see footnote 257 above), at p.
277). | 某一条约同样可能表明其体现了逐渐发展而不是对法律的编纂；例如，在哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案中，国际法院裁定1933年《蒙得维的亚国家权利与义务公约》(国际联盟，《条约汇编》，第165卷，第3802号，第19页)的序言称该公约是对先前一份公约的更改(并且批准前一份公约的国家数量有限)有悖于公约“仅编纂了已被认定为习惯的原则”的论点(哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注257)，见第277页)。 |
| See also the Commission’s Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, guidelines 3.1.5.3
(Reservations to a provision reflecting a customary rule) and 4.4.2 (Absence
of effect on rights and obligations under customary international law),
Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth session, Supplement No.
10 (A/66/10 and Add.1). | 另见委员会《对条约的保留实践指南》，准则3.1.5.3(对反映习惯规则的规定的保留)和4.4.2(对习惯国际法之下的权利和义务不产生效果)，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| The 1930 Convention on Certain Questions
relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws (League of Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. CLXXIX, No. 4137, p. 89), for example, provides that: “The inclusion of the above-mentioned principles and rules in the
Convention shall in no way be deemed to prejudice the question whether they
do or do not already form part of international law”
(art. 18). | 例如，1930年《关于国籍法冲突的若干问题的公约》(国际联盟，《条约汇编》，第179卷，第4137号，第89页)规定“将上述原则和规则纳入公约，无论如何不得视为预断这些原则和规则是否已经构成国际法一部分的问题”(第18条)。 |
| Sometimes a general reference is made to
both codification and development: in the 1969 Vienna Convention, for
example, the States parties express in the preamble their belief that “codification and progressive development of the law of treaties
[are] achieved in the present Convention”; in the
2004 United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and
Their Property (General Assembly resolution 59/38 of 2 December 2004), the
States parties consider in the preamble “that the
jurisdictional immunities of States and their property are generally accepted
as a principle of customary international law” and
express their belief that the Convention “would
contribute to the codification and development of international law and the
harmonization of practice in this area”. | 有时，会笼统地同时提及编纂和发展：例如，在1969年《维也纳公约》中，各缔约国在序言中表示它们深信“本公约[达成了]条约法之编纂及逐渐发展”；在2004年《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》(2004年12月2日大会第59/38号决议)中，各缔约国在序言中考虑到“国家及其财产的管辖豁免为一项普遍接受的习惯国际法原则”，并表示相信《公约》“将有助于国际法的编纂与发展及此领域实践的协调”。 |
| In examining in the North Sea Continental
Shelf cases whether article 6 of the 1958 Convention on the Continental Shelf
(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 499, No. 7302, p. 311) reflected customary
international law when the Convention was drawn up, the International Court
of Justice held that: “The status of the rule in the
Convention therefore depends mainly on the processes that led the
[International Law] Commission to propose it. | 在北海大陆架案中，国际法院审查了1958年《大陆架公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第499卷，第7302号，第311段)第6条在起草时是否反映了习惯国际法，并判定：“因此，《公约》中规则的法律地位主要取决于致使[国际法]委员会提出该规则的程序。 |
| These processes have already been
reviewed in connection with the Danish-Netherlands contention of an a priori
necessity for equidistance, and the Court considers this review sufficient
for present purposes also, in order to show that the principle of
equidistance, as it now figures in Article 6 of the Convention, was proposed
by the Commission with considerable hesitation, somewhat on an experimental
basis, at most de lege ferenda, and not at all de lege lata or as an emerging
rule of customary international law. | 已经结合丹麦－荷兰关于等距离测量的先验必要性的主张对这些程序进行了审查，并且法院认为这种审查在此也能满足要求，显示委员会在提出《公约》第6条中出现的等距离原则时相当犹豫，在某种程度上是一种试验，充其量是拟议法，绝不是现行法或是正在出现的新习惯国际法规则。 |
| This is clearly not the sort of
foundation on which Article 6 of the Convention could be said to have
reflected or crystallized such a rule” (North Sea
Continental Shelf (see footnote 254 above), at p. 38, para. 62). | 显然不能以此为基础来说《公约》第6条反映或具体化了这样的规则”(北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，见第38页，第62段)。 |
| See also Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State (footnote 255 above), at pp. 138-139, para. 89. | 另见国家的司法管辖豁免(上文脚注255)，第138-139页，第89段。 |
| Even where a treaty provision could not
eventually be agreed, it remains possible that customary international law
has later evolved “through the practice of States on
the basis of the debates and near-agreements at the Conference [where a
treaty was negotiated]”: Fisheries Jurisdiction
(United Kingdom v. Iceland), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1974, p. 3, at
p. 23, para. 52. | 即便最终无法商定某一条约条款，习惯国际法仍有可能稍后“在[谈判条约的]会议的辩论和接近协定的基础上通过各国惯例”而演变出来，捕鱼管辖权案(联合王国诉冰岛)，案情实质，判决书，《1974年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第23页，第52段。 |
| See, for example, Continental Shelf
(footnote 255 above), at p. 33, para. 34 (“It is in
the Court’s view incontestable that … the institution of the exclusive economic zone, with its rule on
entitlement by reason of distance, is shown by the practice of States to have
become a part of customary law” (emphasis added)). | 例如，见大陆架案(上文脚注255)，第33页，第34段(“法院认为，毫无疑问，各国惯例显示，根据距离确定应享权利的专属经济区制度已成为习惯法的一部分”(强调系本文所加))。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
confirmed, “this process is a perfectly possible one
and does from time to time occur: it constitutes indeed one of the recognized
methods by which new rules of customary international law may be formed” (North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 254 above), at p. 41,
para. 71). | 正如国际法院所确认的，“这个过程完全有可能发生，且实际上不时发生：这已构成公认的习惯国际法新规则形成的方法之一”(北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，见第41页，第71段)。 |
| One example may be found in The Hague
Regulations annexed to the 1907 Fourth Hague Convention respecting the Laws
and Customs of War on Land: although these were prepared, according to the
Convention, “to revise the general laws and customs
of war” existing at that time (and thus did not
codify existing customary international law), they later came to be regarded
as reflecting customary international law (see Legal Consequences of the
Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 172, para. 89). | 在1907年海牙第四公约《陆战法规和习惯公约》附件《海牙章程》(《1899年和1907年的海牙公约和宣言》可以找到一个例子：尽管根据《公约》，起草这些条款，是为“修改[当时存在的]一般战争法规和惯例”(因此不是编纂现有的习惯国际法)，但后来它们被视为反映了习惯国际法(见在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第172页，第89段)。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
254 above), at pp. 41-42 and 43, paras. 72 and 74 (cautioning, at para. 71,
that “this result is not lightly to be regarded as
having been attained”). | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，见第41-42页和第43页，第72和第74段(在第71段提醒“这种结果不能轻率地视为已经达成”)。 |
| See also Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (footnote 246 above), at p. 98, para. 184
(“Where two States agree to incorporate a particular
rule in a treaty, their agreement suffices to make that rule a legal one,
binding upon them; but in the field of customary international law, the shared
view of the Parties as to the content of what they regard as the rule is not
enough. | 另见在尼加拉瓜和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动(上文脚注246)，见第98页，第184段(“如果两国商定将某项规则纳入条约，其商定协议足以使这一规则成为约束双方的法律规则；但在习惯国际法领域中，仅缔约方就规则内容达成共识还不够。 |
| The Court must satisfy itself that the
existence of the rule in the opinio juris of States is confirmed by practice”). | 法院必须确定各国惯例的确证实该规则存在于国家法律确信中”)。 |
| See Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of
Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Preliminary Objections,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 582, at p. 615, para. 90 (“The fact invoked by Guinea that various international agreements,
such as agreements for the promotion and protection of foreign investments
and the Washington Convention, have established special legal regimes
governing investment protection, or that provisions in this regard are
commonly included in contracts entered into directly between States and
foreign investors, is not sufficient to show that there has been a change in
the customary rules of diplomatic protection; it could equally show the
contrary”). | 见艾哈迈杜 •萨迪奥 •迪亚洛(几内亚共和国诉刚果民主共和国)，初步异议，判决书，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第582页起，见第615页，第90段(“据几内亚援引，促进和保护外国投资协定以及《华盛顿公约》等各项国际协定制定了保护投资的特别法律制度，或这方面的规定通常被列入国家与外国投资者之间直接签订的合同，这些事实不足以证明外交保护的习惯规则发生了变化，因为这同样可以证明事实正好相反”)。 |
| See Legality of the Threat or Use of
Nuclear Weapons (footnote 258 above), at pp. 254-255, para 70; SEDCO
Incorporated v. National Iranian Oil Company and Iran, second interlocutory
award, Award No. ITL 59-129-3 of 27 March 1986, International Law Reports,
vol. 84, pp. 483-592, at p. 526. | 见以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(上文脚注258)，见第254-255页，第70段；SEDCO公司诉伊朗国家石油公司和伊朗，中间裁决，第ITL 59-129-3号裁决，1986年3月27日，《国际法报告》，第84卷，第483-592页，见第526页。 |
| There is a wide range of designations,
such as “declaration” or “declaration of principles”. | 其名称众多，例如“宣言”或“原则宣言”。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons (see footnote 258 above), at pp. 254-255, para. 70 (referring to
General Assembly resolutions). | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(上文脚注258)，见第254-255页，第70段(提及大会的决议)。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 246 above), at p. 100, para. 188. | 在尼加拉瓜和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动(见上文脚注246)，见第100页，第188段。 |
| See also The Government of the State of
Kuwait v. The American Independent Oil Company (AMINOIL), Final Award of 24
March 1982, International Law Reports, vol. 66, pp. 518-627, at pp. 601-602,
para. 143. | 另见科威特政府诉美国独立石油公司(AMINOIL)，1982年3月24日最终裁决，《国际法报告》，第66卷，第518-627页，见第601-602页，第143段。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 246 above), at p. 99, para. 188. | 在尼加拉瓜和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动(见上文脚注246)，见第99页，第188段。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons (see footnote 258 above), at p. 255, para. 70. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注258)，见第255页，第70段。 |
| In resolution 96 (I) of 11 December 1946,
for example, the General Assembly “Affirm[ed] that
genocide is a crime under international law”,
language that suggests that the paragraph is declaratory of existing
customary international law. | 例如，在1946年12月11日第九十六(一)号决议中，大会“确认灭绝种族为国际法下之一种犯罪行为”，这种措辞表明该段宣示了现有习惯国际法。 |
| In the General Assembly, explanations of
vote are often given upon adoption by a main committee, in which case they
are not usually repeated in the plenary. | 在大会中，对投票的解释往往在某一主要委员会通过决议时作出，在全体会议中通常不再重复。 |
| See, for example, Legality of the Threat
or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 258 above), at p. 255, para. 71 (“several of the resolutions under consideration in the present case
have been adopted with substantial numbers of negative votes and abstentions;
thus, although those resolutions are a clear sign of deep concern regarding
the problem of nuclear weapons, they still fall short of establishing the
existence of an opinio juris on the illegality of the use of such weapons”). | 例如，见以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注258)，见第255页，第71段(“本案所审查的决议之中有几项决议在通过时，相当多的国家投反对票或弃权；因此，这些决议虽然显示各方对核武器问题深感关切，仍然不足以确立定有一种认为使用核武器为非法的法律意见存在”)。 |
| See, for example, KAING Guek Eav alias
Duch, Case No. 001/18-07-2007-ECCC/SC, Appeal Judgment, Extraordinary
Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, Supreme Court Chamber (3 February 2012),
para. 194 (“The 1975 Declaration on Torture
[resolution 3452 (XXX) of 9 December 1975, Declaration on the Protection of
All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment] is a non-binding General Assembly
resolution and thus more evidence is required to find that the definition of
torture found therein reflected customary international law at the relevant
time”). | 例如，见康克由，别名“杜赫”案，001/18-07-2007-ECCC/SC号案件，上诉判决，柬埔寨法院特别法庭，最高法院分庭(2012年2月3日)，第194段(“1975年《酷刑宣言》[1975年12月9日第3452(XXX)号决议，保护人人不受酷刑和其他残忍、不人道和有辱人格待遇或处罚宣言]是一项不具约束力的大会决议，因而需要有进一步的证据，才能确定其中对酷刑的定义反映了相关时期的习惯国际法”)。 |
| Decisions of international courts and
tribunals thus cannot be said to be conclusive evidence for the
identification of rules of international law in this respect either. | 因此，也不能说国际性法院和法庭的判决是识别这方面国际法规则的确凿证据。 |
| Although there is no hierarchy of
international courts and tribunals, decisions of the International Court of
Justice are often regarded as persuasive by other courts and tribunals. | 尽管国际性法院和法庭不存在等级关系，其他法院和法庭往往认为国际法院的判决令人信服。 |
| See, for example, European Court of Human
Rights, Jones and Others v. the United Kingdom, nos.34356/06 and 40528/06,
ECHR 2014, para. 198; M/V “SAIGA” (No. 2) (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea), Judgment,
ITLOS Reports 1999, p. 10, at paras. 133-134; Japan —
Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages, WTO Appellate Body Report, WT/DS8/AB/R,
WT/DS10/AB/R and WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted on 1 November 1996, sect. D. | 例如，见欧洲人权法院，Jones等人诉联合王国，第34356/06号和第40528/06号，ECHR 2014, 第198段；“赛加羚羊”号轮案(第2号)(圣文森特和格林那丁斯诉几内亚)，判决，《1999 年海洋法法庭汇编》，第10页，见第133-134段；日本－酒精饮料税，世贸组织上诉机构报告，WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R,
1996年11月1日通过，D节。 |
| On decisions of national courts being a
subsidiary means for the determination of rules of customary international
see also, for example, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia,
Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić, Zdravko Mucić also known as “Pavo”, Hazim Delić, Esad Landžo also known as “Zenga”, Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgment of 16 November 1998, at para. 414. | 关于作为确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段的各国法院的判决，例如，另见前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭，检察官诉Zejnil Delalić、Zdravko Mucić(又称Pavo)，Hazim
Delić，Esad
Landžo(又称Zenga)，第IT-96-21-T号案件，1998年11月16日的判决，见第414段。 |
| See also “Ways
and means for making the evidence of customary international law more readily
available”, Yearbook … 1950,
vol. II, document A/1316, Part II, p. 370, para. 53. | 另见“便利各方利用国际习惯法的证据的方式和方法”，《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/1316号文件，第二编，第370页，第53段。 |
| The Paquete Habana and The Lola, US
Supreme Court 175 US 677 (1900), at p. 700. | Paquete Habana和Lola案，美国最高法院175 US 677(1900)，见第700页。 |
| See also The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (footnote 250 above), at pp. 26 and
31. | 另见“莲花号”案(上文脚注250)，第26和第31页。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
254 above), at pp. 38-39, para. 63. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注254)，第38-39页，第63段。 |
| This is true of rules of “general” customary international law, as
opposed to “particular”
customary international law (see draft conclusion 16, below). | 这对于“一般”习惯国际法成立，与“特别”习惯国际法相对(见下文结论草案16)。 |
| See, for example, Entscheidungen des
Bundesverfassungsgerichts (German Federal Constitutional Court), vol. 46
(1978), judgment of 13 December 1977, 2 BvM 1/76, No. 32, pp. 342-404, at pp.
388-389, para. 6 (“This concerns not merely action
that a State can successfully uphold from the outset against application of
an existing general rule of international law by way of perseverant
protestation of rights (in the sense of the ruling of the International Court
of Justice in the Norwegian Fisheries case (see footnote 289 above), p. 131);
instead, the existence of a corresponding general rule of international law
cannot at present be assumed”). | 例如，见德国联邦宪法法院的判决，第46卷(1978年)，1977年12月13日的判决，2 BvM
1/76, No. 32, 第342-404页，见388-389页，第6段(“这不只是说一国可采取行动，从一开始就坚持主张权利，从而成功地坚持对一条国际法现有规则的适用表示反对(就国际法院在挪威渔业案(见上文脚注289,
第131页)中的判决而言)；而是说，目前不能假定存在一条对应的国际法一般规则”)。 |
| In due course, and as part of an overall
package on the law of the sea, States did not in fact maintain their
objections. | 在这一过程中，而且作为一揽子海洋法的一部分，国家实际上没有维持其反对立场。 |
| While the ability of effectively
preserving a persistent objector status over time may sometimes prove
difficult, this does not call into question the existence of the rule. | 虽然要长期地有效保持一贯反对者地位有时证明是很难的，但这不会对这项规则的存在提出疑问。 |
| See, for example, the Fisheries case
(footnote 289 above), at p. 131; Michael Domingues v. United States, Case No.
12.285 (2002), Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Report No. 62/02,
paras. 48 and 49; Sabeh El Leil v. France [GC], no. 34869/05, European Court
of Human Rights, 29 June 2011, para. 54; WTO Panel Reports, European
Communities — Measures Affecting the Approval and
Marketing of Biotech Products, WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R and WT/DS293/R, adopted
21 November 2006, at p. 335, footnote 248; Siderman de Blake v. Republic of
Argentina, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 965 F.2d
699; 1992 U.S. App., at p. 715, para. 54. | 例见渔业案(上文脚注289)，见第131页；Michael Domingues v.United States,
Case No. 12.285 (2002)，美洲人权委员会报告，第62/02号第48和49段；Sabeh El
Leil v. France [GC]，no. 34869/05, 欧洲 人权法院，2011年6月29日，第54段；.,世贸组织小组报告，“欧洲共同体――影响生物技术产品批准和营销的措施”，WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R和WT/DS293/R, 2006年11月21日通过，见第335页，脚注248；Siderman de Blake v. Republic of Argentina,
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 965 F.2d 699; 1992 U.S.
App., at p. 715, para. 54。 |
| See, for example, the intervention by
Turkey in 1982 at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,
document A/CONF.62/SR.189, p. 76, para. 150 (available at); United States
Department of Defense, Law of War Manual, Office of General Counsel,
Washington D.C., June 2015, at pp. 29-34, sect. 1.8 (Customary international
law), in particular at p. 30, para. 1.8 (“Customary
international law is generally binding on all States, but States that have
been persistent objectors to a customary international law rule during its
development are not bound by that rule”) and p. 34,
para. 1.8.4; Republic of Mauritius v. United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland (Arbitration under Annex VII of the 1982 United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea), Reply of the Republic of Mauritius, vol. 1
(18 November 2013), p. 124, para. 5.11. | 例见土耳其于1982年在第三次联合国海洋法会议上的发言，第A/CONF.62/SR.189号文件，第76页，第150段(可访问)；United States Department of Defense, Law of War Manual, Office of
General Counsel, Washington D.C.，June 2015, at pp.
29-34, sect. 1.8(Customary international law)，尤其参见第30页，第1.8段(“习惯国际法在总体上对各国均有约束力，但在一条习惯国际法规则的发展过程中一贯对其反对的国家不受该规则约束”以及第34页，第1.8.4段；毛里求斯共和国诉大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国案(根据1982年《联合国海洋法公约》附件七进行的仲裁)，毛里求斯共和国的答辩状，第1卷(2013年11月18日)，第124页，第5.11段。 |
| The Commission itself recently referred
to the rule in its Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, where it
stated that “a reservation may be the means by which
a ‘persistent objector’
manifests the persistence of its objection; the objector may certainly reject
the application, through a treaty, of a rule which cannot be invoked against
it under general international law” (see para. (7) of
the commentary to guideline 3.1.5.3, Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10/Add.1)). | 委员会最近在“对条约的保留实践指南”中提到了这条规则，委员会说“保留可能是‘一贯反对者’表示坚持反对的一种手段；该反对者肯定可以拒绝通过一项条约适用某项规范，这样，其他国家便无法依一般国际法援引此项规范来指控他了”(见指南3.1.5.3的评注第(7)段，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| See, for example, C v. Director of
Immigration and another, Hong Kong Court of Appeal [2011] HKCA 159, CACV
132-137/2008 (2011), at para. 68 (“Evidence of
objection must be clear”). It is not to be excluded
that such rules may evolve, over time, into rules of general customary
international law. | 例见C v.Director of Immigration and
another, Hong Kong Court of Appeal [2011] HKCA 159, CACV 132-137/2008(2011)，at para. 68(“反对的证据必须清楚”)。 不能排除的是，这类规则可能随时间推移演变为一般习惯国际法规则。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 246 above), at p. 105, para. 199. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注246)，相见第105页，第199段。 |
| Frontier Dispute, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1986, p. 554, at p. 565, para. 21. | 边界争端案，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第554页起，见第565页，第21段。 |
| Case concerning rights of nationals of
the United States of America in Morocco (see footnote 268 above), at p. 200;
Case concerning Right of Passage over Indian Territory (see footnote 258
above), at p. 39. | 摩洛哥境内美利坚合众国国民的权利案(见上文脚注268)，见第200页；在印度领土上的通行权案(见上文脚注258)，见第39页。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (footnote 266 above), at p. 233, para. 34. | 航行权利和相关权利争端案(见上文脚注266)，见第233页，第34段。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see
footnote 257 above). | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注257)。 |
| Case concerning Right of Passage over
Indian Territory (see footnote 258 above). | 在印度领土上的通行权案(见上文脚注258)。 |
| See also draft conclusion 9, para. 2,
above. | 另见上文结论草案9, 第2段。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
treated particular customary international law as falling within Article 38,
paragraph 1 (b), of its Statute: see Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (footnote
257 above), at p. 276. | 国际法院已把特别习惯国际法处理为源于其《规约》第38段第1款(b)项；哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注257)，见第276页。 |
| The position is similar to that set out
in the provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention concerning treaties and third
States (Part III, sect. 4). | 这一立场与1969年《维也纳公约》关于条约与第三国的规定(第三部分，第四节)中的立场相似。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see
footnote 257 above), at p. 276. | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注257)，见第276页。 |
| Case concerning Right of Passage over Indian
Territory (see footnote 258 above), at p. 39. | 在印度领土上的通行权案(见上文脚注258)，见第39页。 |
| Ibid., p. 6. | 同上，第6页。 |
| See the claim by Honduras in Land, Island
and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Salvador/Honduras: Nicaragua intervening),
Judgment of 11 September 1992, p. 351, at p. 597, para. 399. | 见洪都拉斯在关于土地、岛屿和海洋边界争端案(萨尔瓦多/洪都拉斯：尼加拉瓜参加诉讼)中的主张，1992年9月11日的判决，第351页起，见第597页，第399段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (footnote 266 above), at pp. 265-266, paras. 140-144; see also
Judge Sepúlveda-Amor’s
Separate Opinion, at pp. 278-282, paras. 20-36. | 航行权利和相关权利争端案(见上文脚注266)，见第265-266页，第140-144段；另见塞普尔伟达‒阿莫尔法官的个别意见，见第278-282页，第20-36段。 |
| Nkondo v. Minister of Police and Another,
South African Supreme Court, 1980 (2) SA 894 (O), 7 March 1980, International
Law Reports, vol. 82, pp. 358-375, at pp. 368-375 (Smuts J. holding that: “There was no evidence of long standing practice between the
Republic of South Africa and Lesotho which had crystallized into a local
customary right of transit free from immigration formalities” (at p. 359)). | Nkondo v. Minister of Police and Another,
South African Supreme Court, 1980(2) SA 894(O), 7 March 1980, International
Law Reports, vol. 82, pp. 358-375, at pp. 368-375(Smuts法官认定：“没有证据表明，南非共和国与莱索托之间存在长期有效的惯例，已具体化为免于移民手续过境的地方习惯权利”(见第359页))。 |
| Kraftwerk Reckingen AG v. Canton of
Zurich and others, Appeal Judgment, BGE 129 II 114, ILDC 346 (CH 2002), 10
October 2002, Switzerland, Federal Supreme Court [BGer]; Public Law Chamber
II, para. 4. | Kraftwerk Reckingen AG v. Canton of
Zurich and others, Appeal Judgment, BGE 129 II 114, ILDC 346(CH 2002)，10 October 2002, Switzerland, Federal Supreme Court [BGer]；Public Law Chamber II, para. 4. |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see
footnote 257 above), at pp. 276-277. | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注257)，见第276-277页。 |
| At its 2997th meeting, on 8 August 2008.
See Yearbook … | 2008年8月8日第2997次会议。 |
| 2008, vol. II (Part Two), para. 353; and
for the syllabus of the topic, ibid., annex I. | 见《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第353段；专题提纲见同上，附件一。 |
| The General Assembly, in paragraph 6 of
its resolution 63/123 of 11 December 2008, took note of the decision. | 2008年12月11日大会第63/123号决议第6段注意到该决定。 |
| Yearbook … 2009,
vol. II (Part Two), paras. 220-226. | 《2009年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第220-226段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-fifth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/65/10), paras. 344-354; and ibid.,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 337. | 《大会正式记录，第六十五届会议，补编第10号》(A/65/10)，第344-354段；同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第337段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/66/10), paras. 338-341; and ibid., Sixty-seventh Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 230-231. | 同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第338-341段；同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第230-231段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 232-234. | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第232-234段。 |
| At the sixty-third session (2011), the
Chairperson of the Study Group presented nine preliminary conclusions,
reformulated in the light of the discussions in the Study Group (ibid.,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 344). | 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(同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第344段)。 |
| At the sixty-fourth session (2012), the
Chairperson presented the text of six additional preliminary conclusions,
also reformulated in the light of the discussions in the Study Group (ibid.,
Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 240). | 在第六十四届会议上(2012年)，研究组主席提交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(同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第240段)。 |
| 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 Chairperson and agreed upon by the Study Group (ibid., paras.
235-239). | 研究组主席提出了若干建议并得到研究组的赞同(同上，第235-239段)。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 226 and 239. | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第226和第239段。 |
| Ibid., para. 227. | 同上，第227段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), paras. 33-39. | 同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第33-39段。 |
| The Commission provisionally adopted
draft conclusion 1 (General rule and means of treaty interpretation); draft
conclusion 2 (Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as authentic
means of interpretation); draft conclusion 3 (Interpretation of treaty terms
as capable of evolving over time); draft conclusion 4 (Definition of
subsequent agreement and subsequent practice); and draft conclusion 5
(Attribution of subsequent practice). | 委员会暂时通过了结论草案1(条约解释通则和资料)、结论草案2(以嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为作准的解释资料)、结论草案3(能够随时间演变的条约用语的解释)、结论草案4(嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的定义)和结论草案5(嗣后惯例的归属)。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 70-76. | 同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第70-76段。 |
| The Commission provisionally adopted
draft conclusion 6 (Identification of subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice); draft conclusion 7 (Possible effects of subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice in interpretation); draft conclusion 8 (Weight of
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as a means of interpretation);
draft conclusion 9 (Agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of
a treaty); and draft conclusion 10 (Decisions adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties). | 委员会暂时通过了结论草案6(嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的识别)、结论草案7(嗣后协定和嗣后惯例可能对解释产生的影响)、结论草案8(嗣后协定和嗣后惯例作为解释资料的权重)、结论草案9(与条约解释有关的缔约方协定)和结论草案10(在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定)。 |
| Ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), paras. 123-129. | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第123-129段。 |
| The Commission provisionally adopted
draft conclusion 11 (Constituent instruments of international organizations). | 委员会暂时通过了结论草案11(国际组织的组成文书)。 |
| The numbers of the draft conclusions, as
previously adopted by the Commission, are indicated in square brackets. | 委员会先前通过的结论草案编号列于方括号内。 |
| Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
(Vienna, 23 May 1969), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155, No. 18232,
p. 331. | 《维也纳条约法公约》(1969年5月23日，维也纳)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页。 |
| As is always the case with the Commission’s output, the draft conclusions are to be read together with the
commentaries. | 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本结论草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| See Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties between States and International Organizations or between
International Organizations (“1986 Vienna Convention”) (Vienna, 21 March 1986, not yet in force) (A/CONF.129/15); this
does not exclude that some materials relating to such treaties, but which are
also of general relevance are used in the commentaries. | 见《关于国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间条约的维也纳公约》(1986年3月21日，维也纳，尚未生效)(A/CONF.129/15)；不排除在评注中使用一些可能涉及这种条约但属于一般相关的材料。 |
| Title of article 31 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条标题。 |
| See the first report on subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to treaty interpretation
(A/CN.4/660), para. 8; M.E. Villiger, “The 1969 Vienna Convention on the law of treaties: 40 years after”, Recueil des cours de l’Académie de droit international de La Haye 2009 (hereinafter “Recueil des cours …”), vol. 344, p. 9-133,
at pp. 118-119 and 126-128. | 见与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例第一次报告(A/CN.4/660)，第8段；M.E. Villiger, “1969年《维也纳条约法公约》：40年之后”，《2009年海牙国际法学院教程汇编》(下称“《…教程汇编》”)，第344卷，第9-133页，见第118-119页和第126-128页。 |
| On the meaning of the term “rules” in this context: see Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 217-220 (Commentary,
introduction); R.K. Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation, 2nd edition (Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 36-38. | 关于这一上下文中“规则”一词的含义：见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第217-220页(评注，导言)；R.K.
Gardiner, 《条约解释》第二版(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2015年)，第36-38页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷， |
| document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 223, commentary
to draft article 28, para. (19); Waldock, third report on the law of
treaties, Yearbook … 1964, vol. II, document
A/CN.4/167 and Add.1-3, pp. 58-59, para. 21; | A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第223页，第28条草案的评注，第(19)段；Waldock,
关于条约法的第三次报告，《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第58-59页，第21段。 |
| M.K. Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités d’après la
Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités”, Recueil des cours … 1976-III, vol. 151,
pp. 1-114, at p. 78; I. Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1984), pp. 141-142;
Villiger, “The 1969 Vienna Convention …” (see footnote 391 above), pp. 127-128. | M.K. Yasseen, “根据《维也纳条约法公约》对条约进行解释”，《1976年…教程汇编》第三卷，第151卷，第1-114页，见第78页；I.
Sinclair, 《维也纳条约法公约》(曼切斯特，曼彻斯特大学出版社，1984年)，第141-142页；Villiger, “1969年《维也纳…公约》”(见上文脚注391)，第127-128页。 |
| Y. le Bouthillier, “Commentary on article 32 of the Vienna Convention”, in The Vienna Conventions on the Law of Treaties: A Commentary,
O. Corten and P. Klein, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), pp.
841-865, at pp. 843-846, paras. 4-8; P. Daillier, M. Forteau and A. Pellet,
Droit international public (Nguyen Quoc Din), 8th edition (Paris, L.G.D.J.,
2009), at pp. 285-286; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392
above), at pp. 13-20; Villiger, “The 1969 Vienna
Convention” (see footnote 391 above), pp. 132-133. | Y. le Bouthillier, “对《维也纳公约》第三十二条的评注”，O. Corten和P. Klein(编)《〈维也纳条约法公约〉评注》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第841-865页，见843-846页，第4–8段；P. Daillier、M. Forteau和A. Pellet, 《国际公法》，第8版(巴黎，L.G.D.J.，2009年)，见285-286页；Gardiner,
《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，见第13-20页；Villiger, 1969年《维也纳公约》”(见上文脚注391)，第132-133页。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay
(Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 14, at p. 46,
para.65 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31); Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2009, p.
213, at p. 237, para. 47; | 乌拉圭河纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第46页，第65段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)；关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)，判决，《2009年国际法院案例汇编》，第213页起，见第237页，第47段。 |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v.
Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 43, at pp. 109-110,
para.160; Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied
Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136, at p.
174, para. 94; Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of
America), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 12, at p. 48, para. 83;
Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan (Indonesia v. Malaysia),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 625, at p. 645, para. 37; LaGrand (Germany
v. United States of America), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2001, p. 466, at p.
501, para. 99 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31); Kasikili/Sedudu Island
(Botswana/Namibia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1999, p. 1045, at p. 1059, para.
18 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31); Territorial Dispute (Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya/Chad), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1994, p. 6, at pp. 21-22, para. 41
(1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31, and without expressly mentioning art. 32 of
the 1969 Vienna Convention but referring to the supplementary means of
interpretation). | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那诉塞尔维亚和黑山)，判决，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第43页起，见第109-110页，第160段；“在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果”，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第174页，第94段；阿韦纳和其他墨西哥国民案(墨西哥诉美利坚合众国)，判决，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第12页起，见第48页，第83段；利吉丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案(印度尼西亚诉马来西亚)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第652页起，见第645页，第37段；拉格朗案(德国诉美利坚合众国)，判决，《2001年国际法院案例汇编》，第466页起，见第501页，第99段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)；卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(博茨瓦纳/纳米比亚)，判决，《1999年国际法院案例汇编》，第1045页起，见第1059页，第18段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)；领土争端案(阿拉伯利比亚民众国诉乍得)，判决，《1994年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第21-22页，第41段(《维也纳公约》第三十一条，未明确提到1969年《维也纳公约》第三十二条，但提到补充解释资料)。 |
| Responsibilities and obligations of
States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the
area, case No. 17, Advisory Opinion, 1 February 2011, ITLOS Reports …2011, p. 10, at para. 57. | 担保个人和实体从事区域内活动的国家所负责任和义务，第17号案件，咨询意见，2011年2月1日，《2011年海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页，见第57段。 |
| Award in Arbitration regarding the Iron
Rhine (“Ijzeren Rijn”)
Railway between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of the Netherlands,
decision of 24 May 2005, United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral
Awards (UNRIAA), vol. XXVII (sales No. E/F.06.V.8), pp. 35-125, at para. 45
(1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31-32). | 比利时王国与荷兰王国间莱茵铁路公司案仲裁裁决，2005年5月24日的决定，联合国，《联合国国际仲裁裁决汇编》(《国际仲裁裁决汇编》)，第二十七卷(出售品编号E/F.06.V.8)，第35-125页，见第45段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一至第三十二条)。 |
| Art. 3, para. 2, of the WTO understanding
on rules and procedures governing the settlement of disputes provides that “… it serves to … to clarify the existing
provisions of [the WTO-covered] agreements in accordance with customary rules
of interpretation of public international law”
(United Nations, Treaties Series, vol. 1869, No. 31874, p. 402), but does not
specifically refer to arts. 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 世贸组织《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》第3条第2款规定，“…该体制适于…依照解释国际公法的惯例澄清[世贸组织所涵盖的]协定的现有规定”(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1869卷，第31874号，第402页)，但并未具体提到1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条。 |
| However, the Appellate Body has
consistently recognized that arts. 31 and 32 reflect rules of customary
international law and has resorted to them by reference to art. 3.2 of the
understanding on rules and procedures governing the settlement of disputes. | 然而，上述机构历来承认第三十一条和第三十二条反映了习惯国际法的规则，并通过《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》第3条第2款诉诸这些规则。 |
| See, for example, WTO Appellate Body
Report, United States — Standards for Reformulated
and Conventional Gasoline (US-Gasoline), WT/DS2/AB/R, adopted 20 May 1996,
Section III, B (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31, para 1); WTO Appellate Body
Report, Japan — Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages
(Japan-Alcoholic Beverages II), WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R, WT/DS11/AB/R,
adopted 1 November 1996, Section D (1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31-32). | 例如，见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－新配方汽油和常规汽油标准案(美国－汽油案)，WT/DS2/AB/R, 1996年5月20日通过，第三节B(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第一款)；世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－酒精饮料税案(日本－酒精饮料案二)，WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R, WT/DS11/AB/R,
1996年11月1日通过，D节(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十二条)。 |
| See also G. Nolte, “Jurisprudence under special regimes relating to subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice: second report for the ILC Study Group on
treaties over time”, in Treaties and Subsequent
Practice, G. Nolte, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 210-240,
at p. 215. | 另见格•诺尔特，“特殊制度下与嗣后协定和嗣后惯例有关的判例：国际法委员会条约随时间演变问题研究组第二次报告”，载于《条约与嗣后惯例》，格•诺尔特(编)(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2013年)，第210-240页，见第215页。 |
| Golder v. the United Kingdom, no.
4451/70, 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18, para. 29; Witold Litwa v. Poland,
no. 26629/95, 4 April 2000, ECHR 2000-III, para. 58 (1969 Vienna Convention,
art. 31); Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no. 34503/97, 12 November 2008,
ECHR-2008, para. 65 (by implication, 1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31-33). | Golder诉联合王国，第4451/70号，1975年2月21日，A辑第18号，第29段；Witold Litwa诉波兰，第26629/95号，2000年4月4日，《2000年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第三卷，第58段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)；Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[GC]，第34503/97号，2008年11月12日，《2008年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第65段(暗指1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十三条)。 |
| The effect of reservations on the entry
into force of the American Convention on Human Rights (Arts. 74 and 75),
Advisory Opinion OC-2/82, 24 September 1982, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series A No.
2, para. 19 (by implication, 1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31-32); Hilaire,
Constantine and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago (Merits, Reparations
and Costs, Judgment), 21 June 2002, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series C No. 94, para.
19 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31, para. 1). | 保留对《美洲人权公约》生效的影响(第74和75条)，咨询意见OC-2/82, 1982年9月24日，美洲人权法院，A辑第2号，第19段(暗指1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十二条)；Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等诉特立尼达和多巴哥(案情、赔偿和费用，判决)，2002年6月21日，美洲人权法院，C辑第94号，第19段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第一款)。 |
| Brita GmbH v. Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen,
judgment of 25 February 2010, Case C-386/08, European Court Reports 2010
I-01289, paras. 41-43 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31). | Brita有限责任公司诉汉堡港海关总局，2010年2月25日的判决，C-386/08号案，《2010年欧洲法院案例汇编》I-01289, 第41-43段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)。 |
| National Grid plc v. Argentine Republic,
decision on jurisdiction (UNCITRAL), 20 June 2006, para. 51 (1969 Vienna
Convention, arts. 31-32); Canfor Corporation v. United States of America, and
Tembec et al. v. United States of America, and Terminal Forest Products Ltd.
v. United States of America, Order of the Consolidation Tribunal, 7 September
2005, para. 59 (1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31-32). | 英国国家电网公司诉阿根廷共和国，管辖权裁决(国际贸易法委员会)，2006年6月20日，第51段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十二条)；Canfor公司诉美利坚合众国，Tembec公司等诉美利坚合众国，以及Terminal林产品公司诉美利坚合众国，合并法庭命令，2005年9月7日，第59段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十二条)。 |
| LaGrand (see footnote 395 above), p. 502,
para. 101.Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395 above), p. 1062, para. 25;
the Court may have applied this provision only because the parties had not
disagreed about its application. | 拉格朗案(见上文脚注395)，第502页，第101段。卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，第1062页，第25段；法院可能仅仅因当事国未对适用这一规定表示异议而适用了这一规定。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States — Final Countervailing Duty Determination with Respect to Certain
Softwood Lumber from Canada (US — Softwood Lumber
IV), WT/DS257/AB/R, adopted 17 February 2004, para. 59 (1969 Vienna
Convention, art. 33, para. 3); WTO Appellate Body Report, United States — Subsidies on Upland Cotton (US — Upland
Cotton), WT/DS267/AB/R, adopted 21 March 2005, para. 424, where the Appellate
Body applied and expressly referred to art. 33, para. 3, of the 1969 Vienna
Convention without suggesting its customary status; WTO Appellate Body
Report, Chile — Price Band System and Safeguard
Measures Relating to Certain Agricultural Products, WT/DS207/AB/R and Corr.1,
adopted 23 October 2002, para. 271 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 33 (4)). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－对加拿大的某些软木木材反倾销关税最终裁断案(美国－软木木材案(四))，WT/DS257/AB/R,
2004年2月17日通过，第59段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十三条第三款)；世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－高地棉补贴案(美国－高地棉案)，WT/DS267/AB/R, 2005年3月21日通过，第424段，上诉机构适用并明确提到1969年《维也纳公约》第三十三条第三款，而没有表明其习惯法地位；世贸组织上诉机构报告，智利－某些农产品的价格幅度制度和保障措施案，WT/DS207/AB/R和Corr.1, 2002年10月23日通过，第271段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十三条第四款)。 |
| The Question whether the re-evaluation of
the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for application of the
clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement on German External
Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America on the one hand
and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other, 16 May 1980, UNRIAA, vol.
XIX (sales No. E/F.90.V.7), pp. 67-145, at p. 67, para. 17 or International
Law Reports, vol. 59 (1980), p. 494, para. 17. | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国一方与德意志联邦共和国一方《关于德国外债的协定》附件一A第2条(e)项条款问题案，1980年5月16日的裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十九卷(出售品编号E/F.90.V.7)，第67-145页，见第67页，第17段，或《国际法案例汇编》，第59卷(1980年)，第494页，第17段。 |
| Responsibilities and obligations of
States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the
Area, case No. 17, Advisory Opinion, 1 February 2011, ITLOS Reports 2011;
Golder v. the United Kingdom, no. 4451/70, 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18,
para. 29; Witold Litwa v. Poland, no. 26629/95, 4 April 2000, ECHR 2000-III,
para. 59; Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no. 34503/97, 12 November 2008,
ECHR-2008, para. 65 (1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31-33). | 担保个人和实体从事区域内活动的国家所负责任和义务，第17号案件，咨询意见，2011年2月1日，《2011年海洋法法庭案例汇编》；Golder诉联合王国，第4451/70号，1975年2月21日，A辑第18号，第29段；Witold Litwa诉波兰，第26629/95号，2000年4月4日，《2000年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第三卷，第59段；Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[GC]，第34503/97号，2008年11月12日，《2008年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第65段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十三条)。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 219-220, para. (8). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，第A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219-220页，第(8)段。 |
| See, in detail, below para. (12) of the
commentary to draft conclusion 2 [1], para. 5. | 详见下文结论草案2[1]第5段的评注第(12)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 220, para. (8); | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第220页，第(8)段； |
| and G. Nolte, “Jurisprudence
of the International Court of Justice and arbitral tribunals of ad hoc
jurisdiction relating to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice:
introductory report for the ILC Study Group on treaties over time”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398
above), p. 169, at p. 177. | 格•诺尔特，“与嗣后协定和嗣后惯例有关的国际法院和特别管辖权仲裁法庭判例：国际法委员会条约随时间演变问题研究组的介绍性报告”，载于诺尔特，《条约与嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第169页起，见第177页。 |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …” (see footnote 393 above), at p. 79. | Yasseen, “…条约进行解释”，(见上文脚注393)，见第79页。 |
| Yearbook … 1964,
vol. II, document A/5809, pp. 203-204, commentary to draft article 69, para.
(13). | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/5809号文件，第203-204页，第69条草案的评注，第(13)段； |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above), p. 1096, paras. 79-80; Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary objections),
no. 15318/89, 23 March 1995, ECHR Series A no. 310, paras. 79-81; | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，第1096页，第79-80段；Loizidou诉土耳其(初步反对意见)，第15318/89号，1995年3月23日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第310号，第79-81段； |
| Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. (see footnote 400 above), para. 92; Southern Bluefin Tuna (New
Zealand v. Japan; Australia v. Japan), provisional measures, order of 27
August 1999, ITLOS Reports …1999, p. 280, at para.
50; | Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等(见上文脚注400)，第92段；南方金枪鱼案(新西兰诉日本；澳大利亚诉日本)，临时措施，1999年8月27日的命令，《1999年海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第280页，见第50段； |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, European
Communities — Customs Classification of Certain
Computer Equipment (EC — Computer Equipment),
WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R and WT/DS68/AB/R, adopted 22 June 1998, para. 90;
see also WTO Appellate Body Report, United States —
Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements (US — COOL), WT/DS384/AB/R and WT/DS386/AB/R, adopted 23 July 2012,
para. 452. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧洲共同体－某些计算机设备的关税分类案(欧共体－计算机设备案)，WT/DS62/AB/R、WT/DS67/AB/R和WT/DS68/AB/R, 1998年6月22日通过，第90段；另见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－某些原产国标签要求案(美国－原产国标签案)，WT/DS384/AB/R和WT/DS386/AB/R, 2012年7月23日通过，第452段。 |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …” (see footnote 393 above), at p. 52 (“… la Convention de Vienne ne retient pas comme élément de la règle
générale d’interprétation la pratique ultérieure en général,
mais une pratique ultérieure spécifique, à savoir une pratique ultérieure non seulement concordante, mais également
commune à toutes les parties. … Ce qui reste de la pratique ultérieure
peut être un moyen complémentaire
d’interprétation, selon l’article 32 de la Convention de Vienne”)
(emphasis added); Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 393 above), at p. 138: “… paragraph 3 (b) of
[a]rticle 31 of the Convention [covers] … only a
specific form of subsequent practice — that is to
say, concordant subsequent practice common to all the parties. | Yasseen, “…对条约进行解释”，(见上文脚注393)，见第52页(“la Convention de Vienne ne retient pas
comme élément de la règle générale d’interprétation la pratique ultérieure en général,
mais une pratique ultérieure spécifique, à savoir une pratique ultérieure non seulement concordante, mais également
commune à toutes les parties.”Ce qui reste de la pratique ultérieure
peut être un moyen complémentaire
d’interprétation, selon l’article 32 de la Convention de Vienne”)(强调系本文所加)；Sinclair, 《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注393)，见第138页：“…《公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项仅[涉及]一种具体形式的司法惯例――即所有当事方共有的一致性嗣后惯例。 |
| Subsequent practice which does not fall
within this narrow definition may nonetheless constitute a supplementary
means of interpretation with the meaning of [a]rticle 32 of the Convention” (emphasis added); S. Torres Bernárdez, “Interpretation
of treaties by the International Court of Justice following the adoption of
the 1969 Vienna Convention on the law of treaties” in
Liber Amicorum: Professor Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern, in honour of his 80th
birthday, G. Hafner and others, eds. (The Hague, Kluwer Law International,
1998), p. 721, at p. 726; M.E. Villiger, Commentary on the 1969 Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2009), pp.
431-432. | 然而不在这一狭窄定义范围内的嗣后惯例可构成《公约》第三十二条意义上的补充的解释资料”(强调系本文所加)；S.
Torres Bernárdez, “自1969年《维也纳条约法公约》通过以来国际法院对条约的解释”，载于《Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern教授诞辰八十周年纪念文集》，G.
Hafner等人(编)(海牙，Kluwer Law International, 1998年)，第721页起，见第726页；M.E.
Villiger, 《对1969年〈维也纳条约法公约〉的评注》(莱顿，Martinus Nijhoff, 2009年)，第431-432页。 |
| L. Boisson de Chazournes, “Subsequent practice, practices, and ‘family
resemblance’: towards embedding subsequent practice
in its operative milieu”, in Nolte, Treaties and
Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398 above), pp. 53-63, at pp. 59-62. | 见L. Boisson de Chazournes,“嗣后惯例、惯例及‘家族相似性’：力求将嗣后惯例植入到实施场地中”，载于诺尔特,《条约与嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第53-63页，见第59-62页。 |
| A/CN.4/660, para. 64; and Nolte, “Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice …” (see footnote 410 above), at pp. 171 and 177. | A/CN.4/660, 第64段；诺尔特,“…国际法院…判例…”，(见上文脚注410)，见第171和第177页。 |
| On the different function of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to other means of
interpretation, see A/CN.4/660, paras. 42-57; and Nolte, “Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice …” (see footnote 410 above), at p. 183. | 关于嗣后协定和嗣后惯例相对于其他解释资料的不同作用，见A/CN.4/660, 第42-57段；诺尔特,“…国际法院…判例…”，(见上文脚注410)，见第183页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 219-220, para. (8). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219-220页，第(8)段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| This had been proposed by the Special
Rapporteur in his first report, see A/CN.4/660, para. 28: “Draft conclusion 1 (General rule and means of treaty
interpretation) … The interpretation of a treaty in a
specific case may result in a different emphasis on the various means of
interpretation contained in articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention, in
particular on the text of the treaty or on its object and purpose, depending
on the treaty or on the treaty provisions concerned. ” | 特别报告员在第一次报告中曾提出这一提议，见A/CN.4/660, 第28段：“结论草案1(条约解释通则和资料)…在一个具体案件中解释一项条约时，会导致对《维也纳公约》第三十一和三十二条所载各种解释资料给予不同程度的强调，尤其是根据所涉条约或条约条款，对条约案文或条约目的和宗旨给予不同程度的强调。” |
| See also the analysis in the first report
(ibid., paras. 8-27). | 另见第一次报告中的分析(同上，第8-27段)。 |
| See also above commentary to draft
conclusion 2 [1], para. (1); and Villiger, “The 1969
Vienna Convention … “(see footnote 391 above), p.
129; Daillier, Forteau and Pellet, Droit international public (see footnote
394 above), at pp. 284-289. | 另见上文结论草案2[1]评注，第(1)段；Villiger,“1969年《维也纳…公约》”(见上文脚注391)，第129页；Daillier、Forteau和Pellet,《国际公法》(见上文脚注394)，见第284-289页。 |
| Provisional summary record of the 3172nd
meeting, 31 May 2013 (A/CN.4/SR.3172), p. 4. | 第3172次会议临时简要记录，2013年5月31日(A/CN.4/SR.3172)，第4页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 219-220, para. (8). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219-220页，第(8)段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid., p. 219, para. (6). | 同上，第219页，第(6)段。 |
| See also Yasseen, “L’interprétation
des traités …” (footnote 393
above), at p. 58; Sinclair, The Vienna Convention …
(footnote 393 above ), at p. 130; J. Klabbers, “Treaties,
object and purpose”, Max Planck Encyclopedia on
Public International Law, para. 7; | 另见Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”，(上文脚注393)，见第58页；Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(上文脚注393)，见第130页；J.
Klabbers,“条约、目标和宗旨”，《马克斯•普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第7段； |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 414 above), at p. 427, para. 11; Border and
Transborder Armed Actions (Nicaragua v. Honduras), Jurisdiction and
Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1988, p. 69, at p. 89, paras. 45-46;
Delimitation of the continental shelf between the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Republic, decision of 30 June
1977, UNRIAA, vol. XVIII (sales No. E/F.80.V.7), pp. 3-413, at pp. 32-35,
para. 39. | Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注414)，见第427页，第11段；边界和跨界武装行动案(尼加拉瓜诉洪都拉斯)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《1988年国际法院案例汇编》，第69页起，见第89页，第45-46段；大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国与法兰西共和国大陆架划界案，1977年6月30日的裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十八卷(出售品编号E/F.80.V.7)，第3-413页，见第32-35页，第39段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol.II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 220. | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第220页。 |
| Draft conclusion 1, para.2, as proposed
in document A/CN.4/660, at para. 28, and, generally, paras. 10-27. | A/CN.4/660中提出的结论草案1, 第2段起，见第28段，并主要见第10-27段。 |
| Decisions of domestic courts have not
been uniform as regards the relative weight that subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice possess in the process of treaty interpretation, see
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, House of Lords: R
(Mullen) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 18, paras.
47-48 (Lord Steyn); Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation
[2005] UKHL 72, para. 31 (Lord Steyn). | 关于嗣后协定和嗣后惯例在条约解释过程中所占权重，国内法院的决定并不一致，见大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国，上议院：R (Mullen)诉内政大臣[2004] UKHL 18, 第47-48段(Steyn勋爵)；深静脉血栓与航空旅行集团诉讼[2005] UKHL 72, 第31段(Steyn勋爵)。 |
| United States of America, Supreme Court:
Sumitomo Shoji America, Inc. v. Avagliano, 457 U.S. 176 (1982), pp. 183-185;
O’Connor v. United States, 479 U.S. 27 (1986), pp.
31-32; United States v. Stuart, 489 U.S. 353 (1989), where a dissenting judge
(Justice Scalia) criticized the majority of the Court for relying on “[t]he practice of the treaty signatories”,
which, according to him, need not be consulted, since when the “Treaty’s language resolves the issue
presented, there is no necessity of looking further”,
at p. 371. | 美利坚合众国，最高法院：住友商事(美国)公司诉Avagliano, 457 U.S. 176 (1982年), 第183-185页；O’Connor 诉美国，479 U.S. 27 (1986年)，第31-32页；美国诉Stuart,
489 U.S. 353 (1989年)，持不同意见的法官(Scalia勋爵)对占多数意见的法官将“条约签字国的惯例”作为审判依据提出了批评，他认为，不需要考虑这些惯例，因为“《条约》的用语已能解决当前问题，没有必要寻找更多依据”，见第371页。 |
| Switzerland: Federal Administrative
Court, judgment of 21 January 2010, BVGE 2010/7, para 3.7.11; Federal Supreme
Court, A v. B, appeal judgment of 8 April 2004, No. 4C.140/2003, BGE, vol.
130 III, p. 430, at p. 439. | 瑞士：联邦行政法院，2010年1月21日的判决，BVGE 2010/7, 第3.7.11段；联邦最高法院，A诉B,
2004年4月8日的上诉判决，第4C.140/2003号，BGE, 第130卷(三)，第430页起，见第439页。 |
| The first report (A/CN.4/660) refers to
the jurisprudence of different international courts and tribunals as examples
of how the weight of a means in an interpretation exercise is to be determined
in specific cases and demonstrates how given instances of subsequent practice
and subsequent agreements contributed, or not, to the determination of the
ordinary meaning of the terms in their context and in light of the object and
purpose of the treaty. | 第一次报告(A/CN.4/660)以不同国际法院和法庭的判例为例，以说明在特定案件中如何确定资料在解释工作中的权重，从而表明特定嗣后惯例和嗣后协定如何能够或不能协助确定有关术语在其上下文中并结合条约的目标和宗旨的通常意义。 |
| Draft conclusion 1, para. 2, as proposed
in the first report (A/CN.4/660), para. 28, and analysis at paras. 8-28. | A/CN.4/660中提出的结论草案1, 第2段起，见第28段，以及第8-28段中的分析。 |
| WTO Panels and the Appellate Body, for
example, seem to emphasize more the terms of the respective WTO-covered
agreement (for example, WTO Appellate Body, Brazil —
Export Financing Programme for Aircraft, Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5
of the DSU, WT/DS46/AB/RW, adopted 4 August 2000, para. 45), whereas the
European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
highlight the character of the Convention as a human rights treaty (for
example, Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99,
ECHR 2005-I, para. 111; The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in
the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law, Advisory Opinion
OC-16/99, 1 October 1999, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series A No. 16, para. 58); see
also Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10 and Add.1), pp. 281-282, and Nolte, “Jurisprudence under special regimes …”
(see footnote 398 above), p. 210, at pp. 216, 244-246, 249-262 and 270-275. | 例如，世贸组织各专家组和上诉机构看来更加强调世贸组织所涉各协定的术语(例如世贸组织上诉机构，巴西－航空器出口融资方案，加拿大诉诸《争端解决谅解》第21.5条，WT/DS46/AB/RW, 2000年8月4日，第45段)，而欧洲人权法院和美洲人权法院则强调有关公约作为人权条约的性质(例如，Mamatkulov和Askarov诉土耳其[GC]，第46827/99和46951/99号，《2005年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第一卷，第111段；在正当法律程序保障框架内获得领事协助信息的权利，咨询意见OC-16/99, 1999年10月1日，美洲人权法院，A辑，第16号，第58段)；另见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10和Add.1)，第281-282页，和诺尔特,“特殊制度下…的判例”(见上文脚注398)，第210页起，见第216、244-246、249-262、270-275页。 |
| M. Forteau, “Les
techniques interprétatives de la Cour internationale
de Justice”, Revue générale de droit international public, vol. 115 (2011), p. 399, at
pp. 406-407 and 416; Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence
of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security
Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16,
Separate Opinion of Judge Dillard, p. 150, at p. 154, at footnote 1. | M. Forteau, ‘Les
Techniques Interpretatives de la Cour Internationale de Justice’，Revue générale de
droit international public, 第115卷(2011年)，第399页起，见第406-407页、第416页；南非不遵守安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，Dillard法官的个别意见，第150页起，见第154页，脚注1。 |
| Articles on the effects of armed
conflicts on treaties (art. 6 (a)), General Assembly resolution 66/99 of 9
December 2011, annex; see also the guide to practice on reservations to
treaties, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10 and Add.1); guideline 4.2.5 refers to the nature
of obligations of the treaty, rather than the nature of the treaty as such. | 关于武装冲突对条约的影响的条款草案(第6条(a)款)，大会2011年12月9日第66/99号决议，附件；另见对条约的保留实践指南，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10和A/66/10/Add.1)；准则4.2.5提到条约义务的性质，而不是条约本身的性质。 |
| According to the commentary to guideline
4.2.5 of the guide to practice on reservations to treaties, it is difficult
to distinguish between the nature of treaty obligations and the object and
purpose of the treaty (guide to practice on reservations to treaties,
commentary to guideline 4.2.5, para. (3), in Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10 and Add.1)). | 按照对条约的保留实践指南准则4.2.5的评注，难以区分条约义务的性质与条约的目的和宗旨(对条约的保留实践指南，准则4.2.5的评注，第(3)段，见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10和A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| On the other hand, art. 6 of the articles
on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties suggests “a series of factors pertaining to the nature of the treaty,
particularly its subject matter, its object and purpose, its content and the
number of the parties to the treaty”, ibid.,
commentary to draft article 6, para. (3). | 另一方面，关于武装冲突对条约的影响的条款草案第6条提出了“与条约性质有关的一系列因素，特别是条约的主题事项、它的宗旨和目的、它的内容以及缔约方的数量”，同上，第6条草案评注，第(3)段。 |
| 1 (Harlow, Longman, 1992), p. 1268, para.
See R. Jennings and A. Watts, eds., Oppenheim’s
International Law, 9th edition, vol.630; G. Fitzmaurice, “The law and procedure of the International Court of Justice
1951-4: treaty interpretation and certain other treaty points”, British Yearbook of International Law 1957, vol. 33, pp.
203-293, at pp. 223-225; WTO Panel Report, United States — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (second
complaint) (US — Large Civil Aircraft (2nd
Complaint)), WT/DS353/R, adopted 23 March 2012, para. 7.953. | 见R. Jennings和A.
Watts(编)，《奥本海国际法》第9版，第1卷(哈洛，朗文，1992年)，第1268页，第630段；G. Fitzmaurice,“国际法院的法律和程序(1951-4)：条约的解释与其他某些条约问题”《1957年英国国际法年鉴》，第33卷，第203-293页，见第223-225页；世贸组织专家组报告，美国－影响大型民用飞机贸易的措施(第2次申诉)(美国－大型民用飞机案(第2次申诉))，WT/DS353/R, 2012年3月23日，第7.953段。 |
| See Yearbook …
1966, vol.II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (15). | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(15)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1964,
vol. II, document A/5809, pp. 204-205, para. (15); see also ibid., pp.
203-204, para. 13: “Paragraph 3 specifies as further
authentic elements of interpretation: (a) agreements between the parties
regarding the interpretation of the treaty, and (b) any subsequent practice
in the application of the treaty which clearly established the understanding
of all the parties regarding its interpretation”
(emphasis added); on the other hand, Waldock explained in his third report
that “… travaux préparatoires
are not, as such, an authentic means of interpretation”. | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/5809号文件，第204-205页，第(15)段；另见同上，第203-204页，第13段：“第三款具体规定，进一步的权威解释要素：(a) 关于条约之解释之任何协定，和(b) 嗣后在条约适用方面确定各当事方对条约解释之协定之任何惯例”[强调系本文所加]；另一方面，Waldock在其第三次报告中解释了“…准备工作本身并非作准解释资料”。 |
| See ibid., document A/CN.4/167 and Add.1-3,
pp. 58-59, para. (21). | 见同上，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第58-59页，第(21)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 219-220, paras. (8) and (9). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219-220页，第(8)和(9)段。 |
| M.E. Villiger, “The
rules on interpretation: misgivings, misunderstandings, miscarriage? | M.E. Villiger,“解释规则：担心、误解、误用？ |
| The ‘crucible’ intended by the International Law Commission”, in The Law of Treaties beyond the Vienna Convention, E.
Cannizzaro, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 105-122, at p.
111; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392 above), at p. 34; O.
Dörr, “Article 31, general rule of interpretation”, in Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. A commentary, O.
Dörr and K. Schmalenbach, eds. (Berlin, Springer, 2012), pp. 521-570, at pp.
553-554, paras. 72-75; K. Skubiszewski, “Remarks on
the interpretation of the United Nations Charter”, in
Völkerrecht als Rechtsordnung, Internationale Gerichtsbarkeit, Menschenrechte
— Festschrift für Hermann
Mosler, R. Bernhardt and others, eds. (Berlin, Springer, 1983), pp. 891-902,
at p. 898. | 国际法委员会所设想的‘熔炉’”，载于《〈维也纳公约〉之后的条约法》E.
Cannizaro (编) (牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第105-122页，见第111页；Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，见第34页；O.
Dörr,“第三十一条，解释之通则”，《〈维也纳条约法公约〉评注》，载于O. Dörr和K. Schmalenbach (编)，(柏林，Springer, 2012年)，第521-570页，见第553-554页，第72-75段；K. Skubiszewski,“漫谈《联合国宪章》的解释问题”，载于Völkerrecht als Rechtsordnung, Internationale Gerichtsbarkeit,
Menschenrechte – Festschrift für Hermann Mosler, R. Bernhardt等人(编) (柏林，Springer, 1983年)，第891-902页，见第898页。 |
| H. Fox, “Article
31 (3) (a) and (b) of the Vienna Convention and the Kasikili Sedudu Island
Case”, in Treaty Interpretation and the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties: 30 Years on, M. Fitzmaurice, O. Elias and
P. Merkouris, eds. (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2010), pp. 59-74, at pp. 61-62;
A. Chanaki, L’adaptation des traités dans le temps (Brussels, Bruylant, 2013), pp. 313-315; M.
Benatar, “From probative value to authentic
interpretation: the legal effects of interpretative declarations”, Revue belge de droit international, vol. 44 (2011), pp. 170-195,
at pp. 194-195; cautious: J.M. Sorel and B. Eveno, “1969
Vienna Convention, Article 31: General rule of interpretation”, in Corten and Klein, The Vienna Conventions … (see footnote 394 above), pp. 804-837, at p. 825, paras. 42-43; | H. Fox,“《维也纳公约》第三十一条第3款(a)项和(b)项与卡西基里/塞塞杜岛案”，载于《条约解释与〈维也纳条约法公约〉：30年之后》M. Fitzmaurice、O. Elias和P. Merkouris (编) (莱顿，Martinus Nijhoff, 2010年)，第59-74页，见第61-62页；A.
Chanaki, L’adaptation des traités dans le temps (布鲁塞尔，Bruylant, 2013年)，第313-315页；M.
Benatar,“从证明价值到作准的解释：解释性声明的法律效果”，Revue belge de droit
international, 第44卷(2011年)，第170-195页，见第194-195页；提醒：J.M. Sorel和B. Eveno,“1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条：解释之通则”载于Corten和Klein,《〈维也纳…公约〉…》(见上文脚注394)，第804-837页，见第825页，第42-43段； |
| see also G. Nolte, “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of States outside of
judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings”, in Nolte,
Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398 above), pp. 307-385, at p.
375, para. 16.4.3. | 另见格•诺尔特,“司法或准司法程序外的国家嗣后协定与嗣后惯例”，载于诺尔特, 《条约与嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第307-385页，见第375页，第16.4.3段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (14). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(14)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1964,
vol.II, document A/CN.4/167 and Add.1-3, p. 60, para. (25). | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第60页，第(25)段。 |
| See, for example, Germany, Federal Fiscal
Court, BFHE, vol.181, p. 158, at p. 161; and ibid., vol. 219, p. 518 et seq.,
at pp. 527-528. | 例如，见德国，联邦财政法院，BFHE, 第181卷，第158页起，见第161页；以及同上，第219卷，第518页及以下各页，见527-528页。 |
| North American Free Trade Agreement
between the Government of the United States of America, the Government of
Canada and the Government of the United Mexican States (1992) (Washington,
D.C., United States Government Printing Office, 1993). | 《美利坚合众国政府、加拿大政府和墨西哥合众国北美自由贸易协定》(1992年)(华盛顿特区，美国政府印刷局，1993年)。 |
| This question will be explored in more
detail at a later stage of the work on the topic. | 这一问题正在关于本专题工作的稍后阶段详细探讨。 |
| See also: the Marrakesh Agreement
establishing the World Trade Organization (1994), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1867, No. 31874, p. 3, art.IX, para. 2; WTO Appellate Body
Report, European Communities — Custom Classification
of Frozen Boneless Chicken Cuts (EC — Chicken Cuts),
WT/DS269/AB/R and Corr.1, WT/DS286/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 27 September
2005, para. 273; WTO Appellate Body Report, European Communities — Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas,
Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Ecuador (EC — Bananas III), Second Recourse to Article 21.5, WT/DS27/AB/RW2/ECU
and Corr.1, adopted 11 December 2008, WT/DS27/AB/RW/USA and Corr.1, adopted
22 December 2008, paras. 383 and 390. | 另见《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》(1994年)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1867卷，第31874号，第3页，第九条第2款；世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧洲共同体－冷冻无骨切片鸡肉关税分类案(欧共体－切片鸡肉案)，WT/DS269/AB/R和Corr.1, WT/DS286/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年9月27日通过，第273段；世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧洲共同体－香蕉的进口、销售和分销制度案，厄瓜多尔第二次诉诸《争端解决谅解》第21.5条(欧共体－香蕉案(三))，第二次诉诸第21.5条，WT/DS27/AB/RW2/ECU和Corr.1, 2008年12月11日通过，WT/DS27/AB/RW/USA和Corr.1, 2008年12月22日通过，第383和390段。 |
| See, for example, Methanex Corporation v.
United States of America, UNCITRAL Arbitration under NAFTA Chapter Eleven,
Final Award on Jurisdiction and Merits, 3 August 2005, Part II, chap. H,
para. 23 (with reference to Jennings and Watts, see footnote 435 above), p.
1268, para. 630); Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392 above),
at p. 34; U. Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of Treaties (Dordrecht,
Springer, 2007), p. 153; Skubiszewski, “Remarks on
the interpretation of the United Nations Charter”
(see footnote 439 above), at p. 898; G. Haraszti, Some Fundamental Problems of
the Law of Treaties (Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó, 1973), p. 43; see also Nolte, “Jurisprudence
under special regimes … (see footnote 398 above), p.
210, at p. 240, para. 4.5. | 例如，见Methanex公司诉美利坚合众国案，国际贸易法委员会依据《北美自由贸易协定》第十一章进行的仲裁，对管辖权和案情实质的最后裁决，2005年8月3日，第二部分，H章，第23段(提及Jennings和Watts, 见上文脚注435, 第1268页，第630段)；Gardiner, 《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，见第34页；U.
Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(多德雷赫特，Springer,
2007年)，第153页；Skubiszewski,“漫谈《联合国宪章》的解释问题”(见上文脚注439)，见第898页；G.
Haraszti,《条约法的一些基本问题》(布达佩斯，Akadémiai Kiadó，1973年)，第43页；另见诺尔特,“特殊制度下…的判例”(见上文脚注398)，第210页起，见第240页，第4.5段。 |
| Switzerland Federal Supreme Court: A v.
B, appeal judgment of 8 April 2004, No. 4C.140/2003, BGE, vol. 130 III, p.
430, at p. 439 (where the Court speaks of the parties as being “masters of the treaty” (“Herren der Verträge”); judgment of 12
September 2012, No. 2C_743/2011, BGE, vol. 138 II, p. 524, at pp. 527-528. | 瑞士联邦最高法院：A诉B,
2004年4月8日的上诉判决，第4C.140/2003号，BGE, 第130卷(三)，第430页起，见第439页(法院提到缔约国是“条约的主人”(“Herren der Verträge”)；2012年9月12日的判决，第2C_743/2011号，BGE, 第138卷(二)，第524页起，见第527-528页。 |
| Germany, Federal Constitutional Court,
BVerfGE, vol. 90, p. 286, at p. 362. | 德国，联邦宪法法院，BVerfGE, 第90卷，第286页起，见第362页。 |
| See also India, Supreme Court, Godhra
Electricity Co. Ltd. and Another v. The State of Gujarat and Another [1975]
AIR 32. | 另见印度，最高法院，Godhra电力有限公司等诉古吉拉特邦等[1975] AIR 32。 |
| Available from (accessed 8 June 2016). | 可查阅 (访问日期：2016年6月8日)。 |
| Germany, Federal Fiscal Court, BFHE, vol.
215, p. 237, at p. 241; ibid., vol. 181, p. 158, at p. 161. | 德国，联邦财政法院，BFHE, 第215卷，第237页起，见第241页；同上，第181卷，第158页起，见第161页。 |
| New Zealand, Court of Appeal, Zaoui v.
Attorney-General (No. 2) [2005] 1 NZLR 690, para. 130; Hong Kong, China,
Court of Final Appeal, Ng Ka Ling and Others v. Director of Immigration
[1999] 1 HKLRD 315, 354; Austria, Supreme Administrative Court, VwGH,
judgment of 30 March 2006, 2002/15/0098, 2, 5. | 新西兰，上诉法院，Zaoui诉总检察长(第2号)[2005] 1 NZLR
690, 第130段；中国香港，终审法院，吴嘉玲等人诉入境事务处处长[1999] 1 HKLRD 315, 354；奥地利，最高行政法院，VwGH,
2006年3月30日的判决，2002/15/0098, 2, 5。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (14). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(14)段。 |
| Ibid., para. (15). | 同上，第(15)段。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), at pp. 34 and 414-415; Linderfalk, On the Interpretation
of Treaties (see footnote 446 above), at pp. 152-153. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，见第34和414-415页；Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注446)，见第152-153页。 |
| A/CN.4/660, para. 69. | A/CN.4/660, 第69段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 221-222, para. (15); see also W. Karl,
Vertrag und spätere Praxis im Völkerrecht (Berlin, Springer, 1983), p. 294. | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221-222页，第(15)段；另见W.
Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis im Völkerrecht (柏林，Springer,
1983年)，第294页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above), at p. 1087, para. 63, see also below draft conclusion 4 and the
commentary thereto. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，见第1087页，第63段，另见下文结论草案4及其评注。 |
| See below draft conclusion 12 [11] and
Nolte, “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice
of States …” (footnote 440 above), p. 307, at pp. 381
et seq., para. 17.3.1. | 见下文结论草案12[11]和诺尔特,“…国家嗣后协定与嗣后惯例”(上文脚注440)，第307页起，见第381页及以下各页，第17.3.1段。 |
| See below in particular paras. (23) to
(37) of the commentary to draft conclusion 4, para. 3. | 尤见下文结论草案4第3段的评注第(23)至(37)段。 |
| See below also para. (35) of the
commentary to draft conclusion 4, para.3. | 另见下文结论草案4第3段的评注第(35)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (14). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(14)段。 |
| See J.L. Brierly, second report on the
law of treaties, Yearbook … 1951, vol.II, document
A/CN.4/43, pp. 70 et seq.; and G.G. Fitzmaurice, first report on the law of
treaties, Yearbook …1956, vol. II, document
A/CN.4/101, p. 112; see also S. Rosenne, “Treaties,
conclusion and entry into force”, in Encyclopedia of
Public International Law, vol. 7, R. Bernhardt, ed. (Amsterdam, North
Holland, 2000), p. 465 (“[s]trictly speaking it is
the negotiation that is concluded through a treaty”);
Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 414 above), at
pp. 78-80, paras. 9-14. | 见J. L.布赖尔利，关于条约法的第二次报告，《1951年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/43号文件，第70页及以下各页；G. G.菲茨莫里斯，关于条约法的第一次报告，《1956年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/101号文件，第112页；另见S. Rosenne,“条约、缔结与生效”载于《国际公法百科全书》，第7卷，R. Bernhardt (编)，(阿姆斯特丹，North Holland, 2000年)，第465页(“严格地说，正是通过缔结条约而完成了谈判)；Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注414)，第78-80页，第9-14段。 |
| See, for example, Declaration on the
European Stability Mechanism, agreed on by the Contracting Parties to the
Treaty Establishing the Stability Mechanism, 27 September 2012. | 例如，见《欧洲稳定机制宣言》，《欧洲稳定机制条约》缔约国于2012年9月27日商定了此宣言。 |
| See Yearbook …
1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (13); the German Federal
Constitutional Court has held that this term may include unilateral
declarations if the other party did not object to them, | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(13)段；《德意志联邦宪法》认为，这个术语可包括单方面宣布，如果另一方不提出反对的话。 |
| see German Federal Constitutional Court,
BVerfGE, vol.40, p. 141, at p. 176; see, generally, Gardiner, Treaty
Interpretation (footnote 392 above ), at pp. 240-242. | 见《德意志联邦宪法》，BVerfGE, 第40卷，第141页起，见第176页；一般见Gardiner,《条约解释》(上文脚注392)，见第240-242页。 |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …” (see footnote 393 above ), at p. 38;
Jennings and Watts, Oppenheim’s International Law
(see footnote 435 above), p. 1274, para. 632 (“… but,
on the other hand, too long a lapse of time between the treaty and the
additional agreement might prevent it being regarded as made in connection
with ‘the conclusion of’ the
treaty”). | Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第38页；Jennings和Watts,《奥本海国际法》(见上文脚注435)，第1274页，第632段(“…但另一方面，如果条约和补充协定之间间隔的时间太长，可能会妨碍把它与“条约的缔结”联系起来”)。 |
| See Yearbook …
1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (14); see also Villiger,
Commentary … (above footnote 414), at p. 431, paras.
20-21; see also K.J. Heller, “The uncertain legal
status of the aggression understandings”, Journal of
International Criminal Justice, vol. 10 (2012), p. 229-248, at p. 237. | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(14)段；另见Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注414)，第431页，第20-21段；另见K.J. Heller,“The Uncertain Legal Status of the Aggression Understandings”，《国际刑事司法杂志》，第10卷(2012年)，第229-248页，见第237页。 |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 414 above), at p. 80, para.15; P. Gautier, “Commentary on article 2 of the Vienna Convention”, in Corten and Klein, The Vienna Conventions … (see footnote 394 above), vol. II, at pp. 38-40, paras. 14-18; J.
Klabbers, The Concept of Treaty in International Law (The Hague, Kluwer Law
International, 1996), pp. 49-50; see also A. Aust, “The
theory and practice of informal international instruments”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 35, No. 4
(1986), pp. 787-812, at pp. 794 et seq. | Villiger, 《…评注》(见上文脚注414)，第80页，第15段；P. Gautier,“对《维也纳公约》第二条的评注”，载于Corten和P. Klein,《〈维也纳…公约〉…》(见上文脚注394)，第二卷，第38-40页，第14-18段；J. Klabbers,《国际法中的条约概念》(Kluwer Law
International, 1996年)，第49-50页；另见A. Aust,“非正式国际文书的理论和实践”，《国际法和比较法季刊》，第35卷，第4号(1986年)，第787-812页，见第794页及以下各页。 |
| See articles 2, para. 1 (a), 3, 24, para. 2, 39-41, 58 and 60. | 见第二条第一款(a)项、第三条、第二十四条第二款、第三十九至四十一条、第五十八条、第六十条。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol.II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 232 and 233; see also Villiger, Commentary
… (footnote 414 above), at p. 513, para. 7; P. Sands,
“Commentary on article 39 of the Vienna Convention”, in Corten and Klein, The Vienna Conventions … (see footnote 394 above), at pp. 971-972, paras. 31-34. | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第232和233页；另见Villiger,
《…评注》(上文脚注414)，第513页，第7段；P. Sands,“对《维也纳公约》第三十九条的评注”，载于Corten和Klein,《〈维也纳…公约〉…》(见上文脚注394)，第971-972页，第31-34段。 |
| Draft article 27, paragraph 3 (b), which
later became article 31, paragraph 3 (b), of the Vienna Convention, contained
the word “understanding”,
which was changed to “agreement” at the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties. | 国际法委员会条款草案第二十七条第三款(b)项，这一款后来成为《维也纳公约》的第三十一条第三款(b)项，其中的“谅解”一词，在《维也纳公约》中改为“协定”。 |
| This change was “related
to drafting only”, see Official Records of the United
Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties, First session, Vienna 26 March-24
May 1968 (A/CONF.39/11, sales No. E.68.V.7), p. 169; Fox, “Article 31 (3) (a) and (b) …” (see
footnote 440 above ), at p. 63. | 这个修改“只是一个起草问题”，见《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届会议，维也纳，1968年3月26日至5月24日》(A/CONF.39/11, 出售品编号E.68.V.7)，第169页；Fox,“…第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项…”(见上文脚注440)，第63页。 |
| See Territorial Dispute (see footnote 395
above), p. 6, at pp. 34 et seq., paras.66 et seq. | 见领土争端案(见上文脚注395)，第6页起，见第34页及以下各页，第66段及以下各段。 |
| Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau
Sipadan (see footnote 395 above), at p. 656, para.61; in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
case, the Court spoke of “subsequent positions” in order to establish that “the explicit
terms of the treaty itself were, therefore, in practice acknowledged by the
parties to be negotiable”, Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 77,
para. 138, see also Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between
Qatar and Bahrain, Judgment (Jurisdiction and Admissibility), I.C.J. Reports
1995, p. 6, at p. 16, para. 28 (“subsequent conduct”). | 利吉丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案(见上文脚注395)，第625页起，第61段；在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯案中，法院讲到“嗣后立场”，以便确定“因此，条约本身的明确措辞表明，缔约方实际上承认是可以谈判的”，加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(匈牙利诉斯洛伐克)，判决，《1997年国际法院案例汇编》，第7页起，见第77页，第138段，另见卡塔尔和巴林之间的海洋划界和领土问题案，判决(管辖权和可否受理)，《1995年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第16页，第28段(‘嗣后行为’)。 |
| See “Scheduling
guidelines” in WTO Panel Report, Mexico — Measures Affecting Telecommunications Services, WT/DS204/R,
adopted 1 June 2004, and in WTO Appellate Body Report, United States — Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and
Betting Services, WT/DS285/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 20 April 2005; to qualify
a “1981 Understanding” in WTO
Panel Report, United States — Tax Treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations”, WT/DS108/R,
adopted 20 March 2000; “Tokyo Round SCM Code” in WTO Panel Report, Brazil — Measures
Affecting Desiccated Coconut, WT/DS22/R, adopted 20 March 1997, and a “waiver” in WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Bananas III (see footnote 445 above). | 见世贸组织专家组报告中的“具体承诺表指南”，墨西哥－影响电信服务的措施案，WT/DS204/R,
2004年6月1日通过，以及世贸组织上诉机构报告中的“具体承诺表指南”，美国－影响跨界提供赌博服务的措施案，WT/DS285/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年4月20日通过；对世贸组织专家组报告中“1981年谅解”的定性，美国－“外国销售公司”的税务待遇案，WT/DS108/R,
2000年3月20日通过；世贸组织专家组报告中的“东京回合补贴和反补贴协定”，巴西－影响椰子粉的措施案，WT/DS22/R, 1997年3月20日通过，以及世贸组织上诉机构报告中的“放弃”，欧共体－香蕉案(三)(见上文脚注445)。 |
| C.C.F.T. v. United States, UNCITRAL
Arbitration under NAFTA Chapter Eleven, Award on Jurisdiction, 28 January
2008; see also Compañía de Aguas del Aconquija S.A.
and Vivendi Universal S.A. v. Argentine Republic, Decision on the Challenge
to the President of the Committee, 3 October 2001, ICSID Case No. ARB/97/3,
ICSID Reports 2004, vol.6 (2004), p. 168, at p. 174, para. 12; P.Merkouris
and M. Fitzmaurice, “Canons of treaty interpretation:
selected case studies from the World Trade Organization and the North
American Free Trade Agreement”, in Fitzmaurice, Elias
and Merkouris, Treaty Interpretation … (see footnote
440 above), at pp. 217-233. | C.C.F.T诉美国案，国际贸易法委员会依照《北美自贸协定》第十一章进行的仲裁，关于管辖权的裁决，2008年1月28日；另见Compañía de Aguas del Aconquija S.A.和Vivendi Universal S.A.诉阿根廷共和国，关于质疑委员会主席的裁决，2001年10月3日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号 ARB/97/3, 《2004年解决投资争端国际中心案例汇编》，第六卷(2004年)，第168页起，见第174页，第12段；P.
Merkouris and M. Fitzmaurice,“Canons of treaty
interpretation: selected case studies from the World Trade Organization and
the North American Free Trade Agreement”，载于Fitzmaurice、Elias 和Merkouris, Treaty Interpretation (见上文脚注440)，第217-233页。 |
| C.C.F.T. v. United States (see footnote
472 above), paras. 174-177. | C.C.F.T诉美国案(见上文脚注472)，第174-177段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 184-187. | 同上，第184-187段。 |
| Ibid., paras.188, see also para.189; and
in a similar sense: Aguas del Tunari SA v. Republic of Bolivia
(Netherlands/Bolivia BIT), Decision on Respondent’s
Objections to Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/3, 21 October 2005, ICSID
Review — Foreign Investment Law Journal, vol. 20, No.
2 (2005), p. 450, at pp. 528 et seq., paras. 251 et seq. | 同上，第188段，另见第189段；相似的还有Aguas del Tunari SA诉玻利维亚共和国(荷兰/玻利维亚双边投资条约)，就应诉方反对管辖权作出的裁决，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/02/3, 2005年10月21日，《解决投资争端国际中心评论――外国投资法律杂志》，第20卷，No.2 (2005年)，第450页，见528页及以下各页，第251段及以下各段。 |
| Yearbook …1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 221-222, para. (15). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221-222页，第(15)段。 |
| Ibid.; see also Karl, Vertrag und spätere
Praxis … (footnote 454 above), at p. 294. | 同上；另见Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis …(上文脚注454)，第294页。 |
| The word “understanding” had been used by the Commission in the corresponding draft
article 27, para. 3 (b), on the law of treaties (see footnote 468 above). | 委员会在关于条约法的相应条款草案第二十七条第三款(b)项中使用了“谅解”一词(见上文脚注468)。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay
(Argentina v. Uruguay), Provisional Measures, Order of 13 July 2006, I.C.J.
Reports 2006, p. 113, at pp. 127-128, para. 53: in this case, even an
explicit subsequent verbal agreement was characterized by one of the parties
as “subsequent practice”. | 乌拉圭河纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，临时措施，2006年7月13日的命令，《2006年国际法院案例汇编》，第113页起，见第127-128页，第53段：在该案中，即使一个明确的嗣后口头协定，也被一个缔约方定性为“嗣后惯例”。 |
| See WTO Appellate Body Report, United
States — Measures Concerning the Importation,
Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products, WT/DS381/AB/R, adopted 13 June,
para. 371. | 见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－关于进口、营销和销售金枪鱼和金枪鱼产品的措施案，WT/DS381/AB/R,
2012年6月13日通过，第371段。 |
| A common act may consist of an exchange
of letters … . | 共同的行为可包括换文。 |
| Ibid., paras. 366-378, in particular para. 372; Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of Treaties (see footnote
446 above), at pp. 164 et seq. | 同上，第366-378段，特别是372段；Linderfalk,《关于条约的解释》(见上文脚注446)，见第164页及以下各页。 |
| Maritime Delimitation in the Area between
Greenland and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993, p. 38, at p. 51,
para. | 格陵兰和扬马延之间区域的海洋划界案，《1993年国际法院案例汇编》，第38页起，见第51页，第28段。 |
| 28. Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), Declaration of Judge ad hoc
Guillaume, p. 290, at pp. 298-299, para. 16. | 航行权和相关权利争端案(见上文脚注395)，专案法官纪尧姆的声明，第290页起，见第298-299页，第16段。 |
| See Ng Ka Ling and Others v. Director of
Immigration (footnote 449 above). | 见吴嘉玲等人诉入境事务处处长案(上文脚注449)。 |
| Ibid., at paras. 152-153. | 同上，见152-153段。 |
| On the distinction between the two forms
of subsequent practice see below, paras. (23) and (24) of the present
commentary. | 关于这两种嗣后惯例形式的区分，见本评注下文第(23)和第(24)段。 |
| Yearbook … 2001,
vol. II (Part Two) and Corrigendum, pp. 34-35, paras. (2)-(4) of the
commentary. Waldock, third report on the law of treaties, Yearbook … | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)及更正，第34-35页，评注第(2)-(4)段。 |
| 1964, vol. II, document A/CN.4/167 and
Add.1-3, pp. 61-62, paras. (32)-(33); Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (Cambodia v Thailand), Merits, Judgment of 15 June 1962, I.C.J.
Reports 1962, p. 6, at p. 23; | 沃尔多克，《关于条约法的第三次报告》，《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第61-62页，第(32)-(33)段；隆瑞古寺案(柬埔寨诉泰国)，案情，1962年6月15日的判决，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第23页； |
| Case concerning Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America),
Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 392, at p.
410, para. 39; Dispute between Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle
Channel, UNRIAA, vol. XXI (Sales No. E/F.95.V2), pp. 53-264, at pp. 185-187,
paras. 168-169. | 在尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《1984年国际法院案例汇编》，第392页起，见第410页，第39段；阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡争端案，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第21卷(出售品编号E/F.95.V2)，第53-264页，见第185-187页，第168-169段。 |
| NAFTA Arbitral Panel Final Report,
Cross-Border Trucking Services (Mexico v. United States of America), No.
USA-MEX-98-2008-01, adopted 6 February 2001, para. 224 (footnotes omitted). | 《北美自贸协定》仲裁专家组最后报告，跨界卡车运输服务(墨西哥诉美利坚合众国)，编号USA-MEX-98-2008-01, 2001年2月6日通过，第224段(脚注略)。 |
| For example, WTO Panel Report, United
States — Section 110(5) Copyright Act, WT/DS160/R,
adopted 27 July 2000, para. 6.55; WTO Panel Report, United States — Continued Existence and Application of Zeroing Methodology,
WT/DS350/R, adopted 19 February 2009, para. 7.173; WTO Appellate Body Report,
United States — Definitive Anti-Dumping and
Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China, WT/DS379/AB/R, adopted
25 March 2011, paras. 335-336; | 例如，世贸组织专家组报告，美国－版权法第110(5)节条款案，WT/DS160/R, 2000年7月27日通过，第6.55段；世贸组织专家组报告，美国－“归零”法的继续存在和适用案，WT/DS350/R, 2009年2月19日通过，第7.173段；世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－对中国某些产品确定征收的反倾销税和反补贴税案，WT/DS379/AB/R, 2011年3月25日通过，第335-336段； |
| CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentine
Republic (United States/Argentina Bilateral Investment Treaty), Decision on
Objections to Jurisdiction, 17 July 2003, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8, ICSID
Reports 2003, vol. 7, p. 492, para. 47; V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no.
24888/94, 16 December 1999, ECHR 1999-IX, para. 73; | CMS燃气输送公司诉阿根廷共和国(美国/阿根廷双边投资条约)，就反对管辖权作出的裁决，2003年7月17日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/01/8, 《2003年解决投资争端国际中心案例汇编》，第7卷，第492页，第47段；V.诉英国[GC]，第24888/94号申诉，1999年12月16日，《1999年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第九卷，第73段； |
| Kart v. Turkey [GC], no. 8917/05, 3
December 2009, ECHR 2009-VI, para. 54; Sigurður A.
Sigurjónsson v. Iceland, no. 16130/90, 30 June 1993,
ECHR Series A no. 264, para. 35. | Kart诉土耳其[GC]，第8917/05号申诉，2009年12月3日，《2009年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第六卷，第54段；Sigurður A. Sigurjónsson诉冰岛，第16130/90号申诉，1993年6月30日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第264号，第35段。 |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see footnote 454 above), at pp. 115 et seq. | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis …(见上文脚注454)，见第115页及以下各页。 |
| See draft conclusion 5, para. 2. | 见结论草案5第2段。 |
| Yearbook … 1964,
vol. II, document A/5809, p. 204, para. (13); see also Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 221-222, para. (15). | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/5809号文件，第204页，第(13)段；另见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221-222页，第(15)段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, Japan — Alcoholic Beverages II, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and
WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted on 1 November 1996, and WTO Report of the Panel,
WT/DS8/R, WT/DS10/R and WT/DS11/R, adopted on 1 November 1996. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－酒精饮料案(二)，WT/DS8/AB/R、WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，以及世贸组织专家组报告，WT/DS8/R、WT/DS10/R和WT/DS11/R, 1996年11月1日通过。 |
| Ibid. (WTO Appellate Body Report),
section E, p. 16. | 同上(世贸组织上诉机构报告)，E节，第16页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above), at p. 1,078, para. 55. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，第1078页，第55段。 |
| Ibid., p. 1,096, para. 80. | 同上，第1096页，第80段。 |
| O.K. Fauchald, “The
Legal Reasoning of ICSID Tribunals — An Empirical
Analysis”, European Journal of International Law,
vol. 19, No. 2 (2008), p. 301, at p. 345. | O.K. Fauchald,“解决投资争端国际中心法庭的法律推理－实证分析”，《欧洲国际法杂志》，第19卷，第2号(2008年)，第301页起，见第345页。 |
| CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentine
Republic (United States/Argentina Bilateral Investment Treaty), Decision on
Objections to Jurisdiction, 17 July 2003, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8, ICSID
Reports 2003, vol. 7, p. 492, at para. 47. | CMS燃气输送公司诉阿根廷共和国(美国/阿根廷双边投资条约)，就反对管辖权作出的裁决，2003年7月17日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号 ARB/01/8, 《2003年解决投资争端国际中心案例汇编》，第7卷，第492页，第47段。 |
| Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary
objections), no. 15318/89, 23 March 1995, ECHR Series A no. 310, para. 79. | Loizidou 诉土耳其(初步反对意见)，第15318/89号申诉，1995年3月23日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第310号，第79段。 |
| Ibid., para. 80; it is noteworthy that
the Court described “such a State practice” as being “uniform and consistent” despite the fact that it had recognised that two States possibly
constituted exceptions (Cyprus and the United Kingdom; “whatever their meaning”), paras. 80 and
82. | 同上，第80段；值得一提的是，法院形容“这种国家惯例”是“统一和一贯的”，尽管法院承认，可能有两个国家例外(塞浦路斯和联合王国；“不管其意义如何”)，第80和82段。 |
| Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no.
34503/97, 12 November 2008, ECHR-2008, para. 52. | Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[GC]，第34503/97号申诉，2008年11月12日，《2008年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第52段。 |
| Ibid., para. 151; similarly Jorgic v.
Germany, no. 74613/01, 12 July 2007, ECHR 2007III, para. 69. | 同上，第151段；相似的还有Jorgic
诉德国，第74613/01号申诉，2007年7月12日，《2007年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第三卷，第69段。 |
| Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. (see footnote 400 above), Concurring Separate Opinion of Judge
Sergio García Ramírez, para.
12. | Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等人诉特立尼达和多巴哥(见上文脚注400)，Sergio García
Ramírez法官单独的赞同意见，第12段。 |
| Jong-Cheol v. The Republic of Korea,
Views, 27 July 2005, Communication No. 968/2001, Report of the Human Rights
Committee, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixtieth Session,
Supplement No. 40 (A/60/40), vol. II, annex V, G. | Jong-Cheol诉大韩民国，意见，2005年7月27日，第968/2001号来文，人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第六十届会议，补编第40号》(A/60/40)，第二卷，附件五，G节。 |
| Ibid., para. 8.3. | 同上，第8.3段。 |
| Ibid.; see also Yoon and Choi v. The
Republic of Korea, Views, 3 November 2006, Communication Nos. 1321/2004 and
1322/2004, ibid., Sixty-second Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/62/40), vol. II,
annex VII, V, para. 8.4. | 同上；另见Yoon和Choi诉大韩民国，意见，2006年11月3日，第1321/2004和第1322/2004号来文，同上，《第六十二届会议，补编第40号》(A/62/40)，第二卷，附件七，V节，第8.4段。 |
| M/V “SAIGA” (No. 2) (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea), Judgment,
ITLOS Reports … 1999, p. 10, at pp. 61-62, paras.
155-156. | M/V ‘SAIGA’ (第2号)案(圣文森特和格林纳丁斯诉圭亚那)，判决，《1999年海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页起，见第61-62页，第155-156段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1833,
No. 31363, p. 3, art. 293. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1883卷，第31363号，第3页，第293条。 |
| M/V “SAIGA” (No. 2) (see footnote 508 above), at paras. 155-156; | M/V ‘SAIGA’(第2号)案(见上文脚注508)，见第155-156段； |
| see also “Tomimaru” (Japan v. Russian Federation), case No. 15, Prompt Release,
Judgment, ITLOS Reports … 2007, p. 74, para. 72;
Southern Bluefin Tuna (New Zealand v. Japan; Australia v. Japan), Provisional
Measures, Order of 27 August 1999, ITLOS Reports …1999,
p. 280, at paras. 45 and 50. | 另见富丸号渔船案(日本诉俄罗斯联邦)，第15号案件，立即释放，判决，《2007年海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第74页，第72段；蓝鳍金枪鱼案(新西兰诉日本；澳大利亚诉日本)，临时措施，1999年8月27日的命令，《1999年海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第280页，见第45和第50段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 78,
No. 1021, p. 277. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第78卷，第1021号，第277页。 |
| Prosecutor v. Goran Jelisić, Trial Chamber,
Judgment, 14 December 1999, IT-95-10-T, para. 61 (footnotes omitted);
similarly Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Trial Chamber, Judgment, 2 August
2001, IT-98-33-T, para. 541. | 检察官诉Goran Jelisić案，审判庭，判决，1999年12月14日，IT-95-10-T,
第61段(脚注略)；相似的还有检察官诉Radislav Krstić，审判庭，判决，2001年8月2日，IT-98-33-T, 第541段。 |
| WTO Panel Report, United States — Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act, WT/DS160/R, adopted 27
July 2000. | 世贸组织专家组报告，美国－版权法第110(5)节条款案，WT/DS160/R, 2000年7月27日通过。 |
| See Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights, art.9, para. 1. | 见《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》，第9条第1款。 |
| WTO Panel Report, United States — Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act, WT/DS160/R, adopted 27
July 2000, para.6.55 (footnotes omitted). | 世贸组织专家组报告，美国－版权法第110(5)节条款案，WT/DS160/R, 2000年7月27日通过，第6.55段(脚注略)。 |
| Ibid., at footnote 69. | 同上，见脚注69。 |
| See WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Computer Equipment, WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R and WT/DS68/AB/R,
adopted 22 June 1998, at para.90. | 见世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－电脑设备案，WT/DS62/AB/R、WT/DS67/AB/R和WT/DS68/AB/R, 1998年6月22日通过，第90段。 |
| See also I. van Damme, Treaty
Interpretation by the WTO Appellate Body (Oxford, Oxford University Press,
2009), p. 342. | 另见 I. van Damme,《世贸组织上诉机构对条约的解释》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2009年)，第342页。 |
| See also WTO Appellate Body Report, US — COOL, WT/DS384/AB/R and WT/DS386/AB/R, adopted 23 July 2012,
para. 452. | 另见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－COOL案，WT/DS384/AB/R和WT/DS386/AB/R, 2012年7月23日通过，第452段。 |
| Sempra Energy International v. Argentine
Republic, Award, 28 September 2007, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/16, para. 385; | Sempra Energy International诉阿根廷共和国，裁决，2007年9月28日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/02/16, 第385段； |
| see also Enron Corporation and Ponderosa
Assets, L.P. v. Argentine Republic, Award, 22 May 2007, ICSID Case No.
ARB/01/3, para. 337; WTO Panel Report, US — Large
Civil Aircraft (2nd Complaint), WT/DS353/R, adopted 23 March 2012, fn. 2420
in para. 7.953. | 另见Enron Corporation 和Ponderosa Assets, L.P.诉阿根廷共和国，裁决，2007年5月22日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/01/3, 第337段；世贸组织专家组报告，美国－大型民用飞机案(第二次申诉)，WT/DS353/R,
2012年3月23日通过，第7.953段中脚注2420。 |
| See, for example: United Kingdom, House
of Lords, Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation [2005] UKHL
72, paras. 54-55 and 66-85 (Lord Mance); | 例如，见：联合王国，上议院，深静脉血栓与航空旅行集团诉讼[2005] UKHL
72, 第54-55段和第66-85段(Mance勋爵)； |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords, R
(Al-Jedda) v. Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 58, para. 38; United
Kingdom, House of Lords, R (Mullen) v. Secretary of State for the Home
Department [2004] UKHL 18, para. 47 (Lord Steyn); | 联合王国，上议院，R (Al-Jedda)诉国防大臣[2007] UKHL 58, 第38段；联合王国，上议院，R (Mullen)诉内政大臣[2004] UKHL 18, 第47段(Steyn勋爵)； |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords, King v.
Bristow Helicopters Ltd. (Scotland) [2002] UKHL 7, para. 80 (Lord Hope); | 联合王国，上议院，King诉Bristow直升机公司(苏格兰) [2002] UKHL 7, 第80段(Hope勋爵)； |
| New Zealand, Court of Appeal, Zaoui v.
Attorney-General (No. 2) [2005] 1 NZLR 690, para. 130 (Glazebrook J.); | 新西兰，上诉法院，Zaoui诉总检察长(第2号)[2005] 1 NZLR
690, 第130段(Glazebrook J.)； |
| New Zealand, Court of Appeal, P. v.
Secretary for Justice, ex parte A.P. [2004] 2 NZLR 28, para. 61 (Glazebrook
J.); | 新西兰，上诉法院，P.诉司法部长，ex
parte A.P. [2004] 2 NZLR 28, 第61段(Glazebrook J.)； |
| Germany, Federal Administrative Court,
BVerfGE, vol. 104, p. 254, at pp. 256-257; | 德国，联邦行政法院，BVerfGE, 第104卷，第254页起，见第256-257页； |
| judgment of 29 November 1988, 1 C 75/86
[1988], Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht, p.
765, at p. 766. | 1988年11月29日的判决，1 C 75/86 [1988]，Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht, 第765页起，见第766页。 |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 414 above), at p. 431, para. 22. | Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注414)，第431页，第22段。 |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 446 above ), at p. 166. | Linderfalk,《关于条约的解释》(见上文脚注446)，第166页。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, Japan — Alcoholic Beverages II, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and
WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted 1 November 1996, section E, p. 13. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－酒精饮料案(二)，WT/DS8/AB/R、WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，E节，第13页。 |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see footnote 454 above), at pp. 114 et seq. | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis …(见上文脚注454)，见第114页及以下各页。 |
| Articles on the responsibility of States
for internationally wrongful acts, with commentaries, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 35, para. (4) of the
commentary; the question of the attribution of relevant subsequent conduct to
international organizations for the purpose of treaty interpretation is
addressed in draft conclusion 12 [11] below. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款及评注，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第35页，评注第(4)段；为了条约解释的目的，国际组织的相关嗣后行为的归属问题在下文结论草案12[11]中作了说明。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above), at p. 1094, para. 74. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，见第1094页，第74段。 |
| 34 Stat. 2905 (1902-1907). | 34 Stat. 2905 (1902-1907)。 |
| Case concerning rights of nationals of
the United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th, 1952,
I.C.J. Reports 1952, p. 176, at p. 211. | 摩洛哥境内美利坚合众国国民权利案，1952年8月27日的判决，《1952年国际法院案例汇编》，第176页起，见第211页。 |
| Case concerning the question whether the
re-evaluation of the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for
application of the clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement
on German External Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of
America on the one hand and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other,
Decision, 16 May 1980, UNRIAA, vol. XIX (Sales No. E/F.90.V.7), pp. 67-145,
at pp. 103-104, para. 31. | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠和北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国与德意志联邦共和国关于德国外债的协定附件一A第2条(e)项条款的情况问题，1980年5月16日的决定，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十九卷(出售品编号E/F.90.V.7)，第67-145页，见第103-104页，第31段。 |
| Question of the tax regime governing
pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France, Decision, 14
January 2003, UNRIAA, vol. XXV (Sales No. E/F.05.V.5), pp. 231-266, at p.
257, para. 66 and p. 259, para. 74. | “关于居住在法国的教科文组织退休官员所领退休金的征税制度问题”，2003年1月14日的决定，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十五卷(出售品编号E/F.05.V.5)，第231-266页，见第257页第66段和第259页第74段。 |
| See Chanaki, L’adaptation
des traités … (see footnote
440 above), at pp. 323-328; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (footnote 392
above), at p. 269-270; M. Kamto, “La volonté de l’État en droit international”, Recueil des cours … 2004, vol. 310, pp.
9-428, pp. 142-144; Dörr, “Article 31…” (see footnote 439 above), at pp. 555-556, para. 78. | 见Chanaki, L’adaptation
des traités …(见上文脚注440)，第323-328页；Gardiner,
Treaty Interpretation(见上文脚注392)，第269-270页；M. Kamto, 《国际法中的国家意志》，《2004年海牙国际法学院讲义》，第310卷，第9-428页，见第142-144页；Dörr,“Article 31…”(见上文脚注439)，第555-556页，第78段。 |
| See A/CN.4/660, para. 144 (draft conclusion
4, para. 1). | 见A/CN.4/660, 第144段(结论草案4，第1段)。 |
| Ibid., p. 46, para.120.. | 同上，第46页，第120段。 |
| See para. (19) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 4 above. | 见上文结论草案4的评注第(19)段。 |
| See Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
United States of America et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran et al., Award No.
108-A-16/582/591-FT, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Reports, vol5 (1984),
p. 57, at p. 71; similarly Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Interlocutory
Award No.ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim), The Islamic Republic of Iran v. United
States of America, ibid., vol. 38 (2004-2009), p. 77, at pp. 124-125, paras.
127-128; | 见伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭，美利坚合众国等诉伊朗伊斯兰共和国，第108-A-16/582/591
FT号裁决，《伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭裁决汇编》，第5卷(1984年)，第57页起，见第71页；相似的还有伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)，伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国，同上，第38卷(2004-2009年)，第77页起，见第124-125页，第127-128段； |
| see also Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal, Interlocutory Award No. ITL 37-111-FT, International Schools
Services, Inc. (ISS) v. National Iranian Copper Industries Company (NICICO),
ibid., vol. 5 (1984), p. 338, Dissenting Opinion of President Lagergren, p.
348, at p. 353: “… the provision in the Vienna
Convention on subsequent agreements refers to agreements between States
parties to a treaty, and a settlement agreement between two arbitrating
parties can hardly be regarded as equal to an agreement between the two
States that are parties to the treaty, even though the Islamic Republic of
Iran was one of the arbitrating parties in the case”. | 另见伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭，第ITL 37-111-FT号中间裁决，“国际学校服务公司诉伊朗国家铜业公司”，同上，第5卷(1984年)，第338页起，Lagergren庭长的不同意见，第348页起，见第353页：“《维也纳公约》关于嗣后协定的规定系指条约当事国之间的协定，尽管伊朗伊斯兰共和国是该案仲裁当事方之一，但仲裁当事双方之间的和解协定很难被视为等同于均为条约缔约方的两国间的协定”。 |
| For the Algiers Declarations (Declaration
of the Government of the Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria and
Declaration of the Government of the Democratic and Popular Republic of
Algeria concerning the Settlement of Claims by the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, see
International Legal Materials, vol. 20, No. 1 (1981), pp. 224 and 230
(respectively), at pp. 232-233). | 各项阿尔及尔声明(阿尔及利亚人民民主共和国政府的声明以及阿尔及利亚人民民主共和国政府就美利坚合众国政府和伊朗伊斯兰共和国政府处理索赔问题发表的声明)见International Legal Materials, vol. 20,
No. 1 (1981)，pp. 224 and 230 (respectively)，at pp. 232-233。 |
| See, for example, Iran-United States
Claims Tribunal (footnote 537 above), Dissenting Opinion of Judge Parviz
Ansari, p. 97, at p. 99. | 例如，见伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭(上文脚注537)，Parviz Ansari法官的不同意见，第97页起，见第99页。 |
| See, for example, Observations of the
United States of America on the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment 33: The Obligations of States Parties under the
Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, 22 December 2008, p. 1, para. 3 (available at:). | 例如，见美利坚合众国关于人权事务委员会第33号一般性意见：缔约国在《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》下的义务的意见，2008年12月22日，第1页，第3段(可查阅)。 |
| To the extent that the statement by the
United States relates to the interpretation of the Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 999, No. 14668, p. 171), to which the United States is not party
nor a contracting State, its statement constitutes “other
conduct” under draft conclusion 5, para. 2. | 美国与解释《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第14668号，第171页)有关的声明――虽然美国既不是该公约的当事国也不是缔约国――构成结论草案5第2段所称的“其他行为”。 |
| See, for example, International Law
Association, Committee on International Human Rights Law and Practice, “Final report on the impact of findings of United Nations Human
Rights treaty bodies”, Report of the Seventy-first
Conference, Berlin, 16-21 August 2004 (London, 2004), p. 621, paras. 21 et
seq. | 例如，见国际法协会人权法和惯例委员会，“关于联合国人权条约机构调查结果影响的最后报告”，第七十一届会议报告，柏林，2004年8月16日至21日(伦敦，2004年)第621页，第21段及以下各段。 |
| See Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), at p. 270. | 见Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation(见上文脚注392)，第270页。 |
| This aspect of subsequent practice to a
treaty will be the addressed at a later stage of the work on the topic. | 条约嗣后惯例的这方面将在本专题工作以后阶段进行讨论。 |
| See UNHCR, Handbook and Guidelines on
Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951
Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (December
2011), HCR/1P/4/ENG/REV. 3, Foreword; the view that the UNHCR Handbook itself
expresses State practice has correctly been rejected by the Federal Court of
Australia in Semunigus v. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[1999] FCA 422 (1999), Judgment, 14 April 1999, paras. 5-13; the UNHCR
Handbook nevertheless possesses considerable evidentiary weight as a correct
statement of subsequent State practice. | 见难民署，《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》(2011年12月)，HCR/IP/4/Eng/REV.3，前言；“Semunigus诉澳大利亚移民和多元文化事务部长案”正确地否决了难民署手册本身体现国家惯例的意见，[1999] FCA 422(1999)，1999年4月14日判决，第5-13段；但手册作为一项关于嗣后国家惯例的正确声明具有重要的证据份量。 |
| Its authority is based on article 35,
paragraph 1, of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951
(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 189, No. 2545, p. 137), according to
which “[t]he Contracting States undertake to
co-operate with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
refugees … in the exercise of its functions, and
shall in particular facilitate its duty of supervising the application of the
provisions of this Convention”. | 该手册的权威性基于1951年《关于难民地位的公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第189卷，第2545号，第137页)第35条第1款，根据该款，“缔约各国保证同联合国难民事务高级专员办事处…在其执行职务时进行合作，并应特别使其在监督适用本公约规定而行使职务时获得便利”。 |
| Security Council resolution 1540 (2004)
of 24 April 2004, operative para. 8 (c); according to the 1540 Committee’s website, “the 1540 Matrix has functioned
as the primary method used by the 1540 Committee to organize information
about implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1540 by Member States” (accessed 11 May 2016)). | 安全理事会2004年4月24日第1540(2004)号决议，执行部分第8(c)段；根据1540委员会的网页，“1540汇总表是1540委员会使用的一个主要方法，用于汇总会员国执行联合国安全理事会第1540号决议工作的有关信息”((2016年5月11日查阅))。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1015,
No. 14860, p. 163. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1015卷，第14860号，第163页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1974,
No. 33757, p. 45. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1974卷，第33757号，第45页。 |
| See, generally, Gardiner, Treaty
Interpretation (footnote 392 above), at p. 270. | 一般见Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (见上文脚注392)，第270页。 |
| H.-P. Gasser, “International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)”, Max Planck Encyclopedia
of Public International Law, para. 20. | H.-P. Gasser,“红十字国际委员会(红十字委员会)”，《马克思普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第20段。 |
| Ibid., para. 25. | 同上，第25段。 |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field (Geneva,
12 August 1949), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, No. 970, p. 31 (“Geneva Convention I”); Geneva Convention
for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked
Members of Armed Forces at Sea (Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 971, p.
85 (“Geneva Convention II”);
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War (Geneva, 12
August 1949), ibid., No. 972, p. 135 (“Geneva
Convention III”); and Geneva Convention relative to
the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949),
ibid., No. 973, p. 287 (“Geneva Convention IV”). | 《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第75卷，第970号，第31页(《日内瓦第一公约》)；《改善海上武装部队伤者病者及遇船难者境遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第971号，第85页(《日内瓦第二公约》)；《关于战俘待遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第972号，第135页(《日内瓦第三公约》)；及《关于战时保护平民的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第973号，第287页(《日内瓦第四公约》)。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1977, United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3; and Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), 1977, ibid., No. 17513, p.
609. | 《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受害者的附加议定书》(第一议定书)，1977年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页；《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护非国际性武装冲突受害者的附加议定书》(第二议定书)，1977年，同上，第17513号，第609页。 |
| Adopted by the 25th International
Conference of the Red Cross at Geneva in 1986 and amended in 1995 and 2006. | 1986年在日内瓦举行的第25届国际红十字大会通过，并于1995年和2006年进行了修正。 |
| Available from (accessed on 17 May 2016). | 可查阅： (2016年5月17日查阅)。 |
| Geneva, 2009, p. 10. Available from
www.icrc.org. | 日内瓦，2009年，第10页，可查阅www.icrc.org。 |
| Ibid., p. 9. | 同上，第9页。 |
| Resolution 1 on strengthening legal
protection for victims of armed conflicts, 1 December 2011. | 第1号决议――加强对武装冲突受害者的法律保护，2011年12月1日。 |
| See. | 见www.the-monitor.org。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2056,
No. 35597, p. 211. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第2056卷，第35597号，第211页。 |
| Ibid., vol. 2688, No. 47713, p. 39. | 同上，《条约汇编》，第2688卷，第47713号，第39页。 |
| See, for example, Cluster Munitions
Monitor 2011, pp. 24-31. | 例如，见《2011年集束弹药监测报告》，第24-31页。 |
| See A/CN.4/660, paras. 129 et seq. | 见A/CN.4/660, 第129段及以下各段。 |
| Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom
[GC], no. 28957/95, 11 July 2002, ECHR 2002-VI, para. 85. | Christine Goodwin诉联合王国[GC]，第28957/95号申诉，2002年7月11日，《2002年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第六卷，第85段。 |
| Ibid., para. 100. | 同上，第100段。 |
| See also I. v. the United Kingdom [GC],
no. 25680/94, 11 July 2002, para. 65; Burden and Burden v. the United
Kingdom, no. 13378/05, 12 December 2006, para. 57; Shackell v. the United
Kingdom (dec.), no. 45851/99, 27 April 2000, para. 1; Schalk and Kopf v.
Austria, no. 30141/04, 24 June 2010, para. 58. | 另见I.诉联合王国[GC]，第25680/94号申诉，2002年7月11日，第65段；Burden和Burden诉联合王国[GC]，第13378/05号申诉，2006年12月12日，第57段；Shackell诉联合王国(裁定)，第45851/99号申诉，2000年4月27日，第1段；Schalk和Kopf诉奥地利，第30141/04号申诉，2010年6月24日，第58段。 |
| Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, no.
7525/76, 22 October 1981, ECHR Series A No. 45, in particular para. 60. | Dudgeon诉联合王国，第7525/76号申诉，1981年10月22日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第45号，特别是第60段。 |
| Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom
[GC], no. 28957/95, 11 July 2002, ECHR 2002-VI, in particular para. 85. | Christine Goodwin诉联合王国[GC]，第28957/95号申诉，2002年7月11日，《2002年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第六卷，特别是第85段。 |
| See Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, no.
7525/76, 22 October 1981, ECHR Series A No. 45, para. 60. | Dudgeon诉联合王国，第7525/76号申诉，1981年10月22日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第45号，第60段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom
[GC], no. 28957/95, 11 July 2002, ECHR 2002-VI, para. 85; see also, ibid.,
para. 90. | Christine Goodwin诉联合王国[GC]，第28957/95号申诉，2002年7月11日，《2002年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第六卷，第85段；另见同上，第90段。 |
| Mazurek v. France, no. 34406/97, 1 February
2000, ECHR 2000-II, para. 52; see also Marckx v.
Belgium, no. 6833/74, 13 June 1979, ECHR Series A no. 31, para. 41; | Mazurek诉法国，第34406/97号申诉，2000年2月1日，《2000年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第二卷，第52段；另见Marckx诉比利时，第6833/74号申诉，1979年6月13日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第31号，第41段； |
| Inze v. Austria, no. 8695/79, 28 October
1987, ECHR Series A no. 126, para. 44; Brauer v.
Germany, no. 3545/04, 28 May 2009, para. 40. | Inze诉奥地利，第8695/79号申诉，1987年10月28日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第126号，第44段；Brauer诉德国，第3545/04号申诉，2009年5月28日，第40段。 |
| Chapman v. the United Kingdom [GC], no.
27238/95, 18 January 2001, ECHR 2001-I, paras. 70 and 93; see also Lee v. the
United Kingdom [GC], no. 25289/94, 18 January 2001, paras. 95-96; | Chapman诉联合王国[GC]，第27238/95号申诉，2001年1月18日，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第一卷，第70和93段；另见Lee诉联合王国[GC]，第25289/94号申诉，2001年1月18日，第95-96段； |
| Beard v. the United Kingdom [GC], no.
24882/94, 18 January 2001, paras. 104-105; Coster v. the United Kingdom [GC],
no. 24876/94, 18 January 2001, paras. 107-108; Jane Smith v. the United
Kingdom [GC], no. 25154/94, 18 January 2001, paras. 100-101. | Beard诉联合王国[GC]，第24882/94号申诉，2001年1月18日，第104-105页；Coster诉联合王国[GC]，第24876/94号申诉，2001年1月18日，第107-108段；Jane Smith诉联合王国[GC]，第25154/94号申诉，2001年1月18日，第100-101段。 |
| See above draft conclusion 4, paras. 1-3,
and commentary thereto, paras. (17)-(20). | 见上文结论草案4, 第1-3段，及评注的第(17)-(20)段。 |
| According to G. Haraszti, “… interpretation has the elucidation of the meaning of the text as
its objective while application implies the specifying of the consequences
devolving on the contracting parties” (see Haraszti,
Some Fundamental Problems … (footnote 446 above), p.
18); he recognizes, however, that “[a] legal rule
manifesting itself in whatever form cannot be applied unless its content has
been elucidated” (ibid., p. 15). | 根据G. Haraszti的看法，“…解释将阐明案文的意思视为其目标，而适用意味着说明给缔约各方带来的后果”(见Haraszti,《…一些基本问题》(上文脚注446)，第18页)；不过他承认,“不论以何形式呈现的法律规则，除非其内容得到阐明，否则不可能适用”(同上，第15页)。 |
| Harvard Draft Convention on the Law of
Treaties, American Journal of International Law Supp., vol. 29, 1935, p. 653,
at pp. 938-939; Lord McNair, The Law of Treaties (Oxford, Clarendon Press,
1961), p. 372; Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 393 above), p. 116; Report of the Study Group on fragmentation of
international law, 2006 (A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1), para. 423; Gardiner,
Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392 above), pp. 28-30 and 238; Yasseen, “L’interprétation
des traités…” (see footnote
393 above) p. 47; U. Linderfalk, “Is the hierarchical
structure of articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention real or not? | 哈佛条约法草案，《美国国际法杂志(增刊)》，第29卷，1935年，第663页起，见第938-939页；Lord
McNair,《条约法》(1961年，克拉伦登出版社，牛津)，第372页；Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注393)，第116页；国际法不成体系问题研究组2006年报告(A/CN.4/L.682和A/CN.4/L.682/Corr.1)，第423段；Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第28-30页和第238页；Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第47页；U.
Linderfalk,“《维也纳公约》第三十一和第三十二条的等级结构是否真实？ |
| Interpreting the rules of interpretation”, Netherlands International Law Review, vol. 54, No. 1 (2007), pp.
141-144 and p. 147; G. Distefano, “La pratique subséquente des États parties à un traité”, Annuaire français de droit international, vol. 40 (1994), p. 44;
Villiger, “The rules on interpretation …” (see footnote 439 above ), p. 111. | 对解释规则进行解释”，《荷兰国际法评论》，第54卷，第1号(2007年)，第141-144页和第147页；G.
Distefano,“条约缔约国的嗣后惯例”，《法国国际法年鉴》，第40卷(1994年)，第44页；Villiger,“解释的规则…”(见上文脚注439)，第111页。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), p. 266; Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of Treaties
(see footnote 446 above), p. 162; Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see footnote 454 above), pp. 114 and 118; Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 439 above), p.
556, paras. 80 and 82. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第266页；Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注446)，第162页；Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis…(见上文脚注454)，第114和第118页；Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第556页，第80和第82段。 |
| This second alternative was introduced at
the proposal of Pakistan, but its scope and purpose was never addressed or
clarified, see Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law
of Treaties, First and Second Sessions, Vienna 26 March-24 May 1968 and 9
April-22 May, Summary records of the plenary meetings and of the meetings of
the Committee of the Whole (A/CONF.39/11, United Nations publications, Sales
No. E.68.V.7), 31st meeting, 19 April 1968, p. 168, para. 53. | 这个第二项备选案文应巴基斯坦提议而提出，但其范围和目的从未得到讨论或澄清，见《联合国条约法会议，第一和第二届会议，1968年3月26日至5月24日和4月9日至5月22日，维也纳，全体会议和全体委员会会议简要记录》(A/CONF.39/11, 联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.68.V.7)，第31次会议，1968年4月19日，第168页，第53段。 |
| See Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (footnote 446 above), pp. 164-165 and 167; see also draft
conclusions 2 [1], para. 4, and 4, para. 3. | 见Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(上文脚注446)，第164-165页和第167页；另见结论草案2[1]第4段和结论草案4第3段。 |
| See below draft conclusion 7, para. 1. | 见下文结论草案7, 第1段。 |
| See Boisson de Chazournes, “Subsequent practice, practices, …” (footnote
415 above), p. 53, at pp. 54, 56 and 59-60. | 见Boisson de Chazournes,“嗣后惯例、惯例…”(上文脚注415)，第53页起，见第54、56及59-60页。 |
| In the case concerning Application of the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation), Preliminary Objections,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2011, p. 70, at p. 117, para. 105, the International
Court of Justice denied that certain conduct (statements) satisfied the
burden of proof with respect to the Russian Federation’s compliance with its obligations under the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination between
1999 and July 2008, in particular because the conduct was not found to
specifically relate to the Convention. | 见《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》的适用案(格鲁吉亚诉俄罗斯联邦)，初步反对意见，判决，《2011年国际法院案例汇编》，第70页，见第117页，第105段，国际法院在这里否认某些行为(声明)已经满足了举证责任，能证明俄罗斯联邦在1999年至2008年期间履行了其按照《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》所承担的义务，这特别是因为有关行为不是专门为了公约而实施的。 |
| According to Judge Simma, the burden of
proof had been met to some degree, see Separate Opinion of Judge Simma,
ibid., pp. 199-223, paras. 23-57. | 根据辛马法官的意见，举证责任已经在一定程度上得到履行，见辛马法官的个别意见，同上，第199-223页，第23-57段。 |
| In the case concerning the
Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395 above), the International Court of
Justice analysed subsequent practice not only in the context of treaty
interpretation but also in the context of acquisitive prescription (see p.
1092, para. 71, p. 1096, para. 79, and p. 1105, para. 97). | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，国际法院不仅从条约的解释角度而且从取得时效的角度分析了嗣后惯例(见第1092页，第71段，第1096页，第79段，及第1105页，第97段)。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion of 20 July 1962,
I.C.J. Reports 1962, p. 151, at pp. 201-202 (Separate Opinion of Judge
Fitzmaurice) and pp. 189-195 (Separate Opinion of Judge Spender). | 联合国某些经费案(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，1962年7月20日咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见第201-202页(菲茨莫里斯法官的个别意见)及第189-195页(斯彭德法官的个别意见)。 |
| Ibid., p. 201. | 同上，第201页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Maritime Delimitation and Territorial
Questions between Qatar and Bahrain (Qatar v. Bahrain), Jurisdiction and
Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1995, p. 6, at p. 16, para. 28. | 卡塔尔和巴林之间的海洋划界和领土问题案(卡塔尔诉巴林)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《1995年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第76页，第28段。 |
| See A. Skordas, “General
provisions: article 5”, in The 1951 Convention
relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol: A Commentary, A.
Zimmermann, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 682, para. 30; J.
McAdam, Complementary Protection in International Refugee Law (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2007), p. 21. | 见A. Skordas,“一般规定：第五条”，载于《1951年〈关于难民地位的公约〉及其1967年议定书：评注》，A. Zimmermann(编)(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第682页，第30段；J. McAdam,《国际难民法律中的补充保护》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2007年)，第21页。 |
| On the “weight” of an agreement or practice as a means of interpretation, see
draft conclusion 9 [8], paras. 1-3, below; for an example of the need, and
also the occasional difficulty, to distinguish between specific conduct by
the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty and more general
development, see Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
2014, p. 3, at pp. 41-58, paras. 103-151. | 关于协定或惯例作为解释手段的“权重”，见下文结论草案9[8]，第1-3段；区别当事方在解释条约方面的具体行为与一般性发展的必要性和困难性的实例见海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页，见第41-58页，第103-151段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), at p. 234, para. 40; see also
Kasikili/Sedudu Island (footnote 395 above), at p. 1091, para. 68, where the
Court implied that one of the parties did not consider that certain forms of
practical cooperation were legally relevant for the purpose of the question
of boundary at issue and thus did not agree with a contrary position of the
other party. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注395)，第234页，第40段；另参阅卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(上文脚注395)，见第1091页，第68段，法院在这里暗示，当事方之一某些实际合作的形式对于解决目前的边界问题有法律意义，因而不同意另一当事方的相反立场。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at p. 248, paras.
55-56; see also Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of
America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 803, at p.
815, para. 30; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392 above), pp.
262-264. | 以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第248页，第55-56段；另参阅石油平台案(伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国)，初步反对意见，判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第803页起，见第815页，第30段；Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第262-264页。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
257, para. 83. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参加诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第257页，第83段。 |
| See Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
Islamic Republic of Iran and United States of America, Iran-United States
Claims Tribunal Reports, Partial Award No. 382-B1-FT vol. 19 (1989), pp.
294-295. | 见伊朗－美国索赔法庭，伊朗伊斯兰共和国和美利坚合众国，《伊朗-美国索赔法庭裁决汇编》，第382-B1-FT号部分裁决，第19卷(1989年)，第294-295页。 |
| Separate Opinion of Judge Holtzmann, Concurring
in Part, Dissenting in Part, ibid., at p. 304. | 霍尔茨曼法官的个别意见，部分赞同、部分反对，同上，第304页。 |
| See second report on subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of
treaties (A/CN.4/671), para. 15. | 见与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例第二次报告(A/CN.4/671)，第15段。 |
| See, for example, Soering v. the United
Kingdom, no. 14038/88, 7 July 1989, ECHR Series A no. 161, para.103; Dudgeon
v. the United Kingdom, no. 7525/76, 22 October 1981, ECHR Series A No. 45,
para. 60; Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no. 34503/97, 12 November 2008,
ECHR-2008, para. 48; however, by way of contrast, compare with Mamatkulov and
Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99, ECHR 2005-I, para. 146;
Cruz Varas and others v. Sweden, no. 15576/89, 20 March 1991, ECHR Series A no.
201, para. 100. | 例如见Soering诉联合王国，第14038/88号，1989年7月7日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第161号，第103段；Dudgeon诉联合王国，第7275/76号，1981年10月22日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第45号，第60段；Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第34503/97号，2008年11月12日，欧洲人权法院2008,
第48段；然而作为对照，请比较Mamatkulov和Askarov诉土耳其案[大审判庭]，第46827/99号和第46951/99号，《2005年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第一卷，第146段；Cruz Varas等人诉瑞典，第15576/89号，1991年3月20日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第201号，第100段。 |
| See footnote 593 above; see further
Marckx v. Belgium, no. 6833/74, 13 June 1979, ECHR Series A no. 31, para. 41;
Jorgic v. Germany, no. 74613/01, 12 July 2007, ECHR 2007III, para. 69;
Mazurek v. France, no. 34406/97, 1 February 2000, ECHR 2000-II, para. 52. | 见上文脚注593；另见Marckx诉比利时，第6833/74号，1979年6月13日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第31号，第41段；Jorgic诉德国，第74613/01号，2007年7月12日，《2007年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第三卷，第69段；Mazurek诉法国，第34406/97号，2000年2月1日《2000年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第二卷，第52段。 |
| See, for example, Hilaire, Constantine
and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago (see footnote 400 above), para.
12. | 例如见Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等人诉特里尼达和多巴哥案(见上文脚注400)，第12段。 |
| Banković et al. v. Belgium and 16 other
contracting States (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, ECHR 2001-XII, para. 62. | Bankovic等人诉比利时及16个其他缔约国(裁决)[大审判庭]，第52207/99号，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第十二卷，第62段。 |
| See footnote 550 above. | 见上文脚注550。 |
| C. Shields Delessert, Release and
Repatriation of Prisoners of War at the End of Active Hostilities (Zurich,
Schulthess, 1977), pp. 145-156 and pp. 171-175; see in general on the duty to
repatriate, S. Krähenmann, “Protection of prisoners
in armed conflict”, in The Handbook of International
Humanitarian Law, 3rd edition, D. Fleck, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2013), pp. 409-410. | C. Shields Delessert, 《敌对活动结束后释放与遣返战俘》(苏黎世，Schulthess, 1977年)，第145-156页和第171-175页；关于一般遣返义务，见S. Krähenmann,“武装冲突中保护战俘”，载于《国际人道主义法手册》，第3版，D. Fleck编(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2013年)，第409-410页。 |
| Thus, by its involvement, the ICRC tries
to reconcile the interests in speedy repatriation and the respect of the will
of prisoners of war (see Krähenmann, “Protection of
prisoners in armed conflict” (footnote 598 above),
pp. 409-410). | 因此，红十字委员会通过自己的介入，力求调和快速遣返与尊重战俘意愿这两种利益(见Krähenmann,“武装冲突中保护战俘”(上文脚注598)，第409-410页)。 |
| J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck,
eds., Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume 1: Rules (Cambridge,
International Committee of the Red Cross and Cambridge University Press,
2005), p. 455 (footnotes omitted). | J.-M. Henckaerts和L.
Doswald-Beck编，《国际人道主义习惯法》，第1卷：《规则》(剑桥，红十字国际委员会和剑桥大学出版社，2005年)，第455页(脚注略)。 |
| J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck,
eds., Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume 2: Practice
(Cambridge, International Committee of the Red Cross and Cambridge University
Press, 2005), pp. 2893-2894, paras. 844-855, and online update for Australia,
Israel, the Netherlands and Spain, available from. | J.-M. Henckaerts和L.
Doswald-Beck编，《国际人道主义习惯法》，第2卷：《惯例》(剑桥，红十字国际委员会和剑桥大学出版社，2005年)，第2893-2894页，第844-855段，以及对澳大利亚、以色列、荷兰和西班牙的在线更新，可查阅。 |
| United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed
Conflict (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 205-206, para. 8.170
(footnote omitted). | 大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国，国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2004年)，第205-206页，第8.170段(脚注略)。 |
| The United States manual mentions only
the will of prisoners of war who are sick or wounded, see Henckaerts and
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume 2: Practice
(footnote 601 above), pp. 2893-2894, paras. 844-855; but United States
practice after the Second Gulf War was to have ICRC establish the prisoner’s will and to act accordingly (United States of America,
Department of Defense, Conduct of the Persian Gulf War: Final Report to
Congress (United States Government Printing Office, 1992), pp. 707-708,
available from). | 美国的手册只提到患病或受伤的战俘的意愿，见Henckaerts和Doswald-Beck, 《国际人道主义习惯法》，第2卷：《惯例》(上文脚注601)，第2893-2894页，第844-855段；但美国在第二次海湾战争之后的惯例是由红十字委员会来确定战俘的意愿并采取相应行动(美利坚合众国，国防部，《波斯湾战争行为：提交国会的最终报告》(美国政府印刷局，1992年)，第707-708页，可查阅。 |
| A/CN.4/671, paras. 11-18. | A/CN.4/671, 第11-18段。 |
| See also L. Crema, “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice within and outside
the Vienna Convention”, in Nolte, Treaties and
Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398 above), pp. 25-26. | 另见L. Crema,“《维也纳公约》之内和之外的嗣后协定与嗣后惯例”，载于诺尔特,《条约与嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第25-26页。 |
| See A/CN.4/671, p. 33, para. 71. | 见A/CN.4/671, 第33页，第71段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), at pp. 234-235, para. 40; Pulp Mills
on the River Uruguay (see footnote 395 above), p. 14, at pp. 65-66, paras.
138-140; J. Crawford, “A consensualist interpretation
of article 31 (3) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398
above), p. 32; for another example, see A/CN.4/671, para. 72; and J.R. Crook,
“Contemporary practice of the United States”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 105 (2011), p. 775
et seq., at pp. 809-812. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注395)，第234-235页，第40段；乌拉圭河纸浆厂案(见上文脚注395)，第14页起，见第65-66页，第138-140段；J.
Crawford,“对《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款的合意主义解释”，载于诺尔特,《条约与嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第32页；另一案例见A/CN.4/671, 第72段；及J.
R. Crook,“美国当代惯例”，《美国国际法期刊》，第105期(2011年)，第775页及以后各页，见第809-812页。 |
| See ICRC, International Red Cross Handbook,
12th edition (Geneva, 1983), p. 20. | 见红十字委员会，《国际红十字手册》，第12版(日内瓦，1983年)，第20页。 |
| “Bulletin
international des Sociétés de
Secours aux Militaires blessés”, No. 29 (January 1877), pp. 35-37, quoted in F. Bugnion, The
Emblem of the Red Cross. | “Bulletin international des Sociétés de Secoursaux Militaires blesses”，第29号(1877年1月)，第35-37页，引用于F.
Bugnion,《红十字标志简史》(日内瓦，红十字委员会，1977年)，第15页。 |
| A Brief History (Geneva, ICRC, 1977), p.
15. Ibid., No. 31 (July 1877), p. 89, quoted in Bugnion, The Emblem of the
Red Cross … (see footnote 608 above), p. 18. | 同上，第31号(1877年7月)，第89页，引用于Bugnion,《红十字标志…》(见上文脚注608)，第18页。 |
| Bugnion, The Emblem of the Red Cross … (see footnote 608 above), pp. 19-31. | Bugnion,《红十字标志…》(见上文脚注608)，第19-31页。 |
| Joined by Egypt upon accession in 1923,
see Bugnion, The Emblem of the Red Cross … (footnote
608 above), pp. 23-26; it was only on the occasion of the revision of the
Geneva Conventions in 1929, when Turkey, Persia and Egypt claimed that the
use of other emblems had become a fait accompli and that those emblems had
been used in practice without giving rise to any objections, that the Red
Crescent and the Red Lion and Sun were finally recognized as a distinctive
sign by article 19, paragraph 2, of the 1929 Geneva Convention for the
Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field
(League of Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 118, No. 2733, p. 303). | 1923年埃及通过继承而加入，见Bugnion,《红十字标志…》(见上文脚注608)，第23-26页；1929年修订各项日内瓦公约时，土耳其、波斯和埃及声称，使用其他标志已成为既成事实，且这些标志已在实践中使用而未致任何异议，红新月和红狮与日这才最终被1929年《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇日内瓦公约》第十九条第二款承认为特殊标志(国际联盟，《条约汇编》，第118卷，第2733号，第303页)。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
4, paras. (17)-(20). | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(17)-(20)段。 |
| See, for example, commentary to draft
conclusion 5 above; Boisson de Chazournes, “Subsequent
practice …” (footnote 415 above), pp. 54, 56 and
59-60; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (footnote 392 above), pp. 257-259; see
also Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 3,
at pp. 42-45, paras. 103-111 and pp. 48-49, paras. 119-122, and p. 50, para.
126; Dörr, “Article 31 …”
(see footnote 439 above), pp. 555-556, para. 78. | 例如见上文结论草案5的评注；Boisson
de Chazournes, 《嗣后惯例…》(上文脚注415)，第54、56和59-60页；Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第257-259页；另见海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第42-45页，第103-111段和第48-49页，第119-122段，以及第50页，第126段；Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第555-556页，第78段。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), pp. 254-255. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第226-227页。 |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (see footnote 488 above), at p. 33; Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see
footnote 395 above), at p. 1213, para. 17 (Dissenting Opinion of Judge
Parra-Aranguren). | 柏威夏寺案(见上文脚注488)，第33页；卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，第1213页，第17段(帕拉－阿朗古伦法官的不同意见)。 |
| Territorial and Maritime Dispute between
Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Honduras),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 659, at p. 737, para. 258; but see
Continental Shelf (Tunisia/Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
1982, p. 18, at p. 83-84, para. 117, where the Court recognized concessions
granted by the parties to the dispute as evidence of their tacit agreement;
see also Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile) (footnote 613 above). | 尼加拉瓜和洪都拉斯之间在加勒比海的领土和海洋争端案(尼加拉瓜诉洪都拉斯)，判决，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第659页起，见第737页，第258段；但是，见大陆架案(突尼斯/阿拉伯利比亚民众国)，判决，《1982年国际法院案例汇编》，第18页起，见第83-84页，第117段，在此段中，法院将争议双方授予的特许权视为双方默示协定的证据；另见海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)(见上文脚注613)。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), pp. 244 and 250. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第244和250页。 |
| See above, paras. (1)-(4) of the present
commentary; and A/CN.4/671, paras. | 见上文，本评注第(1)-(4)段；以及A/CN.4/671, 第3-5段。 |
| 3-5. See above commentary to draft
conclusion 2 [1], para. (10). | 见上文结论草案2[1]的评注，第(10)段。 |
| Crook, “Contemporary
practice of the United States” (see footnote 606 above),
pp. 809-812; see also: Mexico, Diario Oficial de la Federación (7 July 2011), “Decreto por el que se modifica
el artículo 1 del diverso por el que se establece la
Tasa Aplicable durante 2003, del Impuesto General de Importación, para las mercancías originarias de América del Norte”, publicado el 31 de diciembre de
2002, por lo que respecta a las mercancías originarias
de los Estados Unidos de América. | Crook,“美国当代惯例”(见上文脚注606)，第809-812页；另见墨西哥，Diario
Oficial de la Federación (2011年7月7日)，Decreto por el que se
modifica el artículo 1 del diverso por el que se
establece la Tasa Aplicable durante 2003, del Impuesto General de Importación, para las mercancías originarias de América del Norte, publicado el 31 de diciembre de 2002, por lo que
respecta a las mercancías originarias de los Estados
Unidos de América。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
2 [1], para. 5, paras. (12)-(15). | 见上文结论草案2[1]第5段的评注，第(12)-(15)段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| The terminology follows guideline 1.2
(Definition of interpretative declarations) of the Commission’s Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties: “‘Interpretative declaration’ means a
unilateral statement … whereby [a] State or [an]
international organization purports to specify or clarify the meaning or
scope of a treaty or of certain of its provisions. ” | 术语遵循委员会《对条约的保留实践指南》指南1.2(解释性声明的定义)：“‘解释性声明’是指[一]国或[一]国际组织为了阐明或澄清条约或其中某些规定的含义或范围而作出的单方面声明。” |
| (Official records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap. IV,
guideline 1.2); see also commentary to guideline 1.2, para. (18)
(A/66/10/Add.1). | (《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第四章，指南1.2)；另见对指南1.2的评注，第(18)段(A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
2 [1], para. 5, para. (14); Competence of Assembly regarding admission to the
United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 4, at p. 8. | 见上文对结论草案2[1]第5段的评注，第(14)段；大会接纳国家加入联合国的权限，咨询意见，《1950年国院法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第8页。 |
| See, for example, Sovereignty over Pulau
Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan (footnote 395 above), at p. 656, paras.59-61 and p.
665, para. 80; Territorial Dispute (footnote 395 above), at p. 34, paras.
66-71; Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights (footnote 395
above), at p. 290 (Declaration of Judge ad hoc Guillaume). | 例如见吉利丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案(上文脚注395)，第656页，第59-61段和第665页，第80段；领土争端案(上文脚注395)，第34页，第66-71段；关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(上文脚注395)，第290页(专案法官Guillaume的声明)。 |
| For more examples see Nolte, “Jurisprudence under special regimes”
(footnote 398 above), pp. 210-306. | 例如见格 •诺尔特,“特殊制度下的判例”(上文脚注398)，第210-306页。 |
| See also Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic
of Iran v. United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1996, p. 803, at p. 815, para. 30; Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1998,
p. 275, at p. 306, para. 67; Competence of Assembly regarding admission to
the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 4, at p. 9. | 另见石油平台案(伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国)，初步反对意见，判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第803页起，见第815页，第30段；喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚)，初步反对意见，判决，《1998年国际法院案例汇编》，第275页起，见第306页，第67段；大会接纳国家加入联合国的权限，咨询意见，《1950年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第9页。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at p. 248, para. 55. | 使用或威胁使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第248页，第55段。 |
| Reservations to the Convention on
Genocide, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1951, p. 15, at p. 25. | 对《灭绝种族罪公约》的保留，咨询意见，《1951年国际法院案例汇编》，第15页起，见第25页。 |
| Case concerning Rights of Nationals of
the United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th, 1952,
I.C.J. Reports 1952, p. 176, at p. 211. | 摩洛哥境内的美利坚合众国公民权利案，1952年8月27日的判决，《1952年国际法院案例汇编》，第176页起，见第211页。 |
| See, mutatis mutandis, Certain Expenses
of the United Nations (Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory
Opinion of 20July 1962, I.C.J. Reports 1962, p. 151, where the International
Court of Justice interpreted the term “expenses” broadly and “action” narrowly in the light of the respective subsequent practice of
the United Nations, at pp. 158-161 (“expenses”) and pp. 164-165 (“action”). | 比照参见联合国的某些费用(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，1962年7月20日的咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151条，国际法院参照联合国相关的嗣后惯例，对“费用”一词作出了宽泛的解释，而对“行动”一词作出了狭义的解释，见第158-161页(“费用”)和第164-165页(“行动”)。 |
| See, for example, Border and Transborder
Armed Actions (Nicaragua v. Honduras), Jurisdiction and Admissibility,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1988, p. 69, at p. 87, para. 40. | 例如见边界和跨界武装行动案(尼加拉瓜诉洪都拉斯)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《1988年国际法院案例汇编》，第69页起，见第87页，第40段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 289,
No. 4214, p. 3. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第289卷，第4214号，第3页。 |
| Constitution of the Maritime Safety
Committee of the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1960, p. 150, at p. 169; see also pp.
167-169; obiter dicta: Proceedings pursuant to the OSPAR Convention
(Ireland-United Kingdom), 2 July 2003, UNRIAA, vol. XXIII (Sales No.
E/F.04.V.15), pp. 59-151, at p. 99, para. 141. | 政府间海事协商组织海事安全委员会章程，咨询意见，《1960年国际法院案例汇编》，第150页起，见第169页；另见第167-169页；另见根据《保护东北大西洋海洋环境公约》提出的诉讼(爱尔兰诉联合王国)，2003年7月2日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十三卷(出售品编号：E/F.04.V.15)，第59-151页，见第99页，第141段。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), pp. 211 and 219. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第211和219页。 |
| Ibid., pp. 212-215; see also Legal
Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia
(South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970),
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, at p. 31, para. 53; Legal
Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 179, para.
109; R. Higgins, “Some observations on the
inter-temporal rule in international law”, in Theory
of International Law at the Threshold of the 21st Century, J. Makarczyk, ed.
(The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1996), pp. 173-181, at p. 180;
Distefano, “La pratique subséquente
…” (see footnote 573 above), pp. 52-54; Crema, “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice …” (footnote 604 above), p. 21. | 同上，第212-215页；另见南非不遵守安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第31页，第53段；在被占巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第179页，第109段；R.
Higgins,“关于国际法中的时效规则的若干意见”，载于《二十一世纪初的国际法理论》，J.
Makarczyk编(海牙，Kluwer Law
International, 1996年)，第173-181页，见第180页；Distefano,“…嗣后惯例”(见上文脚注573)，第52-54页；Crema,“…嗣后协定与嗣后惯例”(上文脚注604)，第21页。 |
| Maritime Delimitation in the Area between
Greenland and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993, p. 38, at p. 50,
para. 27. | 格陵兰和扬马延间区域海洋划界案，判决，《1993年国际法院案例汇编》，第38页起，见第50页，第27段。 |
| Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran
v. United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
1996, p. 803, at pp. 813 and 815, paras. 27 and 30. | 石油平台案(伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国)，初步反对意见，判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第803页起，见第813和815页，第27和30段。 |
| See also Land and Maritime Boundary
between Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1998, p. 275, at p. 306, para. 67. | 另见喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚)，初步反对意见，判决，《1998年国际法院案例汇编》，第275页起，见第306页，第67段。 |
| This is not to suggest that there may
ultimately be different interpretations of a treaty, but rather that the
treaty may accord the parties the possibility to choose from a spectrum of
different permitted acts, see Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (footnote 392
above), pp. 32-33 and p. 268, quoting the House of Lords in R v. Secretary of
State for the Home Department, ex parte Adan [2001] AC 477: “… It is necessary to determine the autonomous meaning of the
relevant treaty provision. … It follows that, as in
the case of other multilateral treaties, the Refugee Convention must be given
an independent meaning derivable from the sources mentioned in articles 31
and 32 [of the 1969 Vienna Convention] and without taking colour from
distinctive features of the legal system of any individual contracting
[S]tate. | 这并不是说可能存在对条约的不同解释，而是说条约必须让缔约方有可能在一系列允许的行为中作出选择，见Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第32-33页和第268页，引用上议院在R诉内政部大臣案，Adan缺席[2001]AC
477中发表的意见：“…需要确定有关条约规定的自主含义…由此可见，与其他多边条约一样，必须赋予《难民公约》可从[1969年《维也纳公约》]第三十一条和第三十二条所指来源中得出的独立含义，而不是随便借鉴某个缔约国法律体系的特点得出含义。 |
| In principle therefore there can only be
one true interpretation of a treaty. … In practice it
is left to national courts, faced with a material disagreement on an issue of
interpretation, to resolve it. | 因此，原则上，条约只能有一个真正的解释…在实践中，面对解释问题上的重大分歧，由各国法院做出决定。 |
| But in doing so it must search,
untrammelled by notions of its national legal culture, for the true
autonomous international meaning of the treaty. | 不过，做决定时，法院必须摆脱本国法律文化理念的束缚，探索条约真正的自主含义。 |
| And there can only be one true meaning” (The Law Reports, Appeal Cases 2001, vol. 2, at pp. 515-517 (Lord
Steyn)). | 而真正的含义只有一个”(《判例汇编》，2011年上诉案例，第2卷，见第515-517页(斯泰恩勋爵)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 15,
No. 102, p. 2. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第15卷，第102号，第2页。 |
| S.D. Murphy, “The
relevance of subsequent agreement and subsequent practice for the
interpretation of treaties”, in Nolte, Treaties and
Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398 above), p. 85; A. Aust, Modern Treaty
Law and Practice (see footnote 525 above), p. 215. | S. D. Murphy,“嗣后协定和嗣后管理对条约解释的作用”，载于诺尔特,《条约和嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第85页；A. Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注525)，第215页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 500,
No. 7310, p. 95. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第500卷，第7310号，第95页。 |
| E. Denza, Diplomatic Law: Commentary on
the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Oxford Commentaries on
International Law, 3rd edition (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008), pp.
160-161; J. Salmon, Manuel de droit diplomatique (Brussels, Bruylant, 1994),
p. 208, para. 315. | E. Denza,《外交法：〈维也纳外交关系法〉评注》，牛津大学国际法评论，第3版(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2008年)，第160-161页；J.
Salmon,《外交法手册》(布鲁塞尔，Bruylant,
1994年)，第208页，第315段。 |
| See, for example, Australia, Department
of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Privileges and Immunities of Foreign
Representatives; Iceland, Protocol Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Diplomatic Handbook (Reykjavik, 2009), p. 14 ; United Kingdom, see the
statement of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord
Elton) in the House of Lords, HL Deb, 12 December 1983, vol. 446 cc3-4;
United States, see M. Nash (Leich), “Contemporary
practice of the United States relating to international law”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 88, No. 2 (April
1994), p. 312, at pp. 312-313. | 例如见澳大利亚外交贸易部，《驻外代表的特权和豁免》；冰岛外交部礼宾司，《外交手册》(Reykjavik,
2009年)，第14页；联合王国，见内政部政务次官(埃尔顿议员在上议院的发言，1983年12月12日的上议院辩论，第446卷，cc3-4；美国，见M. Nash (Leich)，“美国在国际法方面的当代惯例”，《美国国际法期刊》，总第88期，第2期(1994年4月)，第312页起，见第312-313页。 |
| Denza, Diplomatic Law … (see footnote 644 above), p. 160; M. Richtsteig, Wiener
Übereinkommen über diplomatische und konsularische
Beziehungen: Entstehungsgeschichte, Kommentierung, Praxis, 2nd edition
(Baden-Baden, Germany, Nomos, 2010), p. 70. | Denza,《外交法…》(见上文脚注644)，第160页；M.
Richtsteig, Wiener Übereinkommen über diplomatische
und konsularische Beziehungen:Entstehungsgeschichte, Kommentierung, Praxis, 第2版(Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2010年)，第70页。 |
| See footnote 551 above. | 见上文脚注551。 |
| Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski and B. Zimmermann
(eds.), Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Dordrecht, ICRC and Martinus Nijhoff, 1987),
p. 1440, paras. 4742-4744; H. Spieker, “Medical
transportation”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public
International Law, paras. 7-12; see also the less stringent future tense in
the French version “sera arboré”. | Y. Sandoz、C.
Swinarski和B. Zimmermann (编)，《对一九四九年八月十二日日内瓦四公约一九七七年六月八日附加议定书的评注》(多德雷赫特，红十字委员会和马蒂努斯•奈霍夫出版社，1987年)，第1440页，第4742-4744段；H. Spieker,“医务运输工具”，载于《马克斯•普朗克国际公法百科全书》，第7-12段；另见法文版使用的不太死板的将来时“sera arboré”。 |
| Deutscher Bundestag, “Antwort der Bundesregierung: Rechtlicher Status des
Sanitätspersonals der Bundeswehr in Afghanistan”, 9
April 2010, Bundestagsdrucksache 17/1338, p. 2 (translation by the Special
Rapporteur). | Deutscher Bundestag,“Antwort der Bundesregierung: Rechtlicher Status des Sanitätspersonals
der Bundeswehr in Afghanistan”，2010年4月9日，Bundestagsdrucksache
17/1338, 第2页(特别报告员翻译)。 |
| Spieker, “Medical
transportation” (see footnote 648 above), para. 12. | Spieker,“医务运输工具”(见上文脚注648)，第12段。 |
| See Denza, Diplomatic Law … (footnote 644 above), pp. 77-88 with further references to
declarations in relation to espionage; see also Salmon, Manuel de droit
diplomatique (footnote 644 above), p. 484, para. 630; and Richtsteig, Wiener
Übereinkommen über diplomatische … (footnote 646 above), p. 30. | 见Denza,《外交法…》(上文脚注644)，第77-88页，其中进一步提到了与间谍活动有关的声明。 另见Salmon,《外交法手册》(上文脚注644)，第484页，第630段；以及Richtsteig, Wiener Übereinkommen über
diplomatische …(上文脚注646)，第30页。 |
| The Netherlands, Protocol Department,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Protocol Guide for Diplomatic Missions and Consular
Posts. | 荷兰外交部礼宾司，《使领馆礼仪指南》。 |
| Available from | 可查阅。 |
| France, Ministère
des affaires étrangères et du
développement, Guide for Foreign Diplomats Serving in
France: Immunities — Respect for Local Laws and
Regulations; Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, traffic regulations to be
followed by foreign missions in Turkey, Principal Circular Note 63552,
Traffic Regulations 2005/PDGY/63552 (6 April 2005); United Kingdom, Foreign
and Commonwealth Office, Circular dated 19 April 1985 to the Heads of
Diplomatic Missions in London, reprinted in G. Marston, “United Kingdom materials on international law 1985”, British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 56, No. 1 (1985), p.
437. | 法国外交与国际发展部，《外国驻法外交官指南：豁免――遵守当地法律和法规》；土耳其外交部，《外国驻土耳其使团应遵守的交通规则》，第63552号重要通知，交规2005/PDGY/63552(2005年4月6日)；联合王国外交及联邦事务部，1985年4月19日致驻伦敦使馆馆长的通知，又刊印于G. Marston的“1985年联合国王国关于国际法的材料”，《英国国际法年鉴》，第56卷，第1(1985)号，第437页。 |
| See Canada, Foreign Affairs, Trade and
Development, Revised Impaired Driving Policy; United States, Department of
State, Diplomatic Note 10-181 of the Department of State (24 September 2010)
, pp. 8-9. | 见加拿大外交、贸易与发展部，经修订的酒后驾车政策；美国国务院，国务院第10-181号外交照会(2010年9月24日)，第8-9页。 |
| See G. Hafner, “Subsequent
agreements and practice: between interpretation, informal modification, and
formal amendment”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent
Practice (see footnote 398 above), p. 105, at p. 112, for an even more
far-reaching case under article 9 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
Relations. | 见G. Hafiner,《嗣后协定和惯例：解释、非正式修改与正式修正》，载于诺尔特,《条约和嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第105页起，见第112页，其中载有《维也纳外交关系公约》第九条下一个影响更加深远的案例。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, China — Measures Affecting Trading Rights and Distribution Services for
Certain Publications and Audiovisual Entertainment Products (China — Publications and Audiovisual Products), WT/DS363/AB/R, adopted 19
January 2010, para. 403; “Although the Panel’s application of [a]rticle 31 of the Vienna Convention to ‘Sound recording distribution services’ led
it to a ‘preliminary conclusion’ as to the meaning of that entry, the Panel nonetheless decided to
have recourse to supplementary means of interpretation to confirm that
meaning. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，中国－影响某些出版物和娱乐视听产品贸易权和分销服务的措施案(中国－出版物和视听产品案)，WT/DS363/AB/R, 2010年1月19日通过，第403段；“虽然专家组适用《维也纳公约》第三十一条解释‘录音制品分销服务’就该词的含义得出了‘初步结论’，专家组还是决定使用解释的补充资料证实该含义。 |
| We note, in this regard, that China’s argument on appeal appears to assume that the Panel’s analysis under [a]rticle 32 of the Vienna Convention would
necessarily have been different if the Panel had found that the application
of [a]rticle 31 left the meaning of ‘Sound recording
distribution services’ ambiguous or obscure, and if
the Panel had, therefore, resorted to [a]rticle 32 to determine, rather than
to confirm, the meaning of that term. | 关于这一点，我们注意到，中国的上诉论点似乎假定如果委员会发现适用第三十一条导致‘录音制品分销服务’一词的含义不明或难解，故而适用第三十二条来确定，而不是证实该词的含义，那么专家组根据《维也纳公约》第三十二条所作的分析必然将得出不同的结果。 |
| We do not share this view. | 我们不同意这种论点。 |
| The elements to be examined under
[a]rticle 32 are distinct from those to be analysed under [a]rticle 31, but
it is the same elements that are examined under [a]rticle 32 irrespective of
the outcome of the [a]rticle 31 analysis. | 第三十二条下考察的要素与第三十一条下分析的要素不同，但是无论根据第三十一条分析的结果如何，第三十二条下需要考察的都是同样的要素。 |
| Instead, what may differ, depending on
the results of the application of [a]rticle 31, is the weight that will be
attributed to the elements analysed under [a]rticle 32. ” | 根据第三十一条分析的结果可能影响的，是第三十二条下需考察的各要素的权重。” |
| See also Villiger, Commentary … (footnote 414 above), p. 447, para. 11. | 另见Villiger,《…评注》(上文脚注414)，第447页，第11段。 |
| See WTO Appellate Body Report, United
States — Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and
Shrimp Products — AB-1998-4, WT/DS58/AB/R, adopted 6
November 1998, para. 17 (“… most treaties have no
single, undiluted object and purpose but rather a variety of different, and
possibly conflicting, objects and purposes”); Gardiner,
Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392 above), p. 216. | 见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－禁止进口某些虾类和虾制品案－AB-1998-4,
WT/DS58/ AB/R, 1998年11月6日通过，第17段(“大多数条约的目的和宗旨不是单一、纯粹的，而是具有各种不同，可能是冲突的目的和宗旨”；Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第216页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above), at p. 1074, para. 45. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，第1074页，第45段。 |
| Ibid., at p. 1078, para. 55 and p. 1096,
para. 80. | 同上，见第1078页，第55段和第1096页，第80段。 |
| Ibid., at p. 1077, para. 55, and p. 1096,
para. 80. | 同上，见第1077页，第55段和第1096页，第80段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1342,
No. 22495, p. 137. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1342卷，第22495号，第137页。 |
| For the military manuals of Argentina
(1989), Canada (2001) and the United Kingdom (2004), see Henckaerts and
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law, volume 2 … (footnote 601 above), pp. 359-360, paras. 160-164 and the online
update for the military manual of Australia (2006); see also Sandoz,
Swinarski and Zimmermann, Commentary on the Additional Protocols … (footnote 648 above), p. 683, para. 2202. | 阿根廷(1989年)、加拿大(2001年)和联合王国(2004年)的军事指南，见Henckaerts和Doswald-Beck,《国际人道主义习惯法》，第2卷…(上文脚注601)，第359-360页，第160-164段，以及澳大利亚军事指南网上最新版(2006年；另见Sandoz、Swinarski和Zimmermann,《对…附加议定书的评注》(上文脚注648)，第683页，第2202段。 |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords,
Fothergill v. Monarch Airlines Ltd. [1981] AC 251, at p. 278 (Lord
Wilberforce) and p. 279 (Lord Diplock); similarly, Germany, Federal Court
(Civil Matters), BGHZ, vol. 84, p. 339, at pp. 343-344. | 联合王国，上议院，Fothergill诉君主航空有限公司案[1981] AC 251, 第278页(Wilberforce勋爵)和第279页(Diplock勋爵)；类似的案件见德国，联邦法院(民事事项)，BGHZ, 第84卷，第339页起，见第343-344页。 |
| United States, Supreme Court, Air France
v. Saks, 470 U.S. 392, pp. 403-404. | 美国，最高法院，法国航空公司诉Saks案，470 U.S. 392, 第403-404页。 |
| Australia, Federal Court of Australia,
Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police and the Commonwealth of Australia
v. Geraldo Magno and Ines Almeida [1992] FCA 566, paras. 30-35 (Einfeld J.);
see also United Kingdom, House of Lords, R (Mullen) v. Secretary of State for
the Home Department [2004] UKHL 18, paras. 47-48 (Lord Steyn). | 澳大利亚，澳大利亚联邦法院，澳大利亚联邦警察专员和澳大利亚联邦诉Geraldo
Magno和Ines Almeida案[1992] FCA
566, 第30-35段(Einfeld J.)；另见联合王国，上议院，R(Mullen)诉内政大臣案[2004] UKHL18, 第47-48段(Steyn勋爵)。 |
| See, for example, United States, Supreme
Court, Air France v. Saks, 470 U.S. 392, pp. 397-407; United States, Supreme
Court, Abbott v. Abbott 560 U.S. (2010), Opinion of the Court (delivered by
Justice Kennedy), Slip Opinion (accessed 9 June 2016), at pp. 12-16; Germany,
Federal Administrative Court, BVerwGE, vol. 139, p. 272, at pp. 288-289; High
Court of Australia, Andrew John Macoun v. Commissioner of Taxation [2015] HCA
44, at pp. 75-82. | 例如，见美国，最高法院，法国航空公司诉Saks案，470 U.S. 392, 第397-407页；美国，最高法院，Abbott诉Abbott案，560
U.S.(2010)，法院意见书(肯尼迪法官撰写)，意见原文单(www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-645.pdf)(2016年6月9日查阅)，见第12-16页；德国，联邦行政法院，BVerwGE,第139卷，第272页，见第288-289页；澳大利亚高等法院，Macoun诉税务专员案[2015] HCA 44, 见第75-82页。 |
| United Kingdom, Supreme Court, R (Adams)
v. Secretary of State for Justice [2011] UKSC 18, para. 17 (Lord Philips) (“[t]his practice on the part of only one of the many signatories to
the ICCPR does not provide a guide to the meaning of article 14 (6) …. It has not been suggested that there is any consistency of
practice on the part of the signatories that assists in determining the
meaning of article 14 (6)”). | 联合王国，最高法院，R (Adams)诉司法大臣案[2011] UKSC 18, 第17段(Philips勋爵)(“《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的许多签署国中唯一一个国家的这种惯例没有为第十四条第6款的含义提供指导…不能认为存在签署国有助于确定第十四条第6款含义的任何一致惯例”)。 |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords, King v.
Bristow Helicopters Ltd (Scotland) [2002] UKHL 7, at para. 81. | 联合王国，上议院，King诉Bristow直升机有限公司(苏格兰)案[2002] UKHL
7, 第81段。 |
| Ibid., at para. 7 (Lord Mackay): “Because I consider it important that the Warsaw Convention should
have a common construction in all jurisdictions that have adopted the
Convention, I attach crucial importance to the decisions of the United States
Supreme Court in Eastern Airlines Inc. v. Floyd (1991) 499 US 530 and El Al
Israel Airlines v. Tseng, particularly as the United States is such a large
participant in carriage by air”; or Einfeld J. for
the Federal Court of Australia in Commissioner of the Australian Federal
Police and the Commonwealth of Australia v. Geraldo Magno and Ines Almeida
[1992] FCA 566, in a case concerning the interpretation of the term “impairment of dignity” of a diplomatic
representation under article 22 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
Relations, recalling article 31, paragraph 3 (b), who stated that “international application of the Convention by democratic
countries indicates that another significant consideration is freedom of
speech in the host country. | 同上，见第7段(Mackay勋爵)：“我认为必须在通过公约的所有法域中建立对《华沙公约》的共同理解，因此我非常重视美国最高法院对东部航空公司诉Floyd案(1991)499 US 530和El Al以色列航空公司诉Tseng案的裁决，特别是考虑到美国是空中运输的如此重大参与方”；或Einfeld J就澳大利亚联邦法院在澳大利亚联邦警察局专员和澳大利亚联邦诉Geraldo
Magno和Ines Almeida案[1992] FCA
566，该案涉及《维也纳外交关系公约》第二十二条规定的外交代表权所涉“损害尊严”一词的解释，他回顾第三十一条第三款(b)项说：“民主国家在国际范围内适用公约时的另一个重要考虑是东道国的言论自由。 |
| This factor is particularly weighty when
dealing with political demonstrations outside embassies. | 在处理大使馆外的政治示威时，这一因素尤为重要。 |
| It is useful to consider the practice of
countries with considerable experience in dealing with this type of
situation, such as the United States and the United Kingdom”, at para. 30. | 应考虑在处理此类情况方面有丰富经验的国家的惯例，如美国和联合王国”。 |
| Canada, Supreme Court, Yugraneft Corp. v.
Rexx Management Corp. [2010] 1 SCR 649, para. 21 (Rothstein J.). | 加拿大，最高法院，Yugraneft公司诉Rexx管理公司案[2010] 1 SCR 649, 第21段(Rothstein, J.)。 |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords: Sidhu v.
British Airways [1997] AC 430, at p. 453 (Lord Hope); Fothergill v. Monarch
Airlines Ltd. [1981] AC 251, pp. 275-276 (Lord Wilberforce). | 联合王国，上议院，Sidhu诉英国航空公司案[1997] AC 430，见第453页(Hope勋爵)；Fothergill诉君主航空有限公司案[1981] AC 251, 第275-276页(Wilberforce勋爵)。 |
| WTO, Appellate Body Report, EC — Bananas III (see footnote 445 above), paras.391-393. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－香蕉案(三)(见上文脚注445)，第391-393段。 |
| Murphy, “The
relevance of subsequent agreement …” (see footnote
642 above), p. 88. | Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(见上文脚注642)，第88页。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see footnote 393 above), p. 107 with reference to Waldock,
Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties …(A/CONF.39/11) (see footnote 575 above), 37th meeting, 24 April
1968, p. 207, paras.49-52; Villiger, Commentary …
(see footnote 414 above), p. 513, paras. 7, 9 and 11; K. Odendahl, “Article 39. General rule regarding the amendment of treaties”, in Dörr and Schmalenbach, Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties … (see footnote 439 above), p. 706, at para.
16. | Sinclair, 《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注393)，第107页，其中提到Waldock, 《联合国条约法会议正式记录…》(A/CONF.39/11)(见上文脚注575)，第37次会议，1968年4月24日，第207页，第49-52段；Villiger, 《…评注》(见上文脚注414)，第513页，第7、9和11段；K. Odendahl,“第三十九条. 修正条约的一般规则”，载于Dörr 和Schmalenbach,《维也纳条约法公约…》(见上文脚注439)，第706页，第16段。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 395 above), at pp. 62-63, paras. 128 and 131; the Court then
concluded, in the case under review, that these conditions had not been
fulfilled, at pp. 62-66, paras. 128-142. | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注395)，第62-63页，第128和131段；法院继而得出结论称，本案不满足这些条件，见第62-66页，第128-142段。 |
| In judicial practice, it is sometimes not
necessary to determine whether an agreement has the effect of interpreting or
modifying a treaty, see Territorial Dispute (footnote 395 above), at p. 29,
para. 60 (“… in the view of the Court, for the
purposes of the present Judgment, there is no reason to categorize it either
as confirmation or as a modification of the Declaration”); it is sometimes considered that an agreement under art. 31,
para. 3 (a), can also have the effect of modifying a treaty (see Aust, Modern
Treaty Law and Practice (see footnote 525 above), pp. 212-214 with examples. | 在司法实践中，有时不需要确定一项协定是具有解释还是修改条约的效果，见领土争端案(上文脚注395)，第29页，第60段(“…法院认为，为本判决之目的，没有必要划分其属于对声明的证实还是修改”)；有时认为，第三十一条第三款(a)项所指协定也可以具有修改条约的效果，(见Aust, 《现代条约法和实践》(上文脚注525)，第212-214页，其中举了例子)。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 395 above), at p. 63, paras. 131 and 140; Crawford, “A consensualist interpretation of article 31 (3) …” (see footnote 606 above), p. 32; Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal, Interlocutory Award No. ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim) (see footnote
537 above), p. 77, at pp. 125-126, para. 132; ADF Group Inc. v. United States
of America (Case No. ARB(AF)/00/1), ICSID Arbitration Under NAFTA Chapter
Eleven, 9 January 2003, ICSID Reports, vol. 6 (2004), pp. 84-85, para. 177 ;
Ibid., Part IV, chap. C, paras. 20-21; A/CN.4/671,
paras. 146-165. | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注395)，第63页，第131和第140段；Crawford,“对…第三十一条第三款的合意主义解释”(见上文脚注606)，第32页；伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)(见上文脚注537)，第77页起，见第125-126页，第132段；ADF集团公司诉美利坚合众国(案件号ARB(AF)/00/1)，国际投资争端解决中心根据《北美自由贸易协定》第11章作出的仲裁，2003年1月9日，《国际投资争端解决中心案例汇编》，第6卷(2004年)，第84-85页，第117段；同上，第四部分，C章，第20-21段；A/CN.4/671, 第146-165段。 |
| It may be that States, in diplomatic
contexts outside court proceedings, tend to acknowledge more openly that a
certain agreement or common practice amounts to a modification of a treaty,
see Murphy, “The relevance of subsequent agreement …” (footnote 642 above), p. 83. | 在法庭诉讼外的外交环境下，国家可能比较愿意公开承认某项协定或共同的惯例构成对条约的修改，见Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(上文脚注642)，第83页。 |
| Ibid., p. 66, para. 140; Crawford, “A consensualist interpretation of article 31 (3) …” (see footnote 606 above), p. 32. | 同上，第66页，第140段；Crawford,“对…第三十一条第三款的合意主义解释”(见上文脚注606)，第32页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷， |
| document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 236 (footnote
omitted). | A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第236页(脚注略)。 |
| See Official Records of the United
Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties …
(A/CONF.39/11) (footnote 575 above), 37th meeting, 24 April 1968, pp.
207-215; A/CN.4/671, paras.119-121; Distefano, “La
pratique subséquente …”
(footnote 573 above), pp. 56-61. | 见《联合国条约法会议正式记录…》(A/CONF.39/11)(上文脚注575)，第37次会议，1968年4月24日，第207-215页；A/CN.4/671, 第119-121段；Distefano,“…嗣后惯例”(上文脚注573)，第56-61页。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see footnote 393 above), p. 138; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation
(see footnote 392 above), pp. 275-280; Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités…” (see footnote 393 above), pp. 51-52;
Kamto, “La volonté de l’État …” (see footnote 533 above), pp.
134-141, at p. 134; Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see footnote 525
above), p. 213; Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote
414 above), p. 432, para. 23; Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 439 above), p. 555, para.76 (in accord, Odendahl, “Article 39 …” (see footnote 675 above), p.
702, paras. 10-11); | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注393)，第138页；Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第275-280页；Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第51-52页；Kamto,“…国家意志”(见上文脚注533)，第134-141页，见第134页；Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注525)，第213页；Villiger,《…评注》(上文脚注414)，第432页，第23段；Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第555页，第76段(又见Odendahl,“第三十九条…”(见上文脚注675)，第702页，第10-11段)； |
| Distefano, “La
pratique subséquente …” (see
footnote 573 above), pp. 62-67; H. Thirlway, “The law
and procedure of the International Court of Justice 1960-1989: supplement,
2006 — part three”, British
Yearbook of International Law 2006, vol. 77, pp. 1-82, p. 65; M.N. Shaw,
International Law, 6th edition (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge
University Press, 2008), p. 934; I. Buga, “Subsequent
practice and treaty modification”, in Conceptual and
Contextual Perspectives on the Modern Law of Treaties, M.J. Bowman and D.
Kritsiotis, eds. (forthcoming), at footnote 452 with further references; | Distefano,“…嗣后惯例”(见上文脚注573)，第62-67页；H.
Thirlway,“1960-1989年国际法院的法律和诉讼：2006年补编－第三部分”，《2006年英国国际法年鉴》，第77卷，第1-82页，见第65页；M. N. Shaw, 《国际法》，第6版(剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2008年)，第934页；I. Buga,“嗣后惯例与条约修改”，载于M. J. Bowman和D. Kritsiotis编写的《现代条约法的概念和语境视角》(即将出版)，见脚注452, 其中提到了更多的参考资料； |
| disagreeing with this view, in
particular, and stressing the solemnity of the conclusion of a treaty in
contrast with the informality of practice Murphy, “The
relevance of subsequent agreement …” (see footnote
642 above), pp. 89-90; see also Hafner, “Subsequent
agreements and practice …” (see footnote 655 above),
pp. 115-117 (differentiating between the perspectives of courts and States,
as well as emphasizing the importance of amendment provisions in this
context). | 反对这种观点，强调相对于实践的非正式性，缔结条约具有庄重性，见Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(见上文脚注642)，第89-90页；另见Hafner,《嗣后协定和惯例…》(见上文上文脚注655)，第115-117页(区分法院和国家的角度，在这种背景下强调修正案的重要性)。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), at p. 242, para. 64; see also
Question of the tax regime governing pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials
residing in France (footnote 532 above); Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …” (see footnote 393 above ), p. 51;
Kamto, “La volonté de l’État … “ (see footnote 533 above), pp.
134-141; R. Bernhardt, Die Auslegung völkerrechtlicher Verträge (Cologne,
Berlin, Heymanns, 1963), p. 132. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注395)，第242页，第64段；另见向居住在法国的教科文组织退休职员支付退休金的税收制度问题案(见上文脚注532)；Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第51页；Kamto,“…国家意志”(见上文脚注533)，第134-141页；R.
Bernhardt, Die Auslegung völkerrechtlicher Verträge (Cologne, 柏林，Heymann, 1963年)，第132页。 |
| See draft conclusion 8 [3] and commentary
thereto, paras. (1)-(18). | 见结论草案8[3]及其评注，第(1)-(18)段。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see footnote 393 above), p. 138; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation
(see footnote 392 above), p. 275; Murphy, “The
relevance of subsequent agreement …” (see footnote
642 above), p. 90; B. Simma, “Miscellaneous thoughts
on subsequent agreements and practice”, in Nolte,
Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398 above), p. 46; Karl,
Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see footnote 454
above), pp. 42-43; Sorel and Boré Eveno, “1969 Vienna Convention, Article 31 …” (see
footnote 440 above), p. 825, para. 42; | Sinclair, 《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注393)，第138页；Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第275页；Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(见上文脚注642)，第90页；B. Simma,“关于嗣后协定和惯例的思考”，载于诺尔特,《条约和嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第46页；Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis…(见上文脚注454)，第42-43页；Sorel和Boré Eveno,“1969年《维也纳公约》，第三十一条…”(见上文脚注440), 第825页，第42段； |
| Dörr, “Article 31
…” (see footnote 439 above), p. 555, para. 76; this
is true even if the two processes can theoretically be seen as being “legally quite distinct”, see the
Dissenting Opinion of Judge Parra-Aranguren in Kasikili/Sedudu Island
(footnote 395 above), at pp. 1212-1213, para. 16; similarly, Hafner, “Subsequent agreements and practice …” (see
footnote 655 above), p. 114; | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第555页，第76段；的确难以划分界限，即使理论上二者被视为“在法律上有明显区别”，见Parra-Aranguren法官在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(上文脚注395)中的反对意见，见1212-1213页，第16段；同样见Hafner,《嗣后协定和惯例…》(见上文上文脚注655)，第114页； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 446 above), p. 168. | Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注446)，第168页。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), at p. 242, para. 64. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注395)，第242页，第64段。 |
| Thirlway, “The
law and procedure of the International Court of Justice 1960-1989 …” (see footnote 683 above), p. 64. | Thirlway,“1960-1989年国际法院的法律和诉讼…”(见上文脚注683)，第64页。 |
| See already Official Records of the
General Assembly, Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10, A/67/10, p. 124,
para. 238, and, ibid., Sixty-third Session, Supplement No. 10, A/63/10, annex
A, para. 42. | 见《大会正式记录，第六十七届会议，补编第10号》，A/67/10, 第124页，第238段，以及同上，《第六十三届会议，补编第10号》，A/63/10, 附件A,
第42段。 |
| Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 353, para. 68. | 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚：赤道几内亚参与诉讼)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第303页起，见第353页，第68段。 |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (see footnote 488 above): “an acknowledgement
by conduct was undoubtedly made in a very definite way … it is clear that the circumstances were such as called for some
reaction” (p. 23); | 柏威夏寺案(见上文脚注488)：“毫无疑问，以非常确定的方式通过行为承认…这种情况下显然需要作出反应”(第23页)； |
| “[a] clearer affirmation of title on the
French Indo-Chinese side can scarcely be imagined”
and therefore “demanded a reaction” (p. 30). | “法属印度支那对所有权的主张再明确不过了”，因此“需要作出反应”(第30页)。 |
| M. Kohen, “Uti
possidetis, prescription et pratique subséquente à un traité dans l’affaire
de l’île de Kasikili/Sedudu devant la Cour
internationale de Justice”, German Yearbook of
International Law, vol. 43 (2000), p. 253, at p. 272. | M. Kohen,“Uti
possidetis, prescription et pratique subséquente à un traité dans l’affaire
de l’île de Kasikili/Sedudu devant la Cour
internationale de Justice”，《德国国际法年鉴》，第43(2000)卷，第253页起，见第272页。 |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (see footnote 488 above), at p. 26: “a fact,
which if true, must have been no less evident in 1908”.Judge Parra-Aranguren has opined that the Temple of Preah Vihear
case demonstrated “that the effect of subsequent
practice on that occasion was to amend the treaty”
(see Kasikili/Sedudu Island (footnote 395 above), Dissenting Opinion of Judge
Parra-Aranguren, at pp. 1212-1213, para. 16); | 柏威夏寺案(见上文脚注488)，第26页：“这一事实，如果千真万确，在1908年一定更加明显”。 Parra-Aranguren法官认为柏威夏寺案表明，“那种情况下的嗣后惯例起到了修改条约的作用”(见卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(上文脚注395)，Parra-Aranguren法官的反对意见，见第1212-1213页，第16段)； |
| Buga, “Subsequent
practice and treaty modification” (see footnote 683
above), at footnote 500. | Buga,“嗣后惯例与条约修改”(见上文脚注683)，脚注500。 |
| In particular the Namibia opinion (see
footnote 636 above) has been read as implying that subsequent practice has
modified Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, see
Alain Pellet, “Article 38”,
in The Statute of the International Court of Justice A Commentary, 2nd
edition, A. Zimmermann and others, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press,
2012), p. 844, para.279, note 809; cf. A/CN.4/671, paras. 124-126. | 特别是，关于纳米比亚的咨询意见(见上文脚注636)被解读为暗示嗣后惯例修改了《联合国宪章》第二十七条第三项，见Alain
Pellet,“第三十八条”，载于A. Zimmermann等人编写的《＜国际法院规约＞评注》，第2版(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2012年)，第844页，第279段；注809, 参见A/CN.4/671, 第124-126段。 |
| M. Kohen, “Keeping
subsequent agreements and practice in their right limits”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398
above), pp. 34 et seq., at p. 43 regarding Decision regarding delimitation of
the border between Eritrea and Ethiopia, 13 April 2002, UNRIAA, vol. XXV
(Sales No. E/F.05.V.5), pp. 83-195, at pp. 110-111, paras. 3.6-3.10; | M. Kohen,“适当限制嗣后协定和惯例的作用”，载于诺尔特, 《条约和嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第34页及以后各页，见第43页，其中提到埃塞俄比亚和厄立特里亚划界案的裁决，2002年4月13日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十五卷(出售品编号：E/F.05.V.5)，第83-195页，见第110-111页，第3.6.-3.10段； |
| see also Case concerning the location of
boundary markers in Taba between Egypt and Israel, 29 September 1988, UNRIAA,
vol. XX (Sales No. E/F.93.V.3), pp. 1-118, see pp. 56-57, paras. 209-210, in
which the Arbitral Tribunal held, in an obiter dictum, “that the demarcated boundary line would prevail over the Agreement
if a contradiction could be detected” (ibid., p. 57); | 另见埃及和以色列之间塔巴界桩位置案，1988年9月29日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十卷(出售品编号：E/F.93.V.3)，第1-118页，见第56-57页，第209和210段，仲裁法庭在附带意见中称：“划定的界线与《协定》不符时，以划定的界线为准”(同上，第57页)； |
| but see R. Kolb, “La modification d’un traité par la
pratique subséquente des parties”, Revue suisse de
droit international et de droit européen, vol. 14 (2004), pp. 9-32, at p.
20. | 另见R. Kolb,“La
modification d’un traité par la pratique
subséquente des parties”，《瑞士国际法和欧洲法评论》，第14卷(2004年)，第9-32页，见第20页。 |
| Interpretation of the Air Transport
Services Agreement between the United States of America and France, 22 December
1963, UNRIAA, vol. XVI (Sales No.E/F.69.V.1), pp. 5-74, at pp. 62-63;
Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties … (A/CONF.39/11) (see footnote 575 above), 37th meeting, 24 April
1968, p. 208, para. 58 (Japan); Murphy, “The
relevance of subsequent agreement …” (footnote 642
above), p. 89. | 对美利坚合众国与法国航空运输协定的解释，1963年12月22日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十六卷(出售品编号：E/F.69.V.1)，第5-74页，见第62-63页；《联合国条约法会议正式记录…》(A/CONF.39/11)(见上文脚注575)，第37次会议，1968年4月24日，第208页，第58段(日本)；Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(见上文脚注642)，第89页。 |
| WTO, Appellate Body Report, EC — Bananas III (see footnote 445 above), Second Recourse to Article
21.5, WT/DS27/AB/RW2/ECU and Corr.1 adopted 11 December 2008,
WT/DS27/AB/RW/USA and Corr.1, adopted 22 December 2008, paras. 391-393. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体―香蕉案(三)(见上文脚注445)，第二次诉诸第21.5条，WT/DS27/AB/ RW2/ECU和Corr.1, 2008年12月11日通过，WT/DS27/AB/RW/USA和Corr.1, 2008年12月22日通过，第391-393段。 |
| Marrakesh Agreement establishing the
World Trade Organization (see footnote 445 above), Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, Annex 2, at p. 401. | 《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》(见上文脚注445)，《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》，附件2, 第401页。 |
| See Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United
Kingdom, no. 61498/08, 4 October 2010, para. 119, referring to Öcalan v.
Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, 12 May 2005, ECHR 2005-IV, and quoting Soering v.
the United Kingdom, no. 14038/88, 7 July 1989, ECHR Series A no. 161. | 见Al-Saadoon和Mufdhi诉联合王国，第61498/08号，2010年10月4日，第119段，其中提到了Öcalan诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第46221/99号，2005年5月12日，《2005年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第四卷，并引用了Soering诉联合王国，第14038/88号，1989年7月7日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第161号。 |
| Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United
Kingdom, no. 61498/08, 4 October 2010, para. 120; B. Malkani, “The obligation to refrain from assisting the use of the death
penalty”, International and Comparative Law
Quarterly, vol. 62, No. 3 (2013), pp. 523-556. | Al-Saadoon和Mufdhi
诉联合王国，第61498/08号，2010年10月4日，第120段；B. Malkani,“避免协助使用死刑的义务”，《国际法和比较法季刊》，第62卷，第3号(2013年)，第523-556页。 |
| See Buga, “Subsequent
practice and treaty modification” (footnote 683
above), at footnotes 126-132. | 见Buga,“嗣后惯例与条约修改”(上文脚注683)，见脚注126-132。 |
| See Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 353, para. 68. | 见喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚：赤道几内亚参与诉讼)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第303页起，见第353页，第68段。 |
| A/CN.4/671, paras. 119-121. | A/CN.4/671, 第119-121段。 |
| Murphy, “The
relevance of subsequent agreement and subsequent practice …” (footnote 642 above), p. 89; Simma, “Miscellaneous
thoughts on subsequent agreements …” (footnote 686
above), p. 47; Hafner, “Subsequent agreements and
practice …” (see footnote 655 above), pp. 115-117;
J.E. Alvarez, “Limits of change by way of subsequent
agreements and practice”, in Nolte, Treaties and
Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398 above), p. 130. | Murphy,“嗣后协定和嗣后惯例…的作用”(上文脚注642)，第89页；Simma,“关于嗣后协定…的思考”(上文脚注686)，第47页；Hafner, 《嗣后协定和惯例….》(见上文脚注655)，第115-117页；J.E. Alvarez,“通过嗣后协定和惯例修改条约的限制”，载于诺尔特, 《条约和嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第130页。 |
| See NATO Strategic Concept Case, German
Federal Constitutional Court, Judgment of 19 June 2001, Application 2 BvE
6/99 (English translation available from, paras. 19-21; | 见北约战略概念案，德国联邦宪法法院，2001年6月19日的判决，申诉号2 BvE
6/99(英文译文见：)，第19-21段； |
| German Federal Fiscal Court, BFHE,
vol.157, p. 39, at pp. 43-44; ibid., vol.227, p. 419, at p. 426; ibid., vol.
181, p. 158, at p. 161; S. Kadelbach, “Domestic
constitutional concerns with respect to the use of subsequent agreements and
practice at the international level”, in Nolte,
Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 398 above), pp. 145-148;
Alvarez, “Limits of change …”
(see footnote 704 above), p. 130; | 德国联邦财政法院，BFHE, 第157卷，第39页起，见第43-44页；同上，第227卷，第419起，见第426页；同上，第181卷，第158页起，见第161页；S.
Kadelbach,“与国际上使用嗣后协定和惯例有关的国内宪法问题”，载于诺尔特,《条约和嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第145-148页；Alvarez,“…修改条约的限制”(见上文脚注704)，第130页； |
| I. Wuerth, “Treaty
interpretation, subsequent agreements and practice, and domestic
constitutions”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent
Practice (see footnote 398 above), pp. 154-159; and H. Ruiz Fabri, “Subsequent practice, domestic separation of powers, and concerns
of legitimacy”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent
Practice (see footnote 398 above), pp. 165-166. | I. Wuerth,“条约解释、嗣后协定和惯例与国内宪法”，载于诺尔特, 《条约和嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第154-159页；H. Ruiz Fabri,“嗣后惯例、国内权力分立与合法性问题”载于诺尔特, 《条约和嗣后惯例》(见上文脚注398)，第165-166页。 |
| See, for example, Kohen, “Uti possidetis, prescription et pratique subséquente …” (footnote 692 above), p. 274 (in
particular with respect to boundary treaties). | 例如见Kohen,“Uti
possidetis, prescription et pratique subséquente …”(上文脚注692)，第274页(特别是在边界条约方面)。 |
| See above draft conclusion 2 [1], para.
5, and the commentary thereto; Hafner, “Subsequent
agreements and practice …” (see footnote 655 above),
p. 117; some authors support the view that the range of what is conceivable
as an “interpretation” is
wider in case of a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3, than in the case of interpretations by other means of
interpretation, including the range for evolutive interpretations by courts
or tribunals, for example, Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392
above), p. 275; Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 439 above), pp. 554-555, para. 76. | 见上文结论草案2[1]第5段及其评注；Hafner, 《嗣后协定和惯例…》(见上文脚注655)，第117页；一些著述者认为，第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定或嗣后惯例作为“解释”的范围超出了其他解释资料，包括法院或仲裁法庭的演进式解释的范围，例如见Gardiner, 《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第275页；Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第554-555页，第76段。 |
| See draft conclusion 8 [3]; in the case
concerning the Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights, for
example, the International Court of Justice could leave the question open as
to whether the term “comercio” had been modified by the subsequent practice of the parties since
it decided that it was possible to give this term an evolutive
interpretation. | 见结论草案8[3]；在关于航行权和相关权利的争端案中，国际法院可以不回答缔约方的嗣后惯例是否修改了“comercio”一词的含义，因为法院已判定可以对其作出演进式解释。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), at pp. 242-243, paras. 64-66. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注395)，第242-243页，第64-66段。 |
| T.O. Elias, “The
doctrine of intertemporal law”, American Journal of
International Law, vol. 74 (1980), pp. 285 et seq.; D.W. Greig,
Intertemporality and the Law of Treaties (London, British Institute of
International and Comparative Law, 2001); | T.O. Elias,“国际法理论”，《美国国际法杂志》，第74卷(1980年)，第285页及以下各页；D.W. Greig,《时际性与条约法》(伦敦，英国国际法和比较法学会，2001年)； |
| M. Fitzmaurice, “Dynamic
(evolutive) interpretation of treaties, Part I”, The
Hague Yearbook of International Law, vol. 21 (2008), pp. 101-153; M. Kotzur, “Intertemporal law”, in Max Planck
Encyclopedia of Public International Law; | M. Fitzmaurice,“动态性(演变性)条约解释，第一部分”，《海牙国际法年鉴》，第21卷(2008年)，第101-153页；M. Kotzur,“时际法”，载于《马克斯•普朗克国际公法百科全书》； |
| U. Linderfalk, “Doing
the right thing for the right reason: why dynamic or static approaches should
be taken in the interpretation of treaties”,
International Community Law Review, vol. 10, No. 2 (2008), pp. 109 et seq.; | U. Linderfalk,“出于正确的理由做正确的事情：对于条约解释为何应当采取动态或静态的办法”，《国际社会法律审评》，第10卷，第2号(2008年)，第109页及以下各页； |
| A. Verdross and B. Simma, Universelles
Völkerrecht, 3rd edition (Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 1984), pp. 496 et
seq., paras. 782 et seq. | A. Verdross和B.
Simma, Universelles Völkerrecht, 第3版(柏林，Duncker & Humblot, 1984年)，第496页及以下各页，第782段及以下各段。 |
| M. Fitzmaurice, “Dynamic
(evolutive) interpretation …” (see footnote 709
above). | M. Fitzmaurice,“动态性(演变性) …解释”(见上文脚注709)。 |
| Island of Palmas case (the Netherlands/United
States of America), award of 4 April 1928, UNRIAA, vol. II (Sales No.
1949.V.1), pp. 829-871, at p. 845. | 帕尔马斯岛案(荷兰诉美利坚合众国)，1928年4月4日的裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二卷(出售品编号1949.V.1)，第829-871页，见第845页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 220-221, para. (11). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第220-221页，第(11)段。 |
| Award in Arbitration regarding the Iron
Rhine (“Ijzeren Rijn”)
Railway (see footnote 397 above), p. 35, at para. 81; see, for example, A.
Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see footnote 525 above), pp. 215-216; | 莱茵铁路公司案仲裁裁决(见上文脚注397)，第35页，见第81段；例如，见A.
Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注525)，第215-216页； |
| M. Fitzmaurice, “Dynamic
(evolutive) interpretation …” (see footnote 709
above), at pp. 29-31; G. Distefano, “L’interprétation évolutive
de la norme internationale”, Revue générale de droit international public, vol.
115, No. 2 (2011), pp. 373-396, at pp. 384 and 389 et seq.; | M. Fitzmaurice,“动态性(演变性)…解释”(见上文脚注709)，见第29-31页；G.
Di Stefano,“L’interprétation évolutive de la norme
internationale”，Revue générale de droit international public, 第115卷，第2号(2011年)，第373-396页，见第384页和第389页及以下各页； |
| Higgins, “Some
observations on the inter-temporal rule …” (see
footnote 636 above), at pp. 174 et seq.; Sorel and Boré Eveno, “1969 Vienna Convention, Article
31 …” (see footnote 440 above), at p. 807, para. 8;
P.-M. Dupuy, “Evolutionary interpretation of treaties”, in Cannizzaro, The Law of Treaties …
(see footnote 439 above), at pp. 125 et seq.; M. Kotzur, “Intertemporal Law” (see footnote 709
above), at para. 14. | Higgins,“关于…时效规则的若干意见(见上文脚注636)，见第174页及以下各页；Sorel和Boré Eveno,“1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条…”(见上文脚注440)，见第807页，第8段；P.-M. Dupuy,“条约的演变性解释”，载于Cannizzaro, 《…条约法》(见上文脚注439)，见第125页及以下各页；M. Kotzur,“国际法”(见上文脚注709)，见第14段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 222, para. (16); Higgins, “Some observations on the inter-temporal rule …” (see footnote 636 above), at p. 178. | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第222页，第(16)段；Higgins,“关于…时效规则的若干意见”(见上文脚注636)，见第178页。 |
| Report of the Study Group on
fragmentation of international law, 2006 (A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1), para.
478. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告，2006年，(A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1)，第478段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), Declaration of Judge ad hoc
Guillaume, p. 290, at pp. 294 et seq., paras. 9 et seq.; | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注395)，纪尧姆专案法官的声明，第290页起，见第294页及以下各页，第9段及以下各段； |
| see also Yearbook … 2005, vol. II (Part Two), p. 89, para.479; Report of the Study
Group on fragmentation of international law (A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1), para. 478; Institut de droit international, resolution on “Le problème intertemporel en droit
international public”, Annuaire de l’Institut de droit international, vol. 56 (Wiesbaden session,
1975), pp. 536 et seq. | 另见《2005年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第89页，479段；国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1)，第478段；国际法学会，关于“公共国际法中的时际问题”的决议，《国际法学会年刊》，第56卷(威斯巴登届会，1975年)，第536页及以下各页。 |
| Case concerning a boundary dispute
between Argentina and Chile concerning the delimitation of the frontier line
between boundary post 62 and Mount Fitzroy, decision of 21 October 1994,
UNRIAA, vol. XXII (Sales No. E/F.00.V.7), pp. 3-149, at p. 43, para. 130; see
also, with respect to the term “watershed”, Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (see footnote 488
above), at pp. 16-22. | 阿根廷和智利在第62号界桩与菲茨罗伊峰之间划界争端案，1994年10月21日的裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十二卷(出售品编号E/F.00.V.7)，第3-149页，见第43页，第130段；另外关于“分水岭”一词，参见隆瑞古寺案(见上文脚注488)，见第16-22页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above), at pp. 1060-1062, paras. 21 and 25. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，见第1060-1061页，第21和第25段。 |
| Decision regarding delimitation of the
border between Eritrea and Ethiopia (Eritrea v. Ethiopia), UNRIAA, vol. XXV
(Sales No. E/F.05.V.5), pp. 83-195, p. 110, para. 3.5. | 关于厄立特里亚与埃塞俄比亚划界问题的裁决(厄立特里亚诉埃塞俄比亚)，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十五卷(出售品编号E/F.05.V.5)，第83-195页，第110页，第3.5段。 |
| Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 338 and 339, para. 48, and p.
346, para. 59. | 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚：赤道几内亚参与诉讼)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第303页，见第338和339页，第48段，以及第346页，第59段。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (see footnote 432 above), at p.
31, para. 53. | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(见上文脚注432)，见第31页，第53段。 |
| Aegean Sea Continental Shelf, Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 1978, p. 3, at p. 32, para. 77; Report of the Study Group on
fragmentation of international law, 2006 (A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1), para.
478. | 爱琴海大陆架案，判决，《1978年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第32页，第77段；国际法委员会国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告，2006年(A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1)，第478段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), at p. 243, para. 66. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注395)，见第243页，第66段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States — Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (US — Shrimp), WT/DS58/AB/R, adopted 6 November 1998, para. 130. | 世贸组织上诉机构的报告，美国－禁止进口特定虾类和虾类制品案(美国－虾案)，WT/DS58/AB/R, 1998年11月6日通过，第130段。 |
| See United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea, 1982, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1833, No. 31363, p. 3,
art. 153, para. 4, and art. 4, para. 4 in annex III. | 见《联合国海洋法公约》，1982年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页，第153条第4款和附件三第4条第4款。 |
| Responsibilities and obligations of
States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the area
(see footnote 396 above), at para. 117. | 担保个人和实体从事“区域”内活动的国家所负责任和义务(见上文脚注396)，见第117段。 |
| Ibid., para. 211. | 同上，第211段。 |
| Tyrer v. the United Kingdom, no. 5856/72,
ECHR Series A, no. 26, para. 31. | Tyrer诉联合王国，第5856/72号，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第26号，第31段。 |
| The Right to Information on Consular
Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law (see
footnote 431 above), para. 114 (“This guidance is
particularly relevant in the case of international human rights law, which
has made great headway thanks to an evolutive interpretation of international
instruments of protection. | 在正当法律程序保障框架内获得领事协助信息的权利(见上文脚注431)，第114段(“这一指导意见与国际人权法问题特别相关，由于对有关保护的国际文书的演进性解释，国际人权法取得了很大进展。 |
| That evolutive interpretation is
consistent with the general rules of treaty interpretation established in the
1969 Vienna Convention. | 演进性解释符合1969年《维也纳公约》确立的条约解释的通则。 |
| Both this Court, in the Advisory Opinion
on the Interpretation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of
Man (1989) and the European Court of Human Rights, in Tyrer v. United Kingdom
(1978), Marckx v. Belgium (1979), Loizidou v. Turkey (1995), among others, have
held that human rights treaties are living instruments whose interpretation
must consider the changes over time and present-day conditions”) (footnotes omitted). | 本法院在关于《美洲关于人的权利和义务宣言》的解释的咨询意见(1989年)中以及欧洲人权法院在Tyrer诉联合王国(1978年)、Marckx诉比利时(1979年)、Loizidou诉土耳其(1995年)等案件中均认定，人权条约是活的文书，其解释必须考虑到随时间流逝而来的变化和今天的条件)”(脚注略)。 |
| See Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine
(see footnote 397 above), at para. 80: “In the
present case it is not a conceptual or generic term that is in issue, but
rather new technical developments relating to the operation and capacity of
the railway”; | 见莱茵铁路公司仲裁案(见上文脚注397)，见第80段：“在本案中，问题并非是概念还是普通用语问题，而是一个涉及铁路运营和能力的新的技术发展问题”； |
| and also Aegean Sea Continental Shelf
case (see footnote 722 above), at p. 32, para. 77; Case concerning the
delimitation of the maritime boundary between Guinea-Bissau and Senegal
(Guinea-Bissau v. Senegal), Award, 31 July 1989, UNRIAA, vol. XX (Sales No.
E/F.93.V.3), pp. 119-213, at pp. 151-152, para. 85. | 另见爱琴海大陆架案(见上文脚注722)，见第32页，第77段；几内亚比绍和塞内加尔海洋疆界划界案(几内亚比绍诉塞内加尔)，裁决，1989年7月31日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十卷(出售品编号E/F.93.V.3)，第119-213页，见第151-152页，第85段。 |
| As the Study Group on fragmentation of
international law has phrased it in its 2006 report, “[t]he starting-point must be … the fact
that deciding [the] issue [of evolutive interpretation] is a matter of
interpreting the treaty itself” (see A/CN.4/L.682 and
Corr.1, para. 478). | 正如国际法不成体系问题研究组在2006年的报告中所述，“起点必须是…就此(演变性解释)问题做出决定就是一件解释条约本身的事情”(见A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1,
第478段)。 |
| Yearbook … 1964,
vol. II, document A/5809, pp. 204-205, para. (15); | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/5809号文件，第204-205页，第(15)段； |
| see also para. (13), “[p]aragraph 3 specifies as further authentic elements of
interpretation: | 另见第(13)段，“第三款具体规定，进一步的权威解释要素有： |
| (a) agreements between the parties
regarding the interpretation of the treaty, and (b) any subsequent practice
in the application of the treaty which clearly established the understanding
of all the parties regarding its interpretation”
(ibid., pp. 203-204); | (a) 关于条约之解释之任何协定，和(b) 嗣后在条约适用方面确定各当事方对条约解释之协定之任何惯例”(同上，第203-204页)； |
| on the other hand, Waldock in his third
report on the law of treaties explained that travaux préparatoires are not, as such, an authentic means of interpretation
(ibid., document A/CN.4/167 and Add.1-3, pp. 58-59, para. (21)). | 另一方面，沃尔多克解释了准备工作本身并非作准的解释资料(同上，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第58-59页，第(21)段。 |
| See also Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation
(above footnote 392), at pp. 292-294; R. Kolb, Interprétation et création du droit international
(see footnote 524 above), pp. 488-501; J. Arato, “Subsequent
practice and evolutive interpretation”, The Law &
Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, vol. 9-3 (2010), pp. 443-494,
at pp. 444-445, 465 et seq. | 另见Gardiner, 《条约解释》(上文脚注392)，见第292-294页；R. Kolb, Interprétation et création du droit international (见上文脚注524)，第488-501页；J. Arato,“嗣后惯例与演进性解释”，《国际法院和法庭的法律和实践》，第9-3卷(2010年)，第443-494页，见第444-445页、第465页及以下各页。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (see footnote 432 above), at
pp. 30-31, paras. 49-51. | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(见上文脚注432)，见第30-31页，第49-51段。 |
| Aegean Sea Continental Shelf case (see
footnote 722 above), at p. 31, para. 74. | 爱琴海大陆架案(见上文脚注722)，见第31页，第74段。 |
| See also Case concerning the delimitation
of the maritime boundary between Guinea-Bissau and Senegal (see footnote 730
above), at pp. 151-152, para. 85. | 另见几内亚比绍与塞内加尔海洋疆界划界案(见上文脚注730)，见第151-152页，第85段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 395 above), at p. 242, para. 64. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注395)，见第242页，第64段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 66-68. | 同上，第66-68段。 |
| Ibid., Separate Opinion of Judge
Skotnikov, p. 283, at p. 285, paras. 9-10. | 同上，斯科特尼科夫法官的个别意见，第283页起，见第285页，第9-10段。 |
| Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, Trial Chamber,
Judgment, 10 December 1998, case No. IT-95-17/1-T,
ICTY Judicial Reports 1998, vol. I, paras. 165 et seq. | 检察官诉Anto Furundžija, 审判庭，判决，1998年12月10日，IT-95-17/1-T号案件，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭《1998年司法案例汇编》，第1卷，第165段及以下各段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75,
No. 973, p. 287. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第75卷，第973号，第287段。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 1125, no. 17512, p. 3. | 《一九四九年八月十二日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(《第一议定书》)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
Non-international Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol.1125, no. 17513, p. 609. | 《一九四九年八月十二日日内瓦四公约关于保护非国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(《第二议定书》)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17513号，第609页。 |
| See Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (footnote 740
above), para. 179; similarly The Prosecutor v. Alfred Musema, International
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Trial Chamber I, Judgment, 27 January 2000,
case No.ICTR-96-13-A, paras. 220 et seq., in particular para. 228. | 见检察官诉Anto Furundžija, (上文脚注740)，第179段；相似的还有，检察官诉Alfred Musema, 卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭，第一审判庭，判决，2000年1月27日，ICTR-96-13-A号案件，第220段及以下各段，尤其是第228段。 |
| See Nolte, “Jurisprudence
under special regimes …” (footnote 398 above ), at
pp. 246 et seq. | 见诺尔特,“特殊制度下…的判例”(见上文脚注398)，见第246页及以下各页。 |
| Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, 12
May 2005, ECHR 2005-IV, para. 163; | Öcalan诉土耳其[GC]，第46221/99号，2005年5月12日，《2005年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第四卷，第163段； |
| VO v. France [GC], no. 53924/00, 8 July
2004, ECHR 2004-VIII, paras. 4 and 70; | VO诉法国[GC]，第53924/00号，2004年7月8日，《2004年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第八卷，第4和第70段； |
| Johnston and Others. v. Ireland, no.
9697/82, 18 December 1986, ECHR Series A no. 112, para. 53; Bayatyan v.
Armenia [GC], no. 23459/03, 7 July 2011, para. 63; | Johnston等人诉爱尔兰，第9697/82号，1986年12月18日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第112号，第53段；Bayatyan诉美国[GC]，第23459/03号，2011年7月7日，第63段； |
| Soering v. the United Kingdom, no.
14038/88, 7 July 1989, ECHR Series A no. 161, para. 103; | Soering诉联合王国，第14038/88号，1989年7月7日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第161号，第103段； |
| Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United Kingdom,
no. 61498/08, 4 October 2010, paras. 119-120, ECHR 2010 (extracts); | Al-Saadoon和Mufdhi诉联合王国，第61498/08号，2010年10月4日，第119-120段，《2010年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘要)； |
| Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no.
34503/97, 12 November 2008, ECHR-2008, para. 76. | Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[GC]，第34503/97号，2008年11月12日，《2008年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第76段。 |
| See, for example, Velásquez-Rodríguez v. Honduras, Judgment,
Merits, 29 July 1988, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series C No. 4, para. 151; The Right
to Information on Consular Assistance In the Framework of the Guarantees of
the Due Process of Law (see footnote 431 above), paras. 130-133 and 137. | 例如，见Velásquez-Rodríguez诉洪都拉斯，判决，案情实质，1988年7月29日，美洲人权法院，C辑，第4号，第151段；在正当法律程序保障框架内获得领事协助信息的权利(见上文脚注431)，第130-133段和第137段。 |
| Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v.
Nicaragua, Judgment (Merits, Reparations and Costs), 31 August 2001, Series C
No. 79, para. 146; also see Interpretation of the American Declaration of the
Rights and Duties of Man within the Framework of Article 64 of the American
Convention on Human Rights, Advisory Opinion, 14 July 1989, OC10/89, Series
A No. 10, para. 38. | Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni族群诉尼加拉瓜，判决(案情实质、赔偿和费用)，2001年8月31日，C辑第79号，第146段；另见关于在《美洲人权公约》第64条框架内对《美洲关于人的权利和义务宣言》的解释，咨询意见，1989年7月14日，OC10/89, A辑第10号，第38段。 |
| Kindler v. Canada, Views, 30 July 1993,
Communication No. 470/1991, Human Rights Committee report, Official Records
of the General Assembly, Forty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/48/40),
vol. II, Annex XII, U. | Kindler诉加拿大，意见，1993年7月30日，第470/1991号来文，人权事务委员会报告，《大会正式记录，第四十八届会议，补编第40号》(A/48/40)，第二卷，附件十二，U。 |
| Judge v. Canada, Views, 5 August 2002,
Communication No. 829/1998, ibid., Fifty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 40
(A/58/40), vol. II, annex V, G, para. 10.3. | 法官诉加拿大，意见，2002年8月5日，第829/1998号来文，同上，《第四十八届会议，补编第40号》(A/48/40)，第二卷，附件五，G, 第10.3段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999,
No. 14668, p. 171. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第14668号，第171页。 |
| Yoon and Choi v. the Republic of Korea,
Views, 3 November 2006, Communication Nos. 1321/2004 and 1322/2004, ibid.,
Sixty-second Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/62/40), vol. II, Annex VII, V,
para. 8.4. | Yoon和Choi诉大韩民国，意见，2006年11月3日，第1321/2004和1322/2004号来文，同上，《第六十二届会议，补编第40号》(A/62/40)，第二卷，附件七，V, 第8.4段。 |
| Mihaly International Corporation v.
Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (United States/Sri Lanka BIT),
Award and Concurring Opinion, 15 March 2002, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/2, ICSID
Reports, vol. 6 (2004), p. 308 et seq., at p. 317, para. 33; | 米海利国际公司诉斯里兰卡民主社会主义共和国(美国/斯里兰卡双边投资条约)，裁定和同意意见，2002年3月15日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/00/2, 《解决投资争端国际中心案例汇编》，第6卷(2004年)，第308页及以下各页，见第317页，第33段； |
| similarly, Autopista Concesionada de
Venezuela, CA v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction,
27 September 2001, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/5, ibid., p. 419, para. 97. | 相似的还有，Autopista Concesionada de
Venezuela, CA诉委内瑞拉玻利瓦尔共和国，关于管辖权的决定，2001年9月27日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/00/5, 同上，第419页，第97段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1343,
No. 22514, p. 89. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1343卷，第22514号，第89页。 |
| New Zealand, Court of Appeal, C v. H
[2009] NZCA 100, paras. 175-177 and 195-196 (Baragwanath J.); see also para.
31 (Chambers J.): “Revision of the text as drafted
and agreed in 1980 is simply impracticable, given that any revisions would
have to be agreed among such a large body of Contracting States. | 新西兰，上诉法院，C诉H
[2009] NZCA 100, 第175-177段和第195-196段(Baragwanath J.)；另见第31段(Chambers J.)：“修改1980年起草和商定的案文肯定不可行，因为任何修改必须经诸多缔约国商定。 |
| Therefore evolutions necessary to keep
pace with social and other trends must be achieved by evolutions in
interpretation and construction. | 因此，必须通过解释和说明的演变，来实现使案文与社会趋势和其他趋势保持一致所必需的演变。 |
| This is a permissible exercise given the
terms of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which also came in
force in 1980. | 考虑到同样于1980年生效的《维也纳条约法公约》的条款，这是可允许的做法。 |
| Article 31 (3) (b) permits a construction
that reflects ‘any subsequent practice in the application
of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its
interpretation’. ” | 第三十一条第三款(b)项允许反映‘嗣后在条约适用方面确定各当事国对条约解释之协定之任何惯例’的说明。” |
| Similarly, Canada, Supreme Court,
Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) [1998] 1 SCR
982, para. 129 (Cory J.). | 相似的还有加拿大，最高法院，Pushpanathan诉加拿大(公民和移民部部长) [1998] 1 SCR 982, 第129段(Cory J.)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 34,
No. 541, p. 243. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第34卷，第541号，第243页。 |
| Germany, Federal Constitutional Court,
BVerfGE, vol. 90, p. 286, at pp. 363-364, para. 276; ibid., vol. 104, p. 151,
at pp. 206-207. | 德国，联邦宪法法院，BVerfGE, 第90卷，第286页起，见第363-364页，第276段；同上，第104卷，第151页起，见第206-207页。 |
| Convention for the Unification of Certain
Rules regarding International Transport, League of Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. CXXXVII, p. 11. | 《统一国际运输某些规则的公约》，国际联盟，《条约汇编》，第一百三十七卷，第11页。 |
| United States of America, Supreme Court,
Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd et al., 499 U.S. 530, pp. 546-549; see also
United Kingdom, House of Lords, King v. Bristow Helicopters Ltd. (Scotland)
[2002] UKHL 7, paras. 98 and 125 (Lord Hope). | 美利坚合众国，最高法院，美国东方航空公司诉Floyd等人，499 U.S. 530, 第546-549页；另见联合王国，上议院，国王诉Bristow直升飞机公司(苏格兰)
[2002] UKHL 7, 第98和125段(Hope勋爵)。 |
| In the case concerning the Maritime
Dispute (Peru v. Chile), the Court privileged the practice that was closer to
the date of entry into force, Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 3, at p. 50, para. 126. | 在海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)中，法院优先采纳更接近生效日期的惯例，海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第50页，第126段。 |
| Murphy, “The
relevance of subsequent agreement and subsequent practice …” (footnote 642 above), p. 91. | Murphy,“嗣后协定和嗣后惯例…的作用”(见上文脚注642)，第91页。 |
| See, for example, Maritime Delimitation
in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993,
p. 38, at p. 55, para. 38; | 例见，格陵兰和扬马延间区域海洋划界案，判决，《1993年国际法院案例汇编》，第38页起，见第55页，第38段； |
| Question of the tax regime governing
pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France (see footnote
532 above), p. 231, at p. 259, para. 74; WTO Panel Report, United States — Continued Existence and Application of Zeroing Methodology,
WT/DS350/R, adopted 19 February 2009, WTO Appellate Body Report, United
States — Subsidies on Upland Cotton (US — Upland Cotton), WT/DS267/AB/R, adopted 21 March 2005, para. 625. | “关于居住在法国的教科文组织退休官员所领退休金的征税制度问题”(见上文脚注532)，第231页起，见第259页，第74段；世贸组织专家组报告，美国“归零”法的继续存在和适用，WT/DS350/R,
2009年2月19日通过，世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－高地棉花补贴案(美国－高地棉花案)，WT/DS267/AB/R,
2005年3月21日通过，第625段。 |
| Plama Consortium Limited v. Republic of
Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction, 8 February
2005, ICSID Review — Foreign Investment Law Journal,
vol. 20, No. 1 (Spring 2005), p. 262, at pp. 323-324, para. 195. | Plama 联合有限公司诉保加利亚共和国，解决投资争端国际中心第ARB/03/24号案件，关于管辖权的裁决，2005年2月8日，解决投资争端国际中心综述－外国投资法期刊，第20卷，第1期(2005年春)，第262页起，见第323-324页，第195段。 |
| See, for example, Cossey v. the United
Kingdom, no. 10843/84, 27 September 1990, ECHR Series A no. 184, para. 40;
Tyrer v. the United Kingdom, no. 5856/72, ECHR Series A, no. 26, para. 31;
Norris v. Ireland, no. 10581/83, 26 October 1988, ECHR Series A no. 142,
para. 46. | 例见，Cossey诉联合王国，第10843/84号，1990年9月27日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第184号，第40段；Tyrer诉联合王国，第5856/72号，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第26号，第31段；Norris诉爱尔兰，第10581/83号，1988年10月26日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第142号，第46段。 |
| Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, no.
25965/04, 7 January 2010, ECHR 2010 (extracts), para. 285; see also paras.
273-274. | Rantsev诉塞浦路斯和俄罗斯，第25965/04号，2010年1月7日，《2010年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘录)，第285段；另见第273-274段。 |
| Chapman v. the United Kingdom [GC], no.
27238/95, 18 January 2001, ECHR 2001-I, para. 93. | Chapman 诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第27238/95号，2001年1月18日，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第一卷，第93段。 |
| Ibid., para. 94. | 同上，第94段。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 395 above), at p. 63, para. 131. | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注395)，第63页，第131段。 |
| See above draft conclusion 4, para. 2. | 见上文结论草案4, 第2段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, Japan — Alcoholic Beverages II, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and
WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted on 1 November 1996, sect. E, pp. 12-13 (footnotes
omitted). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－河水酒精饲料案(二)，WT/DS8/AB/R、WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，E部分，第12-13页(脚注略)。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above), at pp. 1075-1076, paras. 47-50 and p. 1087, para. 63; Territorial
Dispute (see footnote 395 above), at pp. 34-37, paras. 66-71. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，第1075-1076页，第47-54段和第1087页，第63段；领土争端案(见上文脚注395)，第34-37页，66-71段。 |
| Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
Interlocutory Award No. ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim) (see footnote 537 above),
p. 77, at pp. 116-126, paras. 109-133. | 伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)(见上文脚注537)，第77页起，见第116-126页，第109-133段。 |
| Soering v. the United Kingdom, no.
14038/88, 7 July 1989, ECHR Series A no. 161, para. 103; | Soering诉联合王国，第14038/88号，1989年7月7日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第161号，第103段； |
| Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary
objections), no. 15318/89, 23 March 1995, ECHR Series A no. 310, paras. 73
and 79-82; Banković et al. v. Belgium and 16 other contracting States (dec.) [GC],
no. 52207/99, ECHR 2001-XII, paras. 56 and 62; concerning the jurisprudence
of ICSID tribunals, see Fauchald (footnote 498 above), p. 345; see also A.
Roberts, “Power and persuasion in investment treaty
interpretation: the dual role of States”, American
Journal of International Law, vol. 104, 2010, pp. 207-215. | Loizidou诉土耳其(初步反对意见)，第15318/89号，1995年3月23日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第310号，第73段和第79-82段；Bankovic等人诉比利时及16个其他缔约国(裁决)[大审判庭]，第52207/99号，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第十二卷，第56和62段；关于解决投资争端国际中心的判例，见Fauchald(上文脚注498)，第345页，另见A. Roberts,“投资条约解释中的实力和说服：国家的双重角色”，《美国国际法期刊》，第104期，2010年，第207-215页。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see footnote 393 above), p. 137; see also Yasseen, “L’interprétation
des traités…” (see footnote
393 above), pp. 48-49; | Sinclair, 《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注393)，第137页；另见Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第48-49页； |
| whilst “commune” is taken from the work of the International Law Commission, “d’une certaine constance” and “concordante”
are conditions that Yasseen derives through further reasoning; see Yearbook … | “共同的”一词来自国际法委员会的工作，而“一致的”和“协调的”则是Yasseen进一步论述得出的条件； |
| 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp.
98-99, paras. 17-18 and p. 221-222, para. 15. | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第98-99页，第17-18段，以及第221-222页，第15段。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see footnote 393 above); Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
Interlocutory Award No. ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim) (see footnote 537 above),
p. 77, at p. 118, para. 114. | Sinclair, 《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注393)；伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)(见上文脚注537)，第77页起，见第118页，第114段。 |
| Case concerning a dispute between
Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle Channel, 18 February 1977, UNRIAA,
vol. XXI, part II, pp. 53-264, at p. 187, para. 169; | 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡划界争端案，1977年2月18日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十一卷，第二部分，第53-264页，见第187页，第169段； |
| J.-P Cot, “La
conduite subséquente des parties a un traité”, Revue générale
de droit international public, vol. 70, 1966, pp. 644-647 (“valeur probatoire”); | J.-P Cot,“条约缔约国的嗣后惯例”，《国际公法总期刊》，第70期，1966年，第644-647页(临时价值)； |
| Distefano, “La
pratique subséquente …” (see
footnote 573 above), p. 46; Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 439 above), p. 556, para. 79; | Distefano,“…嗣后惯例”(见上文脚注573)，第46页；Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第556页，第79段； |
| see also the oral argument before the
International Court of Justice in Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), CR
2012/33, pp. 32-36, paras.7-19 (Wood), available from and CR 2012/36, pp.
13-18, paras. 6-21 (Wordsworth), available from. WTO Appellate Body Report,
EC — Computer Equipment, WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R
and WT/DS68/AB/R, 22 June 1998, para. 93. | 另见在海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)中国际法庭上的口头抗辩，CR 2012/33, 第32-36页，第7-19段(Wood)，可查阅，以及CR
2012/36, 第13-18页，第6-21段(Wordsworth)，可查阅。世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－电脑设备案，WT/DS62/AB/R、WT/DS67/AB/R和WT/DS68/AB/R, 1998年6月22日，第93段。 |
| See Yearbook …
1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 222, para. (15);
Cot, “La conduite subséquente
des parties …” (see footnote 776 above), p. 652. | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/rev.1号文件，第222页，第(15)段；Cot,“…缔约国的嗣后惯例”(见上文脚注776)，第652页。 |
| In practice, a one-off practice will
often not be sufficient to establish an agreement of the parties regarding a
treaty’s interpretation, as a general rule, however,
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), does not require any
repetition but only an agreement regarding the interpretation. | 在实践中，作为一般性规则，一次性的做法常常不足以确定缔约国就条约解释达成一致；但是，第三十一条第三款(b)项所述的嗣后惯例没有要求任何重复，只是要求就解释达成一致。 |
| The likelihood of an agreement
established by an one-off practice thus depends on the act and the treaty in
question, see E. Lauterpacht, “The development of the
law of international organization by the decisions of international tribunals”, Recueil des cours … 1976, vol. 152, pp.
377-466, at p. 457; Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of Treaties (footnote
446 above), p. 166; C.F. Amerasinghe, “Interpretation
of texts in open international organizations”,
British Yearbook of International Law 1994, vol. 65, p. 175, at p. 199;
Villiger argues in favour of a certain frequency, but emphasizes that the
important point is the establishment of an agreement, Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 414 above), p. 431, para. 22. | 因此，一次性做法确立一致意见的可能性就取决于有关的行为及条约，见E.
Lauterpacht,“国际法庭裁决带来的国际组织法的发展”，《1976年…学院讲义》，第152卷，第377-466页，见第457页；Linderfalk, 《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注446)，第166页；C.F.
Amerasinghe,“公开的国际组织文件的解释”，《1994年英国国际法年鉴》，第65卷，第175页起，见第199页；Villiger支持要有一定的次数要求，但也强调，最重要的一点是确立一致意见，Villiger,
《…评注》(见上文脚注414)，第431页，第22段。 |
| Yasseen and Sinclair write that practice
cannot “in general” be
established by one single act, Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …” (see footnote 393 above), p. 47;
Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see footnote 393
above), p. 137; cf. Nolte, “Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice of States …” (see footnote 440
above), at p. 310. | Yasseen和Sinclair 写道，“通常”一次性的行为不能够构成惯例，Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第47页；Sinclair,
《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注393)，第137页；参阅诺尔特,“…国家嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”(见上文脚注440)，第310页。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Chicken Cuts, WT/DS269/AB/R and Corr.1, and WT/DS286/AB/R and
Corr.1, adopted 27 September 2005, para. 297. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－鸡块案，WT/DS269/AB/R和Corr.1, 以及WT/DS286/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年9月27日通过，第297段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Computer Equipment, WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R and WT/DS68/AB/R,
adopted 22 June 1998, para. 92 (footnote omitted and original emphasis). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－电脑设备案，WT/DS62/AB/R、WT/DS67/AB/R和WT/DS68/AB/R, 1998年6月22日，第92段(脚注略，强调系原文所有)。 |
| EC — Chicken Cuts
(see footnote 780 above), para. 290 (footnote omitted). | 欧共体－鸡块案(见上文脚注780)，第290段(脚注略)。 |
| Ibid., para. 307 (footnote omitted and
original emphasis); cf. also EC — Computer Equipment
(see footnote 781 above), para. 95. | 同上，第307段(脚注略，强调系原文所有)；同时参阅欧洲共同体－电脑设备案(见上文脚注781)，第95段。 |
| EC — Computer
Equipment (see footnote 781 above), para. 93 (original emphasis). | 欧共体－电脑设备案(见上文脚注781)，第93段(强调系原文所加)。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
4, para. (10). | 见上文结论草案4的评注第(10)段。 |
| See above draft conclusions 3 [2] and 4,
para. 3. | 见上文结论草案3[2]和结论草案4第3段。 |
| See Crawford, “A
consensualist interpretation of article 31 (3) …”
(footnote 606 above), p. 30: “There is no reason to
think that the word ‘agreement’ in para. (b) has any different meaning as compared to the meaning
it has in para. (a).” | 见Crawford,“对…第三十一条第三款的合意主义解释”(上文脚注606)，第30页：“没有理由认为(b)项中的‘协定’一词与(a)项中的协定一词的含义有任何的不同。” |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
2 [1], paras. (12)-(15); article 31 must be “read as
a whole” and conceives of the process of
interpretation as “a single combined operation” and is “not laying down a legal hierarchy
of norms for the interpretation of treaties”,
Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 219,
para. (8), and p. 220, para. (9). | 见上文结论2[1]草案的评注，第(12)-(15)段；对第三十一条必须作“整体理解”，它将解释进程视为“一个综合的行动”，该条并“未确立一个解释条约的法律等级制度”，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219页第(8)段和第220页第(9)段。 |
| Case concerning the question whether the
re-evaluation of the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for
application of the clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement
on German External Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of
America on the one hand and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other,
Award of 16 May 1980, UNRIAA, vol. XIX, part III, pp. 67-145, pp. 103-104,
para. 31; | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国与德意志联邦共和国关于德国外债的协定附件一A第2条(e)项条款问题案，1980年5月16日裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十九卷，第三部分，第67-145页，见第103-104页，第31段； |
| see also EC —
Computer Equipment (footnote 781 above), para. 95; | 另见欧共体－电脑设备案(上文脚注781)，第95段； |
| Case concerning the delimitation of the
maritime boundary between Guinea and Guinea-Bissau (footnote 730 above), at
p. 175, para. 66. See above commentary to draft conclusion 7, paras.
(12)-(15). | 几内亚比绍和塞内加尔海洋疆界划界案(上文脚注730)，见第175页，第66段。见上文结论草案7的评注，第(12)-(15)段。 |
| Question of the tax regime governing
pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France (see footnote
532 above), at p. 258, para. 70; Kolb, “La
modification d’un traité …”
(see footnote 695 above), p. 16. | 关于居住在法国的教科文组织退休官员所领退休金的征税制度问题(见上文脚注532)，第258页，第70段；Kolb,“La modification d’un traité …”(见上文脚注695)，第16页。 |
| Case concerning a dispute between
Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle Channel, 18 February 1977, UNRIAA,
vol. XXI, part II, pp. 53-264, at p. 188, para. 171. | 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡争端案，1977年2月18日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十一卷，第二部分，第53-264页，见第188页，第171段。 |
| Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary
objections), no. 15318/89, 23 March 1995, ECHR Series A no. 310, paras. 79
and 81. | Loizidou诉土耳其(初步反对意见)，第15318/89号，1995年3月23日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第310号，第79和81段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 80 and 82; the case did not
concern the interpretation of a particular human right, but rather the
question of whether a State was bound by the Convention at all. | 同上，第80和82段；该案不涉及对具体人权的解释，而是一国是否受《公约》约束的问题。 |
| The more restrictive jurisprudence of the
WTO Dispute Settlement Body suggests that different interpreters may evaluate
matters differently, see United States — Laws,
Regulations and Methodology for Calculating Dumping Margins (Zeroing),
WT/DS294/R, adopted 9 May 2006, para. 7.218: “… even
if it were established conclusively that all the 76 Members referred to by
the European Communities have adopted a [certain] practice … this would only mean that a considerable number of WTO Members
have adopted an approach different from that of the United States. | 世贸组织争端解决机构较严格的判例认为，不同的解释者可能对问题作出不同的评价，见美国－计算倾销差额(持续归零)的法律、条例和方法(Zeroing)，WT/DS294/R, 2006年5月9日通过，第7.218段：“…即使已经确凿地确认，欧洲共同体所指全部76个成员国都采取了一种[特定的]惯例…，这也只能意味着有不少世贸组织成员国采取了与美国不同的办法。 |
| … We note that one third party in this
proceeding submitted arguments contesting the view of the European
Communities ….” | …我们注意到，在本诉讼中，有一个第三方提交了论述，反驳欧洲共同体的观点…” |
| See articles 2, para. 1 (a), 3, 24, para. 2, 39-41, 58 and 60. | 见第二条第一款(a)项、第三条、第二十四条第二款、第三十九至四十一条、第五十八条和第六十条。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
4, para. (5); confirmed by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Bay of
Bengal Maritime Boundary Arbitration (Bangladesh v. India), Award of 7 July
2014, available at, p. 47, para. 165; Yasseen, “L’interprétation
des traités …” (see footnote
393 above), p. 45; Distefano, “La pratique subséquente …” (see footnote 573 above), p. 47. | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(5)段；常设仲裁法庭在孟加拉湾海洋边界仲裁案(孟加拉国诉印度)中确认了这一点，2014年7月7日的裁决，见，第47页，第165段；Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第45页；Distefano,“…嗣后惯例”(见上文脚注573)，第47页。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
4, para. (5); Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392 above), pp.
231-232 and 243-247; | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(5)段；Gardiner, 《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第231-232页和第243-247页； |
| Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see
footnote 525 above), p. 213; Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 439 above), p. 554, para. 75; | Aust, 《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注525)，第213页；Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第554页，第75段； |
| R. Gardiner, “The
Vienna Convention rules on treaty interpretation”, in
The Oxford Guide to Treaties, D.B. Hollis, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2012), pp. 475 and 483. | R. Gardiner,“关于条约解释的维也纳公约法则”，出自D. B. Hollis 所编《牛津条约指南》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2012年)，第475和483页。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
4, para. (10); a “single common act” may also consist of an exchange of letters, see European
Molecular Biology Laboratory Arbitration (EMBL v. Germany), 29 June 1990,
International Law Reports, vol. 105 (1997), p. 1, at pp. 54-56; Fox, “Article 31 (3) (a) and (b) …” (footnote
440 above), p. 63; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (footnote 392 above), pp.
248-249. | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(10)段；“一次共同的行动”也可能包括交换信件，见欧洲分子生物实验室仲裁案(欧洲分子生物实验室诉德国)，1990年6月29日，《国际法案例汇编》，第105卷(1997年)，第1页起，见第54-56页；Fox,“…第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项…”(上文脚注440)，第63页；Gardiner,
《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第248-249页。 |
| Aust, “The theory
and practice of informal international instruments”
(see footnote 465 above), pp. 789-790. | Aust,“非正式国际文书的理论与实践”(见上文脚注465)，第789-790页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above ), at p. 1094, para. 74 (“occupation of the
island by the Masubia tribe”) and pp. 1077, para. 55
(“Eason Report”, which “appears never to have been made known to Germany”); Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 439 above), p. 560, para. 88. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，第1094页，第74段(“马苏比亚部族对岛屿的占领”)和第1077页，第55段(“似乎从未为德国所知的‘伊森报告’”)；Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第560页，第88段。 |
| In this respect, the ascertainment of
subsequent practice under article 31, para. 3 (b), may be more demanding than
what the formation of customary international law requires, but see Boisson
de Chazournes, “Subsequent practice, practices …” (footnote 415 above), pp. 53-55. | 在这方面，确定第三十一条第三款(b)项所述嗣后惯例可能比形成习惯国际法的要求更严格，见Boisson de Chazournes,“嗣后惯例、惯例…”(上文脚注415)，第53-55页。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
4, para. (6); P. Gautier, “Non-binding agreements”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, para.
14; | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(6)段；P. Gautier,“非约束性协定”，载于《马克斯•普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第14段； |
| Benatar, “From
probative value to authentic interpretation …” (see
footnote 440 above), at pp. 194-195; Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice
(see footnote 525 above), p. 213; | Benatar,“从实证价值到作准解释…”(见上文脚注440)，第194-195页；Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注525)，第213页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), p. 244; | Gardiner, 《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第244页； |
| see also Nolte, “Subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice of States …”
(footnote 440 above), p. 307, at p. 375. | 另见诺尔特,“…国家嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”(上文脚注440)，第307页起，见第375页。 |
| See articles 2, para. 1 (a), 3, 24,
para.2, 39-41, 58 and 60. | 见第二条第一款(a)项、第三条、第二十四条第二款、第三十九至四十一条、第五十八和第六十条。 |
| See Yearbook …
1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 222, para. (15). | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第222页，第(15)段。 |
| Case concerning a dispute between
Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle Channel, 18 February 1977, UNRIAA,
vol.XXI, part II, pp. 53-264, at p. 187, para. 169; | 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡争端案，1977年2月18日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十一卷，第二部分，第53-264页，见第187页，第169段； |
| The Question whether the re-evaluation of
the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for application of the
clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement on German External
Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America on the one hand
and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other, 16 May 1980, ibid., vol.
XIX, pp. 67-145, pp. 103-104, para. 31; Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see footnote 454 above), pp. 190-195; Kolb, “La modification d’un traité …” (see footnote 695 above), pp. 25-26; Linderfalk, On the
Interpretation of Treaties (see footnote 446 above), pp. 169-171. | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国与德意志联邦共和国关于德国外债的协定附件一A第2条(e)项条款问题案，1980年5月16日，同上，第十九卷，第67-145页，见103-104页，第31段；Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis…(见上文脚注454)，第190-195页；Kolb,“La modification d’un traité …”(见上文脚注695)，第25-26页；Linderfalk,
《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注446)，第169-171页。 |
| Official Records of the United Nations
Conference on the Law of Treaties … (A/CONF.39/11)
(see footnote 575 above), thirty-first meeting, 19 April 1968, p. 169, at
para. 59 (Australia); | 《联合国条约法会议正式记录…》(A/CONF.39/11)(见上文脚注575)，第31次会议，1968年4月19日，第169页，见第59段(澳大利亚)； |
| P. Gautier, “Les
accords informels et la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités entre États”, in Droit du pouvoir,
pouvoir du droit: mélanges offerts à Jean Salmon, N. Angelet, ed. (Brussels, Bruylant, 2007), pp.
425-454, at pp. 430-431 (“La lettre [a] du paragraphe
3 fait référence à̀ un accord interprétatif et l’on peut supposer que le terme ‘accord’ est ici utilisé dans un sens générique, qui ne correspond pas nécessairement au ‘traité’ défini à l’article
2 de la convention de Vienne. | P. Gautier,“非正式协定与《维也纳条约法公约》”，载于N. Angelet所编的《权利法与法权：Jean Salmon纪念文集》(布鲁塞尔，Bruylant, 2007年)，第425-454页，见第430-431页(“第三款所述系指解释性的协定，此处使用‘协定’是取其广义的意义，不一定与《维也纳公约》第二条定义的‘条约’相符。 |
| Ainsi, l’accord
interprétatif ultérieur
pourrait être un accord verbal, voire un accord
politique”). | 因此，解释性协定最终有可能是一个口头协定甚至是政治协定”)。 |
| See Gautier, “Non-binding
agreements” (footnote 803 above), para. 14; Aust,
Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see footnote 525 above), pp. 211, 213. | 见Gautier,“非约束性协定”(上文脚注803)，第14段；Aust, 《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注525)，第211、213页。 |
| This terminology follows the commentary
of guideline 1.2. (Definition of interpretative declarations) of the
Commission’s guide to practice on reservations to
treaties (see Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session,
Supplement No. 10, A/66/10/Add.1, paras. (18) and (19)). | 这一词汇遵循委员会《对条约的保留实践指南》中准则1.2.(解释性声明的定义)的评注(见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》，A/66/10/Add.1, 第(18)和(19)段)。 |
| See Yearbook …
1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 221-222, paras. (15) and (16) (uses
of the term “understanding”
both in the context of what became article 31, para. 3 (a), as well as what
became article 31, para. 3 (b)). | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221-222页，第(15)和(16)段(在日后成为第三十一条第三款(a)项和第三十一条第三款(b)项的文字中均使用了“谅解”一语)。 |
| United States-United Kingdom Arbitration
concerning Heathrow Airport User Charges, Award on the First Question, 30
November 1992, UNRIAA, vol. XXIV (Sales No. E/F.04.V.18), pp. 1-359, at p.
131, para. 6.7; Aust, “The theory and practice of
informal international instruments” (see footnote 465
above), pp. 787 and 807; | 美国－联合王国希斯罗机场用户诉讼案仲裁，关于第一个问题的裁决，1992年11月30日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十四卷(出售品编号：E/F.04.V.18)，第1-359页，见第131页，第6.7段；Aust,“非正式国际文书的理论和实践”(见上文脚注465)，第787和807页； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 446 above), p. 173; Hafner, “Subsequent
agreements and practice …” (see footnote 655 above),
pp. 110-113; Gautier, “Les accords informels et la
Convention de Vienne …” (see footnote 807 above), p.
434. | Linderfalk, 《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注446)，第173页；Hafner, 《嗣后协定和惯例….》(见上文上文脚注655)，第110-113页；Gautier,“非正式协定与《维也纳条约法公约》”(见上文脚注807)，第434页。 |
| For example, “…
pattern implying the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation …” (WTO Appellate Body Report, Japan —
Alcoholic Beverages II, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted 1
November 1996, section E, p. 13); | 例如，“…说明缔约方就解释达成协定的模式…”(世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－酒精饲料案二，WT/DS8/AB/R、WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，E节，第13页)； |
| or “… pattern … must imply agreement on the interpretation of the relevant
provision” (WTO Panel Report, European Communities
and its member States — Tariff Treatment of Certain
Information Technology Products, WT/DS375/R, WT/DS376/R and WT/DS377/R,
adopted 21 September 2010, para. 7.558); | 或者“…模式…必须暗示就相关条款的解释达成一致”(世贸组织专家组报告，欧洲共同体及其成员国－某些信息技术产品的关税待遇案，WT/DS375/R、WT/DS376/R和WT/DS377/R, 2010年9月21日通过，第7.558段)； |
| or “… practice
[that] reflects an agreement as to the interpretation … ” (Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Interlocutory Award No. ITL
83-B1-FT (Counterclaim) (see footnote 537 above), p. 77, at p. 119, para.
116); | 或“…体现就解释达成协定的惯例”(伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)(见上文脚注537)，第77页起，见第119页，第116段)； |
| or that “… State
practice” was “… indicative
of a lack of any apprehension on the part of the Contracting States … ” (Banković et al. v. Belgium and 16 other contracting States (dec.) [GC],
no. 52207/99, ECHR 2001-XII, para. 62). | 或“…国家惯例”“…表明缔约国没有任何谅解”(Bankovic等人诉比利时及16个其他缔约国(裁决)[大审判庭]，第52207/99号，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第十二卷，第62段)。 |
| United States-United Kingdom Arbitration
concerning Heathrow Airport (see footnote 811 above), at p. 131, para. 6.7;
see also Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine (see footnote 397 above), at p.
98, para. 157. | 美国－联合王国希斯罗机场诉讼案仲裁(见上文脚注811)，第131页，第6.7段；另见莱茵铁路公司案仲裁(见上文脚注397)，第98页，第157段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966,
vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 222, para. (15). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第222页，第(15)段。 |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (see footnote 488 above), at p. 23. | 柏威夏寺案(见上文脚注488)，第23页。 |
| See also Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic
of Iran v. United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1996, p. 803, p. 815, para. 30; Military and Paramilitary Activities
in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America),
Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 392, at p.
410, para. 39; Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (see footnote 740 above), paras. 165 et seq., at para. 179; | 另见石油平台案(伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国)，初步反对意见，判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第803页起，见第815页，第30段；尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事活动和准军事活动案(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)，管辖权和可否受理问题，判决，《1984年国际法院案例汇编》，第392页起，见第410页，第39段；检察官诉Anto
Furundžija(见上文脚注740)，第165段及以后各段，见第179段； |
| Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, no.
25965/04, 7 January 2010, ECHR 2010 (extracts), para. 285; | Rantsev诉塞浦路斯和俄罗斯，第25965/04号，2010年1月7日，《2010年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘录)，第285段； |
| cautiously: WTO Appellate Body Report, EC
— Chicken Cuts WT/DS269/AB/R and Corr.1,
WT/DS286/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 27 September 2005, para. 272; | 较慎重的立场，见世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－鸡块案，WT/DS269/AB/R和Corr.1、WT/DS286/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年9月27日通过，第272段； |
| see, also, for a limited holding,
Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Award No. 30-16-3, RayGo Wagner Equipment
Company v. Iran Express Terminal Corporation, Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal Reports, vol. 2 (1983), p. 141, at p. 144; | 另见，对于控股有限公司，伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第30-16-3号裁决，RayGo Wagner设备公司诉伊朗快递公司，《伊朗－美国索赔法庭裁决汇编》，第2卷(1983年)，第141页起，见第144页； |
| The Question whether the re-evaluation of
the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for application of the
clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement on German External
Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America on the one hand
and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other, 16 May 1980, UNRIAA, vol.
XIX, pp. 67-145, pp. 103-104, para. 31. | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国与德意志联邦共和国关于德国外债的协定附件一A第2条(e)项条款问题案，1980年5月16日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十九卷，第67-145页，见第103-104页，第31段。 |
| Kamto, “La volonté de l’État en droit international” (see footnote 533 above), pp. 134-141; Yasseen, “L’interprétation
des traités …” (see footnote
393 above), p. 49; | Kamto,“国际法中的国家意志”(见上文脚注533)，第134-141页；Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第49页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), p. 267; Villiger, Commentary …
(see footnote 414 above), p. 431, para. 22; Dörr, “Article
31 …” (see footnote 439 above), pp. 557 and 559,
paras. 83 and 86. | Gardiner, 《条约解释》(见上文脚注392)，第267页；Villiger,
《…评注》(见上文脚注414)，第431页，第22段；Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注439)，第557和559页，第83和86段。 |
| For example, when acting within the
framework of an international organization, see Application of the Interim
Accord of 13 September 1995 (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia v.
Greece), Judgment of 5 December 2011, I.C.J. Reports 2011, p. 644, at pp.
675-676, paras. 99-101; | 例如，当在国际组织的框架内行动时，见关于1995年9月13日《临时协定》的适用案(前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国诉希腊)，2011年12月5日的判决，《2011年国际法院案例汇编》，第644页起，见第675-676页，第99-101段； |
| Kamto, “La volonté de l’État en droit international” (see footnote 533 above), p. 136. Case
concerning a dispute between Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle
Channel, 18 February 1977, UNRIAA, vol. XXI, part II, pp. 53-264. | Kamto, 国际法中的国家意志(见上文脚注533)，第136页。 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡争端案，1977年2月18日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十一卷，第二部分，第53-264页。 |
| Ibid., at p. 187, para. 169 (a). | 同上，见第187页，第169(a)段。 |
| Ibid., para. 171. Land and Maritime
Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea
intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 352, para. 67. | 同上，第171段。 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚：赤道几内亚参与诉讼)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第303页起，见第352页，第67段。 |
| Ibid., at p. 351, para. 64: “… The Court notes, however, that now that it has made its findings
that the frontier in Lake Chad was delimited …, it … follows that any Nigerian effectivités
are indeed to be evaluated for their legal consequences as acts contra legem”; | 同上，见第351页，第64段：“…但是，法院指出，鉴于法院已经认定，乍得湖的边界已经划定…自然，事实上必须对尼日利亚的任何行动的效力进行评价，评价其作为违法行为的法律后果”； |
| see also Frontier Dispute, Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 554, at p. 586, para. 63; Case concerning the delimitation
of maritime boundary between Guinea-Bissau and Senegal (see footnote 730
above), at p. 181, para. 70. | 另见边界争端案，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第554页起，见第586页，第63段；几内亚比绍和塞内加尔海洋疆界划界案(见上文脚注730)，第181页，第70段。 |
| Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau
Sipadan (see footnote 395 above), at p. 650, para. 48; WTO Appellate Body
Report, EC — Chicken Cuts, WT/DS269/AB/R and Corr.1,
WT/DS286/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 27 September 2005, para. 334 (“… mere access to a published judgment cannot be equated with
acceptance … ”). | 利吉丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案(见上文脚注395)，第650页，第48段；世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－鸡块案，WT/DS269/AB/R和Corr.1、WT/DS286/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年9月27日通过，第334段(“…仅仅是能够查阅一个公布的判决不能等同于接受…”)。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 395
above), at pp. 1089-1091, paras. 65-68. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注395)，第1089-1091页，第65-68段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Chicken Cuts (see footnote 824 above), para. 272 (footnote
omitted). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－鸡块案(见上文脚注824)，第272段(脚注略)。 |
| The M/V “Virginia
G” (Panama/Guinea-Bissau), Judgment, ITLOS Reports
2014, para. 218. | “弗吉尼亚G号”商船案(巴拿马/几内亚比绍)，判决，《2014年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第218段。 |
| Switzerland, Federal Court, judgment of
17 February 1971, BGE, vol. 97 I, p. 359, at pp. 370-371. | 瑞士，联邦法院，1971年2月17日判决，BGE, 第97 I卷，第359页，见第370-371页。 |
| See United States, Supreme Court, O’Connor et ux. v. United States, 479 U.S. 27, at pp. 33-35;
Germany, Federal Constitutional Court, BVerfGE, vol.59, p. 63, at pp. 94-95. | 见美国，最高法院，O'Connor和ux诉美国案，479 U.S. 27, 见第33-35页；德国，联邦宪法法院，BVerfGE, 第59卷，第63页起，见第94-95页。 |
| See United Kingdom, Supreme Court: on the
one hand, Assange v. The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22, paras.
68-71 (Lord Phillips); and, on the other, Bucnys v. Ministry of Justice,
Lithuania [2013] UKSC 71, paras.39-43 (Lord Mance). | 见联合王国，最高法院，一方面是Assange诉瑞典检察机关案[2012] UKSC 22, 第68-71段(Phillips勋爵)；另一方面是Bucnys诉司法部案，立陶宛[2013] UKSC 71, 第39-43段(Mance勋爵)。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion of 20 July 1962,
I.C.J. Reports 1962, p. 151, at p. 182 (Dissenting Opinion of Judge Spender). | 联合国的特定费用案(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，1962年7月20日的咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见第182页(Spender法官的不同意见)。 |
| Hafner, “Subsequent
agreements and practice …” (see footnote 655 above),
p. 118; this means that the interpretative effect of an agreement under
article 31, para. 3, does not necessarily go back to the date of the entry
into force of the treaty, as Yasseen maintains, “L’interprétation des traités…” (see footnote 393 above), p. 47. | Hafner,“嗣后协定和惯例…”(见上文脚注655)，第118页；这意味着第三十一条第三款所述协定的解释性效力并不一定追溯到条约生效之日，如Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注393)，第47页所主张的那样。 |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see footnote 454 above), p. 151. | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis…(见上文脚注454)，第151页。 |
| Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 3, at p. 52, para. 142. | 海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第52页，第142段。 |
| Other designations include: Meetings of
the Parties or Assemblies of the States Parties. | 其他说法包括：缔约方会议或缔约国大会。 |
| See V. Röben, “Conference
(Meeting) of States Parties”, in Max Planck
Encyclopedia of Public International Law, p. 605; R.R. Churchill and G.
Ulfstein, “Autonomous institutional arrangements in
multilateral environmental agreements: a little-noticed phenomenon in
international law”, American Journal of International
Law, vol. 94, No. 4 (2000), pp. 623-659; J. Brunnée, “COPing with consent: law-making under multilateral environmental
agreements”, Leiden Journal of International Law,
vol. 15, No. 1 (2002), pp. 1-52; A. Wiersema, “The
new international law-makers? | 见V. Röben,“缔约国大会(会议)”，载于《马克斯 •普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第605页；R. R. Churchill和G. Ulfstein,“多边环境协定中的自治机构安排：国际法中极少受到注意的一个现象”，《美国国际法期刊》，总第94期，第4期(2000年)，第623-659页；J.
Brunnée,“处理同意问题：多边环境协定下的法律制订”，《Leiden国际法期刊》，总第15期，第1期(2002年)，第1-52页；A. Wiersema,“新的国际法制订者？ |
| Conference of the Parties to multilateral
environmental agreements”, Michigan Journal of
International Law, vol. 31, No. 1 (2009), pp. 231-287; L. Boisson de
Chazournes, “Environmental treaties in time”, Environmental Policy and Law, vol. 39, No. 6 (2009), pp.
293-298. | 多边环境协定的缔约方大会”，《Michigan国际法期刊》，第31期，第1期(2009年)，第231-287页；L.
Boisson de Chazournes,“最后的环境条约”，《环境政策和法律》，第39期，第6期(2009年)，第293-298页。 |
| Marrakesh Agreement establishing the
World Trade Organization (1994) (see footnote 445 above); Convention on the
Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical
Weapons and on their Destruction (1993) (see footnote 545 above); Convention
on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention, 1944), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 15, No. 102, p. 295. | 《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》(1994年)(见上文脚注445)；《关于禁止发展、生产、储存和使用化学武器及销毁此种武器的公约》(1993年)(见上文脚注545)；《国际民用航空组织公约》(《芝加哥公约》，1944年)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第15卷，第102号，第295页。 |
| See draft conclusion 12 [11] below. | 见下文结论草案12[11]。 |
| See Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and
Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction (1972) (see footnote 545 above), art.
XI. | 见《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌(生物)及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》(1972年)(见上文脚注545)，第十一条。 |
| According to this mechanism, States
parties meeting in a review conference shall “…
review the operation of the Convention, with a view to assuring that the
purposes of the preamble and the provisions of the Convention … are being realised. | 按照这个机制，缔约国在审查会议中须“…审查本公约的实施情况，以保证本公约序言的宗旨和各项条款…正在得到实现。 |
| Such review shall take into account any
new scientific and technological developments relevant to the Convention” (art. XII). | 此项审查应考虑到任何与本公约有关的科学和技术的新发展”(第十二条)。 |
| Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (1968), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 729, No. 10485,
p. 161; art. VIII, para. 3, establishes that a review conference shall be
held five years after its entry into force, and, if so decided, at intervals
of five years thereafter “… in order to review the
operation of this Treaty with a view to assuring that the purposes of the
preamble and the provisions of the Treaty are being realised”. | 《不扩散核武器条约》(1968年)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第729卷，第10485号，第161页；第八条第3款规定，在条约生效后会议五年，应举行审查会议，此后，如有此决定，应每隔五年另行召集这种会议，“…审查本条约的实施情况，以保证本条约序言的宗旨和本条约的各项条款正在得到实现”。 |
| By way of such decisions, States parties
review the operation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons, article by article, and formulate conclusions and recommendations on
follow-on actions. | 通过这种决定，缔约国逐条审查《不扩散核武器条约》的实施情况，并就后续行动拟订结论和建议。 |
| Examples include the Conference of the
Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992)
(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.1771, No. 30822, p. 107), the CMP
Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto
Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto
Protocol, 1997) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2303, No. 30822, p. 161)
and the Conference of the Contracting Parties of the Convention on Wetlands
of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar
Convention, 1971) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 996, No. 14583, p.
245). | 例证包括《联合国气候变化框架公约》(1992年)(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1771卷，第30822号，第107页)缔约方会议，作为《联合国气候变化框架公约京都议定书》(《京都议定书》，1997年)(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2303卷，第30822号，第161页)缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议和《关于特别是作为水禽栖息地的国际重要湿地公约》(《拉姆萨尔公约》，1971年)(联合国，《条约汇编》，第996卷，第14583号，第245页)缔约方会议。 |
| The Convention is often described as
establishing an international organization, but it does not do so clearly,
and it provides the International Whaling Commission with features that fit
the present definition of a Conference of States Parties. | 该公约常常被称为设立了一个国际组织，但事实上并没有这么明确，它为国际捕鲸委员会提供了符合关于缔约国会议当前定义的特点。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
248, para. 46. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第248页，第46段。 |
| Convention on Wetlands of International
Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat: art.6, para. 1, on review
functions and art. 10 bis, on amendments; | 《关于特别是作为水禽栖息地的国际重要湿地公约》：关于审查职能的第6条第1款和关于修正的第10条之二；《联合国气候变化框架公约》： |
| United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change, art.7, para. 2, on review powers, and art. 15, on amendments;
Kyoto Protocol, art. 13, para. 4, on review powers of the Conference of the
Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol, art. 20
on amendment procedures; | 关于审评权力的第七条第2款和关于修正的第十五条；《京都议定书》：关于作为《京都议定书》缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议审评权力的第十三条第4款和关于修正程序的第二十条； |
| Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 993, No. 14537, p. 243), art. XI on Conference of the Parties, and art.
XVII on amendment procedures; Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons; | 《濒危野生动植物国际贸易公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第993卷，第14537号，第243页)，关于缔约国审查会议的第十一条和关于修正程序的第十七条；《不扩散核武器条约》； |
| World Health Organization Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2302, No.
41032, p. 166), art. 23, para. 5 (review powers), art. 28 (amendments) and
art. 33 (protocols). | 《世界卫生组织烟草管制框架公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2302卷，第41032号，第166页)，第23条第5款(审查权力)、第28条(修正)和第33条(议定书)。 |
| Arts. 7 and 9 of the World Health
Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. | 《世界卫生组织烟草管制框架公约》第7条和第9条。 |
| Art. 17 of the Kyoto Protocol provides an
example, see Churchill and Ulfstein, “Autonomous
institutional arrangements in multilateral environmental agreements …” (footnote 836 above), p. 639; J. Brunnée,
“Reweaving the fabric of international law? | 《京都议定书》关于排放贸易的第十七条提供了一个例子，见Churchill 和 Ulfstein,“多边环境协定中的自治机构安排…”(上文脚注836)，第639页；J.
Brunnée,“重新构建国际法架构？ |
| Patterns of consent in environmental
framework agreements”, in Developments of
International Law in Treaty Making, R. Wolfrum and V. Röben, eds. (Berlin,
Springer, 2005), pp. 110-115. | 环境框架协定中的同意模式”，载于R. Wolfrum和V. Röben所编《条约制订方面的国际法发展》(Berlin, Springer,
2005年)，第110-115页。 |
| See J. Brunnée, “Treaty amendments”, in Hollis, The Oxford
Guide to Treaties (footnote 798 above), pp. 354-360. | 见J. Brunnée,“条约的修正”，载于Hollis,《牛津条约指南》(上文脚注798)，第354-360页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| This is the case, for example, for the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. | 例如，《联合国气候变化框架公约》就是这样。 |
| See P. Millett, “The
Biological Weapons Convention: securing biology in the twenty-first century”, Journal of Conflict and Security Law, vol. 15, No. 1 (2010), pp.
25-43, at p. 33. | 见P. Millett,“《生物武器公约》：保障二十一世纪的生物安全”，《冲突和安全法期刊》，总第15期，第1期(2010年)，第25-43页，见第33页。 |
| The “Implementation
Support Unit” was created by the Conference of States
Parties, in order to provide administrative support to the Conference, and to
enhance confidence-building measures among States parties (see Final Document
of the Sixth Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on the
Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological
(Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction (BWC/CONF.VI/6),
Part. III (decisions and recommendations), para. 5). | “履约和支助股”由缔约国会议创立，以便为会议提供行政支持，并加强缔约国之间的建立信任措施(见《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌(生物)及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》缔约国第六次审查会议最后文件(BWC/CONF.VI/6)，第三部分(决定和建议)，第5段)。 |
| See background information document
submitted by the Implementation and Support Unit, prepared for the Seventh
Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention, entitled “Additional understandings and agreements reached by previous
Review Conferences relating to each article of the Convention” (BWC/CONF.VII/INF.5) (updated later to include the understandings
and agreements reached by that Conference, Geneva, 2012). | 见履约和支助股提交的背景资料文件，由公约缔约国第七次审查会议编写，标题为“以前的审查会议就公约每一条款达成的补充谅解和协定”(BWC/CONF.VII/INF.5)(后来进行了更新，增加了会议达成的谅解和协定，2012年，日内瓦)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1046,
No. 15749, p. 120. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1046卷，第15749号，第120页。 |
| Agenda item 4 (Ocean fertilization),
submitted by the Secretariat on procedural requirements in relation to a
decision on an interpretive resolution: views of the IMO Sub-Division of
Legal Affairs, document LC 33/J/6, para. 3. | 议程项目4(海洋富氧化)，秘书处关于解释性决议决定的程序性规定的提交材料：海事组织法律事务处的意见，LC 33/J/6号文件，第3段。 |
| See Conference of the Parties to the
World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control,
Intergovernmental Negotiating Body on a Protocol on Illicit Trade in Tobacco
Products, “Revised Chairperson’s text on a protocol on illicit trade in tobacco products, and
general debate: | 见《世界卫生组织烟草控制框架公约》缔约方会议，关于烟草制品非法贸易议定书的政府间谈判机构，“主席关于烟草制品非法贸易议定书的修正案文和一般性辩论： |
| legal advice on the scope of the protocol”, note by the WHO Legal Counsel on scope of the protocol on illicit
trade in tobacco products (FCTC/COP/INB-IT/3/INF.DOC./6) annex, para. 8; S.F.
Halabi, “The World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control: an analysis of
guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties”,
Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 39 (2010), pp.
121-183. | 关于议定书范围的法律咨询意见”，卫生组织法律顾问关于烟草制品非法贸易议定书范围的说明 (FCTC/COP/INB-IT/3/INF.DOC./6)，附件，第8段；S. F. Halabi,“世界卫生组织烟草控制框架公约：对缔约方会议所通过的指南的分析”，《格鲁吉亚国际和比较法期刊》，第39期(2010年)，第121-183页。 |
| D.H. Joyner, Interpreting the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 83 (with
respect to the Non-Proliferation Treaty); Aust, Modern Treaty Law and
Practice (see footnote 525 above), pp. 213-214. | D. H. Joyner,《解释核不扩散条约》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第83页(关于不扩散条约)；Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注525)，第213-214页。 |
| B.M. Carnahan, “Treaty
review conferences”, American Journal of
International Law, vol. 81, No. 1 (1987), pp. 226-230, at p. 229. | B. M. Carnahan,“条约审查会议”，《美国国际法期刊》，总第81期，第1期(1987年)，第226-230页，见第229页。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
248, para. 46. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第248页，第46段。 |
| Final Declaration of the Third Review
Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and
Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction, Geneva, 9-27 September 1991
(BWC/CONF.III/23, part II). | 《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌(生物)及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》缔约国第三次审查会议最后声明，1991年9月9日至27日，日内瓦(BWC/CONF.III/23, 第二部分)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1522,
No. 26369, p. 3. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1522卷，第26369号，第3页。 |
| Copenhagen Amendment to the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1992), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 1785, No. 26369, p. 517; | 《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书哥本哈根修正案》(1992年)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1785卷，第26369号，第517页； |
| and Beijing Amendment to the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1999), ibid., vol. 2173,
No. 26369, p. 183. | 以及《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书北京修正案》(1999年)，同上，第2173卷，第26369号，第183页。 |
| For details, see decision XV/3 on
obligations of parties to the 1999 Beijing Amendment under art. 4 of the
Montreal Protocol with respect to hydrochlorofluorocarbons; the definition
itself is formulated as follows: | 详情见1999年《北京修正案》各方在《蒙特利尔议定书》关于氢氟碳化合物的第四条下承担义务的第XV/3号决定；定义本身如下： |
| “… (a) The term ‘State
not party to this Protocol’ in article 4, paragraph
9, does not apply to those States operating under article 5, paragraph 1, of
the Protocol until January 1, 2016 when, in accordance with the Copenhagen
and Beijing Amendments, hydrochlorofluorocarbon production and consumption
control measures will be in effect for States that operate under article 5,
paragraph 1, of the Protocol; | “…(a) 第4条第9款中的‘非本议定书缔约方的国家’一语于2016年1月1日之前不适用于那些按《议定书》第5条第1款行事的缔约方，届时依照《哥本哈根修正案》和《北京修正案》的相关规定，氟氯烃的生产和消费控制措施将开始对这些按《议定书》第5条第1款行事的国家生效； |
| (b) The term ‘State
not party to this Protocol’ includes all other States
and regional economic integration organizations that have not agreed to be
bound by the Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments; | (b)‘非本议定书缔约方的国家’一语包括所有尚未同意受《哥本哈根修正》和《北京修正》约束的其他国家和区域经济一体化组织； |
| (c) Recognizing, however, the practical
difficulties imposed by the timing associated with the adoption of the
foregoing interpretation of the term ‘State not party
to this Protocol,’ paragraph 1 (b) shall apply unless
such a State has by 31 March 2004: | (c) 但同时还认识到，鉴于在采用对‘非本议定书缔约方的国家’一语的上述解释时在时间上涉及的实际困难，决定只要所涉国家已于2004年3月31日之前采取了下列各项措施，则以上第1(b)段便将不对之适用： |
| (i) Notified the Secretariat that it
intends to ratify, accede or accept the Beijing Amendment as soon as
possible; | (一) 通知秘书处它打算尽快批准、加入或接受《北京修正》； |
| (ii) Certified that it is in full
compliance with articles 2, 2A to 2G and article 4 of the Protocol, as
amended by the Copenhagen Amendment; | (二) 提供证明，确认它已完全遵守经《哥本哈根修正》修正的《议定书》第2条、第2A-2G条和第4条的相关规定； |
| (iii) Submitted data on (i) and (ii)
above to the Secretariat, to be updated on 31 March 2005, in which case that
State shall fall outside the definition of ‘State not
party to this Protocol’ until the conclusion of the Seventeenth
Meeting of the Parties” (Report of the 15th meeting
of the State Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that deplete the
Ozone Layer (UNEP/OzL.Pro.15/9), chap. XVIII. sect. A, decision XV/3, para.
1). | (三) 向秘书处提交了上述第(一)和(二)项中所述数据，并计划于2005年3月31日予以增订；如系此种情形，则在缔约方第七次会议结束之前便可暂不把此种国家归入‘非本议定书缔约方的国家’的定义范围(UNEP/OzL.Pro.15/9)，第十八章，A节，第XV/3号决定，第1段)。 |
| See above para. (8) of the present
commentary. | 见上文本评注第(8)段。 |
| See London Sixteenth Consultative Meeting
of the Contracting Parties, and resolutions LC.49 (16), LC.50 (16) and LC.51
(16) (United Nations, Treaties Series, vol. 1775, No. 15749, p. 395). | 见缔约方伦敦第十六次磋商会议，LC.49(16)号、LC.50(16)号和LC.51(16)号决议(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1775卷，第15749号，第395页)。 |
| First, the meeting decided to amend the
phasing-out of the dumping of industrial waste by 31 December 1995. | 首先，会议决定在1995年12月31日以前修正逐步停止倾倒工业废物的规定； |
| Second, it banned the incineration at sea
of industrial waste and sewage sludge. | 其次，禁止向海洋倾倒工业废物和下水管道废弃物的焚化物。 |
| And, finally, it decided to replace
para.6 of annex I, banning the dumping of radioactive waste or other
radioactive matter (see also “Dumping at sea: the
evolution of the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping
of Wastes and Other Matter (LC), 1972”, Focus on IMO
(July 1997), p. 11). | 最后，决定取代附件一第6段，禁止倾倒放射性垃圾或其他放射性物质(见“向海洋倾倒：《防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约》的发展(LC)，1972年”，《聚焦海事组织》(1997年7月)，第11页)。 |
| It has even been asserted that these
amendments to annex I of the London Dumping Convention “constitute major changes in the Convention” (see Churchill and Ulfstein, “Autonomous
institutional arrangements in multilateral environmental agreements …” (footnote 836 above), p. 638). | 有人主张，对《伦敦倾倒公约》附件一的这些修正“是公约的重大变化”(见Churchill和Ulfstein,“多边环境协定中的自治机构安排…”(上文脚注836)，第638页)。 |
| IMO, Report of the Thirteenth
Consultative Meeting of Contracting Parties to the Convention on the
Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, LDC
13/15, annex 7, resolution LDC.41 (13), para. 1. | 海事组织，《防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约》第十三次缔约方磋商会议报告，LDC
13/15, 附件7, LDC.41 (13)号决议，第1段。 |
| Churchill and Ulfstein, “Autonomous institutional arrangements in multilateral
environmental agreements …” (see footnote 836 above),
p. 641. | Churchill和Ulfstein,“多边环境协定中的自治机构安排…”(见上文脚注836)，第641页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1673,
No. 28911, p. 57. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1673卷，第28911号，第57页。 |
| See Report of the Conference of the
Parties to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of
Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal on its tenth meeting (Cartagena,
Colombia, 17-21 October 2011), UNEP/CHW.10/28, annex 1, Decision BC-10/3
(Indonesian-Swiss country-led initiative to improve the effectiveness of the
Basel Convention), para. 2. | 见《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置的巴塞尔公约》缔约方会议第十次会议报告(2011年10月17日至21日，哥伦比亚卡塔赫纳)，UNEP/CHW.10/28, 附件一，BC-10/3号决定(印度尼西亚－瑞士关于国家牵头改进《巴塞尔公约》效力的倡议)，第2段。 |
| Ibid., chap. III. A, para. 65. | 同上，第三章A节，第65段。 |
| See Günther
Handl, “International ‘lawmaking’ by conferences of the parties and other politically mandated
bodies”, in Wolfrum and Röben, Developments of
International Law in Treaty Making (footnote 846 above), pp. 127-143, at p.
132. | 见Günther Handl,“缔约方会议和其他有政治授权机构的‘国际法律制订’”，载于Wolfrum和Röben,《国际法在条约形成方面的进展》(上文脚注846)，第127-143页，见第132页。 |
| The “current-time
approach” favoured by the Legal Counsel of the United
Nations stipulates that: “Where the treaty is silent
or ambiguous on the matter, the practice of the Secretary-General is to
calculate the number of acceptances on the basis of the number of parties to
the treaty at the time of deposit of each instrument of acceptance of an
amendment. ” | 联合国法律顾问所赞成的“当前时段的办法”规定，“当条约对此事项未作规定或比较模糊时，秘书长的惯例是以交存对修正的每份接受文书时条约缔约方的数目来计算接受国的数目。” |
| See extracts from the memorandum of 8
March 2004 received from the Office of Legal Affairs of the United Nations,
available at | 见联合国法律事务厅2004年3月8日备忘录摘要，载于。 |
| Report of the Conference of the Parties
to the Basel Convention … (see footnote 869 above),
para. 68 (emphasis added). | 《巴塞尔公约》缔约方会议的报告…(见上文脚注869)，第68段(强调系本文所加)。 |
| Partial guidelines for implementation of
articles 9 and 10 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
(Regulation of the contents of tobacco products and Regulation of tobacco
product disclosures), FCTC/COP4(10), Annex, adopted at the fourth session of
the Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control (Punta del Este, Uruguay, 15-20 November 2010), in FCTC/COP/4/DIV/6,
p. 39. | 执行卫生组织《烟草管制框架公约》第9条和第10条的部分指南(管制烟草制品成分和管制烟草制品披露)，FCTC/COP4(10)，附件，卫生组织《烟草管制框架公约》第四届缔约方会议通过(2010年11月15日至20日，乌拉圭埃斯特角)，载于FCTC/COP/4/DIV/6,
第39页。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
257, para. 83. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第257页，第83段。 |
| Ibid., p. 248, para. 46. | 同上，第248页，第46段。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
10 [9], paras. (23)-(24). | 见上文结论草案10[9]的评注第(23)-(24)段。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226
(Separate Opinion of Judge ad hoc Charlesworth, at p. 454, para. 4: “I note that resolutions adopted by a vote of the [International
Whaling Commission] have some consequence although they do not come within
the terms of [a]rticle 31.3 of the Vienna Convention”). | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起(临时法官Charlesworth的个别意见，见第454页，第4段：“我注意到，[国际捕鲸委员会]投票通过的决议具有一定的后果，但不属于《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款的规定范围”)。 |
| The Conference of States Parties to the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change provisionally applies
the draft rules of procedure of the Conference of the Parties and its
subsidiaries bodies (FCCC/CP/1996/2), with the exception of draft rule 42 in
the chapter on “Voting”,
since no agreement has been reached so far on one of the two voting
alternatives contained therein, see Report of the Conference of the Parties
on its first session (28 March to 7 April 1995) (FCCC/CP/1995/7), p. 8, para.
10; Report of the Conference of the Parties on its nineteenth session (11 to
23 November 2013) (FCCC/CP/2013/10), p. 6, para. 4; similarly, the Conference
of States Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992, United
Nations, Treaties Series, vol. 1760, No. 30619, p. 79) did not adopt Rule 40,
paragraph 1 (Voting), of the rules of procedure “because
of the lack of consensus among the Parties concerning the majority required
for decision-making on matters of substance”, see
Report of the Eleventh Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity (8-19 October 2012) (UNEP/CBD/COP/11/35),
para. 65. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方会议暂时适用缔约方会议及其附属机构议事规则草案(FCCC/CP/1996/2)，但有关“投票”的一章中的规则42草案例外，因为迄今为止尚未就其中列出的两种投票替代办法中的一种达成一致，见缔约方会议第一届会议报告(1995年3月28日至4月7日)
(FCCC/CP/1995/7)，第8页，第10段；缔约方会议第十九届会议报告(2013年11月11日至23日) (FCCC/CP/2013/10)，第6页，第4段；同样，《生物多样性公约》(1992年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1760卷，第30619号，第79页)缔约方会议没有通过议事规则中规则40的第1段(投票)，“因为缔约方对于就实质性事项作出决定所需的多数无法达成共识”，见《生物多样性公约》缔约方会议第十一次会议报告(2012年10月8日至19日) (UNEP/CBD/COP/11/35)，第65段。 |
| See rule 28, paragraph 2, of the
provisional rules of procedure for the Review Conference of the Parties to
the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and
Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their
Destruction, held in Geneva, from 3 to 21 March 1980 (BWC/CONF.I/2). | 见1980年3月3日至21日在日内瓦举行的《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌(生物)及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》缔约国审查会议临时议事规则中规则28第2段(BWC/CONF.I/2)。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 60/286 of
8 September 2006 on revitalization of the General Assembly, requesting the
Office of Legal Affairs of the Secretariat “to make
precedents and past practice available in the public domain with respect to
rules and practices of the intergovernmental bodies of the Organization” (annex, para. 24). | 见大会2006年9月8日关于振兴大会的第60/286号决议，它要求秘书处法律事务厅“提供有关本组织政府间机构规则和做法的先例和惯例，供公众查询”(第24段)。 |
| See “Consensus in
UN practice: General”, paper prepared by the
Secretariat, available from; see also R.Wolfrum and J. Pichon, “Consensus”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of
Public International Law, paras. 3-4 and 24. | 见秘书处编写的文件“联合国实践中的协商一致：概论”，载于；并见R. Wolfrum和J. Pichon,“协商一致”，载于《马克斯•普朗克国际公法百科全书》，第3-4段和第24段。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
257, para.83. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，第257页，第83段。 |
| See report of the sixth meeting of the
Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity
(UNEP/CBD/COP/6/20), annex I, decision VI/23. | 见《生物多样性公约》缔约方会议第六次会议报告(UNEP/CBD/COP/6/20)，附件一，第VI/23号决定。 |
| Ibid., para. 313. | 同上，第313段。 |
| Ibid., para. 318; for the discussion see
paras. 294-324. | 同上，第318段；讨论情况见第294-324段。 |
| Available from the secretariat of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, document SCBD/SEL/DBO/30219 (6 June
2002). | 存于《生物多样性公约》秘书处，SCBD/SEL/DBO/30219号文件(2002年6月6日)。 |
| Letter dated 17 June 2002, transmitted by
facsimile. | 2002年6月17日的信函，通过传真发送。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See report of the Conference of the
Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol on its
sixth session, held in Cancún from 29 November to 10
December 2010 (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/12 and Add.1), decision 1/CMP.6 (The Cancún Agreements: outcome of the work of the Ad hoc Working Group on
Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol at its
fifteenth session) and decision 2/CMP.6 (The Cancún
Agreements: land use, land-use change and forestry); as well as the
proceedings of the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the
Parties to the Kyoto Protocol, para. 29. | 见2010年11月29日至12月10日在坎昆举行的作为《京都议定书》缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议第六届会议报告(FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/12和FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/12/Add.1)，第1/CMP.6号决定(坎昆协议：附件一缔约方在《京都议定书》之下的进一步承诺问题特设工作组第十五届会议的工作结果)和第2/CMP.6号决定(坎昆协议：土地利用、土地利用的变化和林业)；以及作为《京都议定书》缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议纪要，第29段。 |
| See Nolte, “Subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice of States …”
(footnote 440 above), pp. 372-377. | 见诺尔特,“…国家嗣后协定和嗣后惯例”(上文脚注440)，第372-377页。 |
| IMO, report of the 3rd meeting of the
Intersessional Working Group on Ocean Fertilization (LC 33/4), para. 4.15.2. | 海事组织，闭会期间海洋肥化问题工作组第3次会议报告(LC 33/4)，第4.15.2段。 |
| IMO, document LC 33/J/6, para. 3 (see footnote 854 above). | 海事组织，LC 33/J/6号文件，第3段(见上文脚注854)。 |
| Ibid., para. 8. | 同上，第8段。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
10 [9], paras. (9)-(11). | 见上文结论草案10[9]的评注，第(9)-(11)段。 |
| Commentary to draft conclusion 3 [2],
para. (4), above. | 上文结论草案3[2]的评注，第(4)段。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226,
Separate Opinion of Judge Greenwood, at pp. 407-408, para. 6, and Separate
Opinion of Judge ad hoc Charlesworth, at pp. 453-454, para. 4. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页，Greenwood法官的个别意见，见第407-408页，第6段和临时法官Charlesworth的个别意见，见第453-454页，第4段。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
3 [2], para. 4. | 见上文结论草案3[2]的评注，第(4)段。 |
| See also the parallel provision of
article 5 of the 1986 Vienna Convention (A/CONF.129/15). | 另见1986年《维也纳公约》第5条的平行条款(A/CONF.129/15)。 |
| Art. 20, para. 3, of the 1969 Vienna
Convention requires the acceptance, by the competent organ of the
organization, of reservations relating to its constituent instrument. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第二十条第三款规定，条约是一国际组织的组成文书时，保留须经该组织主管机关接受。 |
| Twelfth report on reservations to
treaties, Yearbook …2007, vol. II (Part One),
document A/CN.4/584, paras. 75-77; S. Rosenne, Developments in the Law of
Treaties 1945-1986 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 204. | 《关于对条约的保留的第十二次报告》，《2007年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/CN.4/584号文件，第75-77段；S. Rosenne, Developments in the Law
of Treaties 1945-1986 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989)， p. 204。 |
| See Yearbook …
1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 191 (draft article 4); K.
Schmalenbach, “Art. 5”, in
Dörr and Schmalenbach, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties … (see footnote 439 above), p. 89, para. 1. | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/rev.1号文件，第191页(第四条草案)；K. Schmalenbach,“Art. 5”，in Dörr and K. Schmalenbach, Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties…(见上文脚注439)， p. 89, para. 1。 |
| See, for example, articles 16; 19 (a) and
(b); 20, paras. 1 and 3-5; 22; 24, para. 3; 25, para. 2;
44, para. 1; 55; 58, para. 2; 70, para. 1; 72, para.
1; 77, para. 1, of the 1969 Vienna Convention. The latter category is
addressed by the 1986 Vienna Convention (A/CONF.129/15). | 例如，见1969年《维也纳公约》第十六条，第十九条(a)项和(b)项，第二十条第一款、第三款至第五款，第二十二条，第二十四条第三款，第二十五条第二款，第四十四条第一款，第五十五条，第五十八条第二款，第七十条第一款，第七十二条第一款，第七十七条第一款。
后一类由1986年《维也纳公约》规定(A/CONF.129/15)。 |
| Accordance with International Law of the
Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 403, at p. 442, para.94 (“… While the rules on treaty interpretation embodied in [a]rticles
31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties may provide
guidance, differences between Security Council resolutions and treaties mean
that the interpretation of Security Council resolutions also require that
other factors be taken into account”); see also H.
Thirlway, “The law and procedure of the International
Court of Justice 1960-1989, part eight”, British
Yearbook of International Law 1996, vol. 67, p. 1, at p. 29; M.C. Wood, “The interpretation of Security Council resolutions”, Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, vol. 2 (1998), p. 73,
at p. 85; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 392 above), p. 128. | 科索沃单方面宣布独立是否符合国际法，咨询意见，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第403页起，见第442页，第94段(“…尽管《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条和第三十二条所载关于条约解释的规则可作为指引，但安全理事会决议同条约有所区别，因此在解释安全理事会决议时还需考虑其他因素”)；另见H. Thirlway,“The
law and procedure of the International Court of Justice 1960-1989, part eight”，British Yearbook of International Law 1996, vol. 67, p. 1, at p.
29；M.C. Wood,“The
interpretation of Security Council resolutions”，Max
Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, vol. 2 (1998)，p.
73, at p. 85；Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation(见上文脚注392)，p.128。 |
| Request for Interpretation of the
Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear
(Cambodia v. Thailand), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2013, p. 281, at p. 307,
para. 75 (“A judgment of the Court cannot be equated
to a treaty, an instrument which derives its binding force and content from
the consent of the contracting States and the interpretation of which may be
affected by the subsequent conduct of those States, as provided by the
principle stated in article 31, paragraph 3 (b), of the 1969 Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties”). | “请求解释1962年6月15日对柏威夏寺(柬埔寨诉泰国)案所作判决”，判决，《2013年国际法院案例汇编》，第281页起，见第307页，第75段(“法院的判决不能等同于一项条约。按1969年《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所述的原则，条约这种文书的约束力和内容源自缔约国的同意，其解释可能受到缔约国嗣后行为的影响”)。 |
| See Regina v. Secretary of State for the
Environment, Transport and the Regions ex parte Alconbury Developments
Limited and others [2001] UKHL 23; | 见女王诉环境、运输和地区事务大臣，第三人为Alconbury发展有限公司等案[2001] UKHL 23； |
| Regina v. Special Adjudicator
(respondent) ex parte Ullah (FC) (appellant) Do (FC) (appellant) v. Secretary
of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2004] UKHL 26 [20] (Lord
Bingham of Cornhill); Regina (On the Application of Animal Defenders
International) v. Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport [2008] UKHL
15. | 女王诉特别审裁官(应诉人)，第三人为Ullah (FC) (申诉人)，Do
(FC) (申诉人)诉内政大臣(应诉人)案[2004] UKHL 26[20] (Lord Bingham of
Cornhill)；女王(应动物保护国际的申请)诉文化、媒体和体育大臣案[2008] UKHL 15。 |
| Such jurisprudence may be a means for the
determination of rules of law as indicated, in particular, by article 38,
paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 特别是如《国际法院规约》第38条第1款(d)项所述，此类判例可用作确定法律原则的资料。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), pp. 281-282. | Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (见上文脚注392)，pp.281-282。 |
| Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear
Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 66, at
p. 74, para. 19. | 国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第66页起，见第74页，第19段。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
1962, p. 151, at p. 157. | 联合国某些经费(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》第151页起，见157页。 |
| Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear
Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 66, at
p. 75, para. 19. | 国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第66页起，见第75页，第19段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See Art. 17 of the Convention and Statute
relating to the Development of the Chad Basin (Treaty of Fort-Lamy von 1964),
Heidelberg Journal of International Law, vol. 34 (1974), at p. 80; generally:
P.H. Sand, “Development of International Water Law in
the Lake Chad Basin”, ibid., pp. 52-76. | 见《关于开发乍得湖流域的公约和章程》(《1964年拉密堡条约》)第十七条，Heidelberg
Journal of International Law, vol. 34 (1974)，见第80页；一般参考：P.H. Sand,“Development of International
Water Law in the Lake Chad Basin”，同上，pp. 52-76。 |
| Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1998,
p. 275, at p. 305, para. 65. | 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案，初步反对意见，判决，《1998年国际法院案例汇编》，第275页起，见第305页，第65段。 |
| Ibid., at pp. 306-307, para. 67. | 同上，见第306-307页，第67段。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226; see
also below footnote 944 and accompanying text. | 南极捕鲸(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与)案，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页；另见下文脚注944和随附文本。 |
| See articles 39-41 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 见1969年《维也纳公约》第三十九条至第四十一条。 |
| See Madrid European Council, Conclusions
of the Presidency, European Union Bulletin, No. 12 (1995), p. 9, at p. 10,
sect. I.A.I. | 见马德里欧洲理事会，主席的结论，欧洲联盟公报，第12号(1995年)，第9页起，见第10页，第I.A.I节)。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice
(footnote 525 above), p. 215; Hafner, “Subsequent
agreements and practice …” (see footnote 655 above),
at pp. 109-110. | 见Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice(上文脚注525)，p. 215；Hafner,“Subsequent agreements and practice…”(见上文上文脚注655)，at pp. 109-110。 |
| Case C-181/91 and C-248/91, Parliament v.
Council and Commission [1993], European Court Reports I-3713, para. 12. | C-181/91和C-248/91号案，议会诉理事会和委员会[1993年]，欧洲法院第I-3713号报告，第12段。 |
| Ibid., para. 14. | 同上，第14段。 |
| See above draft conclusions 2 [1], para.
4, and 4, para. 3, and commentary thereto, respectively, para. (10) and
paras. (23)-(37). | 见上文结论草案2[1]，第4段和结论草案4第3段，及结论草案1评注第10段和结论草案4评注第(23)-(37)段。 |
| This is true, for example, for the
Convention on International Civil Aviation (see footnote 837above); P.P.C.
Haanappel, “Bilateral air transport agreements — 1913-1980”, International Trade Law Journal,
vol. 5, No. 2 (1980), pp. 241-267; L. Tomas, “Air
transport agreements, regulation of liability”, in
Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (see footnote 425 above);
B.F. Havel, Beyond Open Skies, A New Regime for International Aviation
(Alphen aan den Rijn, Kluwer Law International, 2009), p. 10. | 又如《国际民用航空公约》(见上文脚注837)；P.P.C. Haanappel,“Bilateral air transport agreements –
1913-1980”，International Trade Law Journal, vol. 5,
No. 2 (1980)，pp. 241-267；L.
Tomas,“Air transport agreements, regulation of
liability” in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public
International Law(www.mpepil.com)；B.F. Havel, Beyond
Open Skies, A New Regime for International Aviation (Alphen aan den Rijn,
Kluwer Law International, 2009)， p. 10。 |
| R. Higgins, “The
Development of international law by the political organs of the United
Nations”, Proceedings of the American Society of
International Law at its 59th Annual Meeting (Washington, D.C., April 22-24,
1965), pp. 116-124, at p. 119; the practice of an international organization,
in addition to arising from, or being expressed in, an agreement or the
practice of the parties themselves under paragraph 2, may also be a means of
interpretation in itself under paragraph 3 (see below at paras. (25)-(35)). | R. Higgins,“The
Development of international law by the political organs of the United
Nations”，Proceedings of the American Society of
International Law at its 59th Annual Meeting (Washington, D.C.，April 22-24, 1965)，pp. 116-124, at p. 119；国际组织的惯例，除出自或体现在第2段所述缔约方本身的共识或惯例中外，还可能其本身就是第3段所述的一种解释手段(见下文第(25)-(35)段)。 |
| Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear
Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 66, at
p. 81, para. 27. | 国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第66页起，见第81页，第27段。 |
| The Permanent Court of International
Justice had adopted this approach in its Advisory Opinion on Competence of
the International Labour Organization to regulate, incidentally, the personal
work of the employer, 23 July 1926, P.C.I.J. Series B. No. 13, at pp. 19-20;
see S. Engel, “‘Living’
international constitutions and the world court (the subsequent practice of
international organs under their constituent instruments)”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 16 (1967), pp.
865-910, at p. 871. | 常设国际法院在关于国际劳工组织附带规范雇主个人工作的权限一案的咨询意见中便采用了这种办法，1926年7月23日，《常设国际法院案例汇编》，B辑第13号，见第19-20页；见S. Engel,“‘Living’
international constitutions and the world court (the subsequent practice of
international organs under their constituent instruments)”，International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 16 (1967)，pp. 865-910, at p. 871。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States — Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes,
WT/DS406/AB/R, adopted 24 April 2012, para. 262 (original emphasis). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－影响丁香烟生产和销售的措施案，WT/DS406/AB/R,
2012年4月4日通过，第262段(强调系原文所有)。 |
| Ibid. (footnotes omitted); although the
Doha Ministerial Decision does not concern a provision of the WTO Agreement
itself, it concerns an annex to that Agreement (the “TBT
Agreement”), which is an “integral
part” of the Agreement establishing the WTO (art. 2,
para. 2, WTO Agreement). | 同上(脚注略)；《多哈部长级会议决定》尽管不涉及《世贸组织协定》本身的条款，但涉及其中一个附件(《技术性贸易壁垒协议》)，该附件是《建立世贸组织的协定》的“完整组成部分”(《世贸组织协定》第2条第2款)。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 14, at p. 100, para. 188: “… The effect of consent to the text of such resolutions cannot be
understood as merely that of a ‘reiteration or
elucidation’ of the treaty commitment undertaken in
the Charter. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)，案情，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第100页，第188段：“…对此类决议文本的同意所具效力不能被理解为仅是‘重申和阐明’《宪章》中的条约义务。 |
| On the contrary, it may be understood as
an acceptance of the validity of the rule or set of rules declared by the
resolution by themselves”. | 相反，同意的效力可被理解为自身接受决议宣示的一项规则或一套规则的有效性”。 |
| This statement, whose primary purpose is
to explain the possible role of General Assembly resolutions for the
formation of customary law, also recognizes the treaty-related point that
such resolutions may serve to express the agreement, or the positions, of the
parties regarding a certain interpretation of the Charter of the United
Nations as a treaty (“elucidation”); similarly: | 这段话的主要目的在于解释大会决议在形成习惯法方面可能起到的作用，但同时也确认了与条约有关的论点，即：此类决议可能有助于表达缔约方对于把《联合国宪章》解释为条约的共识或立场(“阐明”)； |
| Accordance with International Law of the
Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 403, at p. 437, para. 80; | 相似的还有：科索沃单方面宣布独立是否符合国际法，咨询意见，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第403页起，见第437页，第80段； |
| in this sense, for example, L.B. Sohn, “The UN system as authoritative interpreter of its law”, in United Nations Legal Order, vol. 1, O. Schachter and C.C.
Joyner, eds. (Cambridge, American Society of International Law/Cambridge
University Press, 1995), pp. 169-229, at p. 177 (noting in regard to the
Nicaragua case that “[t]he Court accepted the
Friendly Relations Declaration as an authentic interpretation of the Charter”). | 在此意义上，例如L.B. Sohn,“The UN system as authoritative interpreter of its law”，in United Nations Legal Order, vol. 1, O. Schachter and C.C.
Joyner, eds. (Cambridge, American Society of International Law/Cambridge
University Press, 1995)，pp. 169-229, at p. 177 (针对尼加拉瓜案指出，“法院同意《友好关系宣言》是对《宪章》的权威解释”)。 |
| H.G. Schermers and N.M. Blokker,
International Institutional Law, 5th revised edition (Leiden/Boston, Martinus
Nijhoff, 2011), p. 854 (referring to interpretations by the Assembly of the
Oil Pollution Compensation Fund regarding the constituent instruments of the
Fund); M. Cogen, “Membership, associate membership
and pre-accession arrangements of CERN, ESO, ESA, and EUMETSAT”, International Organizations Law Review, vol. 9 (2012), pp.
145-179, at pp. 157-158 (referring to a unanimously adopted decision of the
CERN Council of 17 June 2010 interpreting the admission criteria established
in the CERN Convention as a subsequent agreement under article 31, para. 3
(a), of the 1969 Vienna Convention). | H. G. Schermers and N. M. Blokker,
International Institutional Law, 5th revised edition (Leiden/Boston, Martinus
Nijhoff, 2011)，p. 854 (提到油污赔偿基金大会就基金组成文书所作的解释)；M. Cogen,“Membership,
associate membership and pre-accession arrangements of CERN, ESO, ESA, and
EUMETSAT”，International Organizations Law Review,
vol. 9 (2012)，pp. 145-179, at pp. 157-158 (提到2010年6月17日欧洲核研究组织一致通过决定，该决定将《欧洲核研究组织公约》的接纳标准解释为属于1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项所述的嗣后协定)。 |
| See E.Jimémez de
Aréchega, “International law
in the past third of a century”, Recueil des Cours … 1978, vol. 159, pp. 1-334, at p. 32 (stating in relation to the
Friendly Relations Declaration that “[t]his
Resolution … constitutes an authoritative expression
of the views held by the totality of the parties to the Charter as to these
basic principles and certain corollaries resulting from them. | 见E. Jimémez de Aréchega,“International law in the past third
of a century”，Recueil des Cours …1978, vol. 159, pp. 1-334, at p. 32 (谈到《友好关系宣言》时指出，“该决议…构成了《宪章》全体缔约方对这些基本原则所持观点和由此产生的某些推论的权威表述。 |
| In the light of these circumstances, it
seems difficult to deny the legal weight and authority of the Declaration
both as a resolution recognizing what the Members themselves believe
constitute existing rules of customary law and as an interpretation of the
Charter by the subsequent agreement and the subsequent practice of all its
members”); O. Schachter, “General
course in public international law”, Recueil des
Cours … 1982, vol. 178, pp. 9-396, at p. 113 (“… [t]he law-declaring resolutions that construed and ‘concretized’ the principles of the Charter
— whether as general rules or in regard to particular
cases — may be regarded as authentic interpretation
by the parties of their existing treaty obligations. | 鉴于这种情形，《宣言》的法律份量和权威似乎难以否认：它既是确认会员国自己认为习惯法现有准则之构成的决议，又是其所有成员通过嗣后协定和嗣后惯例对《宪章》的解释”)；O. Schachter,“General
course in public international law”，Recueil des Cours
…1982, vol. 178, pp. 9-396, at p. 113 (“…可把用于解释和‘具体化’《宪章》各项原则(不论是作为一般规则还是针对具体情形)的法律宣示性决议视为缔约方对其现有条约义务的权威解释。 |
| To that extent they were interpretation,
and agreed by all Member States, they fitted comfortably into an established
source of law. | 在此意义上，这些决议属于解释，且经所有会员国同意，所以完全属于确定的法律渊源。 |
| P. Kunig, “United
Nations Charter, interpretation of”, in Max Planck
Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol. X, p. 273 et seq., at p. 275
(stating that, “[i]f passed by consensus, they [that
is, General Assembly resolutions] are able to play a major role in the … interpretation of the UN Charter”); Aust,
Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see footnote 525 above), p. 213 (mentioning
that General Assembly resolution 51/210 on measures to eliminate
international terrorism of 17 December 1996 “can be
seen as a subsequent agreement about the interpretation of the UN Charter”). | P. Kunig,“United
Nations Charter, interpretation of”，in Max Planck
Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol. X p. 273 et seq.，at p. 275(指出，“它们[即大会决议]如果以协商一致的方式获得通过，就能在…解释《联合国宪章》方面发挥重大作用”)；Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice(见上文脚注525)，第213页(提到联合国大会1996年12月17日关于消除国际恐怖主义的措施的第51/210号决议“可被视为关于解释《联合国宪章》的嗣后协定”)。 |
| All resolutions to which the writers are
referring to have been adopted by consensus. | 著述者提到的所有决议均以协商一致的方式获得通过。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States — Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes,
WT/DS406/AB/R, adopted 24 April 2012, para. 265. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－影响丁香烟生产和销售的措施案，WT/DS406/AB/R,
2012年4月24日通过，第265段。 |
| Y. Bonzon, Public Participation and
Legitimacy in the WTO (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2014), pp.
114-115. | Y. Bonzon, Public Participation and
Legitimacy in the WTO(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2014)，pp. 114-115. |
| Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
Notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, at p. 22. | 南非不顾安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第22页。 |
| H. Thirlway, “The
law and procedure of the International Court of Justice 1960-1989, Part Two”, British Yearbook of International Law 1990, vol. 61, pp. 1-133,
at pp. 76 (mentioning that “[t]he Court’s reference to the practice as being ‘of’ the Organization is presumably intended to refer, not to a
practice followed by the Organization as an entity in its relations with
other subjects of international law, but rather a practice followed, approved
or respected throughout the Organization. | H. Thirlway,“The
law and procedure of the International Court of Justice 1960-1989, Part Two”，British Yearbook of International Law 1990, vol. 61, pp. 1-133, at
pp. 76 (提到“法院提及该组织‘的’惯例，很可能是想指这不是该组织作为一个实体在其与国际法其他主体的关系中遵循的惯例，而是在整个组织范围内得到遵循、批准或尊重的惯例。 |
| Seen in this light, the practice is … rather a recognition by the other members of the Security Council
at the relevant moment, and indeed by all member States by tacit acceptance,
of the validity of such resolutions”). | 从这个角度看，该惯例…不如说是在相关时刻安全理事会其他成员承认此类决议的有效性，实际上是所有会员国以默许接受的方式承认此类决议的有效性”)。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 150 (emphasis added). | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第150页(强调系本文所加)。 |
| Ibid. See above commentary to draft
conclusion 10 [9], para.2, second sentence, paras. (13)-(25); Villiger,
Commentary … (see footnote 414 above), pp. 431-432,
para. 22; J. Arato, “Treaty interpretation and
constitutional transformation”, Yale Journal of
International Law, vol. 38, No. 2 (2013), pp. 289-357, at p. 322. | 同上。 见上文结论草案10[9]评注，第2段，第2句，第(13)-(25)段；Villiger, 评注…(见上文脚注414)，第431-432页，第22段；J. Arato,“Treaty interpretation and
constitutional transformation”，Yale Journal of
International Law, vol. 38, No. 2 (2013)， pp. 289-357,
at p. 322。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页。 |
| Ibid., p. 257, para. 83. | 同上，第257页，第83段。 |
| See Legal Consequences of the
Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 149 (referring to General
Assembly resolution 1600 (XV) of 15 April 1961 (adopted with 60 votes to 16,
with 23 abstentions, including the Soviet Union and other States of Eastern
Europe) and resolution 1913 (XVIII) of 13 December 1963 (adopted by 91 votes
to 2 (Spain and Portugal)). | 见在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第149页(提及大会1961年4月15日第1600 (XV)号决议(以60票赞成、23票弃权和16票反对获得通过，反对国包括苏联和“东方阵营”的其他一些国家)和大会1963年12月13日第1913 (XVIII)号决议，(以91票赞同、西班牙和葡萄牙2票反对获得通过)。 |
| Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear
Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 66, at
p. 74; See also D. Simon, L’interprétation judiciaire des traités d’organisations internationales (Paris, Pedone, 1981), pp. 379-384. | 国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第66页起，见第74页；另见D. Simon, L’interprétation
judiciaire des traités d’organisations
internationals (Paris, Pedone, 1981)，pp. 379-384。 |
| Competence of Assembly regarding
admission to the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 4,
at p. 9. | 联合国大会接纳国家加入联合国的权限，咨询意见，《1950年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第9页。 |
| Applicability of Article VI, Section 22,
of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1989, p. 177, at p. 194, para. 48. | 《联合国特权和豁免公约》第六条第二十二节的适用，咨询意见，《1989年国际法院案例汇编》，第177页起，见第194页，第48段。 |
| Constitution of the Maritime Safety
Committee of the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1960, p. 150, at p. 169. | 政府间海事协商组织海上安全委员会的组成，咨询意见，《1960年国际法院案例汇编》，第150页起，见第169页。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
1962, p. 151, at p. 168. | 联合国的某些经费(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见第168页。 |
| See J. Klabbers, An Introduction to
Institutional Law, 2nd edition (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009),
p. 90; C.F. Amerasinghe, Principles of the Institutional Law of International
Organizations, 2nd edition (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005), p.
25; J.E. Alvarez, International Organizations as Law-Makers (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2006), p. 80; Rosenne, Developments in the Law of Treaties … (see footnote 900 above), pp. 224-225. | 见See J. Klabbers, An Introduction to
Institutional Law, 2nd edition (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009),
p. 90; C.F. Amerasinghe, Principles of the Institutional Law of International
Organizations, 2nd edition (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005), p.
25; J.E. Alvarez, International Organizations as Law-Makers (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2006), p. 80; Rosenne, Developments in the Law of Treaties … (见上文脚注514)，pp.
224-225。 |
| See Lauterpacht, “The development of the law of international organization …” (footnote 779 above), at p. 460; N.M. Blokker, “Beyond ‘Dili’: on
the powers and practice of international organizations”, in State, Sovereignty, and International Governance, G. Kreijen,
ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 299-322, at pp. 312-318. | 见Lauterpacht, “The
development of the law of international organization …”(上文脚注393), at p. 460; N.M. Blokker, “Beyond ‘Dili’: on
the powers and practice of international organizations”, in State, Sovereignty, and International Governance, G. Kreijen,
ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 299-322, at pp. 312-318。 |
| C. Brölmann, “Specialized
rules of treaty interpretation: international organizations”, in Hollis, The Oxford Guide to Treaties (see footnote 797 above),
pp. 507-534, at pp. 520-521; S. Kadelbach, “The
interpretation of the Charter”, in The Charter of the
United Nations: A Commentary, 3rd edition, B. Simma and others, eds. (Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 71, at p. 80; Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation
(see footnote 392 above), pp. 127 and 281. | C. Brölmann, “Specialized
rules of treaty interpretation: international organizations”, in Hollis, The Oxford Guide to Treaties (见上文脚注414), pp. 507-534, at pp. 520-521; S. Kadelbach, “The interpretation of the Charter”, in The
Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, 3rd edition, B. Simma and
others, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 71, at p. 80;
Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (见上文脚注392), pp. 127
and 281。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 392 above), p. 282; Schermers and Blokker, International
Institutional Law (see footnote 933 above), p. 844; J. Crawford, Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law, 8th edition (Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 187; Klabbers, An Introduction to
Institutional Law (see footnote 953 above), pp. 89-90; see also Partial Award
on the Lawfulness of the Recall of the Privately Held Shares on 8 January
2001 and the Applicable Standards for Valuation of those Shares, 22 November
2002, UNRIAA, vol. XXIII (Sales No. E/F.04.V.15), pp. 183-251, at p. 224,
para. 145 | Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (见上文脚注392), p. 282; Schermers and Blokker, International Institutional
Law (见上文脚注933), p. 844; J. Crawford, Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law, 8th edition (Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 187; Klabbers, An Introduction to
Institutional Law (见上文脚注953)，第89–90页；另见关于2001年1月8日召回私人持股合法性及此类股份估值适用标准的部分裁决，2002年11月22日，《联合国国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十三卷(出售品编号E/F.04.V.15)，第183-251页，见第224页，第145段。 |
| The Commission may on second reading
revisit the definition of “other subsequent practice” in draft conclusions 2 [1], para. 4, and 4, para. 3, in order to
clarify whether the practice of an international organization as such should
be classified within this category which, so far, is limited to the practice
of parties; see Report of the International Law Commission on its sixty-fifth
session, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), chap. IV, pp. 11-12. | 委员会可以在二读时重新审视结论草案2[1]第4段和结论草案4第3段中“其他嗣后惯例”的定义，以澄清国际组织的自身惯例是否应该纳入该类；该类目前仅限于缔约国的惯例；见国际法委员会第六十五届会议报告，《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第四章，第11-12页。 |
| See Legal Consequences of the
Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 149 (referring to General
Assembly resolution 1600 (XV) of 15 April 1961 (adopted by 60 votes to 16,
with 23 abstentions, including the Soviet Union and other States of Eastern
Europe) and resolution 1913 (XVIII) of 13 December 1963 (adopted by 91 votes
with 2 against (Spain and Portugal)). | 见在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第149页(提及大会1961年4月15日第1600(XV)号决议(以60票赞成、23票弃权和16票反对获得通过，反对国包括苏联和“东方阵营”的其他一些国家)和大会1963年12月13日第1913(XVIII)号决议，(以91票赞同、西班牙和葡萄牙2票反对获得通过)。 |
| The International Court of Justice used
the expression “… purposes and functions as specified
or implied in its constituent documents and developed in practice”, Reparations for injuries suffered in the service of the United
Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 174, at p. 180. | 国际法院所用的措辞是“…其组成文件中具体规定或默示的，以及在实践中发展的宗旨和职能”，执行联合国公务时所受损害的补偿，咨询意见，《1949年国际法院案例汇编》，第174页起，见第180页。 |
| See para. (15) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 1 and footnote 429 above; see also, in particular, Land and
Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1998, p. 275, at pp. 306-307, para. 67. See
South-West Africa—Voting Procedure, Advisory Opinion
of June 7th, 1955, I.C.J. Reports 1955, p. 67, Separate Opinion of Judge Lauterpacht,
at p. 106 | 见结论草案1的评注第(15)段和上文脚注429；尤其另见喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案，初步反对意见，判决，《1998年国际法院判例汇编》，第275页起，见第306-307页，第67段。
见西南非洲－表决程序案，1955年6月7日的咨询意见，《1955年国际法院案例汇编》，第67页起，劳特帕赫特法官的个别意见，见第106页。 |
| (“… [a] proper
interpretation of a constitutional instrument must take into account not only
the formal letter of the original instrument, but also its operation in
actual practice and in the light of the revealed tendencies in the life of
the Organization”). | (“…在适当解释基本文书时，必须不仅考虑到原始文书的正式文字，而且要考虑到其实践中的运作并联系本组织存在期间所出现的各种趋势”)。 |
| Commentators are debating whether the
specific institutional character of certain international organizations, in
combination with the principles and values that are enshrined in their
constituent instruments could also yield a “constitutional” interpretation of such instruments that receives inspiration from
national constitutional law, | 评论家们正在就以下问题进行辩论，即：某些国际组织具体的机构性质，加上其组成文书中所显示的原则和价值，是否也能够导致人们借鉴国家宪法，对此类文书作出“宪法性”解释？ |
| see, for example, J.E. Alvarez, “Constitutional interpretation in international organizations”, in The Legitimacy of International Organizations J.-M. Coicaud
and V. Heiskanen, eds. (Tokyo, United Nations University Press, 2001), pp.
104-154;. A. Peters, “L’acte
constitutif de l’organisation internationale”, in E.Lagrange and J.-M. Sorel, eds., Droit des organisations
internationales (Paris, LGDJ, 2013), pp. 216-218; M. Wood, “‘Constitutionalization’ of International
Law: A Sceptical Voice”, in International Law and
Power: Perspectives on Legal Order and Justice. Essays in Honour of Colin
Warbrick, K.H. Kaikobad and M. Bohlinder, eds. (Leiden/Boston, Brill/Nijhoff,
2009), pp. 85-97. | 例如，见J.E. Alvarez, “Constitutional interpretation in international organizations”, in The Legitimacy of International Organizations J.-M. Coicaud
and V. Heiskanen, eds. (Tokyo, United Nations University Press, 2001), pp.
104-154;. A. Peters, “L’acte
constitutif de l’organisation internationale”, in E. Lagrange and J.-M. Sorel, eds., Droit des organisations
internationales (Paris, LGDJ, 2013), pp. 216-218; M. Wood, “‘Constitutionalization’ of International
Law: A Sceptical Voice”, in International Law and
Power: Perspectives on Legal Order and Justice. Essays in Honour of Colin
Warbrick, K.H. Kaikobad and M. Bohlinder, eds. (Leiden/Boston, Brill/Nijhoff,
2009), pp. 85-97。 |
| Legal consequences for States of the
continued presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
notwithstanding Security Council resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1971, pp. 31-32, para. 53; see also draft conclusion 8 [3] and
commentary thereto, paras. (24)-(30); Dörr, “Article
31 …” (see footnote 439 above), p. 537, para. 31;
Schmalenbach, “Art. 5”
(footnote 901 above), p. 92, para. 7. | 南非不顾安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第31-32页，第53段；另见结论草案8[3]及评注，第(24)-(30)段；Dörr,“Article
31 …”(见上文脚注439)，p. 537, para. 31；Schmalenbach,“Art. 5”(上文脚注901)，p. 92, para. 7。 |
| See Dörr (footnote 439 above), para. 21. | 见Dörr (上文脚注439)，第21段。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
1962, p. 151, at p. 168 (“[b]ut when the Organization
takes action which warrants the assertion that it was appropriate for the
fulfilment of one of the stated purposes of the United Nations, the
presumption is that such action is not ultra vires the Organization”). | 联合国某些经费(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见168页(“但如果该组织采取行动证明其言论，即这样做对于实现联合国明文规定的宗旨之一是适当的，就可推定这种行动没有超越该组织的权力”)。 |
| See above commentary to draft conclusion
5, para. (14). | 见上文结论草案5评注，第(14)段。 |
| The Commission may, however, eventually
revisit the formulation of draft conclusion 5 in the light of draft
conclusion 12 [11] in order to clarify their relationship. | 然而，委员会可能最终会按照结论草案12[11]重新拟定结论草案5, 以明确两者的关系。 |
| See also footnote 957 above. | 另见上文脚注957。 |
| Draft articles on the responsibility of
international organizations, general commentary, para. (7) (report of the
International Law Commission on its sixty-third session, Official Records of
the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap.
V, p. 70, para. 88). | “关于国际组织的责任的条款草案”，总评注，第(7)段，(国际法委员会第六十三届会议报告，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第五章，第70页，第88段)。 |
| See, for example, Klabbers, An
Introduction to Institutional Law (footnote 953 above), p. 88; Schmalenbach, “Art. 5” (footnote 901 above), p. 89, para.
1, and p. 96, para. 15; Brölmann, “Specialized rules
of treaty interpretation …” (footnote 955 above), p.
522; Dörr, “Article 31 …”
(see footnote 439 above), p. 538, para. 32. | 例如，见Klabbers, An Introduction to
Institutional Law (上文脚注953), p. 88; Schmalenbach, “Art. 5”(上文脚注901),
p. 89, para. 1, and p. 96, para. 15; Brölmann, “Specialized
rules of treaty interpretation …”(上文脚注955), p. 522; Dörr, “Article 31 …”(见上文脚注439), p. 538, para. 32。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States — Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes,
WT/DS406/AB/R, adopted 24 April 2012, paras. 252-257. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国—影响丁香烟生产和销售的措施案，WT/DS406/AB/R,
2012年4月4日通过，第252-257段。 |
| Most so-called interpretation clauses
determine which organ is competent authoritatively to interpret the treaty,
or certain of its provisions, but do not formulate specific rules “on” interpretation itself, see C. Fernández de Casadevante y Romani, Sovereignty and Interpretation of
International Norms (Berlin/Heidelberg, Springer, 2007), pp. 26-27; Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 439 above), p.
537, para. 32. | 大多数所谓的解释条款确定哪个机关有权权威地解释条约或其中某些条款，而不是制订“关于”解释本身的具体规则，见C. Fernández de Casadevante y Romani,
Sovereignty and Interpretation of International Norms (Berlin/Heidelberg,
Springer, 2007), pp. 26-27; Dörr, “Article 31 …”(见上文脚注439), p. 537, para. 32。 |
| See 1986 Vienna Convention, art. 2 (j);
and the International Law Commission’s draft articles
on the responsibility of international organizations, art. 2 (b), report of
the International Law Commission on its sixty-third session, Official Records
of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10),
chap. V, sect. E, para. 87; C. Peters, “Subsequent
practice and established practice of international organizations”, Göttingen Journal of International Law, vol. 3 (2011), pp.
617-642. | 见1986年《维也纳公约》，第二条(j)项；国际法委员会关于国际组织的责任的条款草案，第二条(b)项，国际法委员会第六十三届会议报告，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第五章，E节，第87段；C. Peters, “Subsequent practice and
established practice of international organizations”,
Göttingen Journal of International Law, vol. 3 (2011), pp. 617-642。 |
| Yearbook … 1982,
vol. II (Part Two), chap. II, p. 21, commentary to draft article 2, para. 1
(j), para. (25). | 《1982年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第二章，第21页，第二条第1款(j)项草案的评注，第(25)段。 |
| Report of the International Law
Commission on its sixty-third session, Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap. V, p. 52. | 国际法委员会第六十三届会议报告，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第五章，第52页。 |
| See Higgins, “The
Development of international law …” (footnote 927
above), at p. 121 (“… aspects of treaty
interpretation and customary practice in this field merge very closely”); Peters, “Subsequent practice …” (footnote 971 above), at pp. 630-631 (“…
should be considered a kind of customary international law of the
organization”); it is not persuasive to limit the “established practice of the organization”
to so-called internal rules since, according to the Commission, “there would have been problems in referring to the ‘internal’ law of an organization, for
while it has an internal aspect, this law also has in other respects an
international aspect”, Yearbook …1982, vol. II (Part Two), chap. II, p. 21, commentary to draft
article 2, para. 1 (j), para. (25); Schermers and Blokker, International
Institutional Law (see footnote 933 above), at p. 766; but see C. Ahlborn, “The rules of international organizations and the law of
international responsibility”, International
Organizations Law Review, vol. 8 (2011), pp. 397-482, at pp. 424-428. | 见Higgins, “The
Development of international law …”(上文脚注927), at p. 121 (“条约解释的若干方面与这一领域的习惯做法融合得非常接近”)；Peters,“Subsequent
practice …”(上文脚注971)，at pp. 630-631 (“…应视为该组织的一种习惯国际法”)；将“组织已确立的做法”限定为所谓的内部规则是没有说服力的，因为委员会表示，“采用一个组织的‘内部’法这个提法会出现一些问题，因为虽然这种法律有其对内的一面，但在其他方面还有国际性质”，《1982年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第二章，第21页，第二条第1款(j)项草案的评注，第(25)段；Schermers and Blokker, International
Institutional Law (见上文脚注933), at p. 766; but see C.
Ahlborn, “The rules of international organizations
and the law of international responsibility”, International
Organizations Law Review, vol. 8 (2011), pp. 397-482, at pp. 424-428。 |
| Blokker, “Beyond ‘Dili’ …” (see footnote 954 above), p. 312. | Blokker, “Beyond ‘Dili’ …”(见上文脚注954),
p. 312。 |
| Lauterpacht, “The
development of the law of international organization …” (footnote 779 above), p. 464 (“… consent
of the general body of membership”); Higgins, “The Development of international law …”
(footnote 927 above), p. 121 (“[t]he degree of length
and acquiescence need here perhaps to be less marked than elsewhere, because
the U.N. organs undoubtedly have initial authority to make such decisions
[regarding their own jurisdiction and competence]”);
Peters, “Subsequent practice and established practice
…” (footnote 971 above), pp. 633-641. | Lauterpacht, “The
development of the law of international organization …”(上文脚注779), p. 464 (“全体成员普遍的同意”)；Higgins, “The
Development of international law …”(上文脚注927)，p. 121(“此处，长度和默认的程度可能需要比别处弱一些，因为联合国机关无疑具有作出此类[关于其自身管辖权和职权]决定的最初权威”)；Peters, “Subsequent
practice and established practice …”(上文脚注971)，pp. 633-641。 |
| See Nigel Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty bodies”, in
The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law, D. Shelton, ed.
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 621-641, at pp. 622-623. | 见Nigel Rodley, “The
role and impact of treaty bodies”, in The Oxford
Handbook of International Human Rights Law, D. Shelton, ed. (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2013), pp. 621-641, at pp. 622-623。 |
| Arts. 8-14 of the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (New
York, 7 March 1966), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 660, No. 9464, p.
195. | 《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》第八至第十四条(1966年3月7日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第660卷，第9464号，第195页。 |
| Arts. 28-45 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights (New York, 19 December 1966), ibid., vol. 999,
No. 14668, p. 171. | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第二十八至第四十五条(1966年12月19日，纽约)，同上，第999卷，第14668号，第171页。 |
| Arts. 17-22 of the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (New York, 18
December 1979), ibid., vol. 1249, No. 20378, p. 13. | 《消除对妇女一切形式歧视公约》第十七至第二十二条(1979年12月18日，纽约)，同上，第1249卷，第20378号，第13页。 |
| Arts. 34-39 of the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities (New York, 13 December 2006), ibid., vol.
2515, No. 44910, p. 3. | 《残疾人权利公约》第三十四至第三十九条(2006年12月13日，纽约)，同上，第2515卷，第44910号，第3页。 |
| Arts. 43-45 of the Convention on the
Rights of the Child (New York, 20 November 1989), ibid., vol. 1577, No.
27531, p. 3. | 《儿童权利公约》第43至第45条(1989年11月20日，纽约)，同上，第1577卷，第27531号，第3页。 |
| Arts. 17-24 of the Convention against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (New
York, 10 December 1984), ibid., vol. 1465, No. 24841, p. 85. | 《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17至第24条(1984年12月10日，纽约)，同上，第1465卷，第24841号，第85页。 |
| The Commission on the Limits of the
Continental Shelf was established under art.76, para. 8, of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and annex II to the Convention
(Montego Bay, 10 December 1982), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1833,
No. 31363, p. 3. | 大陆架界限委员会是根据《联合国海洋法公约》第七十六条第8款和该《公约》附件二设立的(1982年12月10日，蒙特哥湾)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页。 |
| The Compliance Committee under the Aarhus
Convention was established under art. 15 of the Convention on Access to
Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters (Aarhus, Denmark, 25 June 1998), ibid., vol. 2161, No.
37770, p. 447, and decision I/7 on review of compliance, adopted at the first
meeting of the parties in 2002 (ECE/MP.PP/2/Add.8). | 《奥胡斯公约》遵约委员会是根据《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》第十五条设立的 (1998年6月25日，丹麦奥胡斯)，同上，第2161卷，第37770号，第447页，以及2002年缔约方会议第一届会议通过的关于审查遵约情况的第I/7号决定(ECE/MP.PP/2/Add.8)。 |
| The International Narcotics Control Board
was established under art. 5 of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (New
York, 30 March 1961), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, No. 7515, p.
151. | 国际麻醉品管制局是根据《麻醉品单一公约》第五条设立的 (1961年3月30日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第520卷，第7515号，第151页。 |
| See, e.g., art. 28, para. 3, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; see also Christian
Tomuschat, Human Rights: Between Idealism and Realism, 3rd edition (Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 2014), p. 219. | 例如，见《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第二十八条第3款；另见Christian Tomuschat, Human Rights: Between Idealism and Realism,
3rd edition (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014)，p.
219。 |
| This is true, in particular, for
decisions of Conferences of States Parties, see draft conclusion 12 [11]. | 具体而言，各缔约方会议的决定就属于这种情况，见结论草案12 [11]。 |
| The Committee of Experts on the
Application of Conventions and Recommendations of the International Labour
Organization (ILO) is an important example of an expert body that is an organ
of an international organization. | 国际劳工组织(劳工组织)实施公约与建议书专家委员会是属于国际组织机关的专家机构的重要例子。 |
| It was established in 1926 to examine
government reports on ratified conventions. It is composed of 20 eminent jurists
from different geographic regions, legal systems and cultures, who are
appointed by the governing body of ILO for three-year terms, see www.ilo.org
and information provided by ILO to the Commission, which is available on the
International Law Commission website at | 该机构于1926年设立，负责审查政府关于已批准公约的报告，由20名来自不同地域、法律系统和文化的知名法学家组成，由劳工组织理事会任命，任期三年，见www.ilo.org和劳工组织向委员会提供的资料，可查阅国际法委员会网站：。 |
| Art. 6, para. 1, of the articles on
responsibility of international organizations, General Assembly resolution
66/100, annex, of 9 December 2011 (for the commentary thereto, see Official
Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10
(A/66/10), chap. V, sect. E); the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention is an
example of a body of experts serving in their personal capacity that is
mandated by the Human Rights Council under its resolution 24/7 of 26
September 2013, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth
Session, Supplement No. 53 (A/68/53/Add.1). | 关于国际组织责任的条款草案第6条第1款，大会2011年12月9日第66/100号决议，附件(其评注见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第五章，E节)；任意拘留问题工作组是一例由以个人身份任职的专家组成的机构，其任务授权来自人权理事会2013年9月26日第24/7号决议，《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第53号》(A/68/53/Add.1)。 |
| Being a subsidiary organ of the Council,
it is not an expert treaty body under draft conclusion 13 [12], see. | 该工作组是理事会的附属机构，因此不是结论草案13 [12]所称的专家条约机构，见。 |
| Economic and Social Council, resolution
1987/5 of 26 May 1987 (E/C.12/1989/4), para. 9. | 经济及社会理事会，1987年5月26日第1987/5号决议(E/C.12/1989/4），第9段。 |
| Arts. 1-15 of the Optional Protocol to
the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, annexed
to General Assembly resolution 63/117 of 10 December 2008. | 大会2008年12月10日第63/117号决议所附《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约任择议定书》第一至第十五条。 |
| The Compliance Committee under the Kyoto
Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto,
11 December 1997) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2303, No. 30822, p.
162) was established under art. 18 of the Protocol and decision 24/CP.7 on
procedures and mechanisms relating to compliance under the Kyoto Protocol,
adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its seventh session
(FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.3). | 《联合国气候变化框架公约京都议定书》(1997年12月11日，京都) (联合国，《条约汇编》，第2303卷，第30822号，第162页)遵约委员会是根据《议定书》第十八条和缔约方会议第七届会议(FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.3)通过的关于与《京都议定书》规定的遵约有关的程序和机制的第24/CP.7号决定设立的。 |
| See International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, art. 42, para.7 (c); | 见《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》，第四十二条第7款(丙)项； |
| Optional Protocol to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 5, para. 4; | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》，第五条第4款； |
| and Optional Protocol to the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art.9, para. 1. | 《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约任择议定书》，第九条第一款。 |
| See International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, art. 9, para. 2;
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,
art. 21, para. 1; | 见《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》，第九条第二款；《消除对妇女一切形式歧视公约》，第二十一条第1款； |
| Convention on the Rights of the Child
(New York, 29 November 1989) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577, No.
27531, p. 3), art. 45 (d); International Convention for the Protection of All
Persons from Enforced Disappearance (New York, 20 December 2006) (ibid., vol.
2716, No. 48088, p. 3), art. 33, para. 5; | 《儿童权利公约》 (1989年11月29日，纽约) (联合国，《条约汇编》，第1577卷，第27531号，第3页)，第四十五条(d)项；《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》(2006年12月20日，纽约) (同上，第2716卷，第48088号，第3页)，第三十三条第五款； |
| United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982) (ibid., vol. 1833, No. 31363, p. 3),
art. 76, para. 8. | 《联合国海洋法公约》(1982年12月10日，蒙特哥湾) (同上，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页)，第七十六条第8款。 |
| See Convention against Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, art. 19, para. 3; | 见《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19条第3款； |
| International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, art. 40, para. 4; International Convention on the
Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families
(New York, 18 December 1990) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2220, No.
39481, p. 3), art. 74. | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》，第四十条第四款；《保护所有移徙工人及其家庭成员权利国际公约》(1990年12月18日，纽约) (联合国，《条约汇编》，第2220卷，第39481号，第3页)，第74条。 |
| Decision I/7 on review of compliance (see
footnote 985 above), sect. XI, para. 36, and sect. XII, para. 37; Single
Convention on Narcotic Drugs, art. 14. | 关于审查遵约情况的第I/7号决定(见上文脚注985)，第十一节，第36段，和第十二节，第37段；《麻醉品单一公约》，第十四条。 |
| Decision 24/CP.7 on procedures and
mechanisms relating to compliance under the Kyoto Protocol (see footnote 993
above), annex, sect. XV. | 关于与《京都议定书》规定的遵约有关的程序和机制的第24/CP.7号决定(见上文脚注993)，附件，第十五节。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), chap. III, para.
26 (b); | 见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第三章，第26 (b)段； |
| see also the “Final
report on the impact of findings of the United Nations human rights treaty
bodies”, International Law Association, Report of the
Seventy-first Conference (see footnote 540 above) p. 5, para. 15; European
Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), “Report on the implementation of international human rights
treaties in domestic law and the role of courts”
(CDL-AD(2014)036), adopted by the Venice Commission at its 100th plenary
session (Rome, 10-11 October 2014), p. 31, para. 78. | 另见“关于联合国人权条约机构调查结果影响的最后报告”，国际法协会，第七十一届会议报告 (见上文脚注540)第5页，第15段；European Commission for Democracy
through Law (Venice Commission), “Report on the
implementation of international human rights treaties in domestic law and the
role of courts” (CDL-AD(2014)036), adopted by the
Venice Commission at its 100th plenary session (Rome, 10-11 October 2014), p.
31, para. 78. |
| See Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of
Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
2010, p. 639, at pp. 663-664, para. 66; Rodley, “The
role and impact of treaty bodies” (footnote 977
above), p. 640; Case Law of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee
(2004-2011), 2nd edition, A. Andrusevych, T. Alge and C. Konrad, eds. (Lviv,
Resource and Analysis Center “Society and Environment”, 2011); “Compilation of findings of the
Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee adopted 18 February 2005 to date”, available from (accessed 8 July 2016). | 见艾哈迈杜 •萨迪奥•迪亚洛案(几内亚共和国诉刚果民主共和国)，案情实质，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第639页起，见第663-664页，第66段；Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty
bodies”(上文脚注977), p. 640;
Case Law of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (2004-2011), 2nd
edition, A. Andrusevych, T. Alge and C. Konrad, eds. (Lviv, Resource and
Analysis Center “Society and Environment”, 2011);“2005年2月18日至今通过的《奥胡斯公约》遵约委员会调查结果汇编”，可查 (访问日期：2016年7月8日)。 |
| R. Van Alebeek and A. Nollkaemper, “The legal status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies in
national law”, in UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies: Law
and Legitimacy, H. Keller and L. Grover, eds. (Cambridge, United Kingdom,
Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 356-413, at p. 402; Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty bodies” (see
footnote 977 above), p. 639; K. Mechlem, “Treaty
bodies and the interpretation of human rights“,
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, vol. 42 (2009), pp. 905-947, at p.
908. | R. Van Alebeek and A. Nollkaemper, “The legal status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies in
national law”, in UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies: Law
and Legitimacy, H. Keller and L. Grover, eds. (Cambridge, United Kingdom,
Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 356-413, at p. 402; Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty bodies”(见上文脚注977), p. 639; K. Mechlem, “Treaty bodies and
the interpretation of human rights”, Vanderbilt
Journal of Transnational Law, vol. 42 (2009), pp. 905-947, at p. 908. |
| This is generally accepted in the
literature, see International Law Association, Report of the Seventy-first
Conference (footnote 540 above), p. 5, para.18; Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty bodies” (see
footnote 977 above), p. 639; Tomuschat, Human Rights … (footnote 987 above), pp. 233 and 267; D. Shelton, “The legal status of normative pronouncements of human rights
treaty bodies” in Coexistence, Cooperation and
Solidarity, Liber Amicorum Rüdiger Wolfrum, vol. I,
H.P. Hestermeyer and others, eds. (Leiden; Boston, Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers, 2012), pp. 553-575, at p. 559; H. Keller and L. Grover, “General comments of the Human Rights Committee and their
legitimacy”, in Keller and Grover, UN Human Rights
Treaty Bodies … (see footnote 1001 above), pp.
116-198, at p. 129; Venice Commission, “Report on the
implementation of international human rights treaties … (footnote 999 above), p. 30, para. 76; for the term “determine” in art. 18 of the Kyoto
Protocol and decision 24/CP.7, see G. Ulfstein and J. Werksmann, “The Kyoto compliance system: towards hard enforcement”, in Implementing the Climate Regime: International Compliance,
O.S. Stokke, J. Hovi and G. Ulfstein, eds. (London, Fridtjof Nansen Institut,
2005), pp. 39-62, at pp. 55-56. | 这一点在文献中得到了普遍接受，见国际法协会，第七十一届会议报告（上文脚注540)，第5页，第15段；Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty bodies” (see
footnote 981 above), p. 639; Tomuschat, Human Rights … (footnote 987 above), pp. 233 and 267; D. Shelton, “The legal status of normative pronouncements of human rights
treaty bodies” in Coexistence, Cooperation and
Solidarity, Liber Amicorum Rüdiger Wolfrum, vol. I,
H.P. Hestermeyer and others, eds. (Leiden; Boston, Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers, 2012), pp. 553-575, at p. 559; H. Keller and L. Grover, “General comments of the Human Rights Committee and their
legitimacy”, in Keller and Grover, UN Human Rights
Treaty Bodies … (see footnote 1000 above), pp. 116-198,
at p. 129; Venice Commission, “Report on the
implementation of international human rights treaties … (footnote 999 above), p. 30, para. 76；关于《京都议定书》第十八条和第24/CP.7号决定中“断定”这一术语，见G. Ulfstein and J.
Werksmann, “The Kyoto compliance system: towards hard
enforcement”，in Implementing the Climate Regime:
International Compliance, O.S. Stokke, J. Hovi and G. Ulfstein, eds. (London,
Fridtjof Nansen Institut, 2005), pp. 39-62, at pp. 55-56。 |
| W. Kälin, “Examination
of state reports”, in Keller and Grover, UN Human Rights
Treaty Bodies … (see footnote 1001 above), pp. 16-72;
G. Ulfstein, “Individual complaints”, ibid., pp. 73-115; Mechlem, “Treaty
bodies … (see footnote 1001 above), pp. 922-930; the
legal basis for general comments under the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights is art. 40, para. 4, but this practice has been
generally accepted also with regard to other expert bodies under human rights
treaties, see Keller and Grover, “General comments …” (footnote 1002 above), pp. 127-128. | W. Kälin, “Examination
of state reports”, in Keller and Grover, UN Human
Rights Treaty Bodies … (see footnote 1000 above), pp.
16-72; G. Ulfstein, “Individual complaints”, ibid., pp. 73-115; Mechlem, “Treaty
bodies … (see footnote 1000 above), pp. 922-930；《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》之下一般性建议的法律依据是第四十条第4款，但是对人权条约之下的其他专家机构，也已经普遍接受了这一惯例，见Keller
and Grover, “General comments …” (footnote 1002 above), pp. 127-128。 |
| For example, Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty bodies” (see
footnote 977 above), p. 639; Shelton, “The legal
status of normative pronouncements …” (see footnote
1002 above), pp. 574-575; A. Boyle and C. Chinkin, The Making of
International Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 155. | 例如，Rodley, “The
role and impact of treaty bodies” (see footnote 977
above), p. 639; Shelton, “The legal status of
normative pronouncements …” (see footnote 1002
above), pp. 574-575; A. Boyle and C. Chinkin, The Making of International Law
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 155。 |
| Draft general comment No. 33 (The
obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) (Second revised version
as of 18 August 2008) (CCPR/C/GC/33/CRP.3), 25 August 2008, at para. 17; this
position has also been put forward by several authors, see Keller and Grover,
“General comments …”
(footnote 1002 above), pp. 130-132 with further references. | 第33号一般性意见草案(缔约国根据《公民权利和政治权利任择议定书》所承担的义务) (2008年8月18日第二次修订稿) (CCPR/C/GC/33/CRP.3)，2008年8月25日，见第17段；若干著述者也提出了这一立场，见Keller and Grover, “General comments …”(上文脚注1002)， pp.
130-132 with further references。 |
| See, for example, the “Comments of the United States of America on the Human Rights
Committee’s ‘Draft general
comment 33: The Obligations of States Parties under the Optional Protocol to
the International Covenant Civil and Political Rights’”, 17 October 2008, para. 17. Available from (accessed 8 July
2016). | 例如，见“Comments of the United States of
America on the Human Rights Committee’s ‘Draft general comment 33: The Obligations of States Parties under
the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant Civil and Political
Rights’”，17 October 2008, para. 17. Available from
(accessed 8 July 2016)。 |
| Report of the Human Rights Committee,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-fourth Session, Supplement
No. 40 (A/64/40), vol. I, annex V. | 人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第六十四届会议，补编第40号》(A/64/40)，第一卷，附件五。 |
| See, for example, Official Records of the
General Assembly, Seventieth Session, Sixth Committee, Summary Record of the
22nd meeting (A/C.6/70/SR.22), 6 November 2015, para. 46 (United States: “… States Parties’ reactions to the
pronouncements or activities of a treaty body might, in some circumstances,
constitute subsequent practice (of those States) for the purposes of art. 31,
paragraph 3”). | 例如见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，第六委员会》，第22次会议简要记录(A/C.6/70/SR.22)，2015年11月6日，第46段(美国：“…缔约国对条约机构的声明或活动作出的反应在某些情况下可以构成第三十一条第三款所述的(这些国家的)嗣后惯例”)。 |
| See para. (11) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 3 [2]. | 见结论草案3[2]评注第(11)段。 |
| See International Law Association, Report
of the Seventy-first Conference (footnote 540 above), p. 6, para. 21. | 见国际法协会，第七十一届会议报告(上文脚注540)，第6页，第21段。 |
| See, for example, Mechlem, “Treaty bodies … (footnote 1001 above), pp.
920-921; B. Schlütter, “Aspects
of human rights interpretation by the UN treaty bodies”, in Keller and Grover, UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies … (footnote 1001 above), pp. 289-290; Ulfstein and Werksmann, “The Kyoto compliance system …” (footnote
1002 above), p. 96. | 例如见Mechlem, “Treaty
bodies … (footnote 1000 above), pp. 920-921; B. Schlütter, “Aspects of human rights
interpretation by the UN treaty bodies”, in Keller
and Grover, UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies … (footnote
1000 above), pp. 289-290; Ulfstein and Werksmann, “The
Kyoto compliance system …” (footnote 1002 above), p.
96。 |
| General Assembly resolutions 65/221 of 21
December 2010, para. 5, footnote 8, and 68/178 of 18 December 2013, para. 5,
footnote 8. | 大会2010年12月21日第65/221号决议，第5段，脚注8，和2013年12月18日第68/178号决议，第5段，脚注8。 |
| Report of the Human Rights Committee,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-sixth Session, Supplement No.
40 (A/56/40), vol. I, Annex VI. | 人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第五十六届会议，补编第40号》(A/56/40)，第一卷，附件六。 |
| Ibid., para. 2. | 同上，第2段。 |
| See draft conclusion 11 [10], para. 3,
and the commentary thereto. | 见结论草案11 [10]第3段及其评注。 |
| Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, general comment No. 15 (2002), Official Records of the
Economic and Social Council 2003, Supplement No. 2
(E/2003/22-E/C.12/2002/13), annex IV, para. 2. | 经济、社会及文化权利委员会，第15号一般性意见(2002年)，《2003年经济及社会理事会正式记录，补编第2号》(E/2003/22-E/C.12/2002/13)，附件四，第2段。 |
| (“The human right
to water entitles everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically
accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic uses”). | (“水权意味着每个人都有权获得供个人和家庭使用的充足、安全、可接受、便于汲取和负担得起的用水”)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/169 of 17
December 2015 recalls general comment No. 15 of the Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights on the right to water (see footnote 1016 above)
and uses the same language: “Recognizes that the
human right to safe drinking water entitles everyone, without discrimination,
to have access to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and
affordable water for personal and domestic use”
(para. 2). | 大会2015年12月17日第70/169号决议回顾了经济、社会及文化权利委员会关于水权的第15号一般性意见(见上文脚注1016)，并使用了相同的用语：“确认享受安全饮用水的人权意味着每个人都有权不受歧视地获得供个人和家庭使用的充足、安全、可接受、便于汲取和负担得起的用水”(第2段)。 |
| See draft conclusion 11 [10], para. 3,
and the commentary thereto, paras. (31)-(38); in the case of resolution
70/169 on the right to water (see footnote 1017 above) “… the United States dissociated itself from the consensus on
paragraph 2 on the grounds that the language used to define the right to
water and sanitation was based on the views of the Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights and the Special Rapporteur only and did not appear
in any international agreement or reflect any international consensus” (see Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventieth
Session, Third Committee, 55th meeting (A/C.3/70/SR.55), 24 November 2015,
para. 144). | 见结论草案11[10]，第3段，及其评注，第(31)-(38)段；就关于水权的第70/169号决议(见上文脚注1017)而言，“…美国不赞同关于第2段的协调一致，理由是界定享有水和卫生设施的权利采用的措辞仅以经济、社会及文化权利委员会及特别报告员的观点为基础，而且从未在任何国际协定中出现过，也未反映出任何国际协商一致”(见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，第三委员会，第55次会议》(A/C.3/70/SR.55)，2015年11月24日，第144段)。 |
| It is not entirely clear whether the
United States thereby wished to merely restate its position that the
resolution did not recognize a particular effect of the pronouncement of the
Committee, as such, or whether it disagreed with the definition in substance. | 并不完全清楚的是，美国是否就此简单重申其立场，即该项决议并不承认委员会此种声明的某种具体效力，或是不同意定义的实质内容。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 69/166 of
18 December 2014, adopted without a vote, recalling general comment No. 16 of
the Human Rights Committee on the right to respect of privacy, family, home
and correspondence, and protection of honour and reputation (Official Records
of the General Assembly, Forty-third Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/43/40),
annex VI). | 见大会2014年12月18日第69/166号决议，未经表决获得通过，回顾人权事务委员会关于尊重隐私、家庭、住宅和通信权，以及保护荣誉和声誉问题的第16号一般性意见(《大会正式记录，第四十三届会议，补编第40号》(A/43/40)，附件六)。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 69/157 of
18 December 2014, adopted without a vote; and resolution 68/147 of 18
December 2013, adopted without a vote. | 见大会2014年12月18日第69/157号决议，未经表决获得通过；以及2013年12月18日第68/147号决议，未经表决获得通过。 |
| Decision I/7 on review of compliance (see
footnote 985 above), annex, sects. III and XII, para. 37; V. Koester, “The Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in
Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus
Convention)”, in Making Treaties Work, Human Rights,
Environment and Arms Control, G. Ulfstein and others, eds. (Cambridge, United
Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 179-217, at p. 203. | 关于审查遵约情况的第I/7号决定(见上文脚注985)，附件，第三和第十二节，第37段；V. Koester, “The Convention on Access to
Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention)”, in Making
Treaties Work, Human Rights, Environment and Arms Control, G. Ulfstein and
others, eds. (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2007),
pp. 179-217, at p. 203。 |
| See Human Rights Council resolutions
28/16 of 26 March 2015 and 28/19 of 27 March 2015, adopted without a vote
(report of the Human Rights Council, Official Records of the General
Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 53 (A/70/53)). | 见人权理事会2015年3月26日第28/16号和2015年3月27日第28/19号决议，未经表决获得通过(人权理事会报告，《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第53号》(A/70/53))。 |
| See footnote 986 above. See Report of the
International Narcotics Control Board for 2009 (E/INCB/2009/1, United Nations
Publication, Sales No.E.10.XI.1), para. 278; see also J. Csete and D. Wolfe, “Closed to reason: the International Narcotics Control Board and
HIV/AIDS” (Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal
Network/International Harm Reduction Development of the Open Society
Institute, 2007), pp. 12-18. | 见上文脚注986。 见《国际麻醉品管制局2009年报告》(E/INCB/2009/1，联合国出版物，出售品编号E.10.XI.1)，第278段；另见J. Csete and D. Wolfe, “Closed to reason:
the International Narcotics Control Board and HIV/AIDS” (Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network/International Harm Reduction
Development of the Open Society Institute, 2007), pp. 12-18。 |
| D. Barrett, Unique in International
Relations? A Comparison of the International Narcotics Control Board and the
UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies (London, International Harm Reduction
Association, 2008), p. 8. | D. Barrett, Unique in International
Relations? A Comparison of the International Narcotics Control Board and the
UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies (London, International Harm Reduction
Association, 2008), p. 8。 |
| Expert treaty bodies under human rights
treaties have rarely attempted to specifically identify the practice of the
parties for the purpose of interpreting a particular treaty provision, see
examples in G. Nolte, “Jurisprudence under special
regimes relating to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice: second
report for the ILC Study Group on treaties over time”,
in Treaties and Subsequent Practice, G. Nolte, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2013), pp. 210-278; Schlütter, “Aspects of human rights interpretation …”
(see footnote 1011 above), p. 318. | 人权条约的专家条约机构很少出于解释某一条约条款的目的而试图确定缔约方的惯例，举例见，G. Nolte, “Jurisprudence under special
regimes relating to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice: second
report for the ILC Study Group on treaties over time”,
in Treaties and Subsequent Practice, G. Nolte, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2013), pp. 210-278; Schlütter, “Aspects of human rights interpretation …”
(见上文脚注1011), p. 318。 |
| See draft conclusion 10 [9], para. 2. | 见结论草案10 [9]，第2段。 |
| See Ulfstein and Werksmann, “The Kyoto compliance system …” (footnote
1002 above), p. 97; Van Alebeek and Nollkaemper, “The
legal status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies …” (footnote 1001 above), p. 410. | See Ulfstein and Werksmann, “The Kyoto compliance system …” (上文脚注1002), p. 97; Van Alebeek and Nollkaemper, “The legal status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies …” (上文脚注1001), p. 410。 |
| Such as a pronouncement regarding the
permissibility of a reservation that it has formulated, see guideline 3.2.3
of the guide to practice on reservations to treaties, and para. (3) of the
commentary thereto, adopted by the Commission in 2011, report of the
International Law Commission, Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10/Add.1). | 例如对其提出的某项保留的允许性的声明，见委员会2011年通过的《对条约的保留实践指南》，指南3.2.3及其评注第(3)段，国际法委员会报告，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea
v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010,
p. 639, at pp. 663-664, para. 66; see also Judgment No. 2867 of the
Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a
Complaint Filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 10, at p. 27, para. 39; | 艾哈迈杜•萨迪奥•迪亚洛案(几内亚共和国诉刚果民主共和国)，实质问题，判决书，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第639页起，见第663-664页，第66段；另见国际劳工组织行政法庭关于对国际农业发展基金提起的申诉的第2867号判决，咨询意见，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第10页起，见第27页，第39段； |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at pp. 179-181, paras. 109-110 and 112, and at pp. 192-193,
para. 136, in which the Court referred to various pronouncements of the Human
Rights Committee and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第179-181页，第109-110和112段，以及第192-193页，第136段，其中法院提到人权事务委员会和经济、社会及文化权利委员会的多项声明； |
| see also Questions relating to the
Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 2012, p. 422, at p. 457, para. 101, referring to pronouncements of
the Committee against Torture when determining the temporal scope of the
Convention against Torture. | 另见与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题(比利时诉塞内加尔)，判决书，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第422页起，见第457页，第101段，其中提及禁止酷刑委员会在确定《禁止酷刑公约》的时间范围时的声明。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights,
Case of the Constitutional Tribunal (Camba Campos and Others) v. Ecuador,
Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of 28 August
2013, Series C No. 268, paras. 189 and 191; African Commission on Human and
Peoples’ Rights, Civil Liberties Organisation and
others v. Nigeria, Communication No. 218/98, Decisions on communications
brought before the African Commission, twenty-ninth ordinary session,
Tripoli, May 2001 at para. 24 (“In interpreting and
applying the Charter, the Commission … is also
enjoined by the Charter and by international human rights standards, which
include decisions and general comments by UN treaty bodies”); | 美洲人权法院，宪法法院(Camba Campos和其他人)诉厄瓜多尔案，初步反对意见，案情，赔偿和费用，2013年8月28日判决书，Series C
No. 268，第189和第191段；非洲人权和人民权利委员会，公民自由组织及其他方诉尼日利亚案，第218/98号来文，关于提交给非洲委员会第二十九届常会(2001年5月，的黎波里)的来文的决定，见第24段(“在解释和适用《宪章》过程中，委员会…还受《宪章》和包括联合国条约机构的决定和一般性意见在内的国际人权标准的指导”)； |
| African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Social and Economic Rights Action Centre and the Centre
for Economic and Social Rights v. Nigeria, Communication No. 155/96, Decisions
on communications brought before the African Commission, thirtieth ordinary
session, Banjul, October 2001 at para.63 (“draws
inspiration from the definition of the term ‘forced
evictions’ by the Committee on Economic Social and
Cultural Rights in its General Comment No. 7”); | 非洲人权和人民权利委员会，社会和经济权利行动中心及经济和社会权利中心诉尼日利亚案，第155/96号来文，关于提交给非洲委员会第三十届常会(2001年10月，班珠尔)的来文的决定，见第63段(“借鉴经济、社会和文化权利委员会在其第7号一般性意见中的“强行驱逐”一词的定义”)； |
| Marguš v. Croatia [GC],
No. 4455/10, ECHR 2014 (extracts), paras. 48-50; Baka
v. Hungary, No. 20261/12, 27 May 2014, para. 58; Othman (Abu Qatada) v. the
United Kingdom, No. 8139/09, ECHR 2012 (extracts), paras.107-108, 147-151,
155 and 158; Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], No. 22978/05, ECHR 2010, paras. 68 and
70-72; see also International Law Association, Report of the Seventy-first
Conference (footnote 540 above), pp. 29-38, paras. 116-155. | Marguš诉克罗地亚案[GC]，第4455/10号，《2014年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘要)，第48-50段；巴卡诉匈牙利案，第20261/12 [2014]号，2014年5月27日，第58段；Othman (Abu Qatada) 诉联合王国案，第8139/09号，《2012年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘要)，第107-108、147-151、155和158段；Gäfgen诉德国案[GC]，第22978/05号，《2010年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第68段和第70-72段；另见国际法协会第七十三届会议报告(上文脚注540)，第29-38页，第116-155页。 |
| See the decisions quoted in Venice
Commission, “Report on the implementation of
international human rights treaties …” (footnote 999
above), at para. 76, footnotes 172 and 173 (Ireland, Supreme Court, Kavanagh
(Joseph) v. the Governor of Mountjoy Prison and the Attorney General [2002]
IESC 13 (1 March 2002), para. 36; France, Council of State, Hauchemaille v.
France, case No. 238849, 11 October 2001, ILDC 767 (FR 2001), para. 22). | 见威尼斯委员会引用的决定，《关于…落实国际人权条约的报告》(上文脚注999)，见第76段，脚注172和173(爱尔兰，最高法院：Kavanagh (Joseph)诉Mountjoy监狱长和司法部长案[2002] IESC 13 (2002年3月1日)，第36段；法国，国务委员会：Hauchemaille诉法国案，case no 238849, 2001年10月11日，ILDC 767(FR2001)，第22段)。 |
| International Law Association, Report of
the Seventy-first Conference (footnote 540 above), p. 43, para. 175; Germany,
Federal Administrative Court, BVerwGE, vol. 134, p. 1, at p. 22, para. 48. | 国际法协会第七十一届会议报告(上文脚注540)，第43页，第175段；德国，联邦行政法院，BVerwGE，第134卷，第1页起，见第22页，第48段。 |
| Report of the International Law
Commission (2011), Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10/Add.1). | 2011年国际法委员会报告，《大会正式记录》，第六十六届会议，补编第10号(A/66/10/ Add.1)。 |
| “Of course, if such bodies have been
vested with decision-making power the parties must respect their decisions,
but this is currently not the case in practice except for some regional human
rights courts. | “当然，如果这些机构已被赋予决策权，则当事方必须遵守它们的决定，但是，目前在实践中，除了区域人权法院以外，还没有这么做。 |
| In contrast, the other monitoring bodies
lack any juridical decision-making power, either in the area of reservations
or in other areas in which they possess declaratory powers. Consequently,
their conclusions are not legally binding, and States parties are obliged
only to ‘take account’ of
their assessments in good faith”(ibid., para. (3) of
the commentary to guideline 3.2.3). | 与此相反，其他监督机构在保留方面和它们拥有宣示权力的其他方面没有任何法律决策权，因此，它们得出的结论不具有法律约束力，缔约国只是有义务诚意地“顾及”其评估”(同上，准则3.2.3评注第(3)段)。 |
| International Law Association, Report of
the Seventy-first Conference (see footnote 540 above), p. 5, para.17; Van
Alebeek and Nollkaemper, “The legal status of
decisions by human rights treaty bodies …” (footnote
1001 above), p. 401; one of the few judgments in which this was the case is
High Court of Osaka, Judgment of 28 October 1994, 1513 Hanrei Jiho 71, 87, 38
(as quoted in the Report of the Seventy-first Conference of the International
Law Association (see footnote 540 above), at para. 20, footnote 22), also
available in Japanese Annual of International Law, vol. 38 (1995), pp.
109-150, at pp. 118-133; and Germany, Federal Administrative Court (see
footnote 1034 above). | 国际法协会第七十一届会议报告(见上文脚注540)，第5页，第17段；Van Alebeek and Nollkaemper, “The legal
status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies …”
(上文脚注1001)，第401页；属于这种情况的少数几个判决书之一是大阪高等法院1994年10月28日判决书，第1513号《判例时报》，第71、87、38页(国际法协会第七十一届会议报告引用(见上文脚注540)，见第20段，脚注22)；还可查阅Japanese Annual of International
Law, vol. 38 (1995)，第109-150页，见第118-133页；和德国，联邦行政法院(见上文脚注1034)。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 179, para. 109. | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第179页，第109段。 |
| The High Court of Osaka has explicitly
stated: “One may consider that the ‘general comments’ and ‘views’… should be relied upon as
supplementary means of interpretation of the ICCPR.” | 大阪高等法院明确指出：“可以认为，应该借助“一般性意见”和“意见”…，作为解释《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的补充资料。” |
| Osaka High Court, Judgment of 28 October
1994 (footnote 1037 above), as quoted in the Report of the Seventy-first
Conference of the International Law Association (see footnote 540 above), at
para. 85, footnote 178, also available in Japanese Annual of International
Law, vol.38 (1995), at pp. 129-130; see also, for example, Netherlands, Central
Appeals Tribunal, Appellante v. de Raad van Bestuur van de Sociale
Verzekeringsbank (available from, accessed 11 July 2016); | 大阪高等法院1994年10月28日判决(上文脚注1037)，国际法协会第七十一届会议报告引用(见上文脚注540)，见第85段，脚注178，另外可查阅Japanese Annual of International
Law, vol. 38 (1995), at pp. 129-130；例如也见荷兰，中央上诉法庭，Appellante诉de Raad van Bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank案，(可查阅, 2016年7月11日登录)； |
| United Kingdom, on the one hand, House of
Lords, Jones v. Saudi Arabia, 14 June 2006 [2006] UKHL 26 (“no value”) and, on the other hand, House
of Lords, A. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 71,
paras. 34-36(relying on treaty body pronouncements to establish an
exclusionary rule of evidence that prevents the use of information obtained
by means of torture) and Court of Appeal, R. (on the application of
Al-Skeini) v. Secretary of State for Defence, application for judicial review
(2005) EWCA Civ 1609 (2006) HRLR 7, at para. 101 (citing general comment No.
31 of the Human Rights Committee to establish the extraterritorial application
of the Human Rights Act 1998); | 联合王国，一方面，上议院，Jones诉沙特阿拉伯案，2016年6月14日 [2006] UKHL 26 (“无价值”)，另一方面，上议院，A. 诉内政大臣案 [2005] UKHL 71，第34-36段(依据条约机构的声明确立一项排除法证据规则，防止利用通过酷刑手段获得的信息)和上诉法院：R (斯凯尼案的应用)诉国防大臣案，申请进行司法审查，(2005) EWCA Civ 1609号，(2006) HRLR 7号，第101段(援引人权事务委员会第31号一般性意见，确立《1998年人权法》域外适用)； |
| South Africa, on the one hand, High Court
Witwatersrand, Residents of Bon Vista Mansions v. Southern Metropolitan Local
Council, 2002 (6) BCLR, p. 625, at p. 629 (“general
comments have an authoritative status under international law”), as quoted at para. 11 the Report of the Seventy-first
Conference of the International Law Association (footnote 540 above) and, on
the other hand, Constitutional Court, Minister of Health and Others v.
Treatment Action Campaign and Others (No 2) (CCT 8/02) [2002] ZACC 15, paras.
26 and 37 (rejecting [application of] the “minimum-core
standard” set out by the Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights in general comment No. 3 (Official Records of the
Economic and Social Council, 1991, Supplement No. 3 (E/1991/23-E/C.12/1990/8
and Corr.1), annex III, p. 83); | 南非：一方面：威特沃特斯兰高等法院：Bon Vista Mansions 居民诉南部都市地方理事会案，2002 (6) BCLR, 第625页起，见第629页(“一般性意见具有国际法所规定的权威性地位”)，国际法协会第七十一届会议报告第11段引用(上文脚注540)另一方面，宪法法院：卫生部长和其他人诉治疗行动运动和其他人案(第2号)(CCT 8/02)[2002]
ZACC 15，第26和37段(反对[适用]经济、社会和文化权利委员会一般性意见第3号规定的“最低核心标准”)(《经济及社会理事会正式记录》1991年，补编第3号(E/1991/23-E/C.12/1990/8和Corr.1)，附件三，第83页)； |
| Japan, Tokyo District Court, Judgment of
15 March 2001, 1784 Hanrei Jiho 67, at 74 (“the
General Comment neither represents authoritative interpretation of the ICCPR
nor binds the interpretation of the treaty in Japan”),
as quoted at para. 87 of the Report of the Seventy-first Conference of the
International Law Association (footnote 540 above). | 日本，东京区法院，2001年3月15日判决书， 1784 Hanrei Jiho 67, at 74 (“一般性意见既不是对《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的权威性解释，也不对条约在日本的解释具约束力”)，国际法协会第七十一届会议报告第87段引用(上文脚注540)。 |
| See para. (15) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 2 [1], footnote 429; | 见结论草案2 [3]评注第(15)段，脚注429；另见结论草案12 [11]，第3段。 |
| see also draft conclusion 12 [11], para.
3. | 见结论草案12 [11]第3段。 |
| See draft conclusion 12 [11], para. 3.
Pronouncements of expert bodies are indeed “in the
application of the treaty” since such “application”, according to the Commission,
“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” (see para. (18) of the commentary to draft conclusion 4). | 专家的声明的确是“适用条约”的行为，因为委员会认为，这种适用“不仅包括在国际上或在国内为适用条约――包括为遵守或确保履行条约义务――采取的官方行为，而且除其他外，也包括有关条约解释的官方声明”(见结论草案4的评注第(18)段)。 |
| Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea
v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010,
p. 639, at pp. 663-664, para. 66. | 艾哈迈杜•萨迪奥•迪亚洛案(几内亚共和国诉刚果民主共和国)，案情，判决书，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第639页起，见第663-664页，第66段。 |
| In its commentary to draft conclusion 12
[11], paragraph 3, the Commission noted: “The
Commission may … revisit the definition of ‘other subsequent practice’ in draft
conclusions 2 [1], para. 4, and 4, para. 3, in order to clarify whether the
practice of an international organization as such should be classified within
this category which, so far, is limited to the practice of parties” (see footnote 957 above). | 在结论草案12 [11]第3段的评注里，委员会指出：“委员会可以在二读时重新审视结论草案2[1]第4段和结论草案4第3段中“其他嗣后惯例”的定义，以澄清国际组织的自身惯例是否应该纳入该类；该类目前仅限于缔约国的惯例”(见上文脚注957)。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), para. 266. | 《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第266段。 |
| Ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), paras. 110-117. | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第110-117段。 |
| Ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), para. 115. | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第115段。 |
| See the Provisional Summary Records of
the 3296th to 3301st meetings (A/CN.4/SR.3296, A/CN.4/SR.3297,
A/CN.4/SR.3298, A/CN.4/SR.3299, A/CN.4/SR.3300 and A/CN.4/SR.3301). | 见第3296至第3301次会议临时简要记录(A/CN.4/SR.3296、A/CN.4/SR.3297、A/CN.4/SR. 3298、A/CN.4/SR.3299、A/CN.4/SR.3300和A/CN.4/SR.3301)。 |
| See the second report on crimes against
humanity (A/CN.4/690): draft article 5 (Criminalization under national law);
draft article 6 (Establishment of national jurisdiction); | 见关于危害人类罪的第二次报告(A/CN.4/690)：第5条草案(在国内法中定为刑事犯罪)；第6条草案(国家管辖权的确定)； |
| draft article 7 (General investigation
and cooperation for identifying alleged offenders); draft article 8 (Exercise
of national jurisdiction when an alleged offender is present); draft article
9 (Aut dedere aut judicare); and draft article 10 (Fair treatment of the
alleged offender). | 第7条草案(开展一般性调查与合作以查明被指控罪犯)；第8条草案(被指控罪犯所在地行使国家管辖权)；第9条草案(引渡或审判)；第10条草案(公平对待被指控罪犯)。 |
| The placement of this paragraph will be
addressed at a further stage. | 本款的位置将在以后讨论。 |
| Judgment of 30 September 1946, in Trial
of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal
(Nuremberg 14 November 1945-1 October 1946), vol.22 (1948), p. 466. | 1946年9月30日判决，载于《国际军事法庭对主要战争罪犯的审判》(1945年11月14日至1946年10月1日，纽伦堡)，第22卷(1948年)，第466页。 |
| Yearbook … 1950,
vol. II, document A/1316, Part III, p. 374, para. 97 (Principle 1). | 《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/1316号文件，第三部分，第374页，第97段(原则1)。 |
| Convention on the Non-Applicability of
Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity (New York, 26
November 1968), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 754, No. 10823, p. 73. | 《战争罪及危害人类罪不适用法定时效公约》(1968年11月26日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第754卷，第10823号，第73页。 |
| As of August 2016, this Convention had 55
parties. | 截至2016年8月，这项公约有55个缔约方。 |
| Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Court (Rome, 17 July 1998), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
2187, No. 38544, p. 3. | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》(1998年7月17日，罗马)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2187卷，第38544号，第3页。 |
| See Judgment on the Appeal of Côte d’Ivoire against the Decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I of 11 December
2014 entitled “Decision on Côte d’Ivoire’s challenge to the admissibility of
the case against Simone Gbagbo”, Appeals Chamber, No.
ICC-02/11-01/12 OA (27 May 2015) (finding that a national prosecution for the
ordinary domestic crimes of disturbing the peace, organizing armed gangs and
undermining State security was not based on substantially the same conduct at
issue for alleged crimes against humanity of murder, rape, other inhumane
acts and persecution). | 见关于科特迪瓦对2014年12月11日第一预审庭题为“关于科特迪瓦质疑西蒙•巴博案件可受理性的裁定”提起上诉的裁决，上诉庭，第ICC-02/11-01/12 OA号(2015年5月27日) (其中认定，国家起诉扰乱和平、组织武装团伙和破坏国家安全等国内普通罪行不是基于和本案行为大体相同的行为，即所指称的谋杀、强奸、其他不人道行为和迫害等危害人类罪。 |
| Available from (accessed 22 June 2016). | 可查阅(2016年6月22日检索)。 |
| Convention against Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (New York, 10 December
1984), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1465, No. 24841, p. 85
(hereinafter, “Convention against Torture”). | 《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》(1984年12月10日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》第1465卷，第24841号，第85页(下称《禁止酷刑公约》)。 |
| See Committee against Torture, General
Comment No. 2 (2007), para. 9, in Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-third Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/63/44), annex VI; | 见禁止酷刑委员会《第2号一般性意见》(2007年)，第9段，《大会正式记录，第六十三届会议，补编第44号》(A/63/44)，附件六； |
| see also Committee against Torture,
ibid., Fifty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/58/44), chap. III,
consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 19 of the
Convention, Slovenia, para. 115 (a), and Belgium, para. 130. | 又见禁止酷刑委员会，同上，《第五十八届会议，补编第44号》(A/58/44)，第三章，审议缔约国在《公约》第19条下提交的报告，斯洛文尼亚，第115(a)段和比利时，第130段。 |
| See, for example: Convention for the
Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (The Hague, 16 December 1970),
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.860, No. 12325, p. 105, art. 2; | 例如，见《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》(1970年12月16日，海牙)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第860卷，第12325号，第105页，第2条； |
| Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, including
Diplomatic Agents (New York, 14 December 1973), ibid., vol. 1035, No. 15410,
p. 167, art. 2, para. 2; | 《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纽约公约》(1973年12月14日，纽约)，同上，第1035卷，第15410号，第167页，第2条第2款； |
| International Convention Against the
Taking of Hostages (New York, 17 December 1979), ibid., vol. 1316, No. 21931,
p. 205, art. 2; | 《反对劫持人质国际公约》(1979年12月17日，纽约)，第1316卷，第21931号，第205页，第2条； |
| Convention against Torture (see footnote
1056 above), at art. 4; Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish
Torture (Cartagena, 9 December 1985), Organization of American States, Treaty
Series, No. 67, art. 6; | 《禁止酷刑公约》(见上文脚注1056)，第4条；《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》(1985年12月9日，卡塔赫纳)，美洲国家组织，《条约汇编》，第67号，第6条； |
| Convention on the Safety of United
Nations and Associated Personnel (New York, 9 December 1994), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol.2051, No. 35457, p. 363, art. 9, para. 2; | 《联合国人员和有关人员安全公约》(1994年12月9日，纽约)，同上，第2051卷，第35457号，第363页，第9条第2款； |
| Inter-American Convention on Forced
Disappearance of Persons (Belem do Para, 9 June 1994), Organization of
American States, Treaty Series, No. 68, art. III; | 《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》(1994年6月9日，贝伦杜帕拉)，美洲国家组织，《条约汇编》，第68号，第3条； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of Terrorist Bombings (New York, 15 December 1997), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2149, No. 37517, p. 256, art. 4; | 《制止恐怖主义爆炸的国际公约》(1997年12月15日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2149卷，第37517号，第256页，第4条； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (New York, 9 December 1999), ibid.,
vol. 2178, No. 38349, p. 197, art. 4; | 《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》(1999年12月9日，纽约)，同上，第2178卷，第38349号，第197页，第4条； |
| OAU [Organization of African Unity]
Convention on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism (Algiers, 14 July
1999), ibid., vol. 2219, No. 39464, p. 179, art. 2 (a); | 《非统组织[非洲统一组织]防止和打击恐怖主义公约》(1999年7月14日，阿尔及尔)，同上，第2219卷，第39464号，第179页，第2条(a)款； |
| Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish
Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the
United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (New York, 15
November 2000), ibid., vol. 2237, No. 39574, p. 319, art. 5, para. 1; | 《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约关于预防、禁止和惩治贩运人口特别是妇女和儿童行为的补充议定书》(2000年11月15日，纽约)，同上，第2237卷，第39574号，第319页，第5条第1款； |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (New York, 20 December
2006), ibid., vol. 2716, No. 48088, p. 3, art. 7, para. 1; | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》(2006年12月20日，纽约)，同上，第2716卷，第48088号，第3页，第7条第1款； |
| Association of Southeast Asian Nations
Convention on Counter Terrorism (Cebu, 13 January 2007), art. IX, para. 1, in
International Instruments related to the Prevention and Suppression of
International Terrorism, United Nations publication, Sales No. E.08.V.2 (New
York, 2008), p. 336. | 《东南亚国家联盟反恐怖主义公约》(2007年1月13日，宿务)，第9条第1款，见《与预防和打击国际恐怖主义有关的国际文书》，联合国出版物，出售品编号E.08.V.2 (2008年，纽约)，第336页。 |
| Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Paris, 9 December 1948), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 78, No. 1021, p. 277, art. V. Geneva Convention for the Amelioration
of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field
(Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., vol. 75, No. 970, p. 31, art. 49 ( “Geneva Convention I”); | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》(1948年12月9日，巴黎)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第78卷，第1021号，第277页，第5条。《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇之日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第75卷，第970号，第31页，第49条(《日内瓦第一公约》)； |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea
(Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 971, p. 85, art. 50 ( “Geneva Convention II”); | 《改善海上武装部队伤者病者及遇船难者境遇之日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第971号，第85页，第50条(《日内瓦第二公约》)； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the
Treatment of Prisoners of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 972, p.
135, art. 129 (“Geneva Convention III”); | 《关于战俘待遇之日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第972号，第135页，第129条(《日内瓦第三公约》)； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the
Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949),
ibid., No. 973, p. 287, art. 146 (“Geneva Convention
IV”). | 《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第973号，第287页，第146条(《日内瓦第四公约》)。 |
| For the Commentary of 2016 on art. 49
(Penal sanctions) of Geneva Convention I (hereinafter, “2016 ICRC Commentary on art. 49”), see
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) at Agreement for the
Prosecution and Punishment of the Major War Criminals of the European Axis
(London, 8 August 1945), Charter of the International Military Tribunal, art.
6, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 82, No. 251, p. 279 (hereinafter, “Nürnberg Charter”). | 2016年关于《日内瓦第一公约》第49条(刑事制裁)的评注(下称2016年红十字委员会关于第49条的评注)，见红十字委员会网页。《关于控诉和惩处欧洲轴心国主要战犯的协定》(1945年8月8日，伦敦)，《国际军事法庭宪章》，第6条，联合国，《条约汇编》，第82卷，第251号，第279页(下称《纽伦堡宪章》。 |
| Statute of the International Tribunal for
the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of
International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the former
Yugoslavia since 1991, approved by the Security Council in its resolution 827
(1993) of 25 May 1993 and contained in the report of the Secretary-General
pursuant to para. 2 of Security Council resolution 808 (1993), S/25704 and
Add.1, annex, art. 7, para. 1. | 《起诉应对1991年以来前南斯拉夫境内所犯严重违反国际人道主义法行为负责者的国际法庭规约》，经安全理事会1993年5月25日第827(1993)号决议通过，载于秘书长按照安理会第808 (1993)号决议提交的报告第2段，S/25704和Add.1，附件，第7条第1款。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other
Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law in the Territory of
Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens responsible for Genocide and Other such
Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighboring States between 1 January
1994 and 31 December 1994, Security Council resolution 955 (1994) of 8
November 1994, annex, art. 6, para. 1. | 《起诉应对1994年1月1日至12月31日期间在卢旺达境内的灭绝种族和其他严重违反国际人道主义法行为负责者和应对这一期间邻国境内灭绝种族和其他这类违法行为负责的卢旺达公民的国际刑事法庭规约》，经安全理事会1994年11月8日第955(1994)号决议通过，附件，第6条第1款。 |
| See Rome Statute (footnote 1054 above),
art. 25, paras. 2 and 3 (a). | 见《罗马规约》(上文脚注1054)，第二十五条第(二)款和第(三)款第1项。 |
| Agreement between the United Nations and
the Government of Sierra Leone on the Establishment of a Special Court for
Sierra Leone (with Statute) (Freetown, 16 January 2002), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 2178, No. 38342, p. 137, art. 6, para. 1 (hereinafter, “Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone”). | 《联合国和塞拉利昂政府关于设立塞拉利昂特别法庭协定》(附《规约》)，(2002年1月16日，弗里敦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2178卷，第38342号，第137页，第6条第1款(下称《塞拉利昂问题特别法庭规约》)。 |
| United Nations Transitional
Administration in East Timor, Regulation No. 2000/15 on the establishment of
panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences
(UNTAET/REG/2000/15), sect. 5 (2000) (hereinafter, “East
Timor Tribunal Charter”). | 联合国东帝汶过渡行政当局,《关于设立具有重大刑事罪专属管辖权的审判小组的第2000/15号条例》(UNTAET/REG/2000/15)，第5节(2000年) (下称《东帝汶法庭宪章》)。 |
| Law on the Establishment of Extraordinary
Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia for the Prosecution of Crimes Committed
During the Period of Democratic Kampuchea, 27 October 2004 (NS/RKM/1004/006),
art. 5, | 《设立起诉在民主柬埔寨时期实施的罪行的柬埔寨法院特别法庭法》，2004年10月27日(NS/RKM/1004/006)，第5条。 |
| available from (accessed on 22 June 2016,
hereinafter “Extraordinary Chambers of Cambodia
Agreement”). | 可查阅 (2016年6月22日检索，下称《柬埔寨特别法庭协定》)。 |
| See also Agreement between the United
Nations and the Royal Government of Cambodia concerning the Prosecution under
Cambodian Law of Crimes Committed during the Period of Democratic Kampuchea
(Phnom Penh, 6 June 2003), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2329, p. 117. | 另见《联合国和柬埔寨王国政府关于按照柬埔寨法律起诉在民主柬埔寨时期实施的罪行的协定》(2003年6月6日，金边)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2329卷，第117页。 |
| Statute of the Iraqi Special Tribunal,
International Legal Materials, vol. 43, p. 231, art. 10 (b) (2004)
(hereinafter, “Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal
statute”). | 《伊拉克特别法庭规约》,《国际法材料》，第43卷，第231页，第10(b)条(2004年) (下称“伊拉克最高刑事法庭”)。 |
| The Iraqi Interim Government enacted a
new statute in 2005, built upon the earlier statute, which changed the
tribunal’s name to “Supreme
Iraqi Criminal Tribunal”. | 伊拉克临时政府2005年在原规约的基础上颁布了新的规约，将法庭更名为“伊拉克最高刑事法庭”。 |
| See Law of the Supreme Iraqi Criminal
Tribunal, Law No. 10, Official Gazette of the Republic of Iraq, vol. 47, No.
4006 (18 October 2005). | 见《伊拉克特别法庭法》，第10号，《伊拉克共和国政府公报》，第47卷，第4006号(2005年10月18日)。 |
| Statute of the Extraordinary African Chambers
within the Courts of Senegal Created to Prosecute International Crimes
Committed in Chad between 7 June 1982 and 1 December 1990, International Law
Materials, vol. 52, p. 1028, arts. 4 (b) and 6 (2013) (hereinafter, “Extraordinary African Chambers statute”). | 《在塞内加尔法院系统内设立的起诉1982年6月7日至1990年12月1日间在乍得共和国领土内所犯国际罪行的非洲特别法庭规约》,《国际法材料》，第52卷，第1028页，第4(b)和第6条 (2013年) (下称“非洲特别法庭规约”)。 |
| Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, arts. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》，第三条(a)项)和第四条。 |
| III (a) and IV. Rome Statute (see
footnote 1054 above), art. 25, para. 3 (f). | 《罗马规约》(见上文脚注1054)，第二十五条第(三)款第6项。 |
| Prosecutor v. Abdallah Banda Abakaer
Nourain and Saleh Mohammed Jerbo Jamus, Case No. ICC-02/05-03/09, Corrigendum
of the “Decision on the Confirmation of Charges of 7
March 2011”, International Criminal Court, Pre-Trial
Chamber I, para. 96. | 检察官诉班达和杰宝案，ICC-02/05-03/09号案件，关于2011年3月7日“确认指控的决定”的更正，国际刑事法院第一预审分庭，第96段。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (see footnote 1062 above), art. 7, para.
1. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1062)，第7条第1款。 |
| Various decisions of the Tribunal have
analysed such criminal responsibility. | 该法庭的各项裁决分析了此种刑事责任。 |
| See, for example, Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-A, Appeals Chamber, judgment of 15 July 1999, International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Judicial Reports 1999, para. 220
(hereinafter, “Tadić 1999”)
(finding that “the notion of common design as a form
of accomplice liability is firmly established in customary international law”). | 例如见检察官诉Duško Tadić案，IT-94-1-A号案件，上诉庭，1999年7月15日判决，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭，1999年司法报告，第220段(下称“1999年Tadić案”) (认定“共同策划概念作为共犯罪责的形式之一已为习惯国际法牢固确立”)。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda (see footnote 1063 above), art. 6, para. 1. | 《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1063)，第6条第1款。 |
| See, for example, Prosecutor v. Furundžija, Case No.
IT-95-17/1-T, Trial Chamber II, judgment of 10 December 1998, International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Judicial Reports 1998, para. 246
(finding that: “If he is aware that one of a number
of crimes will probably be committed, and one of those crimes is in fact
committed, he has intended to facilitate the commission of that crime, and is
guilty as an aider and abettor”). | 例如，见检察官诉 Furundžija案，IT-95-17/1-T号案件，第二审判分庭，1998年12月10日的判决，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭，《1998年司法报告》，第246段(认定“如果他知道很可能将实施一些罪行之一，而且实际上确实实施了其中一个罪行，那么他意图协助实施这一罪行，并犯有协助和煽动罪”)。 |
| Statute of the Special Court for Sierra
Leone (see footnote 1065 above), art. 6, para. 1. | 《塞拉利昂问题特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1065)，第6条第1款。 |
| East Timor Tribunal Charter (see footnote
1066 above), sect. 14. | 《东帝汶法庭宪章》(见上文脚注1066)，第14节。 |
| Extraordinary Chambers of Cambodia
Agreement (see footnote 1067 above), art. 29. | 《柬埔寨法院特别法庭协定》(见上文脚注1067)，第29条。 |
| Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal Statute
(see footnote 1068 above), art. 15. | 《伊拉克最高刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1068)，第15条。 |
| Extraordinary African Chambers Statute
(see footnote 1069 above), art. 10. | 《非洲特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1069)，第10条. |
| Rome Statute (see footnote 1054), art.
25, para. 3 (a-d). | 《罗马规约》(见上文脚注1054)，第二十五条第(三)款第1-4项。 |
| Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, art. III (b)-(e). | 《战争罪及危害人类罪不适用法定时效公约》，第三条(b)-(e)项。 |
| Convention on the Non-Applicability of
Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, art. 2. | 《战争罪及危害人类罪不适用法定时效公约》，第二条。 |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 6, para. 1 (a). | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》第6条第1款(a)项。 |
| See, for example, United States of
America v. Wilhelm von Leeb, et al. (“The High
Command Case”), in Trials of War Criminals Before the
Nuernberg Military Tribunals, vol. 11 (Washington D.C., United States
Government Printing Office, 1950), pp. 543-544. | 例如，见美利坚合众国诉Wilhelm von Leeb等人案(“高级指挥官案”)，纽伦堡军事法庭的战犯审判，第11卷(华盛顿哥伦比亚特区，美国政府出版局，1950年)，第543-544页。 |
| Ibid.; see also International Criminal
Law: International Enforcement, M.C. Bassiouni, ed., vol. III, 3rd ed.
(Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2008, p. 461); and K.J. Heller, The Nuremberg
Military Tribunals and the Origins of International Criminal Law (Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 262–263. | 同上；另见International Criminal Law:
International Enforcement, M.C. Bassiouni, ed., vol. III, 3rd ed. (Leiden,
3tinus Nijhoff, 2008, p. 461); and K.J. Heller, The Nuremberg Military
Tribunals and the Origins of International Criminal Law (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2011), pp. 262–263。 |
| See The Prosecutor v. Alfred Musema, Case
No. ICTR-96-13-A, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Trial Chamber
I, judgment and sentence of 27 January 2000, para. 132. Statute of the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (see footnote 1062
above), art. 7, para. 3. | 见检察官诉Alfred Musema案，ICTR-96-13-A号案件，卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭，第一审判分庭，2000年1月27日的判决，第132段。 |
| See, for example, The Prosecutor v.
Zlatko Aleksovski, Case No. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1062)，第7条第3款。 |
| IT-95-14/1-T, International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Trial Chamber, judgment of 25 June 1999,
paras. 66-77; | 例如，见检察官诉Zlatko Aleksovski案，IT-95-14/1-T号案件，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭，审判分庭，1999年6月25日的判决，第66-77段； |
| The Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić et al., Case No.
IT-96-21-T, judgment of 16 November 1998, International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia, Trial Chamber, paras. 330-400 and 605-810. | 检察官诉 Zejnil Delalić 等人案，IT-96-21-T号案件，1998年11月16日的判决，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭，审判分庭，第330-400段和第605-810段。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda (see footnote 1063 above), art. 6, para. 3. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1063)，第6条第3款。 |
| See The Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu,
Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Trial
Chamber, judgment of 2 September 1998; The Prosecutor v. Jean Kambanda, Case
No. ICTR-97-23-S, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Trial Chamber,
judgment and sentence of 4 September 1998. | 见检察官诉Jean-Paul Akayesu案，ICTR-96-4-T号案件，卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭，审判分庭，1998年9月2日的判决；检察官诉Jean Kambanda案，ICTR-97-23-S号案件，卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭，审判分庭，1998年9月4日的判决。 |
| Statute of the Special Court for Sierra
Leone (see footnote 1065 above), art. 6, para. 3. | 《塞拉利昂问题特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1065)，第6条第3款。 |
| Statute of the Special Tribunal for
Lebanon, Security Council resolution 1757 (2007) of 30 May 2007 (annex and
attachment included), art. 3, para. 2. | 《黎巴嫩问题特别法庭规约》，安全理事会2007年5月30日第1757(2007)号决议，(包括附件和附录)，第3条第2款。 |
| East Timor Tribunal Charter (see footnote
1066 above), sect. 16. | 《东帝汶法庭宪章》(见上文脚注1066)，第16节。 |
| Extraordinary Chambers of Cambodia
Agreement (see footnote 1067 above), art. 29. | 《柬埔寨特别法庭协定》(见上文脚注1067)，第29条。 |
| Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal statute
(see footnote 1068 above), art. | 《伊拉克最高刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1068)，第15条。 |
| 15. Rome Statute (see footnote 1054),
art. 28. | 《罗马规约》(见脚注1054)，第二十八条。 |
| Agreement on the Extraordinary African
Chambers statute (see footnote 1069 above), art. 10. | 《非洲特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1069)，第10条。 |
| See, for example, The Prosecutor v. Dario
Kordić
and Mario Cerkez, Case. No. IT-95-14/2-T, International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia, Trial Chamber, judgment of 26 February 2001, at para.
369. | 例如，见检察官诉Kordić 和 Čerkez 案，IT-95-14/2-T号案件，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭，审判分庭，2001年2月26日的判决，第369段。 |
| The Prosecutor v. Jean-Pierre Bemba
Gombo, Case No. ICC-01/05-01/08, International Criminal Court, Trial Chamber
III, judgment of 21 March 2016, paras. 630, 638 and 734. | 检察官诉 Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo案，ICC-01/05-01/08号案件，国际刑事法院第三审判庭，2016年3月21日的判决，第630、第638和第734段。 |
| See Commission on Human Rights report on
the sixty-first session, Official Records of the Economic and Social Council,
2005, Supplement No. 3 (E/2005/23-E/CN.4/2005/135), resolution 2005/81 on
impunity of 21 April 2005, para. 6 (urging “all
States to ensure that all military commanders and other superiors are aware
of the circumstances in which they may be criminally responsible under
international law for … crimes against humanity … including, under certain circumstances, for these crimes when
committed by subordinates under their effective authority and control”). | 见人权委员会第六十一届会议报告，《经济及社会理事会正式记录，2005年，补编第3号》(E/2005/23-E/CN.4/2005/135)，2005年4月21日关于有罪不罚问题的第2005/81号决议，第6段(敦促“各国确保各级军事指挥员和其他长官意识到根据国际法他们要对…危害人类罪…负有刑事责任的情况，包括在某些情况下，他们要对在其有效指挥和控制下的下属所犯罪行负有刑事责任”)。 |
| See, for example, Protocol Additional to
the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of
Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) (Geneva, 8 June 1977),
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3, art. 86, para. 2; | 例如，见《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(《第一议定书》) (1977年6月8日，日内瓦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页，第86条第2款； |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, at art. 6, para. 1. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第6条第1款。 |
| See Commission on Human Rights,
resolution 2005/81 on impunity (footnote 1100 above), para. 6 (urging all
States “to ensure that all relevant personnel are
informed of the limitations that international law places on the defence of
superior orders”). | 见人权委员会关于有罪不罚问题的第2005/81号决议(上文脚注1100)，第6段(敦促所有各国“确保所有有关人员都得知国际法对以上级命令为理由进行的辩护作出的限制”)。 |
| Trial of the Major War Criminals … (see footnote 1051 above), p. 466. | 《对主要战争罪犯的审判》(见上文脚注1051)，第466页。 |
| Charter of the International Military
Tribunal for the Far East (Tokyo, 19 January 1946) (as amended on 26 April
1946), Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of
America 1776-1949, vol. 4, C. Bevans ed. (Washington, D.C., Department of
State, 1968), p. 20, at p. 23, art. 6 (hereinafter, “Tokyo
Charter”). | 《远东国际军事法庭宪章》(1946年1月19日，东京) (1946年4月26日修正)，Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States
of America 1776-1949, vol. 4, C. Bevans ed. (Washington, D.C.，Department of State, 1968)，p. 20, at p.
23, art. 6 (下称《东京宪章》)。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (see footnote 1062 above), art. 7, para.
4. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1062)，第7条第4款。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda (see footnote 1063 above), art. 6, para. 4. | 《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1063)，第6条第4款。 |
| Statute of the Special Court for Sierra
Leone (see footnote 1065 above), art. 6, para. 4. | 《塞拉利昂问题特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1065)，第6条第4款。 |
| Statute of the Special Tribunal for
Lebanon (see footnote 1093 above), art. 3, para. 3. | 《黎巴嫩问题特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1093)，第3条第3款。 |
| East Timor Tribunal Charter (see footnote
1066 above), sect. 21. | 《东帝汶法庭宪章》(见上文脚注1066)，第21节。 |
| Extraordinary Chambers of Cambodia
Agreement (see footnote 1067 above), art. 29. | 《柬埔寨特别法庭协定》(见上文脚注1067)，第29条。 |
| Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal statute
(see footnote 1068 above), art. 15. | 《伊拉克最高刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1068)，第15条。 |
| Extraordinary African Chambers statute
(see footnote 1069 above), art. 10, para. 5. | 《非洲特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1069)，第10条第5款。 |
| See, for example, statute of the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (footnote 1062
above), art. 7, para. 4; statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda (footnote 1063 above), art. 6, para. 4; | 例如，见《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》(上文脚注1062)，第7条第4款；《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》(上文脚注1063)，第6条第4款； |
| statute of the Special Court for Sierra
Leone (footnote 1065 above), art. 6, para. 4; East Timor Tribunal Charter
(footnote 1066 above), sect. 21. | 《塞拉利昂问题特别法庭规约》(上文脚注1065)，第6条第4款；《东帝汶法庭宪章》(上文脚注1066)，第21节。 |
| Convention against Torture, art. 2, para.
3 (“An order from a superior officer or a public
authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture”). | 《禁止酷刑公约》第2条第3款(“上级官员或政府当局的命令不得援引为施行酷刑的理由”)。 |
| Inter-American Convention to Prevent and
Punish Torture, art. 4 (“The fact of having acted
under orders of a superior shall not provide exemption from the corresponding
criminal liability”). | 《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》第4条(“按照上级命令行事这一事实不能豁免相应的刑事责任”)。 |
| Inter-American Convention on Forced
Disappearance of Persons, art. VIII (“The defense of
due obedience to superior orders or instructions that stipulate, authorize,
or encourage forced disappearance shall not be admitted. | 《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》，第8条(“不应受理以正当服从规定、授权或鼓励强迫失踪的上级命令或指示作为辩护理由。 |
| All persons who receive such orders have
the right and duty not to obey them”). | 所有接受此类命令的人均有权利和义务不服从命令”)。 |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 6, para. 2 (“No order or instruction from any public authority, civilian,
military or other, may be invoked to justify an offence of enforced
disappearance”). | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第6条第2款(“不得援引任何公共机构包括民政、军事或其他机构的任何命令或指示作为被强迫失踪的理由”)。 |
| This provision “received
broad approval” at the drafting stage. | 这条规定在起草阶段“得到了广泛赞同”。 |
| See Commission on Human Rights, report of
the intersessional open-ended working group to elaborate a draft legally
binding normative instrument for the protection of all persons from enforced
disappearance (E/CN.4/2004/59), at para. 72 | 见人权委员会，起草一个关于保护所有人不遭受强迫失踪的具有法律拘束力的规范性文书委员会闭会期间不限成员名额工作组的报告(E/CN.4/2004/59)，第72段(强迫失踪问题工作组的报告)； |
| (see also the Declaration on the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, General Assembly
resolution 47/133 of 18 December 1992, art. 6). | 又见《保护所有人不遭受强迫失踪宣言》，大会1992年12月18日，第47/133号决议，第6条。 |
| Report of the Committee against Torture,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-first Session, Supplement No.
44 (A/61/44), chap. III, consideration of reports by States parties under
article 19 of the Convention, Guatemala, para. 32 (13). | 禁止酷刑委员会的报告,《大会正式记录，第六十一届会议，补编第44号》(A/61/44)，第三章，审议缔约国根据《公约》第19条提交的报告，危地马拉，第32(13)段。 |
| See, for example, report of the Committee
against Torture, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-ninth
Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/59/44), chap. III, consideration of reports by
States parties under article 19 of the Convention, Chile, para. 56 (i); | 例如，见禁止酷刑委员会的报告,《大会正式记录，第五十九届会议，补编第44号》(A/59/44)，第三章，审议缔约国根据《公约》第19条提交的报告，智利，第56(i)段； |
| see also, ibid., Sixtieth Session,
Supplement No. 44 (A/60/44), chap. III, consideration of reports by States
parties under article 19 of the Convention, Argentina, para. 31 (a) (praising
Argentina for declaring its due obedience act “absolutely
null and void”). | 又见，同上，《第六十届会议，补编第44号》(A/60/44)，第三章，审议缔约国根据《公约》第19条提交的报告，阿根廷，第31 (a)段(赞扬阿根廷宣布其正当服从法案“绝对无效”)。 |
| Control Council Law No. 10 on Punishment
of Persons Guilty of War Crimes, Crimes Against Peace and Against Humanity,
art. II, para. 5, 20 December 1945, in Official Gazette of the Control
Council for Germany, vol. 3, p. 52 (1946). | 管制委员会关于惩治战争罪、危害和平罪和危害人类罪罪犯的第10号法令，第2条第5款，1945年12月20日，德国管制委员会官方公报，第3卷第52页(1946年)。 |
| Rome Statute (see footnote 1054 above),
art. 29. | 《罗马规约》(见上文脚注1054)，第二十九条。 |
| United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries
on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Rome, 15 June-17
July 1998, document A/CONF.183/13 (vol. II), p. 138, 2nd meeting
(A/CONF.183/C.1/SR.2), paras. 45-74. | 见联合国设立国际刑事法院全权代表外交会议，1998年6月15日至7月17日，A/CONF.183/13(Vol. II)号文件，第138页，第2次会议(A/CONF.183/C.1/SR.2)，第45-74段。 |
| Extraordinary Chambers of Cambodia
Agreement (see footnote 1067 above), art. 5; statute of the Iraqi Special
Tribunal (see footnote 1068 above), art. 17 (d); | 《柬埔寨特别法庭协定》(见上文脚注1067)，第5条；《伊拉克特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1068)第17条(d)项； |
| East Timor Tribunal Charter (see footnote
1066 above), sect. 17.1; see also report of the Third Committee (A/57/806),
para. 10 (Khmer Rouge trials) and General Assembly resolution 57/228 B of 13
May 2003. | 《东帝汶法庭宪章》(见上文脚注1066)，第17.1节；又见第三委员会的报告(A/57/806)，第10段(审判红色高棉)和大会2003年5月13日第57/228 B号决议。 |
| Further, it should be noted that the
Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia were provided jurisdiction
over crimes against humanity committed decades prior to its establishment,
between 1975 and 1979, when the Khmer Rouge held power. | 此外，应该指出，柬埔寨法院特别法庭获得对在其成立前数十年(即1975年至1979年红色高棉执政时期)犯下的危害人类罪的管辖权。 |
| General Assembly resolution 2338 (XXII)
of 18 December 1967, entitled “Question of the
punishment of war criminals and of persons who have committed crimes against
humanity”; see also General Assembly resolution 2712
(XXV) of 15 December 1970; General Assembly resolution 2840 (XXVI) of 18
December 1971. | 大会1967年12月18日题为“惩治战争罪犯及危害人类罪犯问题”的第2338 (XXII)号决议，又见大会1970年12月15日第2712 (XXV)号决议和1971年12月18日第2840 (XXVI)号决议。 |
| Convention on the Non-Applicability of
Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, art. IV. | 《战争罪及危害人类罪不适用法定时效公约》，第四条。 |
| European Convention on the
Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitation to Crimes against Humanity and War
Crimes (Strasbourg, 25 January 1974), Council of Europe, European Treaty
Series, No. 82, art. 1. | 《危害人类罪和战争罪不适用法定时效欧洲公约》(1974年1月25日，斯特拉斯堡)，欧洲委员会，《欧洲条约汇编》，第82号，第1条。 |
| See, for example, report of the Committee
against Torture, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-second
Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/62/44), chap. III, consideration of reports by
States parties under article 19 of the Convention, Italy, para. 40 (19). | 例如，见禁止酷刑委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第六十二届会议，补编第44号》(A/62/44)，第三章，审议缔约国根据《公约》第19条提交的报告，意大利，第40 (19)段。 |
| International Covenant for Civil and
Political Rights (New York, 16 December 1966), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 999, No. 14668, p. 171. | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》(1966年12月16日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第14668卷，第171页。 |
| See, for example, report of the Human
Rights Committee, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-third
Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/63/40), vol. I, chap. IV, consideration of
reports submitted by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant and of
country situations in the absence of a report resulting in public concluding
observations, Panama (sect. A, para. 79), at para. (7). | 例如，见人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第六十三届会议，补编第40号》(A/63/40)，第一卷，第四章，审议缔约国根据《公约》第40条提交的报告和由于未提交报告而公开发表结论性意见的国别情况，巴拿马，(A节，第79段)，第(7)段。 |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 8, para. 1 (a). | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第8条第1款(a)项。 |
| In contrast, the Inter-American
Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons provides that criminal
prosecution and punishment of all forced disappearances shall not be subject
to statutes of limitations. | 相形之下，《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》规定，所有被迫失踪案件的刑事起诉和惩治不受时效限制。 |
| Report of the intersessional open-ended
working group to elaborate a draft legally binding normative instrument for
the protection of all persons from enforced disappearance (E/CN.4/2004/59)
(see footnote 1117 above), paras. 43-46 and 56. | 起草一个关于保护所有人不遭受强迫失踪的具有法律拘束力的规范性文书不限成员名额工作组的报告(E/CN.4/2004/59)，(见上文脚注1117)，第43-46段和第56段。 |
| Yearbook … 1996,
vol. II (Part Two), chap. II, sect. D, art. 3. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第二章，D节，第3条。 |
| Ibid., para. (3) of the commentary to
art. 3. | 同上，对第3条的评注第(3)段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (see footnote 1062 above), art.24, para.
1. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1062)，第24条第1款。 |
| Ibid., art. 24, para. 2. | 同上，第24条第2款。 |
| Statute of the International Tribunal for
Rwanda (see footnote 1063 above), art.23, para. 1. | 《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1063)，第23条第1款。 |
| Rome Statute (see footnote 1054 above),
art. 77. | 《罗马规约》(见上文脚注1054)，第七十七条。 |
| Statute of the Special Court for Sierra
Leone (see footnote 1065 above), art. 19. | 《塞拉利昂问题特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1065)，第19条。 |
| Statute of the Special Tribunal for
Lebanon (see footnote 1093 above), art. 24. East Timor Tribunal Charter (see
footnote 1066 above), sect. 10. | 《黎巴嫩问题特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1093)，第24条。 《东帝汶法庭宪章》(见上文脚注1066)，第10节。 |
| Extraordinary Chambers of Cambodia
Agreement (see footnote 1067 above), art. 39. | 《柬埔寨特别法庭协定》(见上文脚注1067)，第39条。 |
| Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal statute
(see footnote 1068 above), art. 24 | 《伊拉克最高刑事法庭规约》(见上文脚注1068)，第24条。 |
| Extraordinary African Chambers Statute
(see footnote 1069 above), art. 24. | 《非洲特别法庭规约》(见上文脚注1069)，第24条。 |
| See the report of the intersessional
open-ended working group to elaborate a draft legally binding normative
instrument for the protection of all persons from enforced disappearance
(E/CN.4/2004/59), para. 58 (indicating that “[s]everal
delegations welcomed the room for manoeuvre granted to States” in this provision); | 见起草一个关于保护所有人不遭受强迫失踪的具有法律拘束力的规范性文书委员会闭会期间不限成员名额工作组的报告(E/CN.4/2004/59)，第58段(表示“若干代表团欢迎(该条款)赋予缔约国灵活的余地”)； |
| report of the Ad hoc Committee on the
Drafting of an International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-second Session, Supplement
No. 39 (A/32/39), annex I (Summary records of the 1st to the 19th meetings of
the Committee), 13th meeting (15 August 1977), para. 4 (similar comments by
the representative of the United States of America); | 起草反对劫持人质国际公约特设委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第三十二届会议，补编第39号》(A/32/39)，附件一(委员会第1至第19次会议简要记录)，第13次会议(1977年8月15日)，第4段(美利坚合众国的类似意见)； |
| Commission on Human Rights resolution
2005/81 on impunity (see footnote 1100 above), para. 15 (calling upon “all States … to ensure that penalties are
appropriate and proportionate to the gravity of the crime”). | 人权委员会关于有罪不罚问题的第2005/81号决议(见上文脚注1100)，第15段(呼吁“各国确保…量刑适当，适合所犯罪行的严重程度”)。 |
| See the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, art. V. | 见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》，第五条。 |
| Geneva Convention I, art. 49; Geneva
Convention II, art. 50; Geneva Convention III, art. 129; Geneva Convention
IV, art. 146; | 《日内瓦第一公约》第四十九条、《日内瓦第二公约》第五十条、《日内瓦第三公约》第一百二十九条、《日内瓦第四公约》第一百四十六条； |
| see 2016 ICRC Commentary on art. 49 (see
footnote 1060 above), paras. 2838-2846. | 见2016年红十字委员会关于第49条的评注(见上文脚注1060)，第2838-2846段。 |
| See Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, including
Diplomatic Agents, art. 2, para. 2 (“[e]ach State
Party shall make these crimes punishable by appropriate penalties …”). | 见《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》，第二条第2款(“每一缔约国应按照这类罪行的严重性处以适当的惩罚”)。 |
| Yearbook … 1972,
vol. II, document A/8710/Rev.1, chap. III, sect. B (Draft articles on the
prevention and punishment of crimes against diplomatic agents and other
internationally protected persons), para. (12) of the commentary to draft
article 2, para. 2. | 《1972年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/8710/Rev.1号文件, 第三章，B节(关于防止及惩治侵害外交代表和其他应受国际保护人员的罪行的条款草案)，对第2条草案第2款的评注第(12)段。 |
| Convention against Torture, art. 4; see
also Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel,
art. 9, para. 2; International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist
Bombings, art. 4 (b); International Convention for the Suppression of the
Financing of Terrorism, art. 4 (b); OAU Convention on the Prevention and
Combating of Terrorism, art. 2 (a). | 《禁止酷刑公约》第4条，又见《联合国人员和有关人员安全公约》第九条第2款、《制止恐怖主义爆炸的国际公约》第四条(b)项、《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》第四条(b)项、《非统组织防止和打击恐怖主义公约》第二条(a)项。 |
| See, for example, International
Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance,
art. 7, para. 1; Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture,
art.6; Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, art.
III. | 例如，见《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》第七条第1款、《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》第6条、《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》第3条。 |
| See, for example, Special Tribunal for
Lebanon, New TV S.A.L. Karma Mohamed Tashin Al Khayat, Case No.
STL-14-05/PT/AP/AR126.1, Appeals Panel, Decision of 2 October 2014 on
interlocutory appeal concerning personal jurisdiction in contempt
proceedings, at para. 58 (hereinafter, “STL Appeals
Decision”) (“the practice
concerning criminal liability of corporations and the penalties associated
therewith varies in national systems”). | 例如，见黎巴嫩问题特别法庭，New TV S.A.L. Karma Mohamed
Tashin Al Khayat案， STL-14-05/PT/AP/AR126.1号案件，上诉分庭2014年10月2日就关于藐视法庭诉讼中的属人管辖权的中间上诉作出的裁决，第58段(下称“黎特别法庭上诉裁决”)(“不同国家体系关于企业刑事责任和相关处罚的做法各异”)。 |
| See, for example, Ecuador Código Orgánico Integral Penal, Registro Oficial,
Suplemento, Año 1, N° 180, 10 February 2014, art. 90. | 例如，见Ecuador Código Orgánico Integral Penal, Registro Oficial, Suplemento, Año 1 N° 180, 2014年2月10日，第90条。 |
| Penalty for a legal person (providing, in
a section addressing crimes against humanity, that: “When
a legal person is responsible for any of the crimes of this Section, it will
be penalized by its dissolution”). | 对法人的惩罚(关于危害人类罪的一节规定：“Cuando una persona jurídica sea la
responsable de cualquiera de los delitos de esta Sección, será sancionada con la extinción de la misma”)。 |
| See, for example, United States v. Krauch
and others, in Trials of War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military
Tribunals (The I.G. Farben Case), vols. VII-VIII (Washington D.C., Nürnberg Military Tribunals, 1952). | 例如，见美国诉Krauch及其他人，见纽伦堡军事法庭对战犯的审判(I.G. Farben案)，第七至八卷(华盛顿特区，纽伦堡军事法庭，1952年)。 |
| See Official Records of the United
Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an
International Criminal Court, Rome, 15 June-17 July 1998, vol. III
(A/CONF.183/13), document A/CONF.183/2, art. 23, para. 6, footnote 71. | 见《联合国设立国际刑事法院全权代表外交会议正式记录，罗马，1998年6月15日至7月17日》，第三卷(A/CONF.183/13)，A/CONF.183/2号文件，第23条第6款，脚注71。 |
| Yearbook … 1996,
vol.II (Part Two), chap. II, sect. D, p. 23. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第二章，D节，第23页。 |
| See Protocol on Amendments to the
Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights, 27
June 2014, art. 46C. | 见修正《非洲司法和人权法院章程》的议定书，2014年6月27日，第46C条。 |
| STL Appeals Decision (see footnote 1152
above). | 黎特别法庭上诉裁决(见上文脚注1152)。 |
| The Tribunal ultimately found that the
legal person, Al Jadeed TV, was not guilty. | 法庭最终判定法人Al Jadeed电视台无罪。 |
| See Al Jadeed [Co.] S.A.L./New T.V.S.A.L.
(N.T.V.) Karma Mohamed Tahsin Al Khayat, Case No. STL-14-05/T/CJ, Contempt
Judge, Decision of 18 September 2015, Special Tribunal for Lebanon, para. 55
(hereinafter, “STL Contempt Judge Decision”); | 见Al Jadeed [Co.] S.A.L./New
T.V.S.A.L.(N.T.V.) Karma Mohamed Tahsin Al Khayat案，案件号STL-14-05/T/CJ，藐视法庭案法官，2015年9月18日的裁决，黎巴嫩问题特别法庭，第55段(下称“黎特别法庭藐视法庭案法官裁决”)； |
| Al Jadeed [Co. ] S.A.L./New T.V.S.A.L.
(N.T.V.) Karma Mohamed Tahsin Al Khayat, Case No. STL-14-05/A/AP, Appeals
Panel, Decision of 8 March 2016. | Al Jadeed [Co.] S.A.L./New
T.V.S.A.L.(N.T.V.) Karma Mohamed Tahsin Al Khayat案，案件号STL-14-05/A/AP，上诉分庭，2016年3月8日的裁决。 |
| See International Convention on the
Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (New York, 30 November
1973), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1015, No. 14861, p. 243, art. I,
para. 2 (“The States Parties to the present Convention
declare criminal those organizations, institutions and individuals committing
the crime of apartheid”). | 见《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》(1973年11月30日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1015卷，第14861号，第243页，第一条第2款(“本公约缔约国宣布：凡是犯种族隔离罪行的组织、机构或个人即为犯罪”)。 |
| Basel Convention on the Control of
Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (Basel, 22
March 1989), ibid., vol. 1673, No. 28911, p. 57, art. 2, para. 14 (“For the purposes of this Convention: … ‘Person’ means any natural or legal person”) and
art. 4, para. 3 (“The Parties consider that illegal
traffic in hazardous wastes or other wastes is criminal”). | 《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置巴塞尔公约》(1989年3月22日，巴塞尔)，同上，第1673卷，第28911号，第57页，第2条第14款(“为本公约的目的：…“人”是指任何自然人或法人)和第4条第3款(“各缔约国认为危险废物或其他废物的非法运输为犯罪行为”)。 |
| International Convention for the Suppression
of the Financing of Terrorism, art. 5. | 《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》，第5条。 |
| For the proposals submitted during the
negotiations that led to art. 5, see “Measures to
eliminate international terrorism: report of the working group” (A/C.6/54/L.2) (26 October 1999). | 谈判期间提出的促成第5条的提案见《消除国际恐怖主义的措施：工作组的报告》(A/C.6/54/L.2)(1999年10月26日)。 |
| United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organized Crime, art. 10. | 《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》，第10条。 |
| Optional Protocol to the Convention on
the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child
Pornography (New York, 25 May 2000), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
2171, No. 27531, p. 227. | 《儿童权利公约关于买卖儿童、儿童卖淫和儿童色情制品问题的任择议定书》(2000年5月25日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2171卷，第27531号，第227页。 |
| United Nations Convention against
Corruption, art. 26. | 《联合国反腐败公约》，第26条。 |
| For background, see United Nations Office
on Drugs and Crime, Travaux Préparatoires of the
Negotiations for the Elaboration of the United Nations Convention against
Corruption (United Nations publication, Sales No. E. 10.V.13), pp. 233-235
and Legislative Guide for the Implementation of the United Nations Convention
against Corruption (2nd revised edition, 2012), pp. 107-113. | 背景见联合国毒品和犯罪问题办公室，《谈判拟订〈联合国反腐败公约〉的准备工作文件》(联合国出版物，出售品编号E.10.V.13)，第233-235页，《执行〈联合国反腐败公约〉的立法指南》(修订版第2版，2012年)，第107-113页。 |
| For the analogous convention adopted by
the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, see Convention on
Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business
Transactions (Paris, 21 November 1997), art. 2 (“Each
Party shall take such measures as may be necessary, in accordance with its
legal principles, to establish the liability of legal persons for the bribery
of a foreign public official”), available
from(accessed 11 July 2016). | 经济合作与发展组织通过的类似公约见《禁止在国际商业交易中贿赂外国公职人员公约》(1997年11月21日，巴黎)，第二条(“每一缔约方应依照其法律准则采取必要措施以确定法人因行贿外国公职人员而承担的责任”)，可查阅 (2016年7月11日查阅)。 |
| Protocol of 2005 to the Protocol for the
Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on
the Continental Shelf (London, 14 October 2005), art. 5 (for the 1988
Convention and the Protocol thereto, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1678, No. 29004, p. 201). | 《制止危及大陆架固定平台安全非法行为议定书》的2005年议定书(2005年10月14日，伦敦)，第五条(1988年公约及其议定书见联合国，《条约汇编》，第1678卷，第29004号，第201页)。 |
| See, for example, Council of Europe,
Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (Strasbourg, 27 January 1999), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2216, No. 39391, p. 225, art. 18, supplemented
by the Additional Protocol (Strasbourg, 15 May 2003) (relating to bribery of
arbitrators and jurors), ibid., vol. 2466, No. 39391, p. 168; | 例如，见欧洲委员会《反腐败刑法公约》(1999年1月27日，斯特拉斯堡)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2216卷，第39391号，第225页，第18条，以及(关于贿赂仲裁员和陪审员的)补充议定书(2003年5月15日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第2466卷，第39391号，第168页； |
| European Convention on the Suppression of
Terrorism (Strasbourg, 27 January 1977), ibid., vol. 1137, No. 17828, p. 93,
art. 10. | 《欧洲制止恐怖主义公约》(1977年1月27日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第1137卷，第17828号，第93页，第10条。 |
| See, for example, Inter-American
Convention against Corruption, art. 8; | 例如，见《美洲国家反腐败公约》，第8条； |
| Southern African Development Community
Protocol against Corruption (Blantyre, Malawi, 14 August 2001), available
from, art. 4, para. 2; African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating
Corruption, art. 11, para. 1. | 《南部非洲发展共同体反腐败议定书》(2001年8月14日，马拉维布兰太尔)，可查阅，第4条第2款；《非洲联盟预防和打击腐败公约》，第11条第1款。 |
| The Council of Europe Criminal Law
Convention on Corruption makes explicit such exclusion (see, for example,
art. 1 (d), “For the purposes of this Convention: …
‘legal person’ shall mean any entity
having such status under the applicable national law, except for States or
other public bodies in the exercise of State authority and for public
international organisations”). | 欧洲委员会《反腐败刑法公约》明文作出排除(例如，见第1条(d)项，“为本公约的目的，…“法人”应指根据适用的国内法具有此种地位的任何实体，但不包括国家或行使国家权力的其他公共机构以及公共国际组织”)。 |
| For a brief overview of divergences in various
common law and civil law jurisdictions on liability of legal persons, see STL
Contempt Judge Decision (footnote 1152 above), paras. 63-67. | 关于不同普通法和民法对法人责任管辖权差异的概述，见黎特别法庭藐视法庭案法官裁决(上文脚注1152)，第63-67段。 |
| At art. 10, para.2 (“Subject to the legal principles of the State Party, the liability
of legal persons may be criminal, civil or administrative”); | 第10条第2款(“在不违反缔约国法律原则的情况下，法人责任可包括刑事、民事或行政责任。”)； |
| see also the International Convention for
the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, art. 5, para. 1 (“Each State Party, in accordance with its domestic legal
principles, shall take the necessary measures to enable a legal entity
located in its territory or organized under its laws to be held liable when a
person responsible for the management or control of that legal entity has, in
that capacity, committed an offence set forth in article 2. | 另见《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》第5条第1款(“每一缔约国应根据其本国法律原则采取必要措施，以致当一个负责管理或控制设在其领土内或根据其法律设立的法律实体的人在以该身份犯下了本公约第2条所述罪行时，得以追究该法律实体的责任。 |
| Such liability may be criminal, civil or
administrative”). | 这些责任可以是刑事、民事或行政责任”)。 |
| At art. 26, para. 2 (“Subject to the legal principles of the State Party, the liability
of legal persons may be criminal, civil or administrative”). | 第二十六条第二款(“在不违反缔约国法律原则的情况下，法人责任可以包括刑事责任、民事责任或者行政责任”)。 |
| Yearbook … 1996,
vol. II (Part Two), chap. II, sect. D, art. 8. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第二章，D节，第8条。 |
| Ibid., para. (5) of the commentary to
art. 8. | 同上，第8条评注第(5)段。 |
| Commission on Human Rights, report of the
intersessional open-ended working group to elaborate a draft legally binding
normative instrument for the protection of all persons from enforced
disappearance (E/CN.4/2003/71), para.65. | 人权委员会，起草一个关于保护所有人不遭受强迫失踪的具有法律拘束力的规范性文书委员会闭会期间不限成员名额工作组的报告(E/CN.4/2003/71)，第65段。 |
| See Questions relating to the Obligation
to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
2012, p. 422, at p. 451, para. 75. | 见与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(比利时诉塞内加尔)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第422页起，见第451页，第75段。 |
| See, for example, Convention for the
Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, art. 4; | 例如，见《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》，第4条； |
| Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation (Montreal, 23 September
1971, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 974, No. 14118, p. 177, art. 5,
para. 1 (a)-(b); | 《制止危害民用航空安全非法行为公约》(1971年9月23日，蒙特利尔)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第974卷，第14118号，第177页，第5条，第1款(a)-(b)项； |
| Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, including
Diplomatic Agents, art. 3; International Convention Against the Taking of
Hostages, art. 5; | 《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》，第3条；《反对劫持人质国际公约》，第5条； |
| Inter-American Convention to Prevent and
Punish Torture, art. 12; Convention against Torture, art. 5; Convention on
the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, art. 10; | 《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》，第12条；《禁止酷刑公约》，第5条；《联合国人员和有关人员安全公约》，第10条； |
| Inter-American Convention on Forced
Disappearance of Persons, art. IV; International Convention for the
Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, art. 6; International Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, art. 7; | 《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》，第四条；《制止恐怖主义爆炸国际公约》，第6条；《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》，第7条； |
| OAU Convention on the Prevention and
Combating of Terrorism, art. 6, para. 1; United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organized Crime (New York, 15 November 2000), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 2225, No. 39574, p. 209, art. 15; | 《非统组织防止和打击恐怖主义公约》，第6条第1款；《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》(2000年11月15日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2225卷，第39574号，第209页，第15条； |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 9, paras. 1-2;
Association of Southeast Asian Nations Convention on Counter Terrorism, art.
VII, paras. (1)-(3). | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第9条第1-2款；《东盟打击恐怖主义公约》，第七条第(1)-(3)款。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000
(Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002,
p. 3, Joint Separate Opinion of Judges Higgins, Kooijmans and Buergenthal, at
para. 51. | 2000年4月11日逮捕令案(刚果民主共和国诉比利时)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页，希金斯、科艾曼斯和比尔根塔尔法官的联合个别意见，第51段。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), chap. VII, sect.
C., art. 4, para. 1 (a) (referring to “any territory
under its jurisdiction or control”). | 见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第七章，C节，第4条，第1款(a)项(提及“在其管辖或控制的任何领土内”)。 |
| See Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration
of a Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, revised draft United
Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (A/AC.254/4/Rev.4),
footnote 102, p. 20; see also Council of Europe, Explanatory Report to the
Criminal Law Convention on Corruption, European Treaty Series, No. 173, para.
83 (“Jurisdiction is traditionally based on
territoriality or nationality. | 然而见拟订一项打击跨国有组织犯罪国际公约特设委员会，《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》修订草案(A/AC.254/4/Rev.4)，脚注102，第20页；另见欧洲委员会，《反腐败刑法公约》解释性报告，《欧洲条约汇编》，第173号，第83段(“管辖权历来依据属地或国籍。 |
| In the field of corruption these
principles may, however, not always suffice to exercise jurisdiction, for
example over cases occurring outside the territory of a Party, not involving
its nationals, but still affecting its interests (e.g. national security). | 在反腐败领域，这些原则有时可能不足以用于行使管辖权，例如在发生于缔约方领土之外，不涉及其国民但仍然影响其利益(如国家安全)的案件中。 |
| Paragraph 4 of this article allows the
Parties to establish, in conformity with their national law, other types of
jurisdiction as well.”). | 本条第4款允许缔约方依照其国内法，确定其他类型的管辖权。”)。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see
footnote 1177 above), Joint Separate Opinion of Judges Higgins, Kooijmans and
Buergenthal, at para. 51. | 2000年4月11日逮捕令案(见上文脚注1177)，希金斯、科艾曼斯和比尔根塔尔法官的联合个别意见，第51段。 |
| Ibid., Separate Opinion of Judge
Guillaume, at para. 9 (emphasis added). | 同上，纪尧姆法官的个别意见，第9段(强调系本文所加)。 |
| See, for example, Inter-American
Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, art.8; International Convention for
the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 12, para. 2; | 例如，见《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》，第8条；《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第12条第2款； |
| Council of Europe Convention on
Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence
(Istanbul, 11 May 2011), Council of Europe, European Treaty Series, No. 210,
art. 55, para. 1. | 《欧洲委员会防止和打击暴力侵害妇女行为和家庭暴力公约》(2011年5月11日，伊斯坦布尔)，欧洲委员会，《欧洲条约汇编》，第210号，第55条第1款。 |
| See Encarnacíon
Blanco Abad v. Spain, Communication No. 59/1996, 14 May 1998, para.8.2, in
report of the Committee against Torture, Official Records of the General
Assembly, Fifty-third Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/53/44), annex X, sect.
A.3; | 见Encarnacíon
Blanco Abad 诉西班牙，第59/1996号来文，1998年5月14日，第8.2段，载于禁止酷刑委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第五十三届会议，补编第44号》(A/53/44)，附件十，A.3节； |
| Danilo Dimitrijevic v. Serbia and
Montenegro, Communication No. 172/2000, 16 November 2005, para. 7.3, ibid.,
Sixty-first Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/61/44), annex VIII, sect. A. | Danilo Dimitrijevic 诉塞尔维亚和黑山，第172/2000号来文，2005年11月16日，第7.3段，同上，《第六十一届会议，补编第44号》(A/61/44)，附件八，A节。 |
| See Dhaou Belgacem Thabti v. Tunisia,
Communication No. 187/2001, 14 November 2003, para. 10.4, ibid., Fifty-ninth
Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/59/44), annex VII, sect. A. | 见Dhaou Belgacem Thabti 诉突尼斯，第187/2001号来文，2003年11月14日，第10.4段，同上，《第五十九届会议，补编第44号》(A/59/44)，附件七，A节。 |
| See, for example, Bairamov v. Kazakhstan,
Communication No. 497/2012, 14 May 2014, paras. 8.7-8.8, ibid., Sixty-ninth
Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/69/44), annex XIV. | 例如，见Bairamov 诉哈萨克斯坦，第497/2012号来文，2014年5月14日，第8.7-8.8段，同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第44号》(A/69/44)，附件十四。 |
| Qani Halimi-Nedzibi v. Austria,
Communication No. 8/1991, 18 November 1993, para.13.5, ibid., Forty-ninth
Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/49/44), annex V. | Qani Halimi-Nedzibi 诉奥地利，第8/1991号来文，1993年11月18日，第13.5段，同上，《第四十九届会议，补编第44号》(A/49/44)，附件五。 |
| Encarnacíon
Blanco Abad v. Spain (see footnote 1183 above), para.8.2. | Encarnacíon
Blanco Abad 诉西班牙(见上文脚注1183)，第8.2段。 |
| Report of the Committee against Torture,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-ninth Session, Supplement No.
44 (A/49/44), chap. IV, consideration of reports submitted by States parties
under article 19 of the Convention, Ecuador, paras. 97-105, at para. 105. | 禁止酷刑委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第四十九届会议，补编第44号》(A/49/44)，第四章，审议缔约国根据《公约》第19条提出的报告，厄瓜多尔，第97-105至段，见第105段。 |
| Ibid., Fifty-sixth Session, Supplement
No. 44 (A/56/44), chap. IV, consideration of reports submitted by States
parties under article 19 of the Convention, Guatemala, paras. 67-76, at para.
76 (d). | 同上，《第五十六届会议，补编第44号》(A/56/44)，第四章，审议缔约国根据《公约》第19条提出的报告，危地马拉，第67-76段，见第76段(d)分段。 |
| Khaled Ben M’Barek
v. Tunisia, Communication No. 60/1996, 10 November 1999, paras. 11.9-11.10,
ibid., Fifty-fifth Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/55/44), annex VIII, sect. A. | Khaled Ben M’Barek
诉突尼斯，第60/1996号来文，1999年11月10日，第11.9-11.10段，同上，《第五十五届会议，补编第44号》(A/55/44)，附件八，A节。 |
| See Human Rights Committee, general
comment No. 31, para. 15 (report of the Human Rights Committee, Official
records of the General Assembly, Fifty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 40
(A/59/40), vol. I, annex III); see also Nazriev v. Tajikistan, Communication
No. 1044/2002, views adopted on 17 March 2006, para. 8.2 (ibid., Sixty-first
Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/61/40), vol. II, annex V, sect. P); | 见人权事务委员会第31号一般性评论，第15段(人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第五十九届会议，补编第40号》(A/59/40)，第一卷，附件三)；另见Nazriev 诉塔吉克斯坦，第1044/2002号来文，2006年3月17日通过的意见，第8.2段(同上，《第六十一届会议，补编第40号》(A/61/40)，第二卷，附件五，P节)； |
| Kouidis v. Greece, Communication No.
1070/2002, views adopted on 28 March 2006, para. 9 (ibid., sect. T); Agabekov
v. Uzbekistan, Communication No. 1071/2002, views adopted on 16 March 2007,
para. 7.2 (ibid., Sixty-second Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/62/40), vol. II,
annex VII, sect. I); | Kouidis 诉希腊，第1070/2002号来文，2006年3月28日通过的意见，第9段(同上，T节)；Agabekov 诉乌兹别克斯坦，第1071/2002号来文，2007年3月16日通过的意见，第7.2段(同上,《第六十二届会议，补编第40号》(A/62/40)，第二卷，附件七，I节)； |
| Karimov v. Tajikistan and Nursatov v.
Tajikistan, Communication Nos. 1108/2002 and 1121/2002, Views adopted on 26
March 2007, para. 7.2 (ibid., sect. H). | Karimov 诉塔吉克斯坦和Nursatov
诉塔吉克斯坦，第1108/2002号和第1121/2002号来文，2007年3月26日通过的意见，第7.2段(同上，H节)。 |
| See, for example, European Court of Human
Rights, Ergi v. Turkey, 28 July 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions
1998-IV, paras. 82, 85-86; Bati and Others v. Turkey, Nos. 33097/96 and
57834/00, ECHR 2004-IV, para. 133; | 例如，见欧洲人权法院，Ergi 诉土耳其，1998年7月28日，《判决和决定汇编》，1998年第四辑，第82段，第85-86段；Bati 等诉土耳其，第33097/96和第57834/00号，《欧洲人权法院判决和决定汇编》，2004年第四辑，第133段； |
| Paniagua Morales et al. v. Guatemala,
judgment of 8 March 1998, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series C, No.
37; Extrajudicial Executions and Forced Disappearances of Persons v. Peru,
Report No. 101/01, 11 October 2001, Inter-American Commission of Human
Rights, OEA/Ser./L/V/II.114 doc. 5 rev., p. 563. | Paniagua Morales等诉危地马拉，1998年3月8日的判决，美洲人权法院，C辑，第37号；“法外处决和强迫失踪－秘鲁”，第101/01号报告，2001年10月11日，美洲人权委员会，OEA/Ser./L/V/II.114 doc.5 rev,
第563页。 |
| General Assembly resolution 2583 (XXIV)
of 15 December 1969 on the question of the punishment of war criminals and of
persons who have committed crimes against humanity, para. 1. | 大会1969年12月15日关于战争罪犯及危害人类罪犯之惩治问题的第2583(XXIV)号决议，第1段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 2840 (XXVI)
of 18 December 1971 on the question of the punishment of war criminals and of
persons who have committed crimes against humanity, para. 4. Security Council
resolution 1894 (2009) of 11 November 2009, para. 10. | 大会1971年12月18日关于战争罪犯及危害人类罪犯的惩治问题的第2840(XXVI)号决议，第4段。 安全理事会2009年11月11日第1894 (2009)号决议，第10段。 |
| See, for example, Convention for the
Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, art. 6; Convention for the
Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation, art. 6; | 例如，见《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》，第6条；《制止危害民用航空安全非法行为公约》，第6条； |
| International Convention Against the
Taking of Hostages, art. 6; Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish
Torture, art. 8; | 《反对劫持人质国际公约》，6条；《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》，第8条； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, art. 7; International Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, art. 9; OAU Convention on the
Prevention and Combating of Terrorism, art. 7; | 《制止恐怖主义爆炸国际公约》，第7条；《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》，第9条；《非统组织防止和打击恐怖主义公约》，第7条； |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 10; Association
of Southeast Asian Nations Convention on Counter Terrorism, art. VIII. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第10条；《东盟打击恐怖主义公约》，第八条。 |
| Convention against Torture, art. 6.
Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote
1175 above), p. 450, para. 72. | 《禁止酷刑公约》，第6条。 与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注1175)，第450页，第72段。 |
| Ibid., p. 453, para. 83. Ibid., p. 454,
para. 86. Ibid., p. 451, para. 74. | 同上，第453页，第83段。同上，第454页，第86段。 同上，第451页，第74段。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), chap. VI. | 见《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第六章。 |
| “Survey of multilateral conventions which
may be of relevance for the work of the International Law Commission on the
topic ‘The obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut
dedere aut judicare)’”, study by the Secretariat
(A/CN.4/630). | “对与国际法委员会就‘引渡或起诉(aut dedere aut judicare)义务’专题开展的工作可能有关的多边公约的调查”，秘书处的研究报告(A/CN.4/630)。 |
| Yearbook … 1996,
vol. II (Part Two), chap. II, sect. D (art. 9); | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第二章，D节(第9条)； |
| see also Commission on Human Rights
resolution 2005/81 on impunity (footnote 1100 above), para. 2 (recognizing “that States must prosecute or extradite perpetrators, including
accomplices, of international crimes such as … crimes
against humanity … in accordance with their
international obligations in order to bring them to justice, and urg[ing] all
States to take effective measures to implement these obligations”). | 另见人权委员会关于有罪不罚问题的第2005/81号决议(上文脚注1100)，第2段(确认“各国必须按照国际法规定的义务起诉或引渡…危害人类罪等国际罪行的肇事者及其同谋，以将其绳之以法，并敦促各国采取有效措施履行这些义务”)。 |
| See Organization of American States
(OAS), Convention to Prevent and Punish the Acts of Terrorism Taking the Form
of Crimes Against Persons and Related Extortion that are of International
Significance (Washington, D.C., 2 February 1971), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1438, No. 24371, p. 195, art. 5; | 见美洲国家组织(美洲组织)，《防止和惩治以侵害个人罪行和相关勒索罪行形式进行的具有国际影响的恐怖主义行为公约》(1971年2月2日，华盛顿特区)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1438卷，第24371号，第195页，第5条； |
| Organization of African Unity Convention
for the Elimination of Mercenarism in Africa (Libreville, 3 July 1977),
ibid., vol. 1490, No. 25573, p. 89, arts. 8-9, paras. 2-3; | 《非洲统一组织消除非洲雇佣军制度公约》(1977年7月3日，利伯维尔)，同上，第1490卷，第25573号，第89页，第8-9条，第2-3款； |
| European Convention on the Suppression of
Terrorism (Strasbourg, 27 January 1977), ibid., vol. 1137, No. 17828, p. 93,
art. 7; | 《欧洲制止恐怖主义公约》(1977年1月27日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第1137卷，第17828号，第93页，第7条； |
| Inter-American Convention to Prevent and
Punish Torture, art. 14; SAARC [South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation] Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism (Kathmandu, 4
November 1987), in International Instruments related to the Prevention and
Suppression of … (see footnote 1058 above), p. 174,
at art. IV, p. 176; Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of
Persons, art. 6; | 《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》，第14条；《南亚区域合作联盟制止恐怖主义活动区域公约》(1987年11月4日，加德满都)，《关于预防和制止…的国际文书》(见上文脚注1058)，174页起，第四条，第176页；《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》，第6条； |
| Inter-American Convention on
International Traffic in Minors (Mexico, 18 March 1994), OAS, Treaty Series,
No. 79, art. 9; Inter-American Convention against Corruption (Caracas, 29
March 1996), art. 13, para. 6; | 《美洲国际贩卖未成年人问题公约》(1994年3月18日，墨西哥城)，美洲组织，《条约汇编》，第79号，第9条；《美洲国家反腐败公约》(1996年3月29日，加拉加斯)，第13条，第6款； |
| Inter-American Convention against the
Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives,
and Other Related Materials (Washington, D.C., 14 November 1997), art. 19,
para. 6; | 《美洲国家禁止非法制造和贩运火器、弹药、爆炸物及其他有关材料公约》(1997年11月14日，华盛顿特区)，第19条，第6款； |
| League of Arab States, Arab Convention on
the Suppression of Terrorism (Cairo, 22 April 1998), in International
Instruments related to the Prevention and Suppression of … (see footnote 1058 above), p. 178, at art. 6, p. 183; Council of
Europe, Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (Strasbourg, 27 January 1999),
European Treaty Series, No. 173, art. 27, para. 5; | 阿拉伯国家联盟，《阿拉伯制止恐怖主义公约》(1998年4月22日，开罗)《关于预防和制止…的国际文书》(见上文脚注1058)，第178页起，第6条，第183页；欧洲委员会，《反腐败刑法公约》(1999年1月27日，斯特拉斯堡)，《欧洲条约汇编》，第173号，第27条第5款； |
| Convention of the Organisation of the
Islamic Conference on Combating International Terrorism (Ouagadougou, 1 July
1999), annex to resolution 59/26-P, available from, art. 6; Council of
Europe, Convention on Cybercrime (Budapest, 23 November 2001), European
Treaty Series, No. 185, art. 24, para. 6; | 《伊斯兰会议组织关于打击国际恐怖主义的公约》(1999年7月1日，瓦加杜古)，第59/26-P号决议附件，可查阅，第6条；欧洲委员会，《网络犯罪公约》(2001年11月23日，布达佩斯)，《欧洲条约汇编》，第185号，第24条第6款； |
| African Union Convention on Preventing
and Combating Corruption (Maputo, 11 July 2003), available from , art. 15,
para. 6; | 《非洲联盟预防和打击腐败公约》(2003年7月11日，马普托)，可查阅, 第15条第6款； |
| Council of Europe, Convention on the
Prevention of Terrorism (Warsaw, 16 May 2005), Council of Europe Treaty
Series, No. 196, art. 18; | 欧洲委员会，防止恐怖主义公约(2005年5月16日，华沙)，《欧洲委员会条约汇编》，第196号，第18条； |
| Council of Europe Convention on Action
against Trafficking in Human Beings (Warsaw, 16 May 2005), Council of Europe
Treaty Series, No. 197, art. 31, para. 3; and ASEAN Convention on Counter
Terrorism (see footnote 1058 above), art. XIII, para. 1. | 《欧洲委员会打击人口贩运公约》(2005年5月16日，华沙)，《欧洲委员会条约汇编》，第197号，第31条第3款；《东盟反恐公约》(见上文脚注1058)，第十三条第1款。 |
| Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, art. 7. | 《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》，第7条。 |
| See A/CN.4/630 (footnote 1203 above), pp.
74-75. | 见A/CN.4/630(上文脚注1203)，第74-75页。 |
| Statement of Chairperson Gilbert
Guillaume (delegate from France), International Civil Aviation Organization,
Legal Committee, Seventeenth Session, Montreal, 9 February-11 March 1970,
Minutes and Documents relating to the Subject of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft
(Montreal, 1970), 30th meeting (3 March 1970) (Doc. 8877-LC/161), para. 15. | 主席Gilbert Guillaume (法国代表)的发言，国际民航组织法律委员会第十七届会议，1970年2月9日至3月11日，蒙特利尔，《关于非法劫持航空器问题的会议记录和文件》，第30次会议(1970年3月3日) (8877-LC/161号文件)，第15段。 |
| Questions relating to the Obligation to
Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 1175 above), pp. 454-461, paras.90-91,
94-95, 114-115 and 120. | 与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注1175)，第454-461页，第90-91段、第94-95段、第114-115段和第120段。 |
| Ibid. p. 460, para. 112. | 同上，第460页，第112段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid. p. 460, para. 113. | 同上，第460页，第113段。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), chap. VI, sect. C
(Final report on the topic), para. (35), pp. 155-156. | 《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第六章，C节(本专题最后报告)，第(35)段，第155-156段。 |
| See, for example, European Union, Council
Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the
surrender procedures between Member States, Official Journal of the European
Communities, L 190, 18 July 2002, p. 1, available from. | 例如见，欧洲联盟，理事会2002年6月13日关于欧洲逮捕令和成员国之间移交程序的框架决定,《欧洲共同体公报》，L 190号，2002年7月18日，第1页，可查阅。 |
| Article 1 of the framework decision
provides: “The European arrest warrant is a judicial
decision issued by a Member State with a view to the arrest and surrender by
another Member State of a requested person, for the purposes of conducting a
criminal prosecution or executing a custodial sentence or detention order” (emphasis added). | 该框架决定第1条规定：“欧洲逮捕令是成员国签发的司法判决，其目的是使另一成员国逮捕和移交所要求的人，以便进行刑事起诉或执行监禁判决或拘留令”(强调系本文所加)。 |
| See International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 11, para. 1. | 见《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第十一条第一款。 |
| Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948, arts. 10-11. | 《世界人权宣言》，大会1948年12月10日第217A (三)号决议，第十至第十一条。 |
| See, for example, Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected
Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, art. 9; | 例如见,《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》，第九条； |
| International Convention Against the
Taking of Hostages, art. 8, para. 2; | 《反对劫持人质国际公约》，第八条第2款； |
| Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, art. 7, para. 3; | 《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7条第3款； |
| Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome, 10 March
1988), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1678, No. 29004, p. 201, art. 10,
para. 2; | 《制止危及海上航行安全非法行为公约》(1988年3月10日，罗马)，联合国,《条约汇编》，第1678卷，第29004号，第201页，第十条第2款； |
| Convention on the Rights of the Child
(New York, 20 November 1989), ibid., vol. 1577, No. 27531, p. 3, art. 40,
para. 2 (b); | 《儿童权利公约》(1989年11月20日，纽约)，同上，第1577卷，第27531号，第3页，第40条第2款(b)项； |
| International Convention Against the
Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries (New York, 4 December
1989), ibid., vol. 2163, No. 37789, p. 75, art. 11; | 《反对招募、使用、资助和训练雇佣军国际公约》(1989年12月4日，纽约)，同上，第2163卷，第37789号，第75页，第11条； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, art. 14; | 《制止恐怖主义爆炸事件的国际公约》，第14条； |
| Second Protocol to the Hague Convention
of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed
Conflict (The Hague, 26 March 1999), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
2253, No. 3511, art. 17, para. 2; | 《1954年关于发生武装冲突时保护文化财产的海牙公约第二议定书》(1999年3月26日，海牙)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2253卷，第3511号，第17条第2款； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, art. 17; | 《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》，第17条； |
| United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organized Crime, art. 16, para. 13; | 《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》，第16条第13款； |
| United Nations Convention against
Corruption (New York, 31 October 2003), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
2349, No. 42146, p. 41, art. 44, para. 14; | 《联合国反腐败公约》(2003年10月31日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2349卷，第42146号，第41页，第四十四条第十四款； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism (New York, 13 April 2005), ibid.,
vol. 2445, No. 44004, p. 89, art. 12; | 《制止核恐怖主义行为国际公约》(2005年4月13日，纽约)，同上，第2445卷，第44004号，第89页，第十二条； |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 11, para. 3; | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第十一条第三款； |
| Association of Southeast Asian Nations
Convention on Counter Terrorism, art. 8, para. 1. | 《东盟反恐公约》，第八条第1款。 |
| Yearbook … 1972,
vol. II, | 《1972年…年鉴》，第二卷， |
| document A/8710/Rev.1, chap. III, sect. B (Draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes
against diplomatic agents and other internationally protected persons), commentary
to art. 8, p. 320. | A/8710/Rev.1号文件，第三章B节(关于防止及惩治侵害外交代表和其他应受国际保护人员的罪行的条款草案)，第8条的评注，第320页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Human Rights Committee, general comment
No. 32 (2007), art. 14 (Right to equality before courts and tribunals and to
a fair trial), Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-second
session, Supplement No. 40 (A/62/40), annex VI, para. 2; | 人权事务委员会第32号一般性意见(2007年)，第十四条(在法庭和裁判所前一律平等和获得公正审判的权利)，《大会正式记录，第六十二届会议，补编第40号》(A/62/40)，附件六，第2段； |
| see also paras. 18-28. | 另见第18-28段。 |
| See, for example, American Convention on
Human Rights: “Pact of San José, Costa Rica” (San José, 22 November 1969), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1144, No.
17955, p. 123, art. 8; | 例如见《美洲人权公约：“哥斯达黎加圣何塞公约”》(1969年11月22日，圣何塞)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1144卷，第17955号，第123页，第八条； |
| African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Nairobi, 27 June 1981), ibid., vol. 1520, No. 26363, p.
217, art. 7; | 《非洲人权和人民权利宪章》(1981年6月27日，内罗毕)，同上，第1520卷，第26363号，第217页，第七条； |
| Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Rome, 4 November 1950), ibid., vol. 213, No.
2889, p. 221, art. 6. | 《保护人权与基本自由公约》(1950年11月4日，罗马)，同上，第213卷，第2889号，第221页，第六条。 |
| See, for example, Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (footnote 1216 above); | 例如见《世界人权宣言》(上文脚注1216)； |
| American Declaration of the Rights and
Duties of Man (Bogota, 2 May 1948), adopted by the Ninth International
Conference of American States (available from | 第九届美洲国家国际会议通过的《美洲关于人的权利和义务宣言》(1948年5月2日，波哥大)(见)； |
| Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in
Islam, Organisation of Islamic Cooperation Resolution No. 49/19-P, annex,
available from; | 《开罗伊斯兰人权宣言》，伊斯兰合作组织第49/19-P号决议，附件，可查阅； |
| Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the
European Union, Official Journal of the European Communities, No. C 364, 18
December 2000, p. 1. | 《欧洲联盟基本权利宪章》,《欧洲共同体公报》，C 364号，2000年12月18日，第1页。 |
| Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
(Vienna, 24 April 1963), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 596, No. 8638,
p. 261, art. 36, para. 1. | 《维也纳领事关系公约》(1963年4月24日，维也纳)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第596卷，第8638号，第261页，第三十六条第一款。 |
| LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2001, p. 466, at p. 492, para. 74 (“Article 36, paragraph 1, establishes an interrelated régime designed to facilitate the implementation of the system of
consular protection”), and, at p. 494, para. 77 (“Based on the text of these provisions, the Court concludes that
Article 36, paragraph 1, creates individual rights”). | 拉格朗案(德国诉美利坚合众国)，判决，《2001年国际法院案例汇编》，第466页起，见第492页，第74段，(“第三十六条第一款规定了一项旨在促进执行领事保护制度的互相关联的制度”)，并见第494页，第77段(“基于这些规定的案文，法院认为，第三十六条第一款确立了个人权利”)。 |
| See, for example, Convention for the
Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, art. 6; | 例如见《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》，第六条； |
| Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation, art. 6, para. 3; | 《制止危害民用航空安全非法行为公约》，第六条第三款； |
| Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, including
Diplomatic Agents, art. 6, para. 2; | 《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》，第六条第2款； |
| International Convention Against the
Taking of Hostages, art. 6, para. 3; | 《反对劫持人质国际公约》，第六条第3款； |
| Convention against Torture, art. 6, para.
3; | 《禁止酷刑公约》第6条第3款； |
| Convention on the Safety of United
Nations and Associated Personnel, art. 17, para. 2; | 《联合国人员和有关人员安全公约》，第十七条第二款； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, art. 7, para. 3; | 《制止恐怖主义爆炸事件的国际公约》，第7条第3款； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, art. 9, para. 3; | 《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》，第9条第3款； |
| OAU Convention on the Prevention and
Combating of Terrorism, art. 7, para. 3; | 《非统组织防止和打击恐怖主义公约》，第七条第3款； |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 10, para. 3; | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第十条第三款； |
| Association of Southeast Asian Nations
Convention on Counter Terrorism, art. VIII, para. 4. | 《东盟反恐公约》，第八条第4款。 |
| Vienna Convention on Consular Relations,
at art. 36, para. 2. | 《维也纳领事关系公约》，第三十六条第二款。 |
| See, for example, International
Convention Against the Taking of Hostages, art. 4; | 例如见，《反对劫持人质国际公约》，第四条； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, art. 7, para. 4; | 《制止恐怖主义爆炸事件的国际公约》，第7条第4款； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, art. 9, para. 4; | 《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》第9条第4款； |
| OAU Convention on the Prevention and
Combating of Terrorism, art. 7, para. 4; | 《非统组织防止和打击恐怖主义公约》第七条第4款； |
| Association of Southeast Asian Nations
Convention on Counter Terrorism, art. VIII, para. 5. | 《东盟反恐公约》，第八条第5款。 |
| Yearbook …1961,
vol. II, document A/4843, draft articles on consular relations and
commentary, commentary to art. 36, paras. (5) and (7). | 《1961年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/4843号文件，关于领事关系的条款草案和评注，第36条的评注第(5)和(7)段。 |
| LaGrand (see footnote 1225 above), p.
497, para. 89. | 拉格朗案(见上文脚注1225)，第497页，第89段。 |
| At its 3197th meeting, on 9 August 2013
(Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10)), para. 168. | 在2013年8月9日举行的第3197次会议上(《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第168段)。 |
| The Commission included the topic in its
programme of work on the understanding that: “(a)
Work on the topic will proceed in a manner so as not to interfere with relevant
political negotiations, including on climate change, ozone depletion, and
long-range transboundary air pollution. | 委员会将此专题列入工作方案时有以下谅解：“(a) 此专题工作的进行方式不会影响有关的政治谈判，包括就气候变化、臭氧层消耗、远距离跨界空气污染进行的政治谈判。 |
| The topic will not deal with, but is also
without prejudice to, questions such as: liability of States and their
nationals, the polluter-pays principle, the precautionary principle, common
but differentiated responsibilities, and the transfer of funds and technology
to developing countries, including intellectual property rights; | 此专题不会处理，但也不妨碍诸如下述问题：国家及其国民的赔偿责任、污染者付费原则、谨慎原则、共同但有区别的责任、向发展中国家转让资金和技术，包括知识产权； |
| (b) The topic will also not deal with
specific substances, such as black carbon, tropospheric ozone, and other
dual-impact substances, which are the subject of negotiations among States. | (b) 这一专题也不会处理具体物质，例如国家之间正在谈判的黑碳、对流层臭氧以及其他双重影响物质。 |
| The project will not seek to ‘fill’ gaps in the treaty regimes; | 这一专题不会试图“弥补”条约制度存在的缺陷； |
| (c) Questions relating to outer space,
including its delimitation, are not part of the topic; | (c) 与外层空间有关的问题，包括外层空间的划界问题，不在此专题的范围之内； |
| (d) The outcome of the work on the topic
will be draft guidelines that do not seek to impose on current treaty regimes
legal rules or legal principles not already contained therein. | (d) 此专题的工作结果将是指南草案，但这种指南草案不会试图给现行条约制度强加条约制度尚不具有的法律规则或法律原则。 |
| The Special Rapporteur’s reports would be based on such understanding. ” | 特别报告员的报告将以上述谅解为基础。” |
| The General Assembly, in paragraph 6 of
its resolution 68/112 of 16 December 2013, took note of the decision of the
Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会2013年12月16日第68/112号决议第6段注意到委员会决定将此专题列入工作方案。 |
| The topic had been included in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission during its sixty-third session
(2011), on the basis of the proposal contained in annex B to the report of
the Commission (Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 365). | 委员会第六十三届会议(2011年)按照委员会报告附件B所载建议(《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第365段)，将此专题列入长期工作方案。 |
| First report on the protection of the
atmosphere (A/CN.4/667). | 关于保护大气层的第一次报告(A/CN.4/667)。 |
| Second report on the protection of the
atmosphere (A/CN.4/681). | 关于保护大气层的第二次报告(A/CN.4/681)。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), paras. 53-54. | 《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第53-54段。 |
| The dialogue with scientists on the
protection of the atmosphere was chaired by Mr. Shinya Murase, Special
Rapporteur. | 与科学家开展的关于保护大气层的对话由特别报告员村濑信也先生主持。 |
| Mr. Øystein Hov, President of the
Commission for Atmospheric Sciences, World Meteorological Organization (WMO),
addressed “Geoengineering — a
way forward?”; | 世界气象组织(气象组织)大气科学委员会主席Øystein Hov先生发表了题为“地球工程――前进方向？ |
| Mr. Peringe Grennfelt, Chairperson of the
Working Group on Effects, Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air
Pollution, Economic Commission for Europe, considered “Linkages between transboundary air pollution and climate change”; | 欧洲经济委员会《远距离跨界空气污染公约》影响问题工作组主席Peringe
Grennfelt先生探讨了“跨界空气污染与气候变化之间的联系”； |
| Mr. Christian Blondin, Head of Cabinet of
the Secretary-General and Director of the External Relations Department, WMO,
analysed the “Scientific aspects of the 2015 Paris
Agreement”; | 气象组织办公厅暨对外关系司司长Christian Blondin先生分析了“2015年《巴黎协定》的科学方面”； |
| Mr. Valentin Foltescu, Head of the
Thematic Assessments Unit in the Division of Early Warning and Assessments,
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), presented “An overview of the latest findings and estimates of the effects of
air pollution”; | 联合国环境规划署(环境署)预警和评估司专题评估股负责人Valentin Foltescu先生概述了“最新调查结果和空气污染影响估计”； |
| Mr. Masa Nagai, Deputy Director of the
Division of Environmental Law and Conventions, UNEP, discussed “Linking science with law”. The dialogue
was followed by a question and answer session. | 环境署环境法律和公约司副司长Masa Nagai先生讨论了“科学与法律挂钩”的问题。 |
| The summary of the informal dialogue is
available on the website of the Commission. | 对话之后是问答环节。 |
| The alternative formulations in brackets
will be subject to further consideration. | 以上非正式对话概要可查阅委员会网站。 |
| The draft guideline has been renumbered
at the current session. | 括号内的备选案文有待进一步审议。 |
| The same principle also appeared in some
of the conventions approved by the Organization in 1919 and in several
conventions adopted afterwards. | 同一原则还见于该组织1919年批准的一些公约以及嗣后通过的一些公约。 |
| See I.F. Ayusawa, International Labor
Legislation (New York, Columbia University, 1920), chap. VI, pp. 149 et seq. | 见Iwao F. Ayusawa, International Labor
Legislation (New York, Columbia University, 1920)，chap.
VI, pp. 149 et seq。 |
| See art. 23 (The most-favoured-nation
clause in relation to treatment under a generalized system of preferences)
and art. 30 (New rules of international law in favour of developing
countries) of the draft articles on the most-favoured-nation clauses adopted
by the Commission at its thirtieth session in 1978, Yearbook …1978, vol. II (Part Two), paras. 74, see also paras. 47-72. | 见1978年国际法委员会第三十届会议通过的最惠国条款草案的第23条(最惠国条款与普遍优惠制待遇的关系)和第30条(有利于发展中国家的国际法新规则)，《1978年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第74段，另见第47至72段。 |
| S. Murase, Economic Basis of
International Law (Tokyo, Yuhikaku, 2001), pp. 109-179 (in Japanese). | S. Murase, Economic Basis of
International Law, (Tokyo, Yuhikaku, 2001)，pp.
109-179(in Japanese)。 |
| And see the earlier exceptions for
developing countries specified in art. XVIII of the 1947 General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 55, No. 814, p. 194. | 又见1947年《关税和贸易总协定》第十八条所述早先给予发展中国家的例外待遇，联合国，《条约汇编》，第55卷，第814号，第194页。 |
| Adopted at Stockholm on 16 June 1972, see
Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm,
5-16 June 1972 (A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1 and Corr.1), part one, chap. I. | 1972年6月16日在斯德哥尔摩通过，见《联合国人类环境大会报告》，斯德哥尔摩，1972年6月5日至16日(A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1和Corr.1)，第一部分，第一章。 |
| See L.B. Sohn, “The
Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment”,
Harvard International Law Journal, vol. 14 (1973), pp. 423-515, at pp.
485-493. | See Louis B. Sohn, “The Stockholm 12laration on the Human Environment”，Harvard International Law Journal, vol. 14 (1973)，pp. 423-515, at pp. 485-493。 |
| Adopted at Rio de Janeiro on 14 June
1992, see Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992 (A/CONF.151/26/Rev.1 (vol. I) and
Corr.1), resolution I, p. 3. | 1992年6月14日在里约热内卢通过，见《联合国环境与发展会议报告》，1992年6月3日至14日，里约热内卢(A/CONF.151/26/Rev.1(第一卷)和Corr.1)，第1号决议，第3页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1771,
No. 30822, p. 107. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1771卷，第30822号，第107页。 |
| Report of the Conference of the Parties
on its twenty-first session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December
2015 (FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1), annex. | 2015年11月30日至12月13日在巴黎举行的《公约》缔约方会议第二十一届会议报告(FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1)，附件。 |
| Adopted by the General Assembly in
resolution 51/229 (annex) on 21 May 1997. | 大会1997年5月21日在第51/229号决议(附件)中通过。 |
| The Convention entered into force on 17
August 2014. | 《公约》于2014年8月17日生效。 |
| See United Nations, Reports of
International Arbitral Awards, vol. III (Sales No. 1949.V.2), pp. 1905-1982
(Award of 11 March 1941), at p. 1965 et seq.; | 见联合国《国际仲裁裁决报告》第三卷，(出售品编号1949.V.2)，第1905-1982页(1941年3月11日裁决)，第1965页及以下； |
| and the first report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/667), para. 43. See also A. | 特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/667)，第43段。 |
| K. Kuhn, “The
Trail Smelter Arbitration, United States and Canada”,
American Journal of International Law, vol. 32 (1938), pp. 785-788 and ibid.,
vol. 35 (1941), pp. 665-666; | 另见A.K. Kuhn, “The
Trail Smelter Arbitration, United States and Canada”，American
Journal of International Law, vol. 32 (1938)，pp.
785-788 and ibid.，vol. 35 (1941)，pp. 665-666； |
| and J. E. Read, “The
Trail Smelter Dispute“, Canadian Yearbook of
International Law, vol. 1 (1963), pp. 213-229. | and J.E. Read, “The
Trail Smelter Dispute”，Canadian Yearbook of
International Law, vol. 1 (1963)，pp. 213-229。 |
| Article 48 (Invocation of responsibility
by a State other than an injured State) provides that “1. Any State other than an injured State is entitled to invoke the
responsibility of another State in accordance with paragraph 2 if … | 第四十八条(受害国以外的国家援引责任)规定，“1. 受害国以外的另一国家有权按照该条第2款在下列情况下对另一国援引责任…， |
| (b) the obligation breached is owed to
the international community as a whole” (General
Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001. | (b) 被违背的义务是对整个国际社会承担的义务”(大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议。 |
| For the draft articles adopted by the
Commission and the commentaries thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two), and corrigendum, chap. IV, sect. E). | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第四章，E节)。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay
(Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 14, at p. 55, para.
101 (“… the principle of prevention, as a customary
rule, has its origins in the due diligence … ”). | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第55页，第101段(“…预防原则，作为一项习惯规则，源自于尽职义务…”)。 |
| United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1833, No. 31363, p. 3, art. 194. | 《联合国海洋法公约》(1982年12月10日，蒙特哥湾)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页，第194条。 |
| United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (New York, 9 May 1992), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1771, No. 30822, p. 107, art. 4. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》(1992年5月9日，纽约)，联合国《条约汇编》，第1771卷，第30822号，第107页，第4条。 |
| Yearbook … 2001,
vol. II (Part Two), chap. V, sect.E, art. 3 (Prevention): “The State of origin shall take all appropriate measures to prevent
significant transboundary harm or at any event to minimize the risk thereof. ” | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第五章，E节，第3条(预防)：“起源国应采取一切适当措施，防止重大越境损害或随时尽量减少这种危险”。 |
| The Commission has also dealt with the
obligation of prevention in its articles on responsibility of States for
internationally wrongful acts. | 委员会还在国家对国际不法行为责任的条款中论述了预防义务。 |
| Art. 14, para. 3, provides that “The breach of an international obligation requiring a State to
prevent a given event occurs when the event occurs and extends over the
entire period during which the event continues …”
(ibid., chap. IV, sect E).. | 第14条第3款规定，“一国违背要求它防止某一特定事件之国际义务的行为开始于该事件发生的时刻，并延续至该事件持续的整个期间…”(出处同上，第四章，E节。 |
| According to the commentary: “Obligations of prevention are usually construed as best efforts
obligations, requiring States to take all reasonable or necessary measures to
prevent a given event from occurring, but without warranting that the event
will not occur” (ibid., para. (14) of the commentary
to art. 14, para. 3). | 根据评注，“对预防义务的通常理解是作出最大努力的义务，要求国家采取一切合理或必要措施防止某一事件发生，但不能确保事件不致发生”(出处同上，第14条第3款评注第(14)段)。 |
| The commentary illustrated “the obligation to prevent transboundary damage by air pollution,
dealt with in the Trail Smelter arbitration [United Nations, Reports of
International Arbitral Awards, vol. III (sales No. 1949.V.2), pp. 1905-1982]” as one of the examples of the obligation of prevention (ibid.). | 评注指出，“特雷尔冶炼厂仲裁裁决案 [联合国《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第三卷(出售品编号1949.V.2)，1905-1982页]处理的是防止空气污染造成越境损害的义务”，正是预防义务的一个例子 (出处同上)。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
emphasized prevention as well. | 国际法院也强调了预防问题。 |
| In the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project case, the Court
stated that it “is mindful that, in the field of
environmental protection, vigilance and prevention are required on account of
the often irreversible character of damage to the environment and of the
limitations inherent in the very mechanism of reparation of this type of
damage” (Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 78, para. 140). | 在Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros项目案中，国际法院表示，“应该铭记，鉴于对环境造成的损害不可逆转的性质，而对这种损害进行赔偿的机制也具有局限性，在环境保护领域需要加以警惕和预防”(Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros项目案(匈牙利/斯洛伐克)，判决，《1997年国际法院案例汇编》，第7页起，见第78页，第140段)。 |
| In the Iron Rhine Railway case, the
Arbitral Tribunal also stated that “[t]oday, in
international environmental law, a growing emphasis is being put on the duty
of prevention” (Award in the Arbitration regarding
the Iron Rhine (“Ijzeren Rijn”) Railway between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of the
Netherlands, decision of 24 May 2005, UNRIAA, vol. XXVII, pp. 35-125, at p.
116, para. 222). | 仲裁法庭在莱茵铁路公司案中也指出，“今天，国际环境法越来越重视预防责任”(比利时与荷兰王国莱茵铁路公司案仲裁裁决，2005年5月24日的决定，联合国《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十七卷，第35-125页起，见第116页，第222段)。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at pp. 241-242, para.
29. | 威胁使用或使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第241-242页，第29段。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (see footnote 1251 above), p. 41, para. 53; | Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros项目案(见上文脚注1251)，第41页，第53段； |
| the Court cited the same paragraph in
Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see footnote 1247 above), p. 78, para. 193. | 法院在乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案中援引了同一段落(见上文脚注1247)，第78页，第193段。 |
| Iron Rhine Railway (see footnote 1251
above), pp. 66-67, para. 59. | 莱茵铁路公司案(见上文脚注1251)，第66-67页，第59段。 |
| See, for example, United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1833, No. 31363, p. 3, | 例如，见《联合国海洋法公约》(1982年12月10日年12月10日，蒙特哥湾)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页； |
| Vienna Convention for the Protection of
the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 22 March 1985), ibid., vol. 1513, No. 26164, p. 293, | 《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》(1985年3月22日，维也纳)，同上，第1513卷，第26164号，第293页； |
| United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (New York, 9 May 1992), ibid., vol. 1771, No. 30822, p. 107, | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》(1992年5月9日，纽约)，同上，第1771卷，第30822号，第107页； |
| Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio
de Janeiro, 5 June 1992), ibid., vol. 1760, No. 30619, p. 79, United Nations
Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious
Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa (Paris, 14 October
1994), ibid., vol. 1954, No. 33480, p. 3, | 《生物多样性公约》(1992年6月5日，里约热内卢)，同上，第1760卷，第30619号，第79页，《联合国关于在发生严重干旱和/或荒漠化的国家特别是在非洲防治荒漠化的公约》(1994年10月14日，巴黎)，同上，第1954卷，第 33480号，第3页； |
| Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants (Stockholm, 22 May 2001), ibid., vol. 2256, No. 40214, p.
119, and Minamata Convention on Mercury (Kumamoto, 10 October 2013),
Available from (Status of Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary
general, chap. XVII.17). | 《关于持久性有机污染物的斯德哥尔摩公约》(2001年5月22日，斯德哥尔摩)，同上，第2256卷，第40214号，第119页，以及《《关于汞的水俣公约》(2013年10月10日，熊本)，可查阅(向秘书长交存的多边条约状况，第XVII.17章)。 |
| Art. 2, para. 1. | 第二条第1款。 |
| Construction of a Road in Costa Rica
along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica), Judgment of 16 December
2015, para. 153. | 哥斯达黎加沿圣胡安河修建道路案(尼加拉瓜诉哥斯达黎加)，2015年12月16日的判决，第153段。 |
| Ibid., para. 168. | 出处同上，第168段。 |
| Ibid., Separate Opinion of Judge Owada,
para. 18. | 出处同上，小和田恒法官的个人意见，第18段。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (see footnote 1251 above). | Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros项目案(见上文脚注1251)。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 1247 above). | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注1247)。 |
| The International Tribunal for the Law of
the Sea, Responsibilities and Obligations of States with Respect to
Activities in the Area (Request for Advisory Opinion submitted to the Seabed
Dispute Chamber), advisory opinion, 1 February 2011, ITLOS Reports 2011, p.
10, at paras. 122 and 141-150. | 国际海洋法法庭，“国家对区域内活动的责任和义务(请求海底争端分庭提出咨询意见)”，咨询意见，2011年2月1日，《2011年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页，第122段和第141-150段。 |
| Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo, 25 February 1991), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1989, No. 34028, p. 309. | 《越境环境影响评估公约》，(1991年2月25日，埃斯波)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1989卷，第34028号，第309页。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 1247 above), p. 83, para. 204. | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注1247)，第83页，第204段。 |
| The Commission has frequently employed
the term “significant” in its
work, including in the articles on the prevention of transboundary harm from
hazardous activities (2001). | 委员会在工作中经常使用“重大”一词，包括在预防危险活动的越境损害条款(2001年)中使用。 |
| In that case, the Commission chose not to
define the term, recognizing that the question of “significance” requires a factual determination rather than a legal one (see the
general commentary, para. (4), Yearbook … 2001, vol.
II (Part Two), chap. V, sect. E). | 当时，委员会选择不对该词进行界定，承认“重大”一词需要作事实判定，而不是法律判定(见一般性评注，第(4)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷，(第二部分)，第五章，E节)。 |
| See, for example, paras. (4) and (7) of
the commentary to art. 2 of the articles on the prevention of transboundary harm
from hazardous activities (ibid.). | 另见预防危险活动的越境损害条款第2条评注第(4)和第(7)段)(出处同上)。 |
| See also the commentary to the draft
principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm
arising out of hazardous activities (commentary to draft principle 2, paras.
(1)-(3), Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), chap.
V, sect. E). | 还见《关于危险活动造成的跨界损害案件中损失分配的原则草案》评注(原则2评注，第(1)至(3)段，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)第五章，E节)。 |
| See draft guideline 7. | 见指南草案7。 |
| Protocol on Strategic Environmental
Assessment to the Convention on the Environmental Impact in the Transboundary
Context (Kiev, 21 may 2003), doc. ECE/MP.EIA/2003/2 (available from:), art. | 《越境环境影响评估公约关于战略环境评估的基辅议定书》(2003年5月21日，基辅)，文件ECE/MP.EIA/2003/2(可查阅：)， |
| 2, paras. 6-7. | 第2条第6-7款。 |
| Convention on Access to Information,
Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters (Aarhus, 28 June 1998), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 2161, No. 37770, p. 447. | 《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》(1998年6月28日，奥胡斯)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2161卷，第37770号，第447页。 |
| Art. 2, paras. 6-7. | 第2条第6-7款。 |
| See para. (2) of the commentary to the
preamble of the draft guidelines on the protection of the atmosphere
provisionally adopted by the Commission at its sixty-seventh session in 2015,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), chap. V, sect. C. | 见2015年委员会第六十七届会议暂时通过的关于保护大气层的指南草案序言评注第(2)段，《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第五章，C节。 |
| Arts. 5 and 6. | 第5和第6条。 |
| For the draft articles and commentaries
thereto adopted by the Commission, see Yearbook … 1994,
vol. II (Part Two), chap. III, sect. E. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《1994年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第三章，E节。 |
| General Assembly resolution 63/124 of 11
December 2008, annex, arts. 4-5. | 大会2008年12月11日第63/124号决议，附件，第4-5条。 |
| For the draft articles and commentaries
thereto adopted by the Commission, see Yearbook …
2008, vol. II (Part Two), chap. IV, sect. E. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第四章，E节。 |
| See draft guideline 7 below. | 见下文指南草案7。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (see footnote 1251 above), p. 78, para.
140. | Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros项目案(见上文脚注1251)，第78页，第140段。 |
| In the 2006 order of the Pulp Mills case,
the International Court of Justice highlighted “the
importance of the need to ensure environmental protection of shared natural
resources while allowing for sustainable economic development” (Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay),
Provisional Measures, Order of 13 July 2006, I.C.J. Reports 2006, p. 113, at
p. 133, para. 80); | 在2006年纸浆厂案的命令中，国际法院着重强调了“确保对共有自然资源予以环境保护同时允许可持续经济发展这一需要的重要性”(乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，临时措施，2006年7月13日的命令，《2006年国际法院案例汇编》，第113页起，见第133页，第80段)； |
| the 1998 WTO Appellate Body decision on
United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp
and Shrimp Products stated that, “recalling the
explicit recognition by WTO Members of the objective of sustainable development
in the preamble of the WTO Agreement, we believe it is too late in the day to
suppose that article XX(g) of the GATT 1994 may be read as referring only to
the conservation of exhaustible mineral or other non-living resources” (Appellate Body Report, United States –
Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/AB/R,
adopted 6 November 1998, para. 131, see also paras. 129 and 153); | 世贸组织上诉机构1998年关于美国－禁止进口特定虾类和虾类制品案的决定指出，“回顾世贸组织成员在《世贸组织协定》序言中明确确认了可持续发展的目标，我们认为，已经不能再认为1994年《关税与贸易总协定》第20条(g)款可解释为只包括对可用尽的矿物或其他非生物资源的保护”(上诉机构报告，美国－禁止进口特定虾类和虾类制品案，WT/DS58/AB/R，1998年11月6日通过，第131段，另见第129和第153段)； |
| in the 2005 arbitral case of the Iron
Rhine Railway, the Tribunal held as follows: “[t]here
is considerable debate as to what, within the field of environmental law,
constitutes ‘rules’ or ‘principles’: what is ‘soft’ law; | 在2005年莱茵铁路公司仲裁案中，仲裁庭认定如下：“在环境法领域中，对以下问题存在不少争议，什么属于‘原则’，什么属于‘规则’：什么是‘软’法； |
| and which environmental treaty law or
principles have contributed to the development of customary international
law. | 哪些环境条约法或原则对习惯国际法的发展作出了贡献。 |
| … The emerging principles, whatever their
current status, make reference to … sustainable
development. … | …新出现的原则，不论其当前地位如何，均提到…可持续发展。 |
| Importantly, these emerging principles
now integrate environmental protection into the development process. | …重要的是，这些新出现的原则现在使环境保护成为了发展进程的一部分。 |
| Environmental law and the law on
development stand not as alternatives but as mutually reinforcing, integral
concepts, which require that where development may cause signify harm to the
environment there is a duty to prevent, or at least mitigate such harm. | 环境法与发展法不是相互替代的关系，而是相互增强的一体的概念，要求是，若发展可能对环境造成显著危害，则有义务防止或至少减缓这种危害。 |
| … This duty, in the opinion of the
Tribunal, has now become a principle of general international law”, Iron Rhine Railway (see footnote 1251 above), paras. 58-59; | …本庭认为，这一义务已成为了一项一般国际法原则”，莱茵铁路公司案(见上文脚注1251)，第58-59段； |
| the 2013 Partial Award of the Indus
Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Pakistan v. India) states: “[t]here is no doubt that States are required under contemporary
customary international law to take environmental protection into
consideration when planning and developing projects that may cause injury to
a bordering State. Since the time of Trail Smelter, a series of international
… arbitral decisions have addressed the need to
manage natural resources in a sustainable manner. | 2013年印度河水域吉申甘加河仲裁案(巴基斯坦诉印度)部分裁决中写道：“无疑，根据当代习惯国际法，各国在规划和开发可能对邻国造成损害的项目时，必须考虑到环境保护问题，自特雷尔冶炼厂案的时代以来，一系列国际…仲裁裁决均提到了以可持续方式管理自然资源的必要性。 |
| In particular, the International Court of
Justice expounded upon the principle of ‘sustainable
development’ in Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros, referring to the ‘need to reconcile economic development with protection of the
environment” (Permanent Court of Arbitration Award
Series, Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Pakistan v. India): Record of
Proceedings 2010-2013, Partial Award of 18 February 2013, para. 449. | 特别是，国际法院在Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros项目案中阐释了‘可持续发展’原则，提到‘需要调和环境保护与经济发展’”(《常设仲裁法院裁决汇编》，印度河水域吉申甘加河仲裁案(巴基斯坦诉印度)：《2010-2013年诉讼记录》，2013年2月18日的部分裁决，第449段。 |
| This was confirmed by the Final Award of
20 December 2013, para. 111. | 2013年12月20日最终裁决第111段证实了这一点。 |
| See, for example, J. Kokott, “Equity in international law”, in Fair
Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change, F.L. Toth, ed. (Abingdon and New
York, Routledge, 2014), pp. 173-192; | 例如，见J. Kokott, “Equity
in international law”, in Fair Weather? Equity
Concerns in Climate Change, F. L. Toth, ed. (Abingdon and New York,
Routledge, 2014), pp. 173-192； |
| Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso v. Mali),
Judgment, I.C.J Reports 1986, p. 554; | 边界争端案(布基纳法索诉马里)，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第554页； |
| Convention on the Prohibition of Military
or any Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (New York, 10
December 1976), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1108, No. 17119, p. 151. | 《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》(1976年12月10日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1108卷，第17119号，第151页。 |
| See art. 1. | 见第一条。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1977, United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3, arts. 35, para. 3 and 55; | 《一九四九年八月十二日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(《第一议定书》)，1977年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页，第三十五条第三款和第五十五条； |
| see also Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No.
38544, p. 3, art. 8, para. 2 (b)(iv). | 另见《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2187卷，第38544号，第3页，第八条第(二)款第2项(4)目。 |
| Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto, 11 December 1997), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2303, No. 30822, p. 162. | 《〈联合国气候变化框架公约〉京都议定书》(1997年12月11日，京都)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2303卷，第30822号，第162页。 |
| 1996 Protocol to the 1972 Convention on
the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter
(London, 7 November 1996), International Legal Materials, vol. 36 (1997), p.
7. | 《防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约》(1972年12月29日，伦敦、墨西哥城、莫斯科和华盛顿特区)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1046卷，第15749号，第138页。 |
| Convention on the Prevention of Marine
Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (London, Mexico City, Moscow
and Washington, D.C., 29 December 1972), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1046, No. 15749, p. 138. | 《1972年〈防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约〉1996年议定书》(1996年11月7日，伦敦)，国际法律资料，第36卷(1997年)，第7页。 |
| See Second Report on the Advancement of
Atmospheric Science and Their Application in the Light of the Developments in
Outer Space (Geneva, World Meteorological Organization, 1963); | 见《关于外空间发展视角下大气科学进步及其应用的第二次报告》(日内瓦，世界气象组织，1963年)； |
| see also Decision 8/7 (Earthwatch:
assessment of outer limits) of the Governing Council of the United Nations
Environment Programme, Part A (Provisions for co-operation between States in
weather modification) of 29 April 1980. | 另见联合国环境规划署理事会1980年4月29日第8/7号决定(地球观察：评估外部界限)A部分(关于各国在人工影响天气方面开展合作的规定)。 |
| Southern Blue Fin Tuna Cases (New Zealand
v. Japan; | 南方蓝鳍金枪鱼案(新西兰诉日本； |
| Australia v. Japan), Provisional
Measures, Order of 27 August 1999, ITLOS Reports 1999, p. 280, at para. 77. | 澳大利亚诉日本)，临时措施，1999年8月27日的命令，《1999年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第280页，见第77段。 |
| The Tribunal stated that “[c]onsidering that, in the view of the Tribunal, the parties
should in the circumstances act with prudence and caution to ensure that
effective conservation measures are taken to prevent serious harm to the
stock of southern bluefin tuna”. | 该法庭指出，“有鉴于此，法庭认为，双方应在这种情况下谨慎和审慎行事，以确保采取有效保护措施，防止对南方蓝鳍金枪鱼鱼种造成严重危害。” |
| Mox Plant (Ireland v. United Kingdom),
Provisional Measures, Order of 3 December 2001, ITLOS Reports 2001, p. 95, at
para. 84 (“[c]onsidering that, in the view of the
Tribunal, prudence and caution require that Ireland and the United Kingdom
cooperate in exchanging information concerning risks or effects of the
operation of the Mox plant and in devising ways to deal with them, as
appropriate”). | 混合氧化物核燃料厂案(爱尔兰诉联合王国)，临时措施，2001年12月3日的命令，《2001年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第95页，见第84段(“有鉴于此，法庭认为，审慎和谨慎原则要求爱尔兰和联合王国开展合作，交流关于混合氧化物核燃料厂的运营所造成的风险或影响的信息，并酌情制定应对这些风险或影响的方式”)。 |
| Case concerning Land Reclamation by
Singapore in and around the Strait of Johor (Malaysia v. Singapore),
Provisional Measures, Order of 8 October 2003, ITLOS Reports 2003, p. 10, at
para. 99. | 新加坡在柔佛海峡及周边填海案(马来西亚诉新加坡)，临时措施，2003年10月8日的命令，《2003年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页，见第99段。 |
| At its 3257th meeting, on 27 May 2015
(Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), para. 286). | 2015年5月27日举行的第3257次会议(《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第286段)。 |
| The topic had been included in the long-term
programme of work of the Commission during its sixty-sixth session (2014), on
the basis of the proposal contained in the annex to the report of the
Commission (ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10)). | 委员会第六十六届会议(2014年)按照委员会报告附件所载的建议(同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10))将此专题列入长期工作方案。 |
| See H. Lauterpacht, report on the law of
treaties, Yearbook … 1953, vol. II, document
A/CN.4/63, p. 154. | 见H. Lauterpacht，关于条约法的报告，《1953年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/63号文件，第154页。 |
| See first report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/693), para. 29. | 见特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/693)，第29段。 |
| Ibid., para. 31. | 同上，第31段。 |
| At para. 33. | 见第33段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155,
No. 18232, p. 331. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页。 |
| See first report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/693), para. 46. | 见特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/693)，第46段。 |
| The text of the draft conclusions, as
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his first report, reads as follows: | 特别报告员第一次报告提出的结论草案案文如下： |
| Draft conclusion 1 | 结论草案1 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
way in which jus cogens rules are to be identified, and the legal
consequences flowing from them. | 本结论草案涉及识别强行法规则的方式以及规则产生的法律后果。 |
| Draft conclusion 2 | 结论草案2 |
| Modification, derogation and abrogation
of rules of international law | 国际法规则的更改、克减和废除 |
| 1.Rules of international law may be
modified, derogated from or abrogated by agreement of States to which the
rule is applicable unless such modification, derogation or abrogation is
prohibited by the rule in question (jus dispositivum). | 1. 国际法规则可经规则适用各国之间的协定予以更改、克减或废除，除非所涉规则(酌定法)禁止此种更改、克减或废除。 |
| The modification, derogation and
abrogation can take place through treaty, customary international law or
other agreement. | 此种更改、克减或废除可通过条约、习惯国际法或其他协定的方式进行。 |
| 2. An exception to the rule set forth in
paragraph 1 is peremptory norms of general international law, which may only
be modified, derogated from or abrogated by rules having the same character. | 2. 一般国际法的强制性规范属于第1款所载规则的例外情况，只有具有同等性质的规则方能更改、克减或废除强制性规范。 |
| Draft conclusion 3 | 结论草案3 |
| General nature of jus cogens norms | 强行法的一般性 |
| 1.Peremptory norms of international law
(jus cogens) are those norms of general international law accepted and
recognized by the international community of States as a whole as those from
which no modification, derogation or abrogation is permitted. | 1. 国际法的强制性规范(强行法)指各国组成的国际社会整体接受并公认为不容更改、克减或废除的一般国际法规范。 |
| 2.Norms of jus cogens protect the
fundamental values of the international community, are hierarchically
superior to other norms of international law and are universally applicable. | 2. 强行法规范保护国际社会的基本价值观，其等级高于国际法其他规范且普遍适用。 |
| See Yearbook …
2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, chap. IV, sect. E. | 见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)及更正，第四章，E节。 |
| See Yearbook …
2006, vol.II (Part Two), chap. XII, sect. D, and A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1. | 见《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第十二章，D节，以及A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap. V, sect. E. | 见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第五章，E节。 |
| Ibid., chap. IV, sect. F (for the
commentary to the draft guidelines, see A/66/10/Add.1). | 同上，第四章，F节(指南草案评注见A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| Ibid., chap. VI, sect. E. | 同上，第六章，E节。 |
| The decision was made at the 3171st
meeting of the Commission, on 28 May 2013 (see Official Records of the
General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), para.
167). | 2013年5月28日委员会第3171次会议做出这一决定(见《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第167段)。 |
| For the syllabus of the topic, ibid.,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), annex E. | 本专题提纲，同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，附件E。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 186-222. | 同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第186-222段。 |
| Ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), paras. 130-170. | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第130-170段。 |
| The text of draft principles I-1, I-3 and
I-4, as proposed by the Special Rapporteur in her third report, reads as
follows: | 特别报告员第三次报告建议的原则草案1-1、1-3和1-4案文如下： |
| Draft principle I-1 | 原则草案1-1 |
| Implementation and enforcement | 实施和强制执行 |
| States should take all necessary steps to
adopt effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other preventive
measures to enhance the protection of the natural environment in relation to
armed conflict, in conformity with international law. | 各国应采取一切必要步骤，通过有效立法、行政、司法或其他防止措施，依照国际法加强与武装冲突有关的自然环境保护。 |
| Draft principle I-3 | 原则草案1-3 |
| Status of forces and status of mission
agreements | 部队地位协定和特派团地位协定 |
| States and international organizations
are encouraged to include provisions on environmental regulations and
responsibilities in their status of forces or status of mission agreements. | 鼓励各国和各国际组织将关于环境法规及责任的条款纳入其部队地位协定或特派团地位协定。 |
| Such provisions may include preventive
measures, impact assessments, restoration and clean-up measures. | 此种条款可包括防止措施、影响评估、恢复和清理措施。 |
| Draft principle I-4 | 原则草案1-4 |
| Peace operations | 和平行动 |
| States and organizations involved in
peace operations shall consider the impacts of those operations on the
environment and take all necessary measures to prevent, mitigate and
remediate the negative environmental consequences thereof. | 参与和平行动的各国和各组织须考虑这些行动对环境的影响，并采取一切必要措施，防止、减轻和补救其负面的环境后果。 |
| The text of draft principles III-1 to
III-5, as proposed by the Special Rapporteur in her third report, reads as
follows: | 特别报告员第三次报告建议的原则草案3-1至3-5案文如下： |
| Draft principle III-1 | 原则草案3-1 |
| Peace agreements | 和平协定 |
| Parties to a conflict are encouraged to
settle matters relating to the restoration and protection of the environment
damaged by the armed conflict in their peace agreements. | 鼓励冲突各方在和平协定中解决因武装冲突受损害的环境的恢复和保护相关事项。 |
| Draft principle III-2 | 原则草案3-2 |
| Post-conflict environmental assessments
and reviews | 冲突后环境评估和审查 |
| 1.States and former parties to an armed
conflict are encouraged to cooperate between themselves and with relevant
international organizations in order to carry out post-conflict environmental
assessments and recovery measures. | 1. 鼓励各国及前武装冲突各方相互合作，并与相关国际组织合作，以便实施冲突后环境评估及复原措施。 |
| 2.Reviews at the conclusion of peace
operations should identify, analyse and evaluate any environmentally
detrimental effects of those operations on the environment, in an effort to
mitigate or remedy those detrimental effects in future operations. | 2. 和平行动结束后随即进行的审查应查明、分析并评价这些行动对环境造成的任何有害于环境的影响，以努力在今后行动中减轻或补救这些有害影响。 |
| Draft principle III-3 | 原则草案3-3 |
| Remnants of war | 战争遗留物 |
| 1.Without delay after the cessation of
active hostilities, all minefields, mined areas, mines, booby-traps,
explosive ordnance and other devices shall be cleared, removed, destroyed or
maintained in accordance with obligations under international law. | 1. 在现行敌对行动停止之后须毫不拖延地按照国际法规定的义务，清除、移除、销毁或维护所有雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置、爆炸性弹药和其他装置。 |
| 2.At all times necessary, the parties
shall endeavour to reach agreement, both among themselves and, where
appropriate, with other States and with international organizations, on the
provision of technical and material assistance, including, in appropriate
circumstances, the undertaking of joint operations necessary to fulfil such responsibilities. | 2. 凡必要时，各方须努力相互，以及酌情与其他国家和国际组织就提供技术和物质援助，包括在适当情况下采取必要联合行动履行此类责任，达成协议。 |
| Draft principle III-4 | 原则草案3-4 |
| Remnants of war at sea | 海上战争遗留物 |
| 1.States and international organizations
shall cooperate to ensure that remnants of war do not constitute a danger to
the environment, public health or the safety of seafarers. | 1. 各国和各国际组织须合作确保战争遗留物不构成对环境、对公共健康或对海员安全的威胁。 |
| 2.To this end States and organizations
shall endeavour to survey maritime areas and make the information freely
available. | 2. 为此，各国和各组织须努力进行海域勘测并使有关信息可供自由查阅。 |
| Draft principle III-5 | 原则草案3-5 |
| Access to and sharing of information | 获取和分享信息 |
| In order to enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflicts, States and international
organizations shall grant access to and share information in accordance with
their obligations under international law. | 为加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护，各国和各国际组织须依照国际法规定的义务，准许获取并分享信息。 |
| The text of draft principle IV-1, as
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in her third report, reads as follows: | 特别报告员第三次报告建议的原则草案4-1案文如下： |
| Draft principle IV-1 | 原则草案4-1 |
| Rights of indigenous peoples | 土著人民权利 |
| 1.The traditional knowledge and practices
of indigenous peoples in relation to their lands and natural environment
shall be respected at all times. | 1. 土著人民在其土地和自然环境方面的传统知识及做法须始终受到尊重。 |
| 2.States have an obligation to cooperate
and consult with indigenous peoples, and to seek their free, prior and
informed consent in connection with usage of their lands and territories that
would have a major impact on the lands. | 2. 各国有义务与土著人民合作协商，并在因使用他们的土地及领地而可能对土地产生重大影响时，征求他们自由、事先且知情的同意。 |
| The statements of the Chairperson of the
Drafting Committee are available on the website of the Commission. | 起草委员会主席的发言，可在委员会网站上查阅。 |
| The text of the draft principles
provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee reads as follows: | 起草委员会暂时通过的原则草案案文如下： |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| Part One | 第一部分 |
| General principles | 一般原则 |
| Draft principle 4 | 原则草案4 |
| Measures to enhance the protection of the
environment | 加强环境保护的措施 |
| 1.States shall, pursuant to their
obligations under international law, take effective legislative,
administrative, judicial and other measures to enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflict. | 1.各国应依照国际法规定的义务，采取有效的立法、行政、司法或其他措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| 2.In addition, States should take further
measures, as appropriate, to enhance the protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflict. | 2.各国还应酌情采取进一步措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Draft principle 6 | 原则草案6 |
| Protection of the environment of
indigenous peoples | 保护土著人民的环境 |
| 1.States should take appropriate
measures, in the event of an armed conflict, to protect the environment of
the territories that indigenous peoples inhabit. | 1.各国应采取适当措施，在发生武装冲突时保护土著人民所居土地的环境。 |
| 2.After an armed conflict that has
adversely affected the environment of the territories that indigenous peoples
inhabit, States should undertake effective consultations and cooperation with
the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in
particular through their own representative institutions, for the purpose of
taking remedial measures. | 2.土著人民居住的土地，环境受到武装冲突的有害影响，各国应在冲突结束后借助适当程序，特别是通过土著人民自身的代表机构，同受影响的土著人民开展有效的协商与合作，以便采取补救措施。 |
| Draft principle 7 | 原则草案7 |
| Agreements concerning the presence of
military forces in relation to armed conflict | 与武装冲突有关的驻军协议 |
| States and international organizations
should, as appropriate, include provisions on environmental protection in
agreements concerning the presence of military forces in relation to armed
conflict. | 各国和国际组织应酌情将环境保护条款纳入与武装冲突有关的驻军协议。 |
| Such provisions may include preventive
measures, impact assessments, restoration and clean-up measures. | 此种条款可包括预防措施、影响评估、恢复和清理措施。 |
| Draft principle 8 | 原则草案8 |
| Peace operations | 和平行动 |
| States and international organizations
involved in peace operations in relation to armed conflict shall consider the
impact of such operations on the environment and take appropriate measures to
prevent, mitigate and remediate the negative environmental consequences
thereof. | 各国和国际组织参加与武装冲突有关的和平行动，应考虑这些行动对环境的影响，并采取适当措施，防止、减轻和补救其负面的环境后果。 |
| Part Two | 第二部分 |
| Principles applicable during armed
conflict | 适用于武装冲突期间的原则 |
| Part Three | 第三部分 |
| Principles applicable after an armed
conflict | 适用于武装冲突后的原则 |
| Draft principle 14 | 原则草案14 |
| Peace processes | 和平进程 |
| 1.Parties to an armed conflict should, as
part of the peace process, including where appropriate in peace agreements,
address matters relating to the restoration and protection of the environment
damaged by the conflict. | 1.武装冲突各方对冲突所造成的环境破坏，应解决有关环境的恢复和保护问题，将之作为和平进程的一部分，包括酌情在和平协议中处理此事。 |
| 2.Relevant international organizations
should, where appropriate, play a facilitating role in this regard. | 2.有关国际组织应酌情在这方面发挥协助作用。 |
| Draft principle 15 | 原则草案15 |
| Post-armed conflict environmental
assessments and remedial measures | 武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施 |
| Cooperation among relevant actors,
including international organizations, is encouraged with respect to post-armed
conflict environmental assessments and remedial measures. | 鼓励包括国际组织在内的有关行为方在武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施方面开展合作。 |
| Draft principle 16 | 原则草案16 |
| Remnants of war | 战争遗留物 |
| 1.After an armed conflict, parties to the
conflict shall seek to remove or render harmless toxic and hazardous remnants
of war under their jurisdiction or control that are causing or risk causing
damage to the environment. | 1.武装冲突后，冲突各方应争取消除其管辖或控制下造成或可能造成环境破坏的有毒和危险的战争遗留物，或使之无害。 |
| Such measures shall be taken subject to
the applicable rules of international law. | 应根据适用的国际法规则采取此类措施。 |
| 2.The parties shall also endeavour to
reach agreement, among themselves and, where appropriate, with other States
and with international organizations, on technical and material assistance,
including, in appropriate circumstances, the undertaking of joint operations
to remove or render harmless such toxic and hazardous remnants of war. | 2.各方还应争取相互并酌情同他国和国际组织就技术与物资援助达成协议，包括在适当情况下开展联合行动，消除这种有毒和危险的战争遗留物或使之无害。 |
| 3.Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without
prejudice to any rights or obligations under international law to clear,
remove, destroy or maintain minefields, mined areas, mines, booby-traps,
explosive ordnance and other devices. | 3.第1和第2段不妨碍国际法规定的任何清除、移除、销毁或维护雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置、爆炸性弹药和其他装置之权利和义务。 |
| Draft principle 17 | 原则草案17 |
| Remnants of war at sea | 海上战争遗留物 |
| States and relevant international
organizations should cooperate to ensure that remnants of war at sea do not
constitute a danger to the environment. | 各国和有关国际组织应开展合作，确保海上战争遗留物不对环境构成危险。 |
| Draft principle 18 | 原则草案18 |
| Sharing and granting access to information | 共享与准许获取信息 |
| 1.To facilitate remedial measures after
an armed conflict, States and relevant international organizations shall
share and grant access to relevant information in accordance with their
obligations under international law. | 1.为便利武装冲突后采取补救措施，各国和有关国际组织应按国际法规定的义务，共享并准许获取相关信息。 |
| 2.Nothing in the present draft principle
obliges a State or international organization to share or grant access to
information vital to its national defence or security. | 2.本原则草案中并无任何内容要求一国或国际组织必须分享和准许获取对其国防或安全至关重要的信息。 |
| Nevertheless, that State or international
organization shall cooperate in good faith with a view to providing as much
information as possible under the circumstances. | 但国家或国际组织应诚意合作，根据具体情况提供尽可能多的信息。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap. VI, sect. E. | 《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第六章，E节。 |
| See the indicative list referred to in
article 7, which appears in the annex to the articles on the effects of armed
conflicts on treaties (ibid.). | 见第7条所述指示性清单，载于关于武装冲突对条约的影响的条款附件(同上)。 |
| Convention (VIII) of 1907 relative to the
Laying of Automatic Submarine Contact Mines (The Hague, 18 October 1907), The
Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907, J.B. Scott, ed. (New
York, Oxford University Press, 1915), p. 151. | 《敷设水下自动触发水雷公约》(1907年第八号公约)(1907年10月18日，海牙)，《1899年和1907年海牙公约和宣言》，J.B. Scott编(牛津大学出版社，1915年，纽约)，第151页。 |
| General Assembly resolution 61/295 of 13
September 2007. | 大会2007年9月13日第61/295号决议。 |
| Organization of American States, AG/RES.
2888 (XLVI-O/16), of 15 June 2016. | 美洲国家组织，AG/RES.2888(XLVI-O/16)，2016年6月15日。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), para. 134. | 《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第134段。 |
| Treaties of friendship, commerce and
navigation and agreements concerning private rights (see the indicative list
of treaties referred to in article 7, which appears in the annex to the draft
articles, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap. VI, sect. | 友好、通商和航海条约以及涉及私权利的协定(见“第7条所指条约的指示性清单”，载于条款草案附件，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第六章，E节。 |
| E). Protocol on Prohibitions or
Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended on
3 May 1996 (Protocol II, as amended on 3 May 1996) annexed to the Convention
on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons
which may be deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to have Indiscriminate
Effects (Geneva, 3 May 1996), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2048, No.
22495, p. 93. | 《禁止或限制使用某些可被认为具有过分伤害力或滥杀滥伤作用的常规武器公约》所附、于1996年5月3日修正的《禁止或限制使用地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的议定书》(《1996年5月3日修正的第二议定书》)(1996年5月3日，日内瓦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2048卷，第22495号，第93页。 |
| United Nations Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples. | 《联合国土著人民权利宣言》。 |
| General Assembly resolution 61/295 of 13
September 2007 and Convention (No. 169) concerning Indigenous and Tribal
Peoples in Independent Countries (Geneva, 27 June 1989), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 1650, No. 28383, p. 383. | 大会2007年9月13日第61/295号决议和《关于独立国家境内土著和部落民族的第169号公约》(1989年6月27日，日内瓦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1650卷，第28383号，第383页。 |
| The Commission has previously chosen to
formulate the outcome of its work as draft principles, for example in the
draft principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm
arising from hazardous activities. | 委员会以前已选择将其工作成果制定为原则草案，如关于危险活动造成的跨界损害案件中损失分配的原则草案。 |
| See Yearbook …
2006, vol. II (Part Two), draft principles on the allocation of loss in the
case of transboundary harm arising from hazardous activities. | 见《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，关于危险活动造成的跨界损害案件中损失分配的原则草案。 |
| A/CN.4/674, paras. 78 and 86. | A/CN.4/674，第78和第86段。 |
| Introductory statement by the Special
Rapporteur, 18 July 2014, at the 3227th meeting of the Commission (not
reflected in the provisional summary record of the 3227th meeting
(A/CN.4/SR.3227)). | 2014年7月18日特别报告员在委员会第3227次会议上的介绍性发言(未反映在第3227次会议临时简要记录(A/CN.4/SR.3227)中)。 |
| A/CN.4/685, annex I. | A/CN.4/685，附件一。 |
| Introductory statement by the Special
Rapporteur, 6 July 2015, at the 3264th meeting of the Commission (partly
reflected in the provisional summary record of the 3264th meeting
(A/CN.4/SR.3264, p. 8)). | 2015年7月6日特别报告员在委员会第3264次会议上的介绍性发言(部分反映在第3264次会议简要记录(A/CN.4/SR.3264，第8页)内)。 |
| The topic was put on the long-term
programme of work of the Commission in 2011 and moved onto the current
programme of work in 2013, see Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), annex E, and ibid.,
Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10) para. 131. | 本专题于2011年列入委员会的长期工作方案，并于2013年转列入当前工作方案，见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，附件E，并见同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)第131段。 |
| See ibid., Sixty-eighth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10) para. 135, and ibid., Sixty-ninth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10) paras. 192-213. | 见同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号(A/68/10)第135段，并见同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)第192至第213段。 |
| The tentative proposal on the use of
terms was referred to the Drafting Committee at the request of the Special
Rapporteur on the understanding that the provision was referred for the
purpose of facilitating discussions. | 应特别报告员的请求，关于术语使用的临时提议被提交起草委员会，提交该款的目的是为了便利讨论。 |
| See e.g. A/CN.4/685, para. 18. | 例如，见A/CN.4/685，第18段。 |
| Ibid., footnote 18, Norway (on behalf of
the Nordic countries) (A/C.6/69/SR.25, para. 133),
Portugal (A/C.6/69/SR.26, para. 6), Singapore (A/C.6/69/SR.26, para. 66), New Zealand (A/C.6/69/SR.27, para. 3) and Indonesia
(A/C.6/69/SR.27, para. 67). | 同上，脚注18，挪威(代表北欧国家)(A/C.6/69/SR.25, 第133段)、葡萄牙(A/C.6/69/SR.26，第6段)、新加坡(A/C.6/69/SR.26,
第66段)、新西兰(A/C.6/69/SR.27，第3段)和印度尼西亚(A/C.6/69/SR.27，第67段)。 |
| For example, remedial measures might be
required during an occupation. | 例如，可能需要在占领期间采取补救措施。 |
| A/CN.4/685, para. 210. | A/CN.4/685，第210段。 |
| See Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1977, United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3, art. 60. | 见《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(第一附加议定书)，1977年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页，第六十条。 |
| See also J-M. Henckaerts and L.
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law: Rules, vol. I
(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005), p. 120. | 另见J-M. Henckaerts和Louise Doswald-Beck著，Customary
International Humanitarian Law:Rules, vol. I(剑桥：剑桥大学出版社，2005年)，第120页。 |
| The ICRC study on customary law considers
that this constitutes a rule under customary international law and is
applicable in both international and non-international armed conflicts. | 红十字委员会关于习惯国际法的研究报告认为，这构成习惯国际法下的一条规则，对国际和非国际武装冲突均适用。 |
| See e.g. Antarctic Treaty, done in
Washington on 1 December 1959 (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 402, No.
5778), art. I. | 例如，见《南极条约》，1959年12月1日订于华盛顿(联合国，《条约汇编》，第402卷，第5778号)，第一条。 |
| See e.g., the definition found in M.
Björklund and A. Rosas, Ålandsöarnas Demilitarisering och Neutralisering
(Åbo, Åbo Academy Press, 1990). | 例如，见M. Björklund和A.
Rosas著Ålandsöarnas Demilitarisering och
Neutralisering (奥布：奥布大学出版社，1990年)中的定义。 |
| The Åland Islands are both demilitarized
and neutralized. | 奥兰群岛既是非军事区，又是中立区。 |
| Björklund and Rosas list as further
examples of demilitarized and neutralized areas Spitzbergen, Antarctica and
the Strait of Magellan (see p. 17). | Björklund和Rosas和还列举了斯匹次卑尔根、南极洲和麦哲伦海峡等中立区(见第17页)。 |
| See also L. Hannikainen, “The Continued Validity of the Demilitarized and Neutralized Status
of the Åland Islands” Zeitschrift fűr ausländisches
öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, vol. 54 (1994), p. 616. | 另见L. Hannikainen著，“The Continued Validity of the Demilitarized and Neutralized Status
of the Åland Islands”Zeitschrift fűr ausländisches
öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, 第54卷(1994年)，第616页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See A/CN.4/685, para. 225. See also C. | 见A/CN.4/685, 第225段。 |
| Droege and M.-L. Tougas, “The Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict — Existing Rules and Need for Further Legal Protection”, Nordic Journal of International Law, vol. 82 (2013), p. 43. | 另见C. Droege 和M.-L.
Tougas著，“The Protection of the Natural Environment in
Armed Conflict―― Existing Rules and Need for Further
Legal Protection”，《北欧国际法杂志》，第82卷(2013年)，第43页。 |
| The working group of Committee III of the
Conference submitted a proposal for a draft article 48ter providing that “publicly recognized nature reserves with adequate markings and
boundaries declared as such to the adversary shall be protected and respected
except when such reserves are used specifically for military purposes”. | 会议第三委员会工作组提出了一项提案，即条款草案48之三，其中规定“向对方宣布了的具有适当标记和界线的公认自然保护区应受保护和尊重，除非这种保护区被专用于军事目的”。 |
| See C. Pilloud and J. Pictet, “Article 55: Protection of the Natural Environment” in ICRC Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to
the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski and B.
Zimmerman, eds. (Geneva, Martinus Nijhoff, 1987), p. 664, paras. 2138-2139. | 见C. Pilloud和J.
Pictet著，“第五十五条：对自然环境的保护”，载于Y. Sandoz、C. Swinarski和B. Zimmerman编，《红十字委员会对1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约1977年6月8日附加议定书的评注》(日内瓦，Martinus Nijhoff, 1987年)，第664页，第2138-2139段。 |
| As recognized by the Permanent Court in
the case concerning the Factory At Chorzów, P.C.I.J.,
Series A, No. 17, p. 45 and reflected in article 34 of the Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties (Vienna, 23 May 1969), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 1155, No. 18232, p. 331. | 这一点在常设法院Factory At Chorzó案中得到承认，常设国际法院，《A辑》，第17号，第45页；
并反映在《维也纳条约法公约》第三十四条(1969年5月23日，维也纳)中，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页。 |
| A/CN.4/685, para. 218. | A/CN.4/685，第218段。 |
| Convention Concerning the Protection of
the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention) (Paris,
16 November 1972), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1037, No. 15511, p.
151. | 《保护世界文化和自然遗产公约》(世界遗产公约)(1972年11月16日，巴黎)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1037卷，第15511号，第151页。 |
| UNESCO, Operational Guidelines for the
Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (8 July 2015) WHC.15/01,
para. 77.1. | 教科文组织，《实施(世界遗产公约)操作指南》(2015年7月8日)WHC.15/01, 第77.1段。 |
| At present, 197 sites representing
natural heritage across the world are listed on the World Heritage List. | 目前，全世界共有197处自然遗产列入了《世界遗产名录》。 |
| A number of these also feature on the
List of World Heritage in Danger in accordance with art. 11(4) of the World
Heritage Convention. | 根据《世界遗产公约》第11条第4款，其中一些遗产也列入了《濒危世界遗产名录》。 |
| Convention for the Protection of Cultural
Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (The Hague, 14 May 1954), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 249, No. 3511, p. 240. | 1954年《关于发生武装冲突时保护文化财产的公约》(1954年5月14日，海牙)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第249卷，第3511号，第240页。 |
| Second Protocol to The Hague Convention
of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed
Conflict (1999 Second Protocol) (The Hague, 26 March 1999) ibid, vol. 2253,
No. 3511, p. 172. | 《1954年关于发生武装冲突时保护文化财产的海牙公约第二议定书》(1999年第二议定书)(海牙，1999年3月26日)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2253卷，第3511号，第172页。 |
| Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio
de Janeiro, 5 June 1992), ibid., vol. 1760, No. 30619), p. 79. | 《生物多样性公约》(1992年6月5日，里约热内卢)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1760卷，第30619号，第79页。 |
| General Assembly resolution 61/295,
annex, art. 12. | 大会第61/295号决议附件，第12条。 |
| Convention on Civil Liability for Damage
Resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment (Lugano, 21 June
1993), Council of Europe, European Treaty Series, No. 150. | 《关于危害环境的活动造成损害的民事责任公约》(1993年6月21日，卢加诺)，欧洲委员会，《欧洲条约汇编》，第150号。 |
| For more information on the applicability
of multilateral environmental agreements in connection to areas of particular
environmental interest, see B. Sjöstedt, Protecting the Environment in
Relation to Armed Conflict: The Role of Multilateral Environmental Agreements
(PhD thesis, Lund University 2016). | 欲了解有关多边环境协定对具有特别环境意义的区域的适用问题的更多情况，可参阅B.
Sjöstedt著，Protecting the Environment in Relation to
Armed Conflict:The Role of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (博士论文，伦德大学，2016年)。 |
| Convention on the Protection and Use of
Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Helsinki, 17 March 1992),
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1936, No. 33207, p. 269. | 《跨界水道和国际湖泊保护和利用公约》(1992年3月17日，赫尔辛基)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1936卷，第33207号，第269页。 |
| Convention on Biological Diversity,
preamble. | 《生物多样性公约》序言。 |
| International Union for Conservation of
Nature, draft convention on the prohibition of hostile military activities in
internationally protected areas (1996), art. 1. | 国际自然保护联盟，禁止在国际保护区开展敌对军事活动公约草案(1996年)，第1条。 |
| Japan, Law for the Protection of Cultural
Property, Law No. 214, May 30, 1950. | 日本《文化财产保护法》，第214号法，1950年5月30日。 |
| Available from (accessed on 28 July
2016). | 见 (2016年7月28日检索)。 |
| New South Wales Consolidated Acts,
National Parks and Wildlife Act, Act 80 of 1974. | 新南威尔士州综合法，《国家公园和野生生物法》，1974年第80号法。 |
| Available from (accessed on 28 July
2016). | 见 (2016年7月28日检索)。 |
| Italy, Act No. 394 laying down the legal
framework for protected areas, 6 December 1991, available from. | 意大利第394号法奠定了保护区的法律框架，1991年12月6日，见。 |
| See Protocol I, arts. 35 and 55. | 见《第一议定书》第三十五和第五十五条。 |
| The ICRC Commentary on article 55 of
Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions advocates that the “natural environment” should be understood
in a wide sense as covering the biological environment in which a population
is living. | 红十字委员会关于《日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第五十五条的评注主张，应广义地理解“自然环境”，其中包括人口生活的“生物环境”。 |
| See Pilloud and Pictet (footnote 1335
above), p. 662, the “natural environment” “does not consist merely of the objects indispensable to survival … but also includes forests and other vegetation … as well as fauna, flora and other biological or climatic elements”. | 见Pilloud和Pictet(上文脚注1335)，第662页，“自然环境”“不仅仅由对于生存而言不可或缺的物体组成，…而且还包括森林和其他植被…动植物及其他生物或气候要素”。 |
| A considerable number of instruments on
the law of armed conflict, environmental law and human rights law which
contain the terms “respect”
and “protect”. | 关于武装冲突法、环境法和人权法的很多文书载有“尊重”和“保护”。 |
| Of most relevance is the World Charter of
Nature, United Nations General Assembly resolution 37/7 of 28 October 1982,
in particular the preamble and principle 1 and Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva
Conventions, art. 48, para. 1, which provides that civilian objects shall be
respected and protected. | 最为相关的是《世界自然宪章》、联合国大会1982年10月28日第37/7号决议尤其是其中的序言和原则1以及《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第四十八条第一款，其中规定应当尊重和保护民用物体。 |
| See also, for example, the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (New York, 16 December 1964), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171, art. 2; | 例如，又见《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》(1964年12月16日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第171页，第二条； |
| Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva
Conventions, art.55, and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
(Rio Declaration), Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3–14 June 1992, vol. I,
Resolutions adopted by the Conference (United Nations publication, Sales No.
E.93.I.8 and corrigendum), resolution 1, annex I, principle 10. | 《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第五十五条以及《里约环境与发展宣言》(《里约宣言》)，《联合国环境与发展会议的报告，1992年6月3日至14日，里约热内卢》，第一卷，《环发会议通过的决议》(联合国出版物，出售品编号：C.93.I.8和更正)，决议1，附件一，原则10。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J Reports 1996, p. 226, at paras. 30 and 63.
For a description of the semantics, see Y. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性”，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页，见第30和第63段。 |
| Dinstein (ed), The Conduct of Hostilities
under the Law of International Armed Conflict, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 2010), at paras. 35-37 and 41-43. | 语义学说明见Y. Dinstein(ed)，The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed
Conflict, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2010)，at paras. 35-37 and 41-43。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-Sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), Commentary on art. 2, p.
182. | 《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，关于第二条的评注，第182页。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons (see footnote 1353 above), paras. 25 and 27-30. | “以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性”(见上文注脚注1353)，第25段和第27-30段。 |
| Article 55 –
Protection of the natural environment reads: | 第五十五条――对自然环境的保护： |
| “1.Care shall be taken in warfare to
protect the natural environment against widespread, long-term and severe
damage. | “一.在作战中，应注意保护自然环境不受广泛、长期和严重地损害。 |
| This protection includes a prohibition of
the use of methods or means of warfare which are intended or may be expected
to cause such damage to the natural environment and thereby to prejudice the
health or survival of the population.” | 这种保护包括禁止使用旨在或可能对自然环境造成这种损害从而伤害居民的健康和生存的作战方法或手段。 |
| 2.Attacks against the natural environment
by way of reprisals are prohibited.” | 二.作为报复对自然环境的攻击，是禁止的。 ” |
| Pilloud and Pictet (see footnote 1335
above), p. 663. | Pilloud和Pictet(见上文脚注1335), 第663页。 |
| See also K. Hulme, “Taking Care to Protect the Environment Against Damage: A
Meaningless Obligation?” | 另见K. Hulme，“注意保护环境不受损毁：是没有意义的义务吗？” |
| in International Review of the Red Cross,
vol.92, No. 879 (2010), pp. 675-691. | 《红十字国际评论》，第92卷，第879(2010)号，第675-691页。 |
| See preliminary report on the protection
of the environment in relation to armed conflicts, A/CN.4/674, p. 21. | 见关于与武装冲突有关的环境保护初步报告，A/CN.4/674，第21页。 |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field (Geneva,
12 August 1949), ibid., vol. 75, No. 970, p. 31, art. 49 | 《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇之日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第75卷，第970号，第31页，第四十九条； |
| ( “Geneva
Convention I”); | (《日内瓦第一公约》)； |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea
(Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 971, p. 85, art. 50 ( “Geneva Convention II”); | 《改善海上武装部队伤者病者及遇船难者境遇之日内瓦公约》(日内瓦，1949年8月12日)，同上，第971号，第85页，第五十条(《日内瓦第二公约》)； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the
Treatment of Prisoners of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 972, p.
135, art. 129 (“Geneva Convention III”); | 《关于战俘待遇之日内瓦公约》(日内瓦，1949年8月12日)，同上，第972号，第135页，第一二九条(《日内瓦第三公约》)； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the
Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949),
ibid., No. 973, p. 287, art. 146 (“Geneva Convention
IV”), common articles 2 and 3; | 《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》(日内瓦，1949年8月12日)，同上，第973号，第287页，第一四六条(《日内瓦第四公约》)，共同的第二条和第三条； |
| Protocol I, art. 1; | 《第一议定书》第一条； |
| and Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), 1977, ibid., No. 17513, p.
609, art 1. | 《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约附加议定书》，及关于保护非国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书(《第二议定书》)，1977年，同上，第17513号，第609页，第一条。 |
| Convention on the Prohibition of Military
or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD)
(New York, 10 December 1976), ibid., vol.1108, No. 17119, p. 151, art.2. | 《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》(《改变环境技术公约》)，(1976年12月10日，纽约)，同上，第1108卷，第17119号，第151页，第二条。 |
| In terms the Understanding to article 2,
the terms “widespread”, “long-term” and “severe” are understood as follows: “‘widespread’: encompassing an area on the scale of several hundred square
kilometers”; | 按照对第二条的理解，“广泛”、“长期”和“严重”这三个词的理解如下：“‘广泛’：指包括几百平方公里大小的地区”； |
| “‘long-lasting’:
lasting for a period of months, or approximately a season”; | “‘长期’：指持续几个月或大约一个季节的时间”； |
| “‘severe’:
involving serious or significant disruption or harm to human life, natural
and economic resources or other assets” (Report of
the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament, Official Records of the
General Assembly, Thirty-first Session, Supplement No. 27 (A/31/27), vol. I,
pp. 91-92). | “‘严重’：指人命、自然和经济资源或其他财产受到严重或重大破坏或伤害”(裁军委员会会议的报告，《大会正式记录，第三十一届会议，补编第27号》(A/31/27)，第一卷，第91-92页。 |
| See e.g. K. Lawend, “Reviewing the Legality of New Weapons, Means and Methods of
Warfare” International Review of the Red Cross, vol.
88, No. 864 (2006), p. 925; | 例如，见K. 拉万德，“新武器及作战手段和方法的合法性述评”《红十字国际评论》第88卷，第64(2006)号，第925页； |
| J. McClelland, “The
Review of Weapons in Accordance with Article 36 of Additional Protocol I” International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 85, No. 850 (2003),
p. 397; | J.马克莱兰德，“按照《第一附加议定书》审查武器”《红十字国际评论》第85卷，第850(2003)号，第397页； |
| UNEP, Protecting the Environment During
Armed Conflict: An Inventory and Analysis of International Law (Nairobi, UNEP,
2009), p. 16. | 环境署，《武装冲突中对于环境的保护：国际法详索及分析》(内罗毕：环境规划署，2009年)，第16页。 |
| See in general Henckaerts and
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 1331 above), at pp. 25-29 and 143. | 一般性阐述见Henckaerts和Doswald-Beck，Customary International Humanitarian Law…(上文脚注1331)，第25-29页和第143页。 |
| Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva
Conventions, art. 52, para. 2. | 《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》，第五十二条第二款。 |
| A similar definition is provided in the
following protocols to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons:
Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps
and Other Devices annexed to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons
(Geneva, 10 October 1980) (Protocol II to the Convention on Certain
Conventional Weapons), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1342, No. 22495,
p. 137, at p. 168; | 《特定常规武器公约》的下列议定书列有类似定义：《特定常规武器公约》所附《禁止或限制使用地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的议定书》(1980年10月10日，日内瓦)(《特定常规武器公约第二号议定书》)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1342卷，第22495号，第137页起，见第168页； |
| Protocol II on Prohibitions or
Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended on
3 May 1996 (Protocol II, as amended on 3 May 1996) annexed to the Convention
on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons
which may be deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to have Indiscriminate
Effects (Geneva, 3 May 1996), ibid., vol. 2048, No. 22495, p. 93 and Protocol
III (on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons,
annexed to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of
Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious
or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (Protocol III to the Convention on Certain
Conventional Weapons), ibid., vol. 1342, No. 22495, p. 171 as well as the
Second Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of
Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (1999 Second Protocol) (The
Hague, 26 March 1999), ibid., vol. 2253, No. 3511, p. 172 . | 《禁止或限制使用某些可被认为具有过分伤害力或滥杀滥伤作用的常规武器公约》所附、于1996年5月3日修正的《禁止或限制使用地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的议定书》(1996年5月3日修正的《第二号议定书》)(1996年5月3日，日内瓦)，同上，第2048卷，第22495号，第93页和《禁止或限制使用某些可被认为具有过分伤害力或滥杀滥伤作用的常规武器公约》所附的《禁止或限制使用燃烧武器的第三号议定书》(《特定常规武器公约第三号议定书》)，同上，联合国，第1342卷，第22495号，第171页，以及《1954年关于武装冲突情况下保护文化财产的海牙公约第二议定书》(1999年《第二号议定书》)(1999年3月26日，海牙)，同上，第2253卷，第3511号，第172页。 |
| See art.52, para 1 of Protocol I to the
1949 Geneva Conventions, as well as art. 2, para. 5 of the Protocol II to the
Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; | 见《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第五十二条第一款以及《特定常规武器公约第二号议定书》第二条第五款； |
| art. 2, para.7, of the amended Protocol
II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons and art. 1, para. 4, of
the Protocol III to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. | 《特定常规武器公约经修正的第二号议定书》第二条第七款和《特定常规武器公约第三号议定书》第一条第四款。 |
| See in general Henckaerts and
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 1331 above), rule 7, pp. 25-29. | 一般性阐述见Henckaerts和Doswald-Beck，Customary International Humanitarian Law…(上文脚注1331)，规则7，第25-29页。 |
| The principle of distinction is codified,
inter alia, in article 48 and 52(2) of Additional Protocol I, as well as the
Amended Protocol II and Protocol III to the Convention on Certain
Conventional Weapons. | 除其他外，区别原则的编纂见《第一附加议定书》第四十八条和第五十二条第二款，以及《特定常规武器公约经修正的第二号议定书》和《第三号议定书》。 |
| It is recognized as a rule of customary
international humanitarian law in both international and non-international
armed conflict. | 这项原则被承认为国际和非国际武装冲突下习惯国际人道法的一条规则。 |
| These instruments have been cited as,
inter alia, art.2, para. 4, of Protocol III to the Convention on Certain
Conventional Weapons; the Guidelines on the Protection of the Environment in
Times of Armed Conflict, the Final Declaration adopted by the International
Conference for the Protection of War Victims, United Nations General Assembly
resolutions 49/50 and 51/157, annex, the military manuals of Australia and
the United States, as well as national legislations of Nicaragua and Spain. | 除其他外，所提到的文书包括《特定常规武器公约第三号议定书》第二条第四款、《武装冲突期间保护环境准则》、保护战争受难者国际会议通过的《最后宣言》、联合国大会第49/50号和第51/157号决议附件、澳大利亚和美国的军事手册以及尼加拉瓜和西班牙的国家立法。 |
| See Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck,
Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote
1331 above), pp. 143 and 144. | 见Henckaerts和Doswald-Beck，Customary International Humanitarian Law…(上文脚注1331)，第143和144页。 |
| See e.g. M. Bothe, “International law protecting the environment during armed
conflict: gaps and opportunities” International
Review of the Red Cross, vol. 92 (2010), p. 576; | 例如，见米夏埃尔米博特，“武装冲突中保护环境的国际法：不足与机遇”《红十字国际评论》，第92(2010)卷，第576页； |
| The reference to the rule of military
necessity rather than to the principle of necessity reflects the view of some
States that military necessity is not a general exemption, but needs to have
its basis in an international treaty provision. | 此处的提法是军事必要性规则，而不是必要性原则，因为有些国家认为，军事必要性不是一种一般性的免责，而是需要以国际条约的条款为依据。 |
| See R. Rayfuse, “Rethinking
international law and the protection of the environment in relation to armed
conflict” in War and the Environment …, Rayfuse (ed.) (footnote 1370 above), p. 6; | See R. Rayfuse, “Rethinking
international law and the protection of the environment in relation to armed
conflict” in War and the Environment …, Rayfuse (ed.) (上文脚注1370), p. 6; |
| UNEP, Protecting the Environment During
Armed Conflict… (footnote 1364 above), pp. 12 and 13. | 环境署，《武装冲突中对于环境的保护…》(上文脚注1364)，第12和13页。 |
| These include, inter alia, arts. 35 and
55 of Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. | 除其他外，其中包括《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第三十五和第五十五条。 |
| Other provisions of Protocol I and
Protocol II, as well as other instruments of the law of armed conflict which
may indirectly contribute to protecting the environment such as those
prohibiting attacks against works and installations containing dangerous
forces (Protocol I, art. 56; Protocol II, art. 15), those prohibiting
attacking objects indispensable to the civilian population (Protocol I, art.
54; Protocol II, art. 14); the prohibition against pillage (Regulations
respecting the laws and customs of war on land (The Hague, 18 October 1907),
art. 28); Protocol II, art. 4, para. 2(g) and the prohibition on the forced
movement of civilians (Protocol II, art. 17). | 《第一议定书》和《第二议定书》以及其他武装冲突法文书中可能间接有利于保护环境的的其他条款，例如禁止对含有危险力量的工程和装置实施攻击的条款(《第一议定书》第五十六条、《第二议定书》第十五条)、禁止对平民居民生存所不可缺少的物体的攻击的条款(《第一议定书》第五十四条、《第二议定书》第十四条)、禁止掠夺(《关于陆战法规和习惯的章程》(1907年10月18日，海牙)第二十八条)、《第二议定书》第四条第二款第(七)项和禁止强迫平民迁移(《第二议定书》第十七条)。 |
| See also UNEP, Environmental
Considerations of Human Displacement in Liberia: A Guide for Decision Makers
and Practitioners (2006). | 另见环境署，“利比里亚人口迁移的环境考虑：政策制定者和从业人员指南”(2006年)。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J Reports 1996, p. 226, at para. 257; | “以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性”，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页，见第257段； |
| The principle of distinction is now
codified in arts.48, 51, para.2 and 52, para. 2 of Protocol I; art. 13, para.
2 of Protocol II to the 1949 Geneva Conventions;Amended Protocol II to the
Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; Protocol III to the Convention on
Certain Conventional Weapons; and the Convention on the Prohibition of the
Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on
their Destruction (Oslo, 18 September 1997), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 2056, No. 35597, p. 211. | 区分原则目前的编纂见《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第四十八条、第五十一条第二款和第五十二条第二款、《第二议定书》第十三条第二款、《特定常规武器公约经修正的第二号议定书》、《特定常规武器公约第三号议定书》以及《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》(1997年9月18日，奥斯陆)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2056卷，第35597号，第211页。 |
| See Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck,
Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote
1331 above), at p. 25. | 见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law…(上文脚注1331)，第25页。 |
| Art. 51, para. 5 (b) of Protocol I to the
1949 Geneva Conventions. | 《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第五十一条第五款第二项。 |
| See also See also Yoram Dinstein, “Protection of the environment in international armed conflict” Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, vol. 5 (2001), p. 523,
at pp. 524-525. | 另见Yoram Dinstein,“Protection of the Environment in International Armed Conflict”, Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, vol. 5(2001)，p. 523, at pp. 524-525。 |
| See also L. Doswald-Beck, “International humanitarian law and the advisory opinion of the
International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of
Nuclear Weapons” International Review of the Red
Cross, vol. 37 (1997), p. 52. | 又见L. 多斯瓦尔德－贝克，“国际人道主义法和国际法院关于以核武器进行威胁和使用核武器的咨询意见”，《红十字国际评论》，第37(1997)卷，第52页。 |
| Schmitt, “Military
necessity and humanity …” (footnote 1374 above), p.
804. | Schmitt, “Military
necessity and humanity …”(上文脚注1374)，第804页。 |
| Protocol I, arts. 51 and 57, Protocol II
to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, and Amended Protocol II to the Convention on
Certain Conventional Weapons as well as the Statute of the International
Criminal Court, art. 8, para. 2 (b)(iv). | 《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第五十一条和《第二议定书》第五十七条、《特定常规武器公约经修正的第二号议定书》以及《国际刑事法院规约》第8条第2(b)(iv)款。 |
| See also Legality of the Threat or Use of
Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J Reports 1996, p. 296, at para. 30. | 另见“以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性”，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第296页，第30段。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 1331
above), p. 46. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law …(上文脚注1331)，第46页。 |
| Ibid., p. 150; | 同上，第150页； |
| Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (footnote 1370 above), p. 19, see also UNEP, Desk Study on the
Environment in Liberia (UNEP, 2004) and UNEP, Environmental Considerations of
Human Displacement in Liberia … (footnote 1373
above). | Droege and Tougas，“The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (上文脚注1370)，第19页，另见环境署，“关于利比里亚环境的案头研究”(环境署，2004年)及环境署，“利比里亚人口迁移的环境考虑…”(上文脚注1373)。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 1331
above), rule 44, p. 150. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law …(上文脚注1331)，规则44，第150页。 |
| See also Dinstein, “Protection of the environment …” (footnote
1377 above), pp. 524-525; | 另见Dinstein，“Protection
of the environment …” (上文脚注1377)，第524-525 页； |
| Doswald-Beck, “International
humanitarian law and the advisory opinion of the International Court of
Justice …” (footnote 1377 above); | Doswald-Beck, “International
humanitarian law and the advisory opinion of the International Court of
Justice …” (上文脚注1377)； |
| UNEP, Protecting the Environment During
Armed Conflict … (footnote 1364 above), p. 13; | 环境署，《武装冲突中对于环境的保护…》(上文脚注1364)，第13页； |
| Rayfuse, introduction in War and the
Environment … (footnote 1370 above), p. 6; | Rayfuse, introduction in War and the
Environment …(上文脚注1370)，第6页； |
| Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment …” (footnote 1370 above), pp. 19-23. | Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment …” (上文脚注1370)，第19-23页。 |
| International Criminal Tribunal for the
Former Yugoslavia, Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee
Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign against the Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia, at para. 19. | 前那斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭：检察官向为审查北约对南斯拉夫联盟共和国的轰炸而设立的委员会提交的最后报告，第19段。 |
| Available from. | 见。 |
| See also Dinstein, “Protection of the environment …” (footnote
1377 above), at pp. 524 and 525. | 另见Dinstein，Protection
of the environment …” (上文脚注1377)，第524和525页。 |
| M. Sassoli, A. Bouvier and A. Quintin, “How does law protect in war: online glossary”. Available from (accessed on 28 July 2016). | M. Sassoli, A. Bouvier and A. Quintin, “How does law protect in war: online glossary”. Available from (2016年7月28日检索)。 |
| Protocol I, art. 35, para. 3. Ibid., art.
51, para. 5 (b). | 《第一议定书》第三十五条第三款。同上，第五十一条第五款第(二)项。 |
| The principle of precautions in attack is
codified in art. 2, para. 3 of the Convention (IX) of 1907 concerning
Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War (The Hague, 18 October 1907); | 攻击时采取预防措施的原则已写入1907年《关于战时海军轰击的第九公约》(海牙，1907年10月18日)第二条第三款、 |
| art. 57, para.1, of Protocol I to the
1949 Geneva Conventions, as well as Amended Protocol II to the Convention on
Certain Conventional Weapons, and the Second Protocol to The Hague Convention
for the Protection of Cultural Property. | 《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第五十七条第一款，以及《特定常规武器公约经修正的第二号议定书》和《海牙保护文化财产公约第二议定书》。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 1331
above), rule 15. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law …(上文脚注1331)，规则15。 |
| Ibid., rule 44. | 同上，规则44。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J Reports 1996, p. 226, at para. 30. | “以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性”，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页，第30段。 |
| See Protocol I, arts. 48, 50, 51 (in
particular para.4), 52 (in particular para. 2) and 57(2) and Protocol II,
art. 13(2) to the 1949 Geneva Conventions.See Y. Dinstein, “Legitimate military objectives under the current jus in bello” International Law Studies, vol. 78 (2002), p. 139, and L.R.
Blank, “Extending positive identification from
persons to places: terrorism, armed conflict, and the identification of
military objectives” Utah Law Review, No. 5 (2013),
p. 1227. See e.g. United Kingdom Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law
of Armed Conflict (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004), para. 5.4; | 见《1949年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第四十八、五十、五十一条(尤其是第四款)、第五十二条(尤其是第二款)、第五十七条第二款和《第二议定书》第十三条第二款。 See Y.
Dinstein, “Legitimate Military Objectives Under the
Current Jus In Bello”International Law Studies, vol.
78 (2002)，p.139, and L. R. Blank,“Extending Positive Identification from Persons to Places:Terrorism,
Armed Conflict, and the Identification of Military Objectives”Utah Law Review, No. 5(2013)，p. 1227.例如，见联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2004年)，第5.4段； |
| Canadian National Defence, Law of Armed
Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels (2001) B-GJ-005-104/FP-021,
pp. 405-427; | 加拿大国防部，《作战和战术层面的武装冲突法》(2001年) B-GJ-005-104/FP-021, 第405-427页； |
| United States Department of Defense, Law
of War Manual (2015). | 美国国防部，《战争法手册》(2015年)。 |
| Protocol I, art. 51, in particular para.
6. | 《第一议定书》，第五十一条，尤其是第六款。 |
| See C. Pilloud and J. Pictet, “Article 51” in ICRC Commentary on the
Additional Protocols …, Sandoz and others (eds.)
(footnote 1335 above), p. 615. | 见C. Pilloud和J.
Pictet，“第五十一条”，载于Sandoz等编，《红十字委员会对…附加议定书的评注》(上文脚注1335)，第615页。 |
| For a discussion on the customary law
status of reprisals, see Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International
Humanitarian Law … (footnote 1331 above), pp.
523-530; | 关于报复的习惯法地位的讨论，见Henckaerts and
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law …(上文脚注1331)，第523-530页； |
| There are currently 174 State parties to
Protocol I. | 目前《第一议定书》共有174个缔约国。 |
| See the ICRC website. | 见红十字委员会网站：。 |
| For a description of declarations,
statements and reservations made by States in connection with regard to,
inter alia, art. 55, see A/CN.4/685, paras. 129 and 130. | 关于各国就第五十五条和其他条款所做的声明、说明和保留的情况，见A/C.N.4/685，第129和130段。 |
| It should also be noted that the United
Kingdom declared that: “The obligations of Articles
51 and 55 are accepted on the basis that any adverse party against which the
United Kingdom might be engaged will itself scrupulously observe those
obligations. | 还应指出，联合王国声明：“接受第五十一条和第五十五条的义务的基础是，联合王国可能交战的任何敌对方本身严格遵守这些义务。 |
| If an adverse party makes serious and
deliberate attacks, in violation of Article 51 or Article 52 against the
civilian population or civilians or against civilian objects, or, in
violation of Articles 53, 54 and 55, on objects or items protected by those
Articles, the United Kingdom will regard itself as entitled to take measures
otherwise prohibited by the Articles in question to the extent that it
considers such measures necessary for the sole purpose of compelling the
adverse party to cease committing violations under those Articles, but only
after formal warning to the adverse party requiring cessation of the
violations has been disregarded and then only after a decision taken at the
highest level of government. | 如果一敌对方违反第五十一条或第五十二条，对平民居民、平民或民用目标发动严重和蓄意的攻击，或违反第五十三、五十四和五十五条，对受这些条款保护的目标和物品发动严重和蓄意的攻击，联合王国将认为自己有权采取有关条款禁止的措施，但条件是，联合王国认为出于迫使敌对方依照这些条款停止违约行动的唯一目的，采取这种措施是必要的，而且只是在要求敌对方停止违约行动的正式警告被漠视、并由政府最高领导层做出决定之后才可采取。 |
| Any measures thus taken by the United
Kingdom will not be disproportionate to the violations giving rise there to
and will not involve any action prohibited by the Geneva Conventions of 1949
nor will such measures be continued after the violations have ceased. | 联合王国据此采取的措施将不会与所涉违约行动不相称，而且不会涉及1949年日内瓦四公约所禁止的任何行动，在违约行动停止后，这些措施也将停止。 |
| The United Kingdom will notify the
Protecting Powers of any such formal warning given to an adverse party, and
if that warning has been disregarded, of any measures taken as a result. | 联合王国将向保护国通报发给敌对方的这种正式警告，如果警告遭到漠视，将通报因此而采取的任何措施。 |
| The text of the reservation is available
on the ICRC website, at para. (m). | 保留的案文可登陆红十字委员会网站查阅：，见(m)段。 |
| The conditions under which belligerent
reprisals against the natural environment may be taken are partly described
in United Kingdom Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed
Conflict … (footnote 1392 above), paras. | 联合王国国防部《武装冲突法手册》中述及可以在交战中报复自然环境的部分条件(上文脚注1392)，第16.18-16.19.1段。 |
| 16.18-16.19.1. For declarations that relate
to the understanding of whether Protocol I is applicable only to conventional
weapons and not to nuclear weapons, see A/C.N/4/685, para. 130. | 有关《第一议定书》是否仅适用于常规武器而不适用于核武器的理解的声明，见A/C.N/4/685，第130段。 |
| See declarations and reservations of
Ireland: “Article 55: In ensuring that care shall be
taken in warfare to protect the natural environment against widespread,
long-term and severe damage and taking account of the prohibition of the use
of methods or means of warfare which are intended or may be expected to cause
such damage to the natural environment thereby prejudicing the health or
survival of the population, Ireland declares that nuclear weapons, even if
not directly governed by Additional Protocol I, remain subject to existing
rules of international law as confirmed in 1996 by the International Court of
Justice in its Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of
Nuclear Weapons. | 见爱尔兰的声明和保留：“第五十五条：为确保在作战中注意保护自然环境不受广泛、长期和严重的损害，并考虑到应禁止使用旨在或可能对自然环境造成这种损害从而妨害居民的健康和生存的作战方法或手段，爱尔兰声明，核武器即便不直接受《第一附加议定书》管辖，也依然受1996年国际法院关于‘以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性’的咨询意见中确认的现有国际法规则的制约。 |
| Ireland will interpret and apply this
Article in a way which leads to the best possible protection for the civilian
population. | 爱尔兰将本着能为平民居民提供最好保护的精神来解释并适用本条款。 |
| The declaration is available on the ICRC
website at. | 本声明可登陆红十字委员会网站查阅：。 |
| It should also be noted that in the
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion (I.C.J
Reports 1996, p. 226, at para. 46), the Court stated that: “Certain States asserted that the use of nuclear weapons in the
conduct of reprisals would be lawful. | 还应指出，法院在“关于以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性的咨询意见”(《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页，第46段)中指出，“某些国家坚称使用核武器进行报复是合法的。 |
| The Court does not have to examine, in
this context, the question of armed reprisals in time of peace, which are considered
to be unlawful. | 在这方面，本院不必审查和平时期进行武装报复的问题，因为这被认为是不合法的。 |
| Nor does it have to pronounce on the
question of belligerent reprisals save to observe that in any case any right
of recourse to such reprisals would, like self-defence, be governed inter alia
by the principle of proportionality.” | 本院也不必对交战国的报复问题发表意见，只须指出，在任何情况下，任何采取这种报复的权利都像自卫一样，必须遵守相称性原则。
” |
| France, Ireland and the United Kingdom. | 法国、爱尔兰和联合王国。 |
| See the Official Records of the
Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International
Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts (Geneva, 1974-1977) vol. IX,
available from, most notably the statements made by Canada (p. 428), the
Islamic Republic of Iran (p. 429), Iraq (p. 314), Mexico (p. 318) and Greece
(p. 429). | 见《关于重申和发展适用于武装冲突的国际人道主义法律的外交会议正式记录》(1974-1977年，日内瓦)第九卷，见，最值得注意的是加拿大(第428页)、伊朗伊斯兰共和国(第429页)、伊拉克(第314页)、墨西哥(第318页)和希腊(第429页)的发言。 |
| See also Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck,
Customary International Humanitarian Law (footnote 1331 above), p. 528. | 另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law …(上文脚注1331)，第528页。 |
| See V. Bílková, “Belligerent reprisals in
non-international armed conflicts” International and
Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 63 (2014), p. 31; | 见V. Bílková，“非国际性武装冲突中的交战报复”，《国际法和比较法季刊》，第63卷(2014年)，第31页； |
| Sandesh Sivakumaran, The Law of
Non-International Armed Conflict (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), pp.
449-457. | Sandesh Sivakumaran, 《非国际性武装冲突法》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2012年)，第449-457页。 |
| Prosecutor v. Duško
Tadić,
case No. IT-94-1-A72, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal
on Jurisdiction, of 2 October 1995, International Criminal Tribunal for the
Former Yugoslavia, paras. 111 and 112. | 检察官诉Duško Tadić，IT-94-1-AR72号案，对辩方关于就管辖权问题提出中间上诉的请求所做出的裁决，1995年10月2日，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭，第111和112段。 |
| See also in general Henckaerts and
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 1331 above), pp. 526-529. | 一般性阐述另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck,
Customary International Humanitarian Law …(上文脚注1331)，第526-529页。 |
| At its 2940th meeting, on 20 July 2007
(Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-second Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/62/10), para. 376). | 2007年7月20日第2940次会议(《大会正式记录，第六十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/62/10)，第376段)。 |
| The General Assembly, in paragraph 7 of
its resolution 62/66 of 6 December 2007, took note of the decision of the
Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会2007年12月6日第62/66号决议第7段注意到委员会将本专题列入其工作方案的决定。 |
| The topic had been included in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission during its fifty-eighth session
(2006), on the basis of the proposal contained in annex A of the report of
the Commission (Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-first
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/61/10), para. 257). | 在第五十八届会议上(2006年)，委员会已根据其报告附件A中所载建议(《大会正式记录，第六十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/61/10)，第257段)将本专题列入其长期工作方案。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-second Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/62/10), para. 386. | 同上，《第六十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/62/10)，第386段。 |
| For the memorandum prepared by the
Secretariat, see A/CN.4/596 and Corr.1. | 秘书处编写的备忘录见A/CN.4/596和Corr.1号文件。 |
| A/CN.4/601 (preliminary report);
A/CN.4/631 (second report); and A/CN.4/646 (third report). | A/CN.4/601(初步报告)、A/CN.4/631(第二次报告)和A/CN.4/646(第三次报告)。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/64/10), para. 207; | 见《大会正式记录，第六十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/64/10)，第207段； |
| and ibid., Sixty-fifth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/65/10), para. 343. | 和同上，《第六十五届会议，补编第10号》(A/65/10)，第343段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-seventh session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 266. | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第266段。 |
| A/CN.4/654 (preliminary report); | A/CN.4/654(初步报告)； |
| A/CN.4/661 (second report); | A/CN.4/661(第二次报告)； |
| A/CN.4/673 and Corr.1 (third report); | A/CN.4/673和Corr.1(第三次报告)； |
| and A/CN.4/687 (fourth report). | 和A/CN.4/687(第四次报告)。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), paras. 48-49. | 见《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第48和第49段。 |
| At its 3174th meeting, on 7 June 2013,
the Commission received the report of the Drafting Committee and
provisionally adopted draft articles 1, 3 and 4 and, at its 3193rd to 3196th
meetings, on 6 and 7 August 2013, it adopted the commentaries thereto (ibid.,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 48-49). | 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第1、第3和第4这三条草案，在2013年8月6日和7日第3193至第3196次会议上通过了这三条的评注(同上，《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第48和第49段)。 |
| At its 3231st meeting, on 25 July 2014,
the Commission received the report of the Drafting Committee and
provisionally adopted draft articles 2 (e) and 5 and, at its 3240th to 3242nd
meetings, on 6 and 7 August 2014, it adopted the commentaries thereto. | 委员会在2014年7月25日第3231次会议上收到了起草委员会的报告并暂时通过了第2条草案(e)项和第5条草案，又在2014年8月6日和7日的第3240至第3242次会议上通过了其评注。 |
| At its 3284th meeting, on 4 August 2015,
the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee presented the report of the
Drafting Committee on “Immunity of State officials
from foreign criminal jurisdiction”, containing draft
articles 2 (f) and 6 provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the
sixty-seventh session, of which the Commission took note (ibid., Seventieth
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), para. 176). | 在2015年8月4日第3284次会议上，起草委员会主席提交了该委员会关于“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”的报告，其中载有起草委员会在第六十七届会议上暂时通过的第2条草案(f)项和第6条草案。
委员会注意到这些草案(同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第176段)。 |
| The text of draft article 7, as proposed
by the Special Rapporteur in the fifth report, reads as follows: | 特别报告员第五次报告建议的第7条草案案文如下： |
| Draft article 7 | 第7条草案 |
| Crimes in respect of which immunity does
not apply | 不适用豁免的罪行 |
| 1.Immunity shall not apply in relation to
the following crimes: | 1. 豁免不应适用于下列罪行： |
| (a)Genocide, crimes against humanity, war
crimes, torture and enforced disappearances; | ㈠灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪、战争罪、酷刑和强迫失踪； |
| (b)Crimes of corruption; | ㈡腐败罪行； |
| (c)Crimes that cause harm to persons,
including death and serious injury, or to property, when such crimes are
committed in the territory of the forum State and the State official is
present in said territory at the time that such crimes are committed. | ㈢造成人身伤害(包括死亡和重伤)或财产损失的罪行，前提是这种罪行发生在法院地国的领土上，而且犯下该罪行时国家官员在该国领土上。 |
| 2.Paragraph 1 shall not apply to persons
who enjoy immunity ratione personae during their term of office. | 2. 第1款不应适用于在任期内享有属人豁免的人员。 |
| 3.Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without
prejudice to: | 3. 第1款和第2款不妨碍： |
| (a)Any provision of a treaty that is
binding on the forum State and the State of the official, under which
immunity would not be applicable; | ㈠对法院地国和官员所属国都有约束力的条约中任何规定不适用豁免的条款； |
| (b)The obligation to cooperate with an
international tribunal which, in each case, requires compliance by the forum
State. | ㈡与要求法院地国履行义务的国际法庭开展合作的义务。 |
| See paragraph (5) of the commentary to
draft article 4, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), pp. 68-69. | 见第4条草案评注第(5)段，《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第68-69页。 |
| Yearbook … 1996,
vol. II (Part Two), p. 23. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第23页。 |
| Yearbook … 2001,
vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 142. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第142页。 |
| The articles on the responsibility of
States for internationally wrongful acts adopted by the Commission at its
fifty-third session are annexed to General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12
December 2001. | 委员会在第五十三届会议上通过的关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款载于大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议附件。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), p. 171. | 《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第171页。 |
| The articles on the responsibility of international
organizations adopted by the Commission at its sixty-third session are
annexed to General Assembly resolution 66/100 of 9 December 2011. | 委员会在第六十三届会议上通过的关于国际组织的责任条款载于大会2011年12月9日第66/100号决议附件。 |
| The following arguments by a court in the
United States, in particular, clarify the reasons for the exclusion of ultra
vires acts: “Where the officer’s powers are limited by statute, his actions beyond those
limitations are considered individual and not sovereign actions. | 具体而言，美国一家法院作出了以下解释，澄清排除越权行为的理由：“如果官员的权力受规章的限制，超越此限制的行动即被视为个人行动，而非主权行动。 |
| The officer is not doing the business
which the sovereign has empowered him to do. | 官员所作所为不是主权国家授予的”。 |
| According to that court, the “FSIA [Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act] does not immunize the
illegal conduct of government officials” and thus, “an official acting under color of authority, but not within an
official mandate, can violate international law and not be entitled to
immunity under FSIA”. | 该法院指出，“外国主权豁免法并不豁免政府官员的非法行为”，因此，“官员虽具有权力身份，但没有在官方授权范围内行事，这就违反了国际法，无权享有外国主权豁免法规定的豁免”。 |
| (In re Estate of Ferdinand Marcos Human
Rights Litigation; | (费迪南 •马科斯的遗产人权诉讼案； |
| Hilao and Others v. Estate of Marcos,
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, judgment of 16 June 1994, 25
F.3d 1467 (9th Cir.1994), International Law Reports (ILR), vol. 104, pp. 119
et seq., particularly pp. 123 and 125). | Hilao等人诉马科斯遗产，美国上诉法院，第九巡回法庭，1994年6月16日的判决，25 F.3d 1467 (9th Cir.1994)，《国际法案例汇编》，第104卷，第119及以下各页，特别是第123和125页)。 |
| Similarly, another court concluded that
ultra vires acts are not subject to sovereign immunity, as the perpetrators
acted beyond their authority by violating the human rights of the plaintiffs:
If officials commit acts that are not officially sanctioned by the State,
that is, if they are not “officials acting in an
official capacity for acts within the scope of their authority”, they cannot benefit from immunity (In Jane Doe I, et al. v. Liu
QI, et al., Plaintiff A, et al. v. Xia Deren, et al., United States District
Court, N.D. California, C 02-0672 CW, C 02-0695 CW). | 同样，另一法院也认为越权行为不享受主权豁免，因为行为人侵犯原告人权的行为是在权力之外实施的：“如果官员实施未经国家官方授权的行为，即如果他们不是‘在其权力范围内以官方身份行事’，那么他们就不能享受豁免。”(DoeI等诉刘淇等、原告A等诉夏德仁等，美国地区法院，加利福尼亚北部地区，C 02-0672 CW, C 02-0695 CW)。 |
| Jaffe v. Miller and Others, Ontario Court
of Appeal (Canada), judgment of 17 June 1993, ILR, vol. 95, p. 446; | Jaffe诉Miller等，安大略上诉法院(加拿大)，1993年6月17日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第95卷，第446页； |
| Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess
Shipping Corporation and Others, United States Supreme Court, 23 January
1989, ILR, vol. 81, p. 658; | 阿根廷共和国诉Amerada Hess船运公司等，美国最高法院，1989年1月23日，《国际法案例汇编》，第81卷，第658页； |
| McElhinney v. Williams, Supreme Court of
Ireland, 15 December 1995, ILR, vol. 104, p. 691. | McElhinney诉Williams,
爱尔兰高等法院，1995年12月15日，《国际法案例汇编》，第104卷，第691页。 |
| I° Congreso del
Partido, House of Lords, United Kingdom, 16 July 1981, [1983] A.C. 244, ILR,
vol. 64, p. 307. | I Congresodel Partido, 联合王国上议院，1981年7月16日，[1983] A.C. 244,《国际法案例汇编》，第64卷，第307页。 |
| In Jones v. Saudi Arabia, House of Lords,
14 June 2006, [2006] UKHL 26, Lord Hoffmann rejected the argument that an act
contrary to jus cogens cannot be an official act (see ILR, vol. 129, p. 744). | 在2006年6月14日上议院Jones诉沙特阿拉伯一案([2006] UKHL 26)中，Hoffmann勋爵不接受关于违反强行法的行为不可能为官方行为的论点(见《国际法案例汇编》，第129卷，第744页)。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), p. 231. | 《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第231页。 |
| See paragraph (11) of the commentary to
draft article 2 (e), ibid., p. 235. | 见第2条草案(e)项的评注第(11)段，同上，第235页。 |
| In this context, the Commission has taken
the view that “State functions” include “the legislative, judicial,
executive or other functions performed by the State”
(ibid.). | 在此背景下，委员会认为，“国家职能”包括“由国家履行的立法、司法、执法或其他职能”(同上)。 |
| Empire of Iran, Federal Constitutional
Court of Germany, 1963, ILR, vol. 45, p. 57; | 伊朗帝国案，德国联邦宪法法院，1963年，《国际法案例汇编》，第45卷，第57页； |
| Victory v. Comisaría, US 336 F. 2d 354 (Second Circuit, 1964), ILR, vol. 35, p. 110; | Victory诉Comisaría, US 336 F. 2d 354(第二巡回法庭，1964)，《国际法案例汇编》，第35卷，第110页； |
| Saltany and Others v. Reagan and Others,
District Court for the District of Columbia, United States, judgment of 23
December 1988, ILR, vol. 80, p. 19; | Saltany等诉Reagan等，哥伦比亚特区地方法院(美国)，1988年12月23日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第80卷，第19页； |
| Holland v. Lampen-Wolf (United Kingdom),
[2000] 1 WLR 1573; | 荷兰诉Lampen-Wolf (联合王国)，[2000] 1 WLR 1573； |
| Lozano v. Italy, case No. 31171/2008,
Italy, Court of Cassation, judgment of 24 July 2008 (available at,
International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 1085 (IT 2008)]). | Lozano诉意大利，第31171/2008号案件，意大利，上诉法院，2008年7月24日的判决(可查阅：，International Law in Domestic Courts
[ILDC 1085 (IT 2008)])。 |
| Empire of Iran (see footnote 1418 above); | 伊朗帝国案(见上文脚注1418)； |
| Church of Scientology, Federal Supreme
Court of Germany, judgment of 26 September 1978, ILR, vol. 65, p. 193; | 科学派教会案，德国联邦最高法院，1978年9月26日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第65卷，第193页； |
| Saudi Arabia and Others v. Nelson, United
States Supreme Court, ILR, vol. 100, p. 544; | 沙特阿拉伯等诉Nelson, 美国最高法院，《国际法案例汇编》，第100卷，第544页； |
| Propend Finance Pty Ltd. v. Sing, United
Kingdom, Court of Appeal, 1997, ILR, vol. 111, p. 611; | Propend Finance Pty Ltd.诉Sing，英国，上诉法院，1997年； 《国际法案例汇编》，第111卷，第611页； |
| Norbert Schmidt v. The Home Secretary of
the Government of the United Kingdom, High Court of Ireland, judgment of 24
April 1997, [1997] 2IR 121; | Norbert Schmidt诉联合王国政府内政大臣，爱尔兰高等法院，1997年4月24日的判决([1997] 2IR 121)； |
| First Merchants Collection v. Republic of
Argentina, United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, 31
January 2002, 190 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (S.D. Fla. 2002). | First Merchants Collection诉阿根廷共和国，美国地区法院，佛罗里达南部地区，2002年1月31日，190 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (S.D. Fla. 2002)。 |
| Empire of Iran (see footnote 1418 above); | 伊朗帝国案(见上文脚注1418)； |
| Victory v. Comisaría (see footnote 1418 above). | Victory诉Comisaría(见上文脚注1418)。 |
| Empire of Iran (see footnote 1418 above); | 伊朗帝国案(见上文脚注1418)； |
| Victory v. Comisaría (see footnote 1418 above). | Victory诉Comisaría(见上文脚注1418)。 |
| Empire of Iran (see footnote 1418 above); | 伊朗帝国案(见上文脚注1418)； |
| case No. 12-81.676, Court of Cassation,
Criminal Chamber (France), judgment of 19 March 2013, and case No. 13-80.158,
Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), judgment of 17 June 2014. | 第12-81.676号案件，最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2013年3月19日的判决，以及第13-80.158号案件，最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2014年6月17日的判决(见www.legifrance.gouv.fr)。 |
| The Swiss courts made a similar ruling in
the case ATF 130 III 136, which concerns an international detention order
issued by a Spanish judge. | 瑞士法院在涉及西班牙一名法官发出的国际拘留令的ATF 130 III 136案中作了类似的裁决。 |
| Victory v. Comisaría (see footnote 1418 above); | Victory诉Comisaría(见上文脚注1418)； |
| Kline and others v. Yasuyuki Kaneko and
others, US, 685 F Supp. 386 (SDNY 1988), ILR, vol. 101, p. 497; | Rukmini S. Kline等诉Yasuyuki Kaneko等，US, 685 F Supp 386 (SDNY
1988)，《国际法案例汇编》，第101卷，第497页； |
| Malta Maritime Authority, No. 04-84.265,
Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), judgment of 23 November 2004,
Bulletin criminel 2004, No. 292, p. 1096. | 马耳他海事当局，第 04-84.265号案件，最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2004年11月23日的判决，Bulletin
criminal 2004，No .292, p. 1096。 |
| Victory v. Comisaría (see footnote 1418 above). | Victory诉Comisaría(见上文脚注1418)。 |
| Doe I v. Israel, US, 400 F. Supp. 2d 86,
106 (DCC 2005) (establishment of Israeli settlements in the occupied
territories); | Doe I诉以色列案，US,
400 F.Supp. 2d 86, 106 (DCC 2005)(以色列在被占领土建立定居点)； |
| Youming, US, 557 F. Supp. 2d 131 (DDC
2008) (hiring of contract killers to threaten members of a religious group). | Youming案，US, 557
F. Supp. 2d 131 (DDC 2008)(雇用职业杀手威胁宗教团体成员)。 |
| In re Rauter, Special Court of Cassation
of the Netherlands, judgment of 12 January 1949, ILR, vol. 16, p. 526 (crimes
committed by German occupation forces in Denmark); | Rauter案，荷兰最高上诉法院特别法庭，1949年1月12日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第16卷，第526页(德国占领军在丹麦所犯罪行)； |
| Attorney General of Government of Israel
v. Adolf Eichmann, District Court of Jerusalem (case No. 40/61), judgment of
12 December 1961, and Appeal Tribunal, judgment of 29 May 1962, ILR, vol. 36,
pp. 18 and 277 (crimes committed during the Second World War, including war
crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide); | 以色列总检察长诉Adolf Eichmann案，耶路撒冷地区法院(第40/61号案件)，1961年12月12日的判决；
以及上诉法院，1962年5月29日的裁决，《国际法案例汇编》，第36卷，第18和277页(二战期间所犯罪行，包括战争罪、危害人类罪和灭绝种族)； |
| Yaser Arafat (Carnevale re.Valente — Imp.Arafat e Salah), Italy, Court of Cassation, judgment of 28
June 1985, Rivista di diritto internazionale 69 (1986), No. 4, p. 884 (sale
of weapons and collaboration with the Red Brigades on acts of terrorism); | 亚西尔•阿拉法特(Carnevale re. Valente – Imp. Arafat e Salah)案，意大利，上诉法院，1985年6月28日的判决，Rivista
di diritto internazionale 69 (1986)，No.4, p. 884 (销售武器及与赤军勾结从事恐怖行为)； |
| R. v. Mafart and Prieur/Rainbow Warrior
(New Zealand v. France), New Zealand, High Court, Auckland Registry, 22
November 1985, ILR, vol. 74, p. 241 (acts carried out by members of the
French armed forces and security forces to mine the ship Rainbow Warrior,
which led to the sinking of the ship and the death of several people; | R.诉Mafart and
Prieur/“彩虹勇士”案，新西兰高等法院，奥克兰登记处，1985年11月22日，《国际法案例汇编》，第74卷，第241页(法国武装部队和安全部队成员用水雷炸“彩虹勇士”号船的行为，结果导致船只沉没，数人死亡； |
| these were described as terrorist acts); | 这些行为被称为恐怖行为)。 |
| Former Syrian Ambassador to the German
Democratic Republic, Federal Supreme Court of Germany, Federal Constitutional
Court of Germany, judgment of 10 June 1997, ILR, vol. 115, p. 595 (the case
examined legal action against a former ambassador who allegedly stored, in
diplomatic premises, weapons that were later used to commit terrorist acts); | 叙利亚驻德意志民主共和国前大使案，德国联邦最高法院，德国联邦宪法法院，1997年6月10日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第115卷，第595页(案件审查了针对一名前大使的法律行动，据称该大使曾在外交房舍内藏有武器，这些武器后来被用于恐怖行为)； |
| Bouterse, R 97/163/12 Sv and R 97/176/12
Sv, Court of Appeal of Amsterdam, 20 November 2000, Netherlands Yearbook of
International Law, vol. 32 (2001), pp. 266 to 282 (torture, crimes against
humanity); | Bouterse案，R
97/163/12 Sv和R 97/176/12 Sv，阿姆斯特丹上诉法院，2000年11月20日，《荷兰国际法年鉴》第32卷(2001)，第266至282页(酷刑、危害人类罪)； |
| Gaddafi, Court of Appeal of Paris,
judgment of 20 October 2000, and Court of Cassation, judgment of 13 March
2001, ILR, vol. 125, pp. 490 and 508 (ordering a plane to be brought down
using explosives, which caused the death of 170 people, considered as
terrorism); | 卡扎菲案，巴黎上诉法院，2000年10月20日的判决，以及最高上诉法院，2001年3月13日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第125卷，第490和508页(下令用炸药使一架飞机坠毁，造成170人死亡，被认为是恐怖行为)； |
| Prosecutor v. Hissène Habré, Court of Appeal of Dakar
(Senegal), judgment of 4 July 2000, and Court of Cassation, judgment of 20
March 2001, | 哈布雷案，达喀尔上诉法院(塞内加尔)，2000年7月4日判决，以及最高上诉法院2001年3月20日的判决； |
| ILR, vol.125, pp. 571 and 577 (acts of
torture and crimes against humanity); | 《国际法案例汇编》，第125卷，第571和577页(酷刑行为和危害人类罪)； |
| Re Sharon and Yaron, Court of appeal of
Brussels, judgment of 26 June 2002, ILR, vol. 127, p. 110 (war crimes, crimes
against humanity and genocide); | Sharon和Yaron案，布鲁塞尔上诉法院，2002年6月26日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第127卷，第110页(战争罪、危害人类罪和灭绝种族)； |
| A. v. Office of the Public Prosecutor of
the Confederation (Nezzar case), Federal Criminal Court of Switzerland (case
No. BB.2011.140), judgment of 25 July 2012 (torture and other crimes against
humanity). | A.诉联邦检察官办公室(Nezzar案)，瑞士联邦刑事法院(第BB.2011.140号案件)，2012年7月25日的判决(酷刑和其他危害人类罪)。 |
| In re Ye v. Zemin, United States Court of
Appeal, Seventh Circuit, 383F. 3d 620 (2004) (unlike the cases cited in
footnotes 1426 and 1428, this was a case before a civil court). | Ye诉ZeminDoe案，美国上诉法院，第七巡回法庭，383F. 3d 620 (2004) (与脚注1426和1428所述案件不同，这是一个向民事法院提起的案件)。 |
| Border Guards Prosecution, Federal
Criminal Court of Germany, judgment of 3 November 1992 (case No. 5 StR
370/92), ILR, vol. 100, p. 364 (death of a young German, as a result of shots
fired by border guards of the German Democratic Republic, when he attempted
to cross the Berlin Wall); | 边界卫兵案，德国联邦刑事法院，1992年11月3日的判决(第5 StR 370/92号案件)，《国际法案例汇编》，第100卷，第364页(一名年轻德国人试图越过柏林墙时被德意志民主共和国边界卫兵开枪打死)； |
| Norbert Schmidt v. The Home Secretary of
the Government of the United Kingdom (see footnote 1419 above) (irregular
circumstances during the detention of the plaintiff by State officials); | Norburt Schmidt诉联合王国政府内政大臣案(见上文脚注1419)(原告被国家官员拘留的非正常情形)； |
| Khurts Bat v. Investigating Judge of the
German Federal Court, United Kingdom ([2011] EWHC 2029 (Admin)), ILR, vol.
147, p. 633 (kidnapping and illegal detention). | Khurts Bat诉德国联邦法院调查法官案，联合王国([2011] EWHC 2029 (Admin)，《国际法案例汇编》，第147卷，第633页(绑架和非法拘留)。 |
| Letelier and Others v. The Republic of
Chile and Linea Aerea Nacional-Chile, United States Court of Appeals, Second
Circuit, 748 F 2d 790 (1984), ILR, vol. 79, p. 561. | Letelier等诉智利共和国和智利国家航空公司，美国上诉法院，第二巡回法庭，748 F 2d 790 (1984)，《国际法案例汇编》，第79卷，第561页。 |
| United States of America v. Noriega,
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, judgment of 7 July 1997,
ILR, vol. 121, p. 591. | 美利坚合众国诉诺列加，美国上诉法院，第十一巡回法庭，1997年7月7日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第121卷，第591页。 |
| Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue and Others,
Court of Appeal of Paris, Pôle 7, Second Investigating Chamber, judgment of
13 June 2013. | Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue等，巴黎上诉法院，Pôle 7, 第二调查庭，2013年6月13日的判决。 |
| Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue and Others,
Court of Appeal of Paris, Pôle 7, Second Investigating Chamber, application
for annulment, judgment of 16 April 2015. | Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue等，巴黎上诉法院，Pôle 7, 第二调查庭，请求废止，2015年4月16日的判决。 |
| United States of America v. Noriega (see
footnote 1430 above); | 美利坚合众国诉诺列加(见上文脚注1430)； |
| Jungquist v. Sheikh Sultan Bin Khalifa al
Nahyan, United States District Court, District of Columbia, judgment of 20
September 1996, ILR, vol. | Jungquist诉Sheikh
Sultan Bin Khalifa al Nahyan,美国哥伦比亚特区地区法院，1996年9月20日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第113卷，第522页； |
| 113, p. 522; Mellerio v. Isabelle de
Bourbon, Recueil général des
lois et des arrêts 1872, p. 293; | Mellerio诉西班牙前女王Isabelle
de Bourbon,《国际公法案件年度摘要和报告》，第1872号案件，第293页； |
| Seyyid Ali Ben Hammoud, Prince Rashid v.
Wiercinski, Tribunal civil de la Seine, judgment of 25 July 1916, Revue de
droit international privé et de droit pénal international, vol. 15 (1919), p. 505; | Seyyid Ali Ben Hammoud、Prince Rashid诉Wiercinski, Seine民事法庭，1916年7月25日的判决，Revue de droit international privé et de
droit pénal international, vol.15 (1919)，p. 505； |
| Ex-roi d’Egypte
Farouk v. s.a.r.l.Christian Dior, Court of Appeal of Paris, judgment of 11
April 1957, Journal du droit international, vol. 84, No. 1 (1957), pp.
716-718; | 埃及前国王Farouk诉克里斯汀•迪奥案，巴黎上诉法院，1957年4月11日的判决，Journal du droit international, vol. 84, No. 1 (1957)，pp. 716 to 718; |
| Ali Ali Reza v. Grimpel, Court of Appeal
of Paris, judgment of 28 April 1961, Revue générale de droit international public, vol. 66, No. 2 (1962), p. 418; | Ali Ali Reza诉Grimpel,
巴黎上诉法院，1961年4月28日的判决，Revue générale de droit international public, vol. 66, No. 2 (1962)，p. 418； |
| In re Estate of Ferdinand E.Marcos Human
Rights Litigation; | 费迪南•马科斯的遗产人权诉讼案； |
| Trajano v. Marcos and Another, United
States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 21 October 1992, 978 F 2d 493 (1992),
ILR, vol. 103, p. 521; | Trajano诉马科斯等，美国上诉法院，第九巡回法庭，1992年10月21日，978 F 2d 493 (1992)，《国际法案例汇编》，第103卷，第521页； |
| Doe v. Zedillo Ponce de León; | Doe诉Zedillo Ponce
de León； |
| Jimenez v. Aristeguieta et al., United
States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 311 F 2d 547 (1962), 33 ILR 353; | Jimenez诉Aristeguieta等，美国上诉法院，第五巡回法庭，311 F 2d 547 (1962), 33 ILR 353； |
| Jean-Juste v. Duvalier (1988), No.
86-0459 Civ. (U.S. District Court, S.D. Fla., 8
January 1988, American Journal of International Law, vol. 82, No. 3 (1988),
p. 594; | Jean-Juste诉Duvalier(1988)，
第86-0459 Civ.号案件(美国地区法院，佛罗里达南部地区，1988年1月8日，《美国国际法杂志》，第82卷，第3号(1988)，第594页； |
| Evgeny Adamov v. Federal Office of
Justice, Federal Tribunal of Switzerland, judgment of 22 December 2005 (1A
288/2005) (available at, International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 339 (CH
2005)]; | Evgeny Adamov诉联邦司法办公室，瑞士联邦法庭，2005年12月22日的判决(1A 288/2005)(可查阅：，International Law in
Domestic Courts [ILDC 339 (CH 2005)]； |
| Republic of the Philippines v. Marcos and
Others, United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 26 November 1986,
ILR, vol. 81, p. 581; | 菲律宾共和国诉马科斯等，美国上诉法院，第二巡回法庭，1986年11月26日，《国际法案例汇编》，第81卷，第581页； |
| Republic of the Philippines v. Marcos and
Others (No. 2), United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 4 June 1987 and
1 December 1988, ILR, vol. 81, p. 608; | 菲律宾共和国诉马科斯等(第2号)，美国上诉法院，第九巡回法庭，1987年6月4日和1988年12月1日，《国际法案例汇编》，第81卷，第608页； |
| Republic of Haiti and Others v. Duvalier
and Others, [1990] 1 QB 2002 (United Kingdom), ILR, vol. 107, p. 491. | 海地共和国等诉杜瓦利埃等，[1990] 1 QB 2002(联合王国)，《国际法案例汇编》，第107卷，第491页。 |
| Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan
Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), House of Lords,
United Kingdom, 24 March 1999, [1999] UKHL 17, [2000] 1 AC 147. | Regina诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官，皮诺切特
•乌加特缺席(第3号)，联合王国上议院，1999年3月24日，[1999] UKHL 17, [2000] 1 AC 147。 |
| Only Lord Goff believed that they were
official acts that benefited from immunity. | 只有Goff勋爵认为这种行为是豁免范围内的官方行为。 |
| Lord Browne-Wilkinson and Lord Hutton
stated that torture cannot be “a public function” or a “governmental function”. | Browne-Wilkinson勋爵Hutton勋爵认为，酷刑不是“公共职能”或“政府职能”。 |
| Lord Goff, dissenting, concluded that it
was a “governmental function”,
while similar statements were expressed by Lord Hope (“criminal yet governmental”), Lord Saville
(who referred to “official torture”), Lord Millett (“public and official acts”) and Lord Philips (“criminal and official”). | Goff勋爵在反对意见中指出，这是“政府职能”，其他人也提出类似的看法：克雷格黑德的Hope勋爵(“这是犯罪行为，但也是政府行为”)、纽迪吉特的Saville勋爵(提及“官方酷刑”)、Millett勋爵(“公共官方行为”)、Philips勋爵(“这是犯罪行为，也是官方行为”)。 |
| See also Jones v. Saudi Arabia (see
footnote 1415 above)( and FF v. Director of Public Prosecutions (Prince
Nasser case), High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench
Division, Divisional Court, judgment of 7 October 2014 [2014] EWHC 3419
(Admin.). | 另见：Jones诉沙特阿拉伯(见上文脚注1415)和FF诉公诉机构首领(Principe
Nasser案)，高等法院王座法庭分庭(联合王国)，2014年10月7日的判决[2014] EWHC 3419 (Admin.)。 |
| Re Pinochet, Examining Magistrate of
Brussels, judgment of 6 November 1998, ILR, vol. 119, p. 345; | 皮诺切特案，布鲁塞尔预审法官，1998年11月6日令，《国际法案例汇编》，第119卷，第345页； |
| Bouterse (see footnote 1426 above); | Bouterse案(见上文脚注1426)； |
| Prefecture of Voiotia v. Federal Republic
of Germany, Court of First Instance of Livadia (Greece), judgment of 30
October 1997. | Voiotia区诉德意志联邦共和国，Livadia(希腊)一审法院，1997年10月30日的判决。 |
| See above draft article 2 (f) provisionally
adopted by the Commission and the commentary thereto. | 见以上委员会暂时通过的第2条草案(f)项及其评注。 |
| See para. (4) of the commentary to draft
article 5, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-ninth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), p. 237. | 见第5条草案评注第(4)段，《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第237页。 |
| See, a contrario sensu, para. (19) of the commentary to draft article 2, para. 1 (b) (v) of the
draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property,
adopted by the Commission at its forty-third session: “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. | 见，从另方面来说，委员会第四十三届会议通过的国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案第2条草案第1款(b)(五)项评注第19段：“属人豁免与属事豁免不同，后者在官方职务终止后仍然继续存在，前者则于公职一旦解除或终止后即无效。 |
| (Yearbook … 1991,
vol. II (Part Two), p. 18). | (《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第18页)。 |
| See Institute of International Law,
resolution entitled “Immunities from Jurisdiction and
Execution of Heads of State and of Government in International Law”, which sets out — a contrario sensu — the same position in its art. 13, paras. 1-2 (Yearbook, vol. 69
(Session of Vancouver, 2001), pp. 743 et seq., in particular p. 753); | 全部见国际法学会，“关于国际法中国家元首和政府首脑的管辖和执行豁免的决议”，该决议――从另方面来说――在第13条第1款和第2款中采取了同样的立场(《国际法学会年鉴》，第69卷(温哥华会议，2001年），第743页及其后，特别是第753页)； |
| and “Resolution
on the Immunity from Jurisdiction of the State and of Persons Who Act on
Behalf of the State in case of International Crimes”
art. III, paras. 1-2, ibid., vol. 73 (Session of Naples, 2009), pp. 226 et
seq., in particular p. 227). | 以及“关于国家及其官员在国际犯罪中的管辖豁免的决议”，第三条，第1款和第2款，同上，第73卷(那不勒斯会议，2009年)，第226页及其后，特别是第227页。 |
| The resolutions are available on the
website of the Institute: www.idi-iil.org. | 以上决议可查阅国际法学会网站：www.idi-iil.org。 |
| Article 39, paragraph 2 of the Convention
provides: “When the functions of a person enjoying
privileges and immunities have come to an end, such privileges and immunities
shall normally cease at the moment when he leaves the country, or on expiry
of a reasonable period in which to do so, but shall subsist until that time,
even in case of armed conflict. | 该公约第三十九条第二款规定：“享有特权与豁免人员之职务如已终止，此项特权与豁免通常于该员离境之时或听任其离境之合理期间终了之时停止，纵有武装冲突情事，亦应继续有效至该时为止。 |
| However, with respect to acts performed
by such a person in the exercise of his functions as a member of the mission,
immunity shall continue to subsist. | 但关于其以使馆人员资格执行职务之行为，豁免应始终有效。 |
| (Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
Relations, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 500, No. 7310, p. 95, in
particular p. 118). | (《维也纳外交关系公约》，联合国，《条约汇编》，第500卷，第7310号，第95页，特别是第118页)。 |
| Article IV, section 12 of the Convention
provides: “In order to secure, for the
representatives of Members to the principal and subsidiary organs of the
United Nations and to conferences convened by the United Nations, complete
freedom of speech and independence in the discharge of their duties, the
immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written and all
acts done by them in discharging their duties shall continue to be accorded,
notwithstanding that the persons concerned are no longer the representatives
of Members. | 该公约第四条第十二节规定：“为确保出席联合国各主要和辅助机关及联合国所召开会议的各会员国代表于履行其职责时言论完全自由和态度完全独立起见，他们为履行职责而发表的口头或书面的言论和他们所实施的一切行为对法律程序的豁免虽在关系人不再担任会员国代表时仍应继续享有。 |
| (Convention on the Privileges and
Immunities of the United Nations, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1, No.
4, p. 15, in particular p. 22). | (《联合国特权和豁免公约》，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1卷第4号，第15页，特别是第22页)。 |
| The 1947 Convention on the Privileges and
Immunities of the Specialized Agencies follows the same model, in article V,
section 14, it provides: | 1947年《专门机构特权和豁免公约》沿袭了同样的模式，在第五条第十四节中规定： |
| “In order to secure for the
representatives of members of the specialized agencies at meeting convened by
them complete freedom of speech and complete independence in the discharge of
their duties, the immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or
written and all acts done by them in discharging their duties shall continue
to be accorded, notwithstanding that the persons concerned are no longer
engaged in the discharge of such duties.” | “为确保出席专门机构所召开会议的各会员国代表于履行其职责时言论完全自由和态度完全独立起见，其为履行职责而发表的口头或书面的言论和所实施的一切行为，虽关系人已不再从事履行这种职责，仍应继续豁免法律程序。 |
| (ibid., vol.33, No. 521, p. 261, in
particular p. 272). | (同上，第33卷，第521号，第261页，特别是第272页)。 |
| For the meaning of the term “individual”, see para. (4) of the
commentary to draft article 2 (e), Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), p. 232. | 关于“个人”一词的定义，见第2条草案(e)项评注第(4)段，《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第232页。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), p. 67 (para. (2) of the commentary to draft article 4). | 同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第67页(第4条草案评注第(2)段)。 |
| Ibid., p. 70 (para. (7) of the
commentary). | 同上，第70页(评注第(7)段)。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/69/10), p. 237 (para. (4) of the commentary). | 同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第237页(评注第(4)段)。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), p. 70 (para. (7) of the commentary to draft article 4). | 同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第70页(第4条草案评注第(7)段)。 |
| See footnotes 1413 and 1414 above. | 见上文脚注1413和1414。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 267. | 《大会正式记录，第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第267段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 144-155. | 同上，第144-155段。 |
| The statement of the Chairperson of the
Drafting Committee is available on the website of the Commission . | 起草委员会主席的发言见委员会网站。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), para. 251. | 《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第251段。 |
| The text of draft guideline 10, as
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his fourth report, reads as follows: | 特别报告员第四次报告建议的准则草案10案文如下： |
| Draft guideline 10 | 准则草案10 |
| Internal law and the observation of
provisional application of all or part of a treaty | 国内法与对条约的全部或局部的暂时适用 |
| A State that has consented to undertake
obligations by means of the provisional application of all or part of a
treaty may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for
non-compliance with such obligations. | 同意通过暂时适用某一条约的全部或局部而承担义务的国家，不得援引其国内法条款，作为不履行此类义务的理由。 |
| This rule is without prejudice to article
46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 此一规则不妨碍1969年《维也纳公约》第四十六条的施行。 |
| The text of the draft guidelines
provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee reads as follows: | 起草委员会暂时通过的准则草案案文如下： |
| Draft guideline 1 | 准则草案1 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| The present draft guidelines concern the
provisional application of treaties. | 本准则草案涉及条约的暂时适用。 |
| Draft guideline 2 | 准则草案2 |
| Purpose | 目的 |
| The purpose of the present draft
guidelines is to provide guidance regarding the law and practice on the
provisional application of treaties, on the basis of Article 25 of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties and other rules of international law. | 本准则草案的目的是，在《维也纳条约法公约》第二十五条和国际法其他规则的基础上，就关于条约的暂时适用的法律和实践提供指导。 |
| Draft guideline 3 | 准则草案3 |
| General rule | 一般规则 |
| A treaty or a part of a treaty may be
provisionally applied, pending its entry into force, if the treaty itself so
provides, or if in some other manner it has been so agreed. | 如条约本身如此规定，或以其他方式协议如此办理，条约或条约之一部分可在条约生效前暂时适用。 |
| Draft guideline 4 | 准则草案4 |
| Form | 形式 |
| In addition to the case where the treaty
so provides, the provisional application of a treaty or part of a treaty may
be agreed through: | 除条约规定的情况外，条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用可通过以下形式约定： |
| (a)a separate agreement; | 一项单独协定； |
| or | 或 |
| (b)any other means or arrangements,
including a resolution adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference. | 任何其他手段或安排，包括国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议。 |
| Draft guideline 5* | 准则草案5 |
| (* The Drafting Committee decided to keep
draft guideline 5 in abeyance and to return to it at a later stage.) | (*起草委员会决定暂时搁置准则草案5,
稍后阶段再回头讨论。 ) |
| Draft guideline 6 | 准则草案6 |
| Commencement of provisional application | 暂时适用的开始 |
| The provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty, pending its entry into force between the States or
international organizations concerned, takes effect on such date, and in
accordance with such conditions and procedures, as the treaty provides or as
are otherwise agreed. | 条约或条约之一部分在有关缔约国或国际组织之间生效前，按条约规定的或以其他方式协定的日期、条件和程序生效。 |
| Draft guideline 7 | 准则草案7 |
| Legal effects of provisional application | 暂时适用的法律效力 |
| The provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty produces the same legal effects as if the treaty were
in force between the States or international organizations concerned, unless
the treaty provides otherwise or it is otherwise agreed. | 除条约另有规定或另经协议外，条约或条约之一部分产生如条约在有关缔约国或国际组织之间生效相同的效果。 |
| Draft guideline 8 | 准则草案8 |
| Responsibility for breach | 违约责任 |
| The breach of an obligation arising under
a treaty or a part of a treaty that is provisionally applied entails
international responsibility in accordance with the applicable rules of
international law. | 根据适用的国际法规则，违反暂时适用的条约或条约之一部分产生的义务引起国际责任。 |
| Draft guideline 9 | 准则草案9 |
| Termination upon notification of
intention not to become a party | 在通知其不欲成为缔约国的意图时终止 |
| Unless the treaty otherwise provides or
it is otherwise agreed, the provisional application of a treaty or a part of
a treaty with respect to a State or international organization shall be
terminated if that State or international organization notifies the other States
or international organizations between which the treaty or a part of a treaty
is being applied provisionally of its intention not to become a party to the
treaty. | 除条约另有规定或另有协议外，对一国或国际组织暂时适用的条约或条约一部分，应于该国或国际组织通知条约或条约一部分对其暂时适用的其他各国或国际组织其不欲成为条约当事国的意图时终止。 |
| Permanent Court of Arbitration, Yukos
Universal Limited (Isle of Man) and the Russian Federation, interim award on
jurisdiction and admissibility, 30 November 2009, Case No. AA 227; | 常设仲裁法院，Yukos Universal Limited(Isle of
Man)诉俄罗斯联邦案，关于管辖权和可受理性问题的临时裁决，2009年11月30日； |
| see also the joined cases in The Hague
District Court, The Russian Federation v. Veteran Petroleum Limited, The
Russian Federation v. Yukos Universal Limited and The Russian Federation v.
Hulley Entreprises Limited (C/09/477160/HA ZA 15-1; | 另见海牙地区法院的合并案件，俄罗斯联邦诉Veteran Petroleum
Limited案，俄罗斯联邦诉Yukos Universal Limited案和俄罗斯联邦诉Hulley Entreprises Limited案(C/09/477160/HA
ZA 15-1； |
| C/09/477162/HA ZA 15-2; | C/09/477162/HA ZA 15-2； |
| C/09/481619/HA ZA 15-112), 20 April
2016). | C/09/481619/HA ZA 15-112)，2016年4月20日。 |
| International Centre for Settlement of
Investment Disputes (ICSID), Ioannis Kardassopoulos and Georgia, decision on
jurisdiction, 6 July 2007, Case No. ARB/05/18. | 国际投资争端解决中心，Ioannis Kardassopoulos诉格鲁吉亚案，关于管辖权的决定，2007年7月6日，第ARB/05/18号案。 |
| Vienna, 23 August 1978, United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 1946, No. 33356, p. 3. | 1978年8月23日，维也纳，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1946卷，第33356号，第3页。 |
| See Regulation to give effect to Article
102 of the Charter of the United Nations, adopted by the General Assembly on
14 December 1946 (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1, p. XVI), as modified
by resolutions 364 (IV) B of 1 December 1949, 482 (V) of 12 December 1950 and
33/141 A of 19 December 1978. | 见大会1946年12月14日通过的落实《联合国宪章》第一〇二条的条例(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1卷，第十六页)，该条例后经大会1949年12月1日第364(IV)B、1950年12月12日第482(V)和1978年12月19日第33/141 A号决议修正。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap. IV, sect.
F, and for the commentary thereto, ibid., addendum 1 (A/66/10/Add.1). | 见《大会正式纪录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第四章F节，有关评注，同上，增编1(A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| Available from. | 可查阅。 |
| Treaty Handbook (United Nations
publication, Sales No. E.12.V.1); | 《条约手册》(联合国出版物，出售品编号E.12.V.1)； |
| Final Clauses of Multilateral Treaties — Handbook (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.04.V.3); and
Summary of Practice of the Secretary-General as Depositary of Multilateral
Treaties (ST/LEG/7/Rev.1, | 《多边条约最后条款――手册》(联合国出版物，出售品编号E.04.V.3)，和《秘书长作为多边条约保存人的惯例摘要》(ST/LEG/
7/Rev.1, 联合国出版物，出售品编号E.94.V.15)。 |
| United Nations publication, Sales No.
E.94.V.15). Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session
Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), paras. | 《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第169段和附件B。 |
| 169 and annex B. Ibid., Sixty-ninth
Session Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 268 and Annex. | 同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第268段和附件。 |
| Yearbook … 1998,
vol. II (Part Two), para. 553. | 《1998年…年鉴》第二卷第二部分，第553段。 |
| See also Yearbook … 1997, vol. II (Part Two), para. 238. | 另见《1997年…年鉴》第二卷第二部分，第238段。 |
| Ibid., 1996, vol. II (Part Two), p. 97,
para. 248 and Annex II, Addendum 2. | 同上，《1996年…年鉴》第二卷第二部分，第97页，第248段和附件二增编2。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-first Session Supplement No. 10 (A/61/10), para. 257 and Annex B. | 《大会正式记录，第六十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/61/10)，第257段和附件B。 |
| Ibid., Annex C. | 同上，附件C。 |
| Ibid., Annex D. | 同上，附件D。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 365 and Annex D. | 《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第365段和附件D。 |
| See para. 307 above. | 见上文第307段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/64/10), para. 231; | 《大会正式记录，第六十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/64/10)，第231段； |
| ibid., Sixty-fifth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/65/10), paras. 390-393; | 同上，《第六十五届会议，补编第10号》(A/65/10)，第390-393段； |
| ibid., Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/66/10), paras. 392-398; | 同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第392-398段； |
| ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 274-279; | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第274-279段； |
| ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), paras. 171-179; | 同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第171-179段； |
| ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 273-280; | 同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第273至第280段； |
| ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), paras. 288-295. | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第288-295段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 67/1 of 30
November 2012 (“Declaration of the High-level Meeting
of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International
Levels”), para. 41. | 大会2012年11月30日第67/1号决议(《国内和国际的法治问题大会高级别会议宣言》)，A/RES/67/1号文件，第41段。 |
| Report of the Secretary-General on
Measuring the effectiveness of the support provided by the United Nations
system for the promotion of the rule of law in conflict and post-conflict
situations, S/2013/341, 11 June 2013, para. 70. | 衡量联合国系统在冲突中和冲突后支持促进法治的效力的秘书长报告，S/2013/341,
2013年6月11日，第70段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 21
October 2015, para. 35. | 大会2015年10月21日第70/1号决议，第35段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/118 of 18
December 2015, paras. 13 and 19. | 大会2015年12月18日第70/118号决议，第13和第19段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/118 of 18
December 2015, para. 8. | 大会2015年12月18日第70/118号决议，第8段。 |
| See more specifically Official Records of
the General Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), para.
294. | 具体见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第294段。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Fifty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/57/10), paras. 525-531; | 见《大会正式记录，第五十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/57/10)，第525至531段； |
| ibid., Fifty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/58/10), para. 447; | 同上，《第五十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/58/10)，第447段； |
| ibid., Fifty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/59/10), para. 369; | 同上，《第五十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/59/10)，第369段； |
| ibid., Sixtieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/60/10), para. 501; | 同上，《第六十届会议，补编第10号》(A/60/10)，第501段； |
| ibid., Sixty-first Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/61/10), para. 269; | 同上，《第六十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/61/10)，第269段； |
| ibid., Sixty-second Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/62/10), para. 379; | 同上，《第六十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/62/10)，第379段； |
| ibid., Sixty-third Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/63/10), para. 358; | 同上，《第六十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/63/10)，第358段； |
| ibid., Sixty-fourth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/64/10), para. 240; | 同上，《第六十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/64/10)，第240段； |
| ibid., Sixty-fifth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/65/10), para. 396, and ibid., Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/66/10), para. 399; | 同上，《第六十五届会议，补编第10号》(A/65/10)，第396段和同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第399段； |
| ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 280; | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第280段； |
| ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), para. 181; | 同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第181段； |
| ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/69/10), para. 281; | 同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第281段； |
| and ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/70/10), para. 299. | 和同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第299段。 |
| See ibid., Sixty-second Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/62/10), paras. 387-395. | 见同上，《第六十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/62/10)，第387-395段。 |
| See also ibid., Sixty-eighth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), para. 185. | 另见同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第185段。 |
| In general, available from:. | 一般可查阅：。 |
| This statement is recorded in the summary
record of that meeting. | 这一发言载于该次会议简要记录。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Statements were made by Ms. Helen Durham,
Director of International Law and Policy, ICRC, Mr. P. Comissário Afonso, Chairperson of the Commission. | 发言的是红十字会国际法律和政策主任Helen Durham女士与委员会主席科米萨里奥•阿丰索先生。 |
| The presentations on “Crimes against Humanity” were by Mr. Sean
D. Murphy, and on “Protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflicts” by Ms. Marie G.
Jacobsson. | 肖恩 •墨菲先生作了关于“危害人类罪”的演讲，玛丽 •雅各布松女士作了关于“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”的演讲。 |
| The further presentations on “Outcomes of the 32nd International Conference of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement”, were by Mr. Knut Doermann,
Chief Legal Officer and Head of the ICRC Legal Division and on “Interaction between international humanitarian law and the legal
framework addressing counter-terrorism”, by Mr.
Tristan Ferraro, Legal Adviser, ICRC. | 介绍“国际红十字和红新月运动第32届国际会议结果情况”的是红十字会首席法务官兼法律司司长Knut Doermann博士，介绍“国际人道主义法与处理反恐问题的法律框架的互动关系”的是红十字会法律顾问Tristan Ferraro先生。 |
| The following persons participated in the
Seminar: Mr. Humberto Cantú Rivera (Mexico), Ms. Hua
Deng (China), Mr. Martina Filippiová (Czech
Republic), Ms. Fong Mian Yi Seraphina (Singapore), Mr. Simon E. Gomez
Guaimara (Venezuela), Ms. Sarah Hayes (France), Mr. Etienne Henry
(Switzerland), Mr. Alonso Emilio Illueca (Panama), Ms. Fatma Fathy Khalifa
(Egypt), Ms. Ayechan Lynn (Myanmar), Mr. Onésime
Alain Ndi Bitan (Cameroon), Ms. Nguyen Thi Tuong Van (Vietnam), Ms. Irekpitan
Okukpon (Nigeria), Ms. Edilen B. Pita Rodríguez (Cuba),
Mr. Eric-Aimé Semien (Côte d’Ivoire),
Mr. Evgeny Skachkov (Russia), Ms. Oratile Slave (Botswana), Mr. Hidetaka
Takeuchi (Japan), Ms. Sosena Tesfamichael Tefera (Ethiopia), Mr. Manasawee
Tonyoopaiboon (Thailand), Ms. Maruša Veber
(Slovenia), Mr. Giovanny Vega-Barbosa (Colombia). | 下列人员参加了讲习班：Humberto Cantú Rivera先生(墨西哥)、Hua Deng(中国)、Martina
Filippiová先生(捷克共和国)、Fong Mian Yi Seraphina 女士(新加坡)、Simon E. Gomez Guaimara 先生(委内瑞拉)、Sarah Hayes女士(法国)、Etienne Henry先生(瑞士)、Alonso Emilio
Illueca先生(巴拿马)、Fatma Fathy Khalifa 女士(埃及)、Ayechan Lynn 女士(缅甸)、Onésime Alain
Ndi Bitan先生(喀麦隆)、Nguyen Thi Tuong Van女士(越南)、Irekpitan Okukpon女士(尼日利亚)、Edilen B.
Pita Rodríguez 女士(古巴)、Eric-Aimé Semien先生(科特迪瓦)、Evgeny
Skachkov 先生(俄罗斯)、Oratile Slave女士(博茨瓦纳)、Hidetaka Takeuchi先生(日本)、Sosena
Tesfamichael Tefera 女士(埃塞俄比亚)、Manasawee Tonyoopaiboon 先生(泰国)、Maruša Veber 女士(斯洛文尼亚)、Giovanny
Vega-Barbosa 先生(哥伦比亚)。 |
| The Selection Committee, chaired by Mr.
Makane Moïse Mbengue, Professor of International Law at the University of
Geneva, met on 12 April 2016 and selected 23 candidates out of 92
applications. | 由日内瓦大学国际法教授Makane Moïse Mbengue先生担任主席的甄选委员会于2016年4月12日举行会议，从92名申请人中录取了23人参加本届讲习班。 |
| One selected candidate could not attend
the Seminar. | 1名被录取的候选人最后未能参加讲习班。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), paras. 80-84. | 《大会第六十六届会议正式记录》，补编第10号(A/66/10)，第80-84段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 66/100 of 9
December 2011. | 大会2011年12月9日第66/100号决议。 |
| Yearbook of the International Law
Commission, 2002, vol. II (Part Two), p. 96, para. 486. | 《国际法年鉴》，2002年，第二卷第二部分，96页第486段。 |
| See the summary records of its plenary
meetings on 29 July 2010 and 31 May and 1 June 2011: documents
A/CN.4/SR.3070, A/CN.4/SR.3095 and A/CN.4/SR.3096. | 见2010年7月29日和2011年5月31日及6月1日全体会议的简要记录：文件A/CN.4/SR.3070、A/CN.4/SR.3095和A/CN.4/SR.3096。 |
| In 2010 the Commission had before it a
Note by the Secretariat on settlement of dispute clauses (document
A/CN.4/623), and in 2011 a Working Paper on the peaceful settlement of
disputes (document A/CN.4/641). | 委员会在2010年收到了秘书处关于解决争端条款的说明(文件A/CN.4/623)，2011年收到了关于和平解决争端的工作文件(文件A/CN.4/641)。 |
| The term “international
organization” is to be understood along the lines of
the definition in the draft articles on the responsibility of international
organizations (Art. 2 (a): | “国际组织”一词的理解应沿循关于国际组织责任的条款草案中的定义(第2条(a)： |
| “‘international organization’ means an organization established by treaty or other instrument
governed by international law and possessing its own international legal
personality. | “‘国际组织’是指根据条约或受国际法制约的其他文书建立的具有独立国际法律人格的组织。 |
| International organizations may include
as members, in addition to States, other entities”). | 国际组织的成员除国家以外，还可包括其他实体”)。 |
| See, e.g., Appeal Relating to the
Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1972, p. 46, at p.
60, para. 26, | 例如见对国际民用航空组织理事会管辖权的上诉案，《1972年国际法院案例汇编》，第46页起，见第60页第26段。 |
| where the ICJ noted: “The case is presented to the Court in the guise of an ordinary
dispute between States (and such a dispute underlies it). | 国际法院在其中指出，“本案作为国家间的一般冲突提交本法院(也是这一冲突的起因)。 |
| Yet in the proceedings before the Court,
it is the act of a third entity — the Council of ICAO
— which one of the parties is impugning and the other
defending”. | 然而在法院的诉讼中，实际上其中的一方所指责而另一方为之辩护的却是一个第三方实体，即国际民用航空组织理事会的行为。” |
| Dispute settlement concerning such
matters has to take account of the immunities enjoyed by international
organizations, as well as the latter’s obligation to
make provisions for appropriate modes of settlement under certain treaties. | 解决有关这类问题的争端，必须考虑国际组织享有豁免，以及在一些条约下国际组织有义务对解决争端的适当方式作出规定。 |
| It is quite common for provision to be
made for special procedures, including arbitration, to cover such cases. | 较为普遍的情况是，对这类案件规定采用包括仲裁在内的特别程序。 |
| The Council of Europe’s Committee of Legal Advisers on Public international law (CAHDI)
has on its agenda an item on | 欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会(CAHDI)的议程上有一个项目： |
| ‘Settlement of disputes of a private
character to which an international organisation is a party’ (see Meeting Report of the 50th meeting of CAHDI, Strasbourg,
24-25 September 2015, CAHDI (2015) 23, paras. 23-29). | “国际组织作为当事方但带有私法性质的争端的解决”(见法律顾问委员会第五十次会议报告，斯特拉斯堡，2015年9月24-25日，法律顾问委员会(2015)23,23-29段)。 |
| The CAHDI has sought the comments of
States on the basis of a questionnaire, which are not yet publicly available
(CAHDI (2016) 9 prov.). | 法律顾问委员会在一份问卷调查中征求各国的意见，但尚未公布(CAHDI(2016)
9 prov.)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 37/10 of 15
November 1982. | 大会1982年11月15日第37/10号决议。 |
| In principle, it is uncontested that the
mechanisms for the peaceful settlement of disputes are open to international
organizations (See Reparation for injuries suffered in the service of the
United Nations, Advisory Opinion: I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 174, where the
Court addressed, among others, the capacity of the United Nations to bring
international claims against States). | 原则上，和平解决争端的机制适应于国际组织没有争议(见“为联合国服务期间所受伤害的赔偿，咨询意见，《1949年国际法院案例汇编》”，第174页，国际法院在意见中讲到联合国可以对国家提出国际索赔)。 |
| Such mechanisms include “negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration,
judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other
peaceful means of [the parties’] own choice” (Art. 33 of the UN Charter). | 这类机制，包括“谈判、调查、调停、和解、公断、司法解决、区域机关或区域办法之利用，或[各方]自行选择之其他和平方法”(《联合国宪章》第三十三条。 |
| See also F. Dopagne, “Les différends opposant l’organisation international à un état ou une autre organisation internationale”, in E. Lagrange and J-M. Sorel (eds.), Droit des Organisations
Internationales (Paris: LGDJ, 2013), pp. 1101-1120, at p. 1109. | 另见F. Dopagne, ”Les
différends opposant l’organisation
international à un état ou
une autre organisation internationale”，in E. Lagrange
and J-M. Sorel(eds.)，Droit des Organisations
Internationales(Paris ：LGDJ, 2013)，pp. 1101-1120, at p. 1109。 |
| “Only states may be parties in cases
before the Court.” | “在法院得为诉讼当事国者，限于国家。” |
| “2. The Court, subject to and in
conformity with its Rules, may request of public international organizations
information relevant to cases before it, and shall receive such information
presented by such organizations on their own initiative. 3. | “二.法院得依其规则，请求公共国际团体供给关于正在审理案件之情报。 该项团体自动供给之情报，法院应接受之。 |
| Whenever the construction of the
constituent instrument of a public international organization or of an
international convention adopted thereunder is in question in a case before
the Court, the Registrar shall so notify the public international
organization concerned and shall communicate to it copies of all the written
proceedings. ” | 三.法院于某一案件遇有公共国际团体之组织约章、或依该项约章所缔结之国际协约、发生解释问题时，书记官长应通知有关公共国际团体井向其递送所有书面程序之文件副本。” |
| See also Art. 43, paras. 2 and 3, of the
Rules of Court, which were added in 2005. | 另见2005年增加的法院规则第四十三条第三和第二款。 |
| Art. 96, UN Charter. Specialised
agencies, when authorised, may only request advisory opinions on legal
questions arising within the scope of their activities. | 《联合国宪章》第九十六条。 各种专门机关，对于其工作范围内之任何法律问题，得随时以大会之授权，请求国际法院发表咨询意见。 |
| Art. VIII, Sect. 30, Convention on the
Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (New York, 13 February 1946),
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1, p. 15. | 《联合国特权和豁免公约》(1946年2月13日，纽约)第八条第三十节，联合国《条约汇编》第一卷第15页。 |
| See also, e.g., Art. IX, Sect. 32,
Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies (New
York, 21 November 1947), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 33, p. 261; Art.
X, Sect. 34, Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (Vienna, 1 July 1959), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 374, p. 147; | 另见《专门机构特权和豁免公约》第九条第32节(1947年11月21日，纽约)，《国际原子能机构特权和豁免协定》(1959年7月1日，维也纳)，联合国《条约汇编》第374卷147页； |
| Art. XI, Sect. 21, Agreement (with
exchange of notes) regulating conditions for the operation, in Chile, of
Headquarters of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America
(Santiago, 16 February 1953), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 314, p. 49; | 《关于联合国拉丁美洲经济委员会在智利开展业务的协定(附换文)》第九条第21节(1953年2月16日，圣地亚哥)，联合国《条约汇编》第314卷第49页； |
| Art. XIII, Sect. 26, Agreement between
the United Nations and the Government of Thailand relating to the
Headquarters of the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East in Thailand
(Geneva, 26 May 1954), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 260, p. 35; | 《联合国与泰国政府关于在泰国设立亚洲及远东经济委员会总部的协定》(1954年5月26日，日内瓦)第十三条第26节，联合国《条约汇编》第260卷第35页； |
| all cited in J. Sztucki, “International Organizations as Parties to Contentious Proceedings
before the International Court of Justice?”, in A.S.
Müller et al. (eds.), The International Court of
Justice: Its Future Role After Fifty Years (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1977), pp.
141-167, at notes 24-25. | 均在J. Sztucki的“国际组织在国际法院的诉讼程序中作为当事方”一文中列举，A.S.Müller et al.(eds.)，The International Court of Justice:Its Future Role After Fifty
Years(The Hague:Nijhoff, 1977)，pp.141-167, at notes
24-25。 |
| Art. VIII, Sect. 21, Agreement between
the United Nations and the United States of America regarding the
Headquarters of the United Nations (Lake Success, 26 June1947), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 11, p. 12: | 《联合国和美利坚合众国关于联合国总部的协定》(1947年6月26日，成功湖村)，第八条第二十一节，联合国《条约汇编》，第11卷第12页： |
| “(a)Any dispute between the United
Nations and the United States concerning the interpretation or application of
this agreement or of any supplemental agreement, which is not settled by
negotiation or other agreed mode of settlement, shall be referred for final
decision to a tribunal of three arbitrators, one to be named by the
Secretary-General, one to be named by the Secretary of State of the United
States, and the third to be chosen by the two, or, if they should fail to
agree upon a third, then by the President of the International Court of
Justice. | “(a)联合国及美国关于解释及实施本协定或任何补充协定之争执，如未能由磋商或其他双方同意之办法解决者，应提交三仲裁人组织之法庭取决。
仲裁人之一由秘书长提名，另一由美国国务卿提名，第三人由秘书长及国务卿一同抉择，如双方不能同意第三仲裁人时，则由国际法院院长指派之。 |
| (b)The Secretary-General or the United
States may ask the General Assembly to request of the International Court of
Justice an advisory opinion on any legal question arising in the course of
such proceedings. | (b)秘书长或美国得就此项程序引起之法律问题请大会征询国际法院之咨询意见。 |
| Pending the receipt of the opinion of the
Court, an interim decision of the arbitral tribunal shall be observed on both
parties. | 于接获法院之意见以前，双方应遵从仲裁法庭之临时裁定。 |
| Thereafter, the arbitral tribunal shall
render a final decision, having regard to the opinion of the Court.” | 其后，仲裁法庭得参照法院之意见作成最后裁定。 ” |
| See also Art. VII, Sect. 31, Agreement
between the International Civil Aviation Organization and the Government of
Canada regarding the Headquarters of the International Civil Aviation
Organization (Montreal, 14 April 1951), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
96, p. 176. | 也见《国际民用航空组织与加拿大政府关于国际民用航空组织总部的协定》(1951年4月14日，蒙特利尔)第七条第31节，联合国《条约汇编》第96卷第176页。 |
| Art. 65 of the ICJ Statute refers to Art.
96 of the UN Charter: | 《国际法院规约》第六十五条提到《联合国宪章》第九十六条： |
| “(a) The General Assembly or the Security
Council may request the International Court of Justice to give an advisory
opinion on any legal question. | “一.大会或安全理事会对于任何法律问题得请国际法院发表咨询意见。 |
| (b) Other organs of the United Nations
and specialized agencies, which may at any time be so authorized by the
General Assembly, may also request advisory opinions of the Court on legal
questions arising within the scope of their activities. ” | 二.联合国其他机关及各种专门机关，对于其工作范围内之任何法律问题，得随时以大会之授权，请求国际法院发表咨询意见。
” |
| Authorised organs include ECOSOC, the
Trusteeship Council and the Interim Committee of the General Assembly. | 得到此授权的机构包括经社理事会、托管理事会和大会临时委员会。 |
| Authorised specialised agencies include
the ILO, FAO, UNESCO, WHO, IBRD, IFC, IDA, IMF, ICAO, ITU, IFAD, WMO, IMO,
WIPO and UNIDO. | 得到此授权的专门机构包括劳工组织、粮农组织、教科文组织、卫生组织、国际复兴开发银行、国际金融公司、国际开发协会、货币基金组织、民航组织、电信联盟、农发基金、气象组织、海事组织、知识产权组织和工发组织。 |
| The IAEA has also been authorised to request
advisory opinions, although it is not a UN specialised agency. | 国际原子能机构尽管不是联合国的专门机构，但也得到咨询授权。 |
| See “Organs and
Agencies of the United Nations Authorized to Request Advisory Opinions”, available at (visited 29 June 2016). | 见“得到联合国授权可请求咨询意见的组织和机构”，可登录： (visited 29
June 2016)。 |
| See also Difference Relating to Immunity
from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1999, p. 62, at p. 81, para. 36. | 另见关于人权委员会特别报告员享有法律程序豁免的争议，咨询意见，《1999年国际法院案例汇编》，第62页起，见第81页第36段。 |
| In this regard, see the complex dispute
settlement clause in Art. 66.2 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties between States and International Organizations or between
International Organizations (1986). | 在这方面，见《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》(1986年)第66条第2款中复杂的争端解决条款。 |
| Yearbook of the International Law
Commission, 1980, vol. 2 (Part Two), pp. 87-88, paras. 9-11; | 《国际法委员会年鉴》1980年，第二卷(第二部分)，第87-88页，第9-11段； |
| Yearbook of the International Law
Commission, 1982, vol. 2 (Part Two), p. 65, paras. 4-6. | 《国际法委员会年鉴》，1982年，第二卷(第二部分)第65页第4-6段。 |
| As the previous footnote reveals, States
rejected these recommendations to leave advisory procedures out of the
dispute settlement clause of what would become the Vienna Convention on the
Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between
International Organizations. | 上一个脚注表明，各国拒绝了这些建议，在《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》中，不将法律咨询程序纳入其解决争端程序。 |
| Considerations of judicial economy have
also been cited following the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s need to bring separate claims against all NATO members, rather
than a single claim against NATO, in the Legality of Use of Force cases. | 在“使用武力的合法性”案中，南斯拉夫联盟共和国必须对北约的所有成员国单独提出索赔，而不是对北约提出一项索赔，之后便有人提出了司法经济的考虑。 |
| Review of the Role of the International
Court of Justice, Report of the Secretary General, document A/8382 (1971),
Question III (a), pp. 6, 70-77, paras. 200-224. | 《审查国际法院的作用》，秘书长的报告，文件A/8382(1971)，问题III(a)，第6页，第70-77页，第200-224段。 |
| See also documents A/8382/Add.1, p. 6; | 另见文件A/8382/Add.1,第6页； |
| A/8382/Add.3, p. 4; | A/8382/Add.3,第4页； |
| A/8382/Add.4, p. 3. | A/8382/Add.4,第3页。 |
| Document A/AC.182/L.95 and Rev.1 (1997). | 文件A/AC.182/L.95和Rev.1(1997)。 |
| Document A/AC.182/L.97 (1997). | 文件A/AC.182/L.97(1997)。 |
| See Wellens (footnote 16 above), pp.
237-238; | 见Wellens(上文脚注16)，第237-238页； |
| See Annex IX to the 1982 Convention, art.
7 of which makes special provision for the case where an international
organization and one or more of its member States are joint parties to a
dispute, or parties in the same interest. | 见1982年公约附件九，其中的第七条对国际组织与一个或多个成员国同为争端当事方的情况和共同利益方的情况专门作了规定。 |
| The European Union has been a party to
one case before the ITLOS Case No. 7, Case concerning the Conservation and
Sustainable Exploitation of Swordfish Stocks in the South-Eastern Pacific
Ocean (Chile/European Union). | 欧洲联盟曾经在国际海洋法法庭的第7号案—“东南太平洋箭鱼种群的保护和可持续开发案”中作为当事方(智利/欧洲共同体)。 |
| International Law Association,
Resolutions: International Arbitration, Int’l L. Ass’n Rep. Conf., vol. 52 (1966), p. xii, para.
1. | 国际法协会，决议：国际仲裁，Int’l L. Ass’n Rep. Conf.，vol. 52(1966)，p. xii, para. 1。 |
| Document A/C.6/47/L.12 (1992), para. 15. | 文件A/C.6/47/L.12(1992)，第15段。 |
| Tax regime governing pensions paid to
retired UNESCO officials residing in France (France - UNESCO), UNRIAA, vol.
XXV, pp. 231-266; | 向在法国定居的教科文组织退休官员支付的退休金税收制度(法国－教科文组织)，联合国《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十五卷，第231-266页； |
| European Molecular Biology Laboratory
(EMBL) v. Federal Republic of Germany, ILR, vol. 105, pp. 1-74. | 欧洲分子生物学实验室(EMBL)诉德意志联邦共和国，《国际法案例汇编》，第105卷，第1-74页。 |
| Another recent case, terminated without
an award, was District Municipality of La Punta (Peru) v. United Nations
Office for Project Services (UNOPS) (PCA Case No. 2014-38); The
Atlanto-Scandian Herring Arbitration (The Kingdom of Denmark in respect of
the Faroe Islands v. The European Union) (PCA Case No. 2013-30, under Part XV
of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, also concluded
without an award. | 另一个最新的案例未作出裁决结案，是拉蓬塔市区(秘鲁)诉联合国项目事务厅(PCA Case No. 2014-38)，还有在《联合国海洋法公约》第十五部分下提出的The Atlanto-Scandian Herring Arbitration(丹麦王国因法罗群岛诉欧洲联盟)(PCA Case No. 2013-30，也在没有作出裁决的情况下结案。 |
| Examples of recent agreements with
provisions along these lines include: the 2010 Agreement concerning the
establishment of UNISDR office in Incheon; | 采用类似规定的一些较新的协定包括：2010年关于联合国减灾办公室在仁川设立办事处的协定； |
| UNICEF Egypt Agreement; | 儿童基金会与埃及的协定； |
| 2010 UNDP-Shared Services Centre
Agreement: Agreement between the Government of Malaysia and the United
Nations Development Programme concerning the establishment of the UNDP global
shared service centre (Kuala Lumpur, 24 October 2011), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 2794. | 2010年开发署分享服务中心协定； 马来西亚政府与联合国开发署关于设立开发署全球分享服务中心的协定(2011年10月24日，科伦坡)，联合国《条约汇编》，第2794卷。 |
| For an earlier form of arbitration clause
see, by way of example, Sect. 21 (a) of the Agreement between the United
Nations and the United States of America regarding the Headquarters of the
United Nations (Lake Success, 26 June 1947), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 11, p. 11. | 较早期的仲裁条款，可参见《联合国和美利坚合众国关于联合国总部的协定》(1947年6月26日，成功湖村)第21(a)节，联合国《条约汇编》第11卷第11页。 |
| For an analysis of the obligation to
arbitrate under such earlier clauses, see: Applicability of the Obligation to
Arbitrate under Section 21 of the United Nations Headquarters Agreement of 26
June 1947, Advisory Opinion of 26 April 1988, I.C.J. Reports 1988, p. 12; | 根据早期的这类条款提交仲裁的义务，有关分析见：在1947年6月26日《联合国总部协定》第二十一节下仲裁义务的适用，1988年4月26日的咨询意见，《1988年国际法院案例汇编》，第12页； |
| Interpretation of Peace Treaties,
Advisory Opinion: I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 65, at p. 77. | 和平条约的解释，咨询意见：《1950年国际法院案例汇编》，第65页起，见第77页。 |
| Permanent Court of Arbitration, Optional
Rules for Arbitration involving International Organizations and States
(1996), at p. vii. | 常设仲裁法院，《常设仲裁法院国际组织和国家间仲裁任择规则》(1996年)，见第七页。 |
| Ibid., recommendations 2-5, at pp.
223-224. | 同上，建议2-5,见第223-224页。 |
| The ILA recommends that an international
organization “may consider the establishment of an
international commission of inquiry into any matter that has become the
subject of serious public concern” (ibid.,
recommendation 6, at p. 224). | 国际法协会建议，国际组织“可考虑设立一个国际调查委员会，调查任何已成为公众严重关切问题的事项”(同上，建议6,见第224页)。 |
| It points in particular to the Report of
the Independent Inquiry into the Actions of the United Nations during the
1994 Genocide in Rwanda (S/1999/1257, annex) and the Report of the
Secretary-General pursuant to general Assembly resolution 53/35 into the fall
of Srebrenica (A/54/549) (ibid., at p. 226). | 国际法协会特别提到《调查联合国在1994年卢旺达发生灭绝种族事件期间所采取的行动的独立调查委员会的报告》(S/1999/1257,附件)和《秘书长依照大会第53/35号决议提出的报告》(A/54/549)(同上，见第226页)。 |
| Practice prior to 1967 was briefly
covered in the practice of the United Nations, the specialized agencies and
the International Atomic Energy Agency concerning their status, privileges
and immunities: study prepared by the Secretariat, document A/CN.4/L.118 and
Add.1 and Add.2 (1967), pp. 218-220, paras. 49-56 (in regard to the UN); | 《联合国、各专门机构和国际原子能组织关于其地位、特权和豁免的惯例：秘书处编写的研究报告》中简要介绍了1967年之前的惯例，A/CN.4/L.118及Add.1和Add.2(1967年)，第218-220页，第49-56段(关于联合国)； |
| p. 302, para. 23 (in regard to the
specialised agencies). | 第302页，第23段(关于各专门机构)。 |
| Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the
Service of the United Nations, at p. 184. | 执行联合国公务时所受损害的赔偿，见第184页。 |
| Article 1 of the ILC Draft Articles on
Diplomatic Protection, document A/61/10 (2006), defines diplomatic protection
as “the invocation by a State, through diplomatic
action or other means of peaceful settlement, of the responsibility of
another State for an injury caused by an internationally wrongful act of that
State to a natural or legal person that is a national of the former State
with a view to the implementation of such responsibility.” | 国际法委员会外交保护条款草案，A/61/10号文件(2006年)将外交保护定义为“一国对于另一国国际不法行为给属于本国国民的自然人或法人造成损害，通过外交行动或其他和平解决手段援引另一国的责任，以期使该国责任得到履行。
” |
| Articles 14-15 of the Draft Articles on
Diplomatic Protection, ibid., define the scope of the exhaustion requirement
in the context of diplomatic protection. | 外交保护条款草案第14-15条，同上，定义了外交保护背景下用尽当地救济这一要求的范围。 |
| See C. Eagleton, “International Organizations and the Law of Responsibility”, in Recueil des Cours, vol. 76, p. 319, at pp. 351-352; | 见C. Eagleton, “International
Organizations and the Law of Responsibility”，in
Recueil des Cours, vol. 76, p.319, at pp. 351-352； |
| Dopagne (footnote 9 above), at p. 1108; | Dopagne(上文脚注9)， at p.1108； |
| C. Trindade, “Exhaustion
of Local Remedies and the Law of International Organizations”, Revue de Droit International, de sciences diplomatiques et
politiques, vol. 57 (1979), p. 81, at pp. 82-83. Eagleton goes so far as to
assert that the requirement of exhaustion applies to every claim by the
United Nations, even “when it alleges injury against
itself by a state” (at p. 352). | C. Trindade, “Exhaustion
of Local Remedies and the Law of International Organizations”，Revue de Droit International, de sciences diplomatiques et
politiques, vol. 57(1979)，p. 81, at pp. 82-83.
Eagleton甚至断言，用尽当地救济的要求适用于联合国提出的所有主张，即便“在联合国声称自身受到一国损害时”也是如此(见第352页)。 |
| This derives from the erroneous view that
the exhaustion requirement applies also to direct injuries to a foreign
State, and not just when a State is exercising diplomatic protection on
behalf of a national. | 这源自一种错误的认识，即用尽当地救济的要求不仅适用于一国为一国民行使外交保护的情况，也适用于对一外国造成的直接伤害。 |
| Amerasinghe rightly notes that, as for
direct injuries to States, “the rule [of exhaustion]
would not apply where a direct injury to the organization has been
perpetrated”. | Amerasinghe正确地指出，关于对国家造成的直接伤害，“若已经给组织造成了直接伤害，则[用尽]这一规则不适用”。 |
| C.F. Amerasinghe, Principles of the
Institutional Law of International Organizations, 2nd edition (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2005), at p. 482. | 参见Amerasinghe, Principles of the
Institutional Law of International Organizations, 2nd
edition(Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2005)，at
p. 482。 |
| Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions (Greece
v. UK), PCIJ Reports, 1924, Series A, No. 2, at p. 12. | 马夫罗马蒂斯在巴勒斯坦的特许权案(希腊诉联合王国)，《1924年常设国际法院案例汇编，A辑，第2号》，见第12页。 |
| See Reparation for Injuries Suffered in
the Service of the United Nations, at pp. 181-184. | 见执行联合国公务时所受损害的赔偿，见第181-184页。 |
| Cf. Art. 7, Draft Articles on Diplomatic
Protection (footnote 34 above): “A State of
nationality may not exercise diplomatic protection in respect of a person
against a State of which that person is also a national unless the
nationality of the former State is predominant, both at the date of injury
and at the date of the official presentation of the claim.” | 参见外交保护条款草案，第7条(见上文脚注34)：“一国籍国不得为同属另一国国民的人针对另一国籍国行使外交保护，除非在发生损害之日和正式提出求偿之日，该国的国籍均为该人的主要国籍。
” |
| See Amerasinghe (footnote 36 above), at
pp. 487-488. | 见Amerasinghe(上文脚注36)，见第487-488页。 |
| See Difference Relating to Immunity from
Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights,
Advisory Opinion (footnote 16 above); | 见关于人权委员会特别报告员诉讼程序豁免权的分歧，咨询意见(上文脚注16)； |
| Applicability of Article VI, Section 22,
of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1989, p. 177. | 《联合国特权及豁免公约》第六条第22节的适用性，咨询意见，《1989年国际法院案例汇编》，第177页。 |
| Amerasinghe (footnote 36 above), at p.
486. | Amerasinghe(上文脚注36)，at p. 486。 |
| See: Exchange of letters constituting an
agreement between the United Nations and Belgium relating to the settlement
of claims filed against the United Nations in the Congo by Belgian nationals
(New York, 20 February 1965), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. | 见：《构成联合国和比利时关于解决比利时国民对联合国刚果行动求偿案的协定的换文》(1965年2月20日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第535卷，第199页； |
| 535, p. 199; Exchange of letters
constituting an agreement between the United Nations and Greece relating to
the settlement of claims filed against the United Nations in the Congo by
Greek nationals (New York, 20 June 1966), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
565, p. 5; | 《构成联合国和希腊关于解决希腊国民对联合国刚果行动求偿案的协定的换文》(1966年6月20日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第565卷，第5页； |
| Exchange of letters constituting an
agreement between the United Nations and Italy relating to the settlement of
claims filed against the United Nations in the Congo by Italian nationals
(New York, 18 January 1967), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. | 《构成联合国和意大利关于解决意大利国民对联合国刚果行动求偿案的协定的换文》(1967年1月18日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第588卷，第198页； |
| 588, p. 198; Exchange of letters
constituting an agreement between the United Nations and Luxembourg relating
to the settlement of claims filed against the United Nations in the Congo by
Luxembourg nationals (New York, 28 December 1966), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 585, p. 149; | 《构成联合国和卢森堡关于解决卢森堡国民对联合国刚果行动求偿案的协定的换文》(1966年12月28日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第585卷，第149页； |
| Exchange of letters constituting an
agreement between the United Nations and Switzerland relating to the
settlement of claims filed against the United Nations in the Congo by Swiss
nationals (New York, 3 June 1966), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. | 《构成联合国和瑞士关于解决瑞士国民对联合国刚果行动求偿案的协定的换文》(1966年6月3日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第565卷，第195页。 |
| 565, p. 195. See also M. Guillaume, ‘La réparation des dommages causés par les contingents français en ex-Yougoslavie et en Albanie’, AFDI, vol. 43 (1997), p. 151; | 另见M. Guillaume, ‘La
réparation des dommages causés
par les contingents français en ex-Yougoslavie et en Albanie’，AFDI, vo.l 43(1997)，p. 151； |
| Yearbook of the International Law
Commission, 1998, Vol. II, Part Two, p. 110. | 《国际法委员会年鉴》，1998年，第二卷(第二部分)，第110页。 |
| First Report on State Responsibility
(Addendum No. 5), by Mr. James Crawford, 22 July 1998, UN
Doc.A/CN.4/490/Add.5, § 282. | 关于国家责任的第一次报告(第5号增编)，詹姆斯•克劳福德先生，1998年7月22日，联合国文件A/CN.4/490/Add.5，第282段。 |
| Commentaries to the Draft Articles on
Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts Adopted by the
International Law Commission, Report of the ILC, Fifty-third session, 2001,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Suppl. No. 10 (A/56/10), p. 119, § 3. | 国际法委员会通过的国家对国际不法行为的责任条款草案评注，国际法委员会的报告，第五十三届会议，2001年，大会正式记录，补编第10号(A/56/10)，第119页，第3段。 |
| Report of the Sub-Committee on Succession
of States and Governments, Yearbook…, 1963, Vol. II,
p. 260. | 国家和政府的继承问题小组委员会的报告，《国际法委员会年鉴》，1963年，第二卷，第260页。 |
| Yearbook …, 1963,
Vol. II, p. 299. | 《国际法委员会年鉴》，1963年，第二卷，第299页。 |
| Text adopted in the annex to the General
Assembly resolution 55/153 of 12 December 2000. | 大会2000年12月12日第55/153号决议附件中通过的案文。 |
| See e.g. Application of the Convention on
the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia and
Montenegro), Preliminary Exceptions. | 例如，见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚和黑山)，初步例外。 |
| Judgment of 18 November 2008, ICJ Reports
2008, para. 109. | 2008年11月18日的判决，《2008年国际法院案例汇编》，第109段。 |
| E.g. both the Czech Republic and the
Slovak Republic made a declaration, when depositing the instruments of
ratification of the 1978 Vienna Convention, under Article 7, paras. 2 and 3,
that they would apply the Convention to their own succession, which took place
before the entry into force of the 1978 Convention. | 例如，捷克共和国和斯洛伐克共和国在交存《1978年维也纳公约》批准书时，均根据第七条第2款和第3款发表声明，称将在本国于《1978年公约》生效之前发生的继承中适用《公约》。 |
| See Status of Treaties as at:15-04-2014. | 见截至2014年4月15日的条约状况表。 |
| Chapter XXIII: Law of Treaties . | 第二十三章：条约法。 |
| Robert E. Brown Claim (United States v.
Great Britain), American & British Claims Arbitration, Claim No. 30; | Robert E. Brown求偿案(美国诉英国)，美国和英国申诉仲裁，第30号申诉； |
| 6 UNRIAA (1923), p. 120. | 6 联合国《国际仲裁裁决汇编》(1923年)，第120页。 |
| Frederick Henry Redward Claim (Great
Britain v. United States), American & British Claims Arbitration, Claim
No. 85; | Frederick Henry Redward求偿案(英国诉美国)，美国和英国申诉仲裁，第85号申诉； |
| 6 UNRIAA (1925), p. 157, 158. | 6 联合国《国际仲裁裁决汇编》(1925年)，第157和158页。 |
| See D.P. O’Connell,
State Succession in Municipal Law and International Law, vol. 1 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1967), pp. 482, 485-486. | 见D.P. O’Connell,
State Succession in Municipal Law and International Law, vol. 1 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1967), pp. 482, 485-486。 |
| See Materials on Succession of States, UN
Doc. ST/LEG/SER.B/14, 1967. | 见《关于国家继承的材料》联合国文件ST/LEG/SER.B/14，1967年。 |
| Lighthouses Arbitration (France v.
Greece, 1956), UNRIAA, vol. 12, p. 155. | 灯塔仲裁案(法国诉希腊，1956年)，联合国《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第12卷，第155页。 |
| See also ILR, vol. 23, p. 81. | 又见《国际法案例汇编》，第23卷，第81页。 |
| Ibid., p. 92. | 同上，第92页。 |
| Ibid., p. 91. | 同上，第91页。 |
| See L. Foscaneanu, “L’accord ayant pour objet l’indemnisation de la compagnie de Suez nationalisée par l’Egypte”,
AFDI, 1959, pp. 196. | 见L. Foscaneanu, "L’accord ayant pour objet l’indemnisation de
la compagnie de Suez nationalisée par l’Egypte", AFDI, 1959, pp. 196。 |
| Agreement between the Government of the
United Kingdom and the Government of the United Arab Republic Concerning
Financial and Commercial Relations and British Property in Egypt, UNTS, vol.
343, p. 159. | 《英国政府与阿拉伯联合共和国政府关于财政和商业关系及英国在埃及的财产问题的协定》，联合国《条约汇编》，第343卷，第159页。 |
| Cf. E. Cotran, “Some
Legal Aspects of the Formation of the United Arab Republic and the United
Arab States”, ICLQ, vol. 8, 1959, p. 366. | 参照E. Cotran,“Some
Legal Aspects of the Formation of the United Arab Republic and the United
Arab States”,《国际法和比较法季刊》，第8卷，1959年，第366页。 |
| Claims Convention between the United
States and Panama (1926), in: UNRIAA, vol. VI, p. 301. Cf. | 《美国巴拿马索赔公约》(1926年)，载于联合国《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第六卷，第301页。 |
| P. Dumberry, op. cit., p. 165. | 参照 P. Dumberry，同前，第165页。 |
| In: M.M. Whiteman, Digest of
International Law, vol. II (Washington, 1973), p. 873. | 载于：M.M. Whiteman, Digest of International
Law, Vol.II, (Washington, 1973), p. 873。 |
| Quoted in: D.P. O’Connell, State Succession …, op. cit.,
vol. I, p. 493. | 引文见：D.P. O’Connell,
State Succession…, op. cit., vol. I, p. 493。 |
| See P. Dumberry, P., op. cit., p. 173. | 见P. Dumberry，同前，第173页。 |
| The EC Arbitration Commission for the
settlement of disputes, Opinion No. 9, 4 July 1992. | 欧共体解决争端仲裁委员会，第9号意见，1992年7月4日。 |
| See Proclamation of the National Council
of the Slovak Republic to Parliaments and Peoples of the World (3 December
1992); | 见《斯洛伐克共和国国务委员会告各国议会和世界人民书》(1992年12月3日)； |
| Proclamation of the National Council of
the Czech Republic to all Parliaments and Nations of the World (17 December
1992). | 《捷克共和国国务委员会告各国议会和世界人民书》(1992年12月17日)。 |
| Constitutional Act No. 4/1993, on
Measures relating to the extinction of the CSFR. | 第4/1993号宪法法案：与捷克斯洛伐克联邦共和国消亡有关的措施。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), ICJ Reports 1997, p. 78
(para. 151). | Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros 项目(匈牙利/斯洛伐克),《1997年国际法院案例汇编》，第78页(第151段)。 |
| SC Res. 777 (1992), 19 September 1992; | 安理会第777 (1992)号决议，1992年9月19日； |
| GA Res. 47/1 (1992), 22 September 1992. | 大会第47/1 (1992)号决议，1992年9月22日。 |
| The EC Arbitration Commission for the
settlement of disputes, Opinion No. 10, 4 July 1992. | 欧共体解决争端仲裁委员会，第10号意见，1992年7月4日。 |
| GA Res. 55/12 (1 November 2000). | 大会第55/12号决议(2000年11月1日)。 |
| UNTS, vol. 2262, No. 40296, p. 251. | 联合国《条约汇编》，第2262卷，第40296号，第251页。 |
| “All rights and interests which belonged
to the SFRY and which are not otherwise covered by this Agreement (including,
but not limited to, patents, trade marks, copyrights, royalties, and claims
of and debts due to the SFRY) shall be shared among the successor States,
taking into account the proportion for division of SFRY financial assets in
Annex C of this Agreement.” | “所有本协定中未以其他方式处理的属于南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国的权利和利益(包括但不限于专利、商标、版权、版税及债务和债权)，均参照本协定附件C中南斯拉夫社会主义联邦共和国财政资产分割比例，由各继承国分担。” |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v.
Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment of 26 February 2007, ICJ Reports 2007, pp.
75-76 (paras. 74, 77-78). | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那诉塞尔维亚和黑山)，2007年2月26日的判决，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第75-76页(第74、77-78段)。 |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia and
Montenegro), Preliminary Exceptions. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚和黑山)，初步例外。 |
| Judgment of 18 November 2008, ICJ Reports
2008, paras. 23-34. | 2008年11月18日的判决，《2008年国际法院案例汇编》，第23-34段。 |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia),
Merits, Judgment of 3 February 2015, ICJ Reports 2015. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚)，案情，2015年2月3日的判决，《2015年国际法院案例汇编》。 |
| Ibid., para. 107. | 同上，第107段。 |
| See the pleadings of Prof. J. Crawford,
advocate for Croatia; | 见 J.克劳福德教授为克罗地亚辩护的诉状； |
| Public sitting held on Friday 21 March
2014, at 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace, President Tomka presiding, in the case
concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of
the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), CR 2014/21, s. 21, para. 42: “We say the rule of succession can occur in particular
circumstances if it is justified. | 2014年3月21日星期五上午10时在和平宫举行的公开审理，由院长通卡主持，案件涉及《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚)，CR
2014/21，第21节，第42段：“我们说，若有正当理由，特定情况下可以出现继承规则。 |
| There is no general rule of succession to
responsibility but there is no general rule against it either.” | 没有关于责任继承的一般规则，但也没有反对责任继承的一般规则。” |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia),
Merits, Judgment of 3 February 2015, para. 107. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚)，案情，2015年2月3日的判决，第107段。 |
| Cf. the pleadings of Prof. A. Zimmermann,
advocate for Serbia, who referred to Article 2 of Annex F of the Agreement,
which provides for the settlement of disputes by the Standing Joint
Committee. | 参照A. Zimmermann教授为塞尔维亚辩护的诉状，他提到该协定附件F第2条规定，由常设联合委员会解决争端。 |
| Public sitting held on Thursday 27 March
2014, at 3 p.m., CR 2014/22, s. 27, paras. 52-54. | 2014年3月27日星期四下午3时举行的公开审理，CR
2014/22，第27节，第52-54段。 |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia),
Merits, Judgment of 3 February 2015, para. 112. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚)，案情，2015年2月3日的判决，第112段。 |
| Ibid., para. 115. | 同上，第115段。 |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia),
Merits, Judgment of 3 February 2015, Declaration of Judge Xue, para. 23. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚)，案情，2015年2月3日的判决，薛法官的声明，第23段。 |
| Mytilineos Holdings SA v. 1. The State
Union of Serbia & Montenegro, 2. Republic of Serbia, Partial Award on
Jurisdiction (arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules), Zurich, 8
September 2006, § 158. | Mytilineos Holdings SA诉1. 塞尔维亚和黑山国家联盟，2. 塞尔维亚共和国，关于管辖权的部分裁决(根据国际贸易法委员会仲裁规则做出的仲裁)，苏黎世，2006年9月8日，第158段。 |
| Art. 24, Treaty on the Establishment of
German Unity, 31 August 1990, ILM, vol. 30, p. 463. | 《德国统一条约》，第24条，1990年8月31日，ILM，第30卷，第463页。 |
| BGBl. 1990, vol. II, s. 1237. | BGBl. 1990, Vol.II, s. 1237。 |
| Decision of 1.7.1999, BVerwG 7 B 2.99.
Cf. P. Dumberry, op. cit., p. 90. | Decision of 1.7.1999, BVerwG 7 B 2.99.
Cf. P. Dumberry, op. cit., p. 90。 |
| UNTS, vol. 1911, p. 27. | 联合国《条约汇编》，第1911卷，第27页。 |
| Report of the ILA Conference (2008). | 《国际法协会2008年会议报告》。 |
| Institut de Droit International, 14th
Commission: State Succession in Matters of State Responsibility. | 国际法学会，第十四委员会：国家责任事项中的国家继承。 |
| IDI, 2015 Resolution, Preamble, al. 2: “Convinced of the need for the codification and progressive
development of the rules relating to succession of States in matters of international
responsibility of States, as a means to ensure greater legal security in
international relations”. | 国际法学会，2015年决议，序言部分第2段：“确信需要编纂和逐步发展与国家的国际责任事项中的国家继承有关的规则，以此为手段，确保在国际关系中加强法律保障”。 |
| Report of the ILC, Fifty-eighth session,
2006, Official Records of the General Assembly, Suppl. No. 10 (A/61/10), p.
35: | 国际法委员会报告，第五十八届会议，2006年，大会正式记录，补编第10号，A/61/10，第35页： |
| “2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, a State
may exercise diplomatic protection in respect of a person who is its national
at the date of the official presentation of the claim but was not a national
at the date of injury, provided that the person had the nationality of a
predecessor State or lost his or her previous nationality and acquired, for a
reason unrelated to the bringing of the claim, the nationality of the former
State in a manner not inconsistent with international law.” | “2. 尽管有第1款的规定，一国对在正式提出求偿之日为其国民但在受到损害之日不是其国民的人，可行使外交保护，但条件是该人曾具有被继承国的国籍，或者已丧失原国籍，并且基于与提出求偿无关的原因、以不违反国际法的方式已获得该国的国籍。” |
| Ibid., p. 55: | 同上，第55页： |
| “1.A State is entitled to exercise diplomatic
protection in respect of a corporation that was a national of that State, or
its predecessor State …” | “1. 一国有权为…该国或被继承国国民的公司行使外交保护。” |
| Articles 296, 297e and 297h of the Treaty
of Versailles. | 《凡尔赛条约》第296、297e和297h条。 |
| Decision Taken by the Governing Council
of the United Nations Compensation Commission at the 27th Meeting, Sixth
Session, 26 June 1992. | 联合国赔偿委员会理事会第六届会议在1992年6月26日第27次会议上通过的决定。 |
| Decision Concerning the First Instalment
of Claims for Serious Personal Injury or Death (Category B Claims) taken by
the Governing Council of the United Nations Compensation Commission at its
43rd meeting, 26 May 1994, Decision No. 20, UNCC Governing Council, UN Doc.
S/AC.26/Dec.20 (1994); | 联合国赔偿委员会理事会在1994年5月26日第43次会议上针对关于严重人身伤害或死亡(“B”类索赔要求)的第一批索赔要求采取的决定，联合国赔偿委员会理事会第20号决定，联合国文件S/AC.26/Dec.20 (1994)； |
| Decision Concerning the First Instalment
of Claims for Departure from Iraq or Kuwait (Category A Claims) taken by the
Governing Council of the United Nations Compensation Commission at its 46th
meeting, 20 October 1994, Decision No. 22, UNCC Governing Council, UN Doc.
S/AC.26/Dec.22 (1994). | 联合国赔偿委员会理事会在1994年10月20日第46次会议上所作关于离开伊拉克或科威特的第一批索赔要求(“A”类索赔要求)的决定，联合国赔偿委员会理事会第22号决定，联合国文件S/AC.26/Dec.22 (1994)。 |
| In this context, see Ališić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia
and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, [GC], No. 60642/08, judgment,
16 July 2014. | 在这方面，见Ališić等诉波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那、克罗地亚、塞尔维亚、斯洛文尼亚和前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国，[GC], 第60642/08号，判决，2014年7月16日。 |
| |
| |
