A/72/10

A/72/10

United Nations

联 合 国

Report of the International Law Commission

国际法委员会报告

Sixty-ninth session

第六十九届会议

(1 May-2 June and 3 July-4 August 2017)

(2017年5月1日至6月2日和7月3日至8月4日)

General Assembly

大 会

Official Records

正式记录

Seventy-second Session

第七十二届会议

Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10)

补编第10号(A/72/10)

A/72/10

A/72/10

General Assembly

大 会

Official Records

正式记录

Seventy-second Session

第七十二届会议

Supplement No. 10

补编第10号(A/72/10)

Report of the International Law Commission

国际法委员会的报告

Sixty-ninth session

第六十九届会议

(1 May-2 June and 3 July-4 August 2017)

(2017年5月1日至6月2日和7月3日至8月4日)

United Nations • New York, 2017

联合国·纽约，2017

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 2017.

委员会报告的排版本将载入《2017年国际法委员会年鉴》第二卷第二部分。

ISSN 0251-822X

ISSN 0251-822X

Chapter I

第一章

Introduction

导言

1. The International Law Commission held the first part of its sixty-ninth session from 1 May to 2 June 2017 and the second part from 3 July to 4 August 2017 at its seat at the United Nations Office at Geneva.

1. 国际法委员会分别于2017年5月1日至6月2日和2017年7月3日至8月4日在联合国日内瓦办事处委员会所在地举行了第六十九届会议第一期会议和第二期会议。

The session was opened by Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Second Vice-Chairperson of the sixty-eighth session of the Commission.

本届会议由委员会第六十八届会议第二副主席吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生主持开幕。

A. Membership

A. 委员

2. The Commission consists of the following members:

2. 委员会由下列委员组成：

Mr. Ali Mohsen Fetais Al-Marri (Qatar)

阿里·穆赫辛·费塔伊斯·马里先生(卡塔尔)

Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez (Nicaragua)

卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生(尼加拉瓜)

Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (Romania)

波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(罗马尼亚)

Mr. Yacouba Cissé (Côte d’Ivoire)

雅库巴·西塞先生(科特迪瓦)

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)

Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles (Portugal)

帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(葡萄牙)

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. Claudio Grossman Guiloff (Chile)

克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生(智利)

Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna (Egypt)

侯赛因·哈苏纳先生(埃及)

Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud (Jordan)

马哈茂德·哈穆德先生(约旦)

Mr. Huikang Huang (China)

黄惠康先生(中国)

Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Sierra Leone)

查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(塞拉利昂)

Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin (Russian Federation)

罗曼·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)

Ms. Marja Lehto (Finland)

玛丽亚·莱赫托女士(芬兰)

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. Hong Thao Nguyen (Viet Nam)

阮洪滔先生(越南)

Mr. Georg Nolte (Germany)

格奥尔格·诺尔特先生(德国)

Ms. Nilüfer Oral (Turkey)

尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士(土耳其)

Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi (Morocco)

哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生(摩洛哥)

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. Aniruddha Rajput (India)

阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生(印度)

Mr. August Reinisch (Austria)

奥古斯特·赖尼希先生(奥地利)

Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria (Peru)

胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生(秘鲁)

Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia (Brazil)

吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生(巴西)

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)

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)

B. Officers and the Enlarged Bureau

B. 主席团成员和扩大的主席团

3. At its 3348th meeting, on 1 May 2017, the Commission elected the following officers:

3. 在2017年5月1日举行的第3348次会议上，委员会选出了下列主席团成员：

Chairperson:

主席：

Mr. Georg Nolte (Germany)

格奥尔格·诺尔特先生(德国)

First Vice-Chairperson:

第一副主席：

Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina (Colombia)

爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生(哥伦比亚)

Second Vice-Chairperson:

第二副主席：

Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna (Egypt)

侯赛因·哈苏纳先生(埃及)

Chairperson of the Drafting Committee:

起草委员会主席：

Mr. Aniruddha Rajput (India)

阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生(印度)

Rapporteur:

报告员：

Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (Romania)

波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(罗马尼亚)

4. The Enlarged Bureau of the Commission was composed of the officers of the present session, the previous Chairperson 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. At its 3350th meeting on 3 May 2017, the Commission set up a Planning Group composed of the following members: Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina (Chairperson), Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Mr. Georg Nolte, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

5. 委员会在2017年5月3日第3350次会议上设立了由下列委员组成的规划组：爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生(主席)、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、侯赛因·哈苏纳先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、黄惠康先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、罗曼·科洛德金先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生、朴基甲先生、阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、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、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

C. Drafting Committee

C. 起草委员会

6. At its 3349th, 3354th, 3360th, 3365th, 3374th and 3381st meetings, on 2, 9, 18 and 30 May and on 13 and 25 July 2017, respectively, the Commission established a Drafting Committee, composed of the following members for the topics indicated:

6. 委员会在分别于2017年5月2日、9日、18日、30日和7月13日和25日举行的第3349、3354、3360、3365、3374和3381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) Provisional application of treaties: Mr. Aniruddha Rajput (Chairperson), Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

(a) 条约的暂时适用：阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生(主席)、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生(特别报告员)、卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、朴基甲先生、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

(b) Crimes against humanity: Mr. Aniruddha Rajput (Chairperson), Mr. Sean D. Murphy (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

(b) 危害人类罪：阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生(主席)、肖恩·墨菲先生(特别报告员)、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、罗曼·科洛德金先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生、朴基甲先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

(c) Protection of the atmosphere: Mr. Aniruddha Rajput (Chairperson), Mr. Shinya Murase (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Mr. Georg Nolte, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

(c) 保护大气层：阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生(主席)、村濑信也先生(特别报告员)、卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、阮洪滔先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、朴基甲先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

(d) Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction: Mr. Aniruddha Rajput (Chairperson), Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Georg Nolte, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

(d) 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免：阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生(主席)、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士(特别报告员)、卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、黄惠康先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生、朴基甲先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、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、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

(e) Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens): Mr. Aniruddha Rajput (Chairperson), Mr. Dire D. Tladi (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Mr. Georg Nolte, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

(e) 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)：阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生(主席)、迪雷·特拉迪先生(特别报告员)、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、罗曼·科洛德金先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生、朴基甲先生，奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

(f) Succession of States in respect of State responsibility: Mr. Aniruddha Rajput (Chairperson), Mr. Pavel Šturma (Special Rapporteur), Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

(f) 国家责任方面的国家继承：阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生(主席)、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(特别报告员)、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、罗曼·科洛德金先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、朴基甲先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

7. The Drafting Committee held a total of 30 meetings on the six topics indicated above.

7. 起草委员会就上列六项专题一共举行了30次会议。

D. Working Groups

D. 工作组

8. At its 3357th meeting on 12 May 2017, the Commission established a Working Group on provisional application of treaties: Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez (Chairperson), Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Mr. Georg Nolte, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

8. 委员会在2017年5月12日第3357次会议上设立了条约的暂时适用工作组：马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生(主席)、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生(特别报告员)、卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、朴基甲先生、阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

9. At its 3380th meeting on 25 July 2017, the Commission established a Working Group on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts: Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez (Chairperson), Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

9. 委员会在2017年7月25日第3380次会议上设立了与武装冲突有关的环境保护工作组：马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生(主席)、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、村濑信也先生，肖恩·墨菲先生，阮洪滔先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生、朴基甲先生、阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、吉尔贝托·贝尔涅·萨博亚先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

10. The Planning Group established the following Working Groups:

10. 规划组设立了以下工作组：

(a) Working Group on the long-term programme of work: Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud (Chairperson), Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna, Mr. Huikang Huang, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Mr. Georg Nolte, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

(a) 长期工作方案工作组：马哈茂德·哈穆德先生(主席)、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、侯赛因·哈苏纳先生、黄惠康先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、罗曼·科洛德金先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生、朴基甲先生、阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生 、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、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、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

(b) Working Group on methods of work: Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna (Chairperson), Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Patricia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Mr. Georg Nolte, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (ex officio).

(b) 工作方法工作组：侯赛因·哈苏纳先生(主席)、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生、朴基甲先生、阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生、爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和波格丹·奥雷斯库先生(当然成员)。

E. Secretariat

E. 秘书处

11. Mr. Miguel de Serpa Soares, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel, represented the Secretary-General.

11. 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 to the Commission.

特等法律干事阿诺德·普龙托先生担任委员会首席助理秘书。

Mr. Trevor Chimimba, Senior Legal Officer, served as Senior Assistant Secretary to the Commission.

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, Mr. David Nanopoulos and Ms. Carla Hoe, Legal Officers, and Mr. Daniel Stewart and Mr. Bart Smit Duijzentkunst, Associate Legal Officers, served as Assistant Secretaries to the Commission.

法律干事帕特里夏·若尔热女士、戴维·纳诺波利斯先生、卡拉·霍伊女士和协理法律干事丹尼尔·斯图尔特先生和巴尔特·施密特·杜依赞特库恩斯特先生担任委员会助理秘书。

F. Agenda

F. 议程

12. At its 3348th meeting, on 1 May 2017, the Commission adopted an agenda for its sixty-ninth session consisting of the following items:

12. 委员会在2017年5月1日第3348次会议上通过了第六十九届会议议程，包括下列项目：

1. Organization of the work of the session.

1. 会议工作安排。

2. Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction.

2. 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。

3. Provisional application of treaties.

3. 条约的暂时适用。

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

4. 与武装冲突有关的环境保护。

5. Protection of the atmosphere.

5. 保护大气层。

6. Crimes against humanity.

6. 危害人类罪。

7. Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens).

7. 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。

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

8. 委员会的方案、程序和工作方法以及文件。

9. Date and place of the seventieth session.

9. 第七十届会议的日期和地点。

10. Cooperation with other bodies.

10. 与其他机构的合作。

11. Other business.

11. 其他事项。

Chapter II

第二章

Summary of the work of the Commission at its sixty-ninth session

委员会第六十九届会议工作概况

13. With respect to the topic “Crimes against humanity”, the Commission had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/704), which addressed, in particular, the following issues: extradition, non-refoulement, mutual legal assistance, victims, witnesses and other affected persons, relationship to competent international criminal tribunals, federal State obligations, monitoring mechanisms and dispute settlement, remaining issues, the preamble to the draft articles, and final clauses of a convention.

13. 关于“危害人类罪”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/ 704)，该报告主要处理了以下问题：引渡、不推回、司法协助、受害人、证人和其他受影响的人、与主管国际刑事法庭的关系、联邦国家的义务、监测机制和争端解决、余下的问题、条款草案的序言以及公约的最后条款。

14. As a result of its consideration of the topic at the present session, the Commission adopted, on first reading, a draft preamble, 15 draft articles and a draft annex, together with commentaries thereto, on crimes against humanity.

14. 由于本届会议对该专题的审议，委员会一读通过了关于危害人类罪的序言草案、15项条文草案和一个附件草案以及评注。

The Commission decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft articles, through the Secretary-General, to Governments, international organizations and others, for comments and observations, with the request that such comments and observations be submitted to the Secretary-General by 1 December 2018 (chap. IV).

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、各国际组织和其他方面转发这些条款草案，征求评论和意见，并要求在2018年12月1日前向秘书长提交这种评论和意见(第四章)。

15. With regard to the topic “Provisional application of treaties”, the Commission referred draft guidelines 1 to 4 and 6 to 9, provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee in 2016, back to the Drafting Committee, with a view to having a consolidated set of draft guidelines, as provisionally worked out thus far, prepared.

15. 关于“条约的暂时适用”专题，委员会将起草委员会2016年暂时通过的准则草案1至4和6至9发回起草委员会，以便将迄今为止暂时拟订的准则草案合并成一套。

The Commission subsequently provisionally adopted draft guidelines 1 to 11, as presented by the Drafting Committee at the current session, with commentaries thereto (chap. V).

随后，委员会暂时通过了起草委员会在本届会议上提出的准则草案1至11及其评注(第五章)。

16. Concerning the topic “Protection of the atmosphere”, the Commission had before it the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/705 and Corr.1), which, building upon the previous three reports, proposed four guidelines on the interrelationship between the rules of international law relating to the protection of the atmosphere and other relevant rules of international law, including the rules of international trade and investment law, the law of the sea, and international human rights law.

16. 关于“保护大气层”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第四次报告(A/CN.4/705和Corr.1)，该报告在过去的三个报告基础上，就关于保护大气层的国际法规则与其他有关的国际法规则(包括国际贸易和投资法规则、海洋法和国际人权法)之间的相互关系问题，提出了四条指南草案。

17. Following the debate in the Commission, which was preceded by an informal dialogue with atmospheric scientists organized by the Special Rapporteur, the Commission decided to refer the four draft guidelines, as contained in the Special Rapporteur’s fourth report, to the Drafting Committee.

17. 委员会在举行辩论之前，先在特别报告员组织下与大气层科学家进行了非正式对话。 辩论之后，委员会决定将特别报告员第四次报告所载的四条指南草案转交起草委员会。

Upon its consideration of the report of the Drafting Committee, the Commission provisionally adopted draft guideline 9 and three preambular paragraphs, together with commentaries thereto (chap. VI).

在审议了起草委员会的报告后，委员会暂时通过了指南草案9和三个序言段及其评注(第六章)。

18. Concerning the topic “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction”, the Commission continued its consideration of the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/701), which had commenced during the sixty-eighth session.

18. 关于“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”专题，委员会继续审议曾在第六十八届会议开始审议的特别报告员第五次报告(A/CN.4/701)。

The report analysed the question of limitations and exceptions to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction and proposed a single draft article on the issue.

该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，并就这个问题提出了一项条文草案。

19. Following the plenary debate, the Commission referred draft article 7, as proposed by the Special Rapporteur in her fifth report, to the Drafting Committee.

19. 在全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将特别报告员第五次报告中提出的第7条草案转交起草委员会。

Upon its consideration of the report of the Drafting Committee, the Commission voted to adopt draft article 7, an annex to the draft articles and a footnote to two of its headings, together with commentaries thereto (chap. VII).

在审议了起草委员会的报告后，委员会表决通过了第7条草案、条款草案附件和其中两个小标题的脚注以及评注(第七章)。

20. With regard to the topic “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)”, the Commission had before it the second report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/706), which sought to set out the criteria for the identification of peremptory norms (jus cogens), taking the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties as a point of departure.

20. 关于“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/706)，该报告以1969年《维也纳条约法公约》为出发点，试图阐明确定强制性规范(强行法)的标准。

The Commission subsequently decided to refer draft conclusions 4 to 9, as contained in the report of the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee, and decided to change the title of the topic from “Jus cogens” to “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)”, as proposed by the Special Rapporteur.

委员会随后决定将特别报告员报告所载的结论草案4至9转交起草委员会，并按特别报告员的提议，决定将该专题的标题从“强行法”改为“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”。

The Commission subsequently took note of the interim report of the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee on draft conclusions 2 and 4 to 7 provisionally adopted by the Committee, which was submitted to the Commission for information (chap. VIII).

随后，委员会注意到起草委员会主席关于起草委员会暂时通过的结论草案2和4至7的临时报告。 该报告提交委员会供参考(第八章)。

21. With regard to the topic “Succession of States in respect of State responsibility”, the Commission decided to include the topic in its programme of work, and to appoint Mr. Pavel Šturma as Special Rapporteur.

21. 关于“国家责任方面的国家继承”专题，委员会决定将该专题列入委员会长期工作方案并任命帕维尔·斯图尔马先生为特别报告员。

The Commission had before it the first report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/708), which sought to set out the Special Rapporteur’s approach to the scope and outcome of the topic, and to provide an overview of general provisions relating to the topic.

委员会收到了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/708)，该报告试图阐明特别报告员关于本专题的范围和成果的想法，并概述了与本专题有关的一般规定。

Following the debate in plenary, the Commission decided to refer draft articles 1 to 4, 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第1至第4条草案转交起草委员会。

The Commission subsequently took note of the interim report of the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee on draft articles 1 and 2 provisionally adopted by the Committee, which was submitted to the Commission for information (chap. IX).

随后，委员会注意到起草委员会主席关于起草委员会暂时通过的第1和第2条草案的临时报告。 该报告提交委员会供参考(第九章)。

22. With respect to the topic “Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts”, the Commission established a Working Group on the topic, chaired by Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez.

22. 关于“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”专题，委员会设立了一个专题工作组，由马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生担任主席。

The Working Group had before it the draft commentaries prepared by the former Special Rapporteur, even though she was no longer with the Commission, on draft principles 4, 6 to 8, and 14 to 18 provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the sixty-eighth session of the Commission, and taken note of by the Commission at the same session.

虽然原特别报告员已离开了委员会，工作组仍收到了她编写的原则草案4、6至8和14至18的评注草稿，上述草稿由起草委员会在第六十八届会议期间暂时通过，并在同一届会议上受到委员会的注意。

The Working Group focused its discussion on the way forward.

工作组重点讨论了今后的工作方向问题。

Upon consideration of the oral report of the Chairperson of the Working Group, the Commission decided to appoint Ms. Marja Lehto as Special Rapporteur (chap. X).

审议工作组主席的口头报告之后，委员会任命玛丽亚·莱赫托女士为特别报告员(第十章)。

23. As regards “Other decisions and conclusions of the Commission”, the Commission decided to include the topic “Succession of States in respect of State responsibility” in its programme of work and decided to appoint Mr. Pavel Šturma as Special Rapporteur for the topic (chap. XI, sect. A).

23. 关于“委员会的其他决定和结论”，委员会决定将“国家责任方面的国家继承”专题列入工作方案，并决定任命帕维尔·斯图尔马先生为特别报告员(第十一章A节)。

24. The Commission also established a Planning Group to consider its programme, procedures and working methods, which in turn decided to establish the Working Group on the long-term programme of work, under the chairmanship of Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, and the Working Group on methods of work, under the chairmanship of Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna (chap. XI, sect. B).

24. 委员会还设立了一个规划组，以审议方案、程序和工作方法，规划组又决定设立长期工作方案工作组(由马哈茂德·哈穆德先生担任主席)和工作方法工作组(由侯赛因·哈苏纳先生担任主席)(第十一章B节)。

The Commission decided to include in its long-term programme of work the topics “General principles of law” and “Evidence before international courts and tribunals” (chap. XI., sect. B.1 and annexes A and B).

委员会决定在其长期工作中方案中列入“一般法律原则”专题和“向国际性法院和法庭提交的证据”专题(第十一章B.1节以及附件A和B)。

25. The Commission will hold a seventieth anniversary commemorative event during its seventieth session in 2018.

25. 委员会将在2018年举行第七十届会议期间举办七十周年纪念活动。

The commemorative event under the theme “70 years of the International Law Commission — Drawing a balance for the future”, will be held in two parts, the first, to be held in New York on 21 May 2018, during the first part of its seventieth session and the second, to be held in Geneva on 5 and 6 July 2018, during the second part of its seventieth session (chap. XI, sect. B).

纪念活动主题为“国际法委员会70年――总结过去，展望未来”，活动分为两部分，第一部分在纽约举行第七十届会议第一期会议期间于2018年5月21日举行，第二部分在日内瓦举行第七十届会议第二期会议期间于2018年7月5日和6日举行(第十一章B节)。

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

26. 委员会继续与国际法院院长、欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会、非洲联盟国际法委员会、亚非法律协商组织和美洲法律委员会进行了传统的信息交流。

Members of the Commission also held an informal exchange of views with the International Committee of the Red Cross (chap. XI, sect. D).

委员会委员还与红十字国际委员会进行了非正式的意见交流(第十一章D节)。

27. The Commission decided that its seventieth session would be held in New York from 30 April to 1 June 2018 and in Geneva from 2 July to 10 August 2018 (chap. XI, sect. C).

27. 委员会决定其第七十届会议于2018年4月30日至6月1日在纽约、7月2日至8月10日在日内瓦举行(第十一章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

28. 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 topic “Protection of the atmosphere”, as well as in Chapter III of the report of its sixty-seventh session (2015) on the topics “Provisional application of treaties”, and “Jus cogens”, and would welcome any additional information.

28. 委员会认为，第六十六届会议(2014年)报告第三章要求就“保护大气层” 专题以及第六十七届会议(2015年)要求就“条约的暂时适用” 和“强行法” 专题提供资料的请求仍然适用，并欢迎提供任何另外资料。

29. The Commission would welcome any information on the issues mentioned in the paragraph above as well as the following issues, by 15 January 2018, in order for it to be taken into account in the respective reports of the Special Rapporteurs.

29. 委员会欢迎在2018年1月15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加以考虑。

A. Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction

A. 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免

30. 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:

30. 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) 国家主管部门在何阶段考虑豁免(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，国家主管部门可以利用的国际法律援助、合作及磋商机制。

B. Succession of States in respect of State responsibility

B. 国家责任方面的国家继承

31. It would assist the Commission if States could provide it with any relevant international agreements, national legislation or decisions of national courts related to succession in, or distribution of, rights and obligations arising from internationally wrongful acts of, or against, a predecessor State.

31. 各国如果可向国际法委员会提供任何涉及被继承国实施或受到的国际不法行为产生的权利和义务的继承或分配问题的相关国际协定、国内法律或国内法院的判决，将对委员会有帮助。

C. New topics

C. 新专题

32. The Commission decided to include in its long-term programme of work two new topics, namely (a) general principles of law; and (b) evidence before international courts and tribunals.

32. 委员会决定在其长期工作方案中纳入两个新专题，即(a) 一般法律原则和(b)向国际性法院和法庭提交的证据。

In the selection of those topics, the Commission was guided by the following criteria that it had agreed upon at its fiftieth session (1998), namely that the topic: (a) should reflect the needs of States in respect of the progressive development and codification of international law;

委员会在选择这两个专题时遵循了委员会第五十届会议(1998年)商定的以下标准，即：(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) 专题应在国家实践方面处于足够成熟阶段，从而允许逐渐发展和编纂；

(c) should be concrete and feasible for progressive development and codification;

(c) 专题应具体可行，宜于逐渐发展和编纂；

and (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，也可考虑反映国际法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 those new topics.

委员会欢迎各国对这两个新专题发表看法。

33. 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.

33. 此外，委员会欢迎各国就可能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。

34. The Commission notes that the commemoration of its seventieth anniversary to be held during its seventieth session in New York and Geneva would provide an opportunity for an exchange of views between States and members of the Commission on possible topics that could be considered by the Commission in the future.

34. 委员会指出，在纽约和日内瓦举行第七十届会议期间纪念委员会成立七十周年，将为各国和委员会委员就委员会未来可能审议的专题相互交换意见提供机会。

Chapter IV

第四章

Crimes against humanity

危害人类罪

A. Introduction

A. 导言

35. 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.

35. 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。

36. At its sixty-seventh session (2015), the Commission considered the first report of the Special Rapporteur and provisionally adopted four draft articles and commentaries thereto.

36. 委员会第六十七届会议(2015年)审议了特别报告员的第一次报告， 并暂时通过了四项条文草案及其评注。

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 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。

37. At its sixty-eighth session (2016), the Commission considered the second report of the Special Rapporteur, 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, and adopted six additional draft articles and commentaries thereto.

37. 委员会第六十八届会议(2016年)审议了特别报告员的第二次报告 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的资料的秘书处备忘录， 并通过了另外六项条文草案及其评注。

B. Consideration of the topic at the present session

B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况

38. At the present session, the Commission had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/704), which was considered at its 3348th to 3354th meetings, from 1 to 9 May 2017.

38. 在本届会议上，委员会收到特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/704)，并在2017年5月1日至9日举行的第3348至第3354次会议上审议了该报告。

39. In his third report, the Special Rapporteur addressed extradition (chap. I);

39. 特别报告员在第三次报告中阐述了下列问题：引渡(第一章)；

non-refoulement (chap. II);

不推回(第二章)；

mutual legal assistance (chap. III);

司法协助(第三章)；

victims, witnesses and other affected persons (chap. IV);

受害人、证人以及其他受影响的人(第四章)；

relationship to competent international criminal tribunals (chap. V);

与主管国际刑事法庭的关系(第五章)；

federal State obligations (chap. VI);

联邦国家义务(第六章)；

monitoring mechanisms and dispute settlement (chap. VII);

监测机制和争端解决(第七章)；

remaining issues (chap. VIII);

余下的议题(第八章)；

preamble (chap. IX);

序言(第九章)；

final clauses of a convention (chap. X);

公约的最后条款(第十章)；

and the future programme of work on the topic (chap. XI).

以及此专题今后的工作方案(第十一章)。

The Special Rapporteur proposed seven draft articles and a draft preamble corresponding to the issues addressed in chapters I to VII and IX, respectively.

特别报告员分别针对第一至第七章和第九章所述问题，相应地提出了七项条文草案和一个序言草案。

40. At its 3354th meeting, on 9 May 2017, the Commission referred draft articles 11 to 17 as well as the draft preamble, as contained in the Special Rapporteur’s third report, to the Drafting Committee.

40. 在2017年5月9日第3354次会议上，委员会将特别报告员第三次报告所载的第11至第17条草案和序言草案交给起草委员会。

41. At its 3366th and 3377th meetings on 1 June and 19 July 2017, respectively, the Commission considered and adopted the two reports of the Drafting Committee on the draft preamble, draft articles 1 to 15, and the draft annex.

41. 在分别于2017年6月1日和7月19日举行的第3366和第3377次会议上，委员会审议并通过了起草委员会关于序言草案、第1至第15条草案和附件草案的两份报告。

It accordingly adopted the entire set of draft articles on crimes against humanity on first reading (see section C.1 below).

委员会遂一读通过了关于危害人类罪的一整套条款草案(见下文C.1节)。

42. At its 3383rd and 3384th meetings, on 31 July 2017, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft articles on crimes against humanity (see section C.2 below).

42. 在2017年7月31日举行的第3383和第3384次会议上，委员会通过了关于危害人类罪的条款草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。

43. At its 3384th meeting, on 31 July 2017, the Commission decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft articles on crimes against humanity, through the Secretary-General, to Governments, international organizations and others for comments and observations, with the request that such comments and observations be submitted to the Secretary-General by 1 December 2018.

43. 在2017年7月31日第3384次会议上，委员会根据其章程第16至第21条，决定通过秘书长将关于危害人类罪的条款草案转交给各国政府、各国际组织和其他方面征求评论和意见，要求在2018年12月1日之前向秘书长提交此类评论和意见。

44. At its 3384th meeting, on 31 July 2017, the Commission expressed its deep appreciation for the outstanding contribution of the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, which had enabled the Commission to bring to a successful conclusion its first reading of the draft articles on crimes against humanity.

44. 在2017年7月31日第3384次会议上，委员会向特别报告员肖恩·墨菲先生深表感谢，由于他的杰出贡献，委员会得以圆满结束对关于危害人类罪的条款草案的一读。

C. Text of the draft articles on crimes against humanity adopted by the Commission on first reading

C. 委员会一读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

45. The text of the draft articles adopted by the Commission on first reading is reproduced below.

45. 委员会一读通过的条款草案案文载录如下。

Crimes against humanity

危害人类罪

Preamble

序言

Mindful that throughout history millions of children, women and men have been victims of crimes that deeply shock the conscience of humanity,

注意到有史以来，使全人类的良知深受震动的罪行残害了无数儿童、妇女和男子，

Recognizing that crimes against humanity threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world,

认识到这种危害人类罪危及世界的和平、安全与福祉，

Recognizing further that the prohibition of crimes against humanity is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens),

还认识到禁止危害人类罪是一般国际法的强制性规范(强行法)，

Affirming that crimes against humanity, which are among the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, must be prevented in conformity with international law,

申明危害人类罪是整个国际社会关切的最严重罪行之一，必须按照国际法予以预防，

Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes,

决心使这些罪行的犯罪者不再逍遥法外，从而有助于预防这种犯罪，

Recalling the definition of crimes against humanity as set forth in article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court,

忆及《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第七条所载的危害人类罪的定义，

Recalling also that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction with respect to crimes against humanity,

又忆及每个国家都有义务对危害人类罪行使刑事管辖权，

Considering that, because crimes against humanity must not go unpunished, the effective prosecution of such crimes must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, including with respect to extradition and mutual legal assistance,

认为对危害人类罪绝不能听之任之不予惩罚，为确保有效起诉这种罪行，必须在国家一级采取措施并加强国际合作，包括在引渡和司法协助方面加强合作，

Considering as well the rights of victims, witnesses and others in relation to crimes against humanity, as well as the right of alleged offenders to fair treatment,

也考虑到与危害人类罪相关的受害人、证人和其他人的权利以及被指控罪犯受到公平对待的权利，

Article 1 [1]

第1[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 [2]

第2[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 [3]

第3[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，或根据公认为国际法所不容的其他理由，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，或与灭绝种族罪或战争罪有关；

(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. 为了本条款草案的目的，“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 [4]

第4[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. 各国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; and

(a) 在其管辖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、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

Non-refoulement

不推回

1. No State shall expel, return (refouler), surrender or extradite a person to territory under the jurisdiction of another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to a crime against humanity.

1. 如有充分理由相信任何人在另一国管辖领土内将有遭受危害人类罪的危险，则任何国家不得将该人驱逐、遣返(推回)、移交或引渡至该国。

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations, including, where applicable, the existence in the territory under the jurisdiction of the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights or of serious violations of international humanitarian law.

2. 为了确定这种理由是否存在，主管当局应考虑到所有有关因素，包括在适当情况下考虑到在有关国家管辖的领土内是否存在一贯严重、公然或大规模侵犯人权行为或严重违反国际人道主义法的情况。

Article 6 [5]

第6[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，如果未对在其实际指挥和控制下的部队，或在其实际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;

(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；

and (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;

(二) 犯罪涉及该上级人员实际负责和控制的活动；

and (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 fact that an offence referred to in this draft article was committed by a person holding an official position is not a ground for excluding criminal responsibility.

5. 各国应采取必要措施，确保根据国家刑法，本条草案所述罪行由担任公职的人实施的事实不成为免除刑事责任的理由。

6. 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.

6. 各国应采取必要措施，确保国家刑法规定，本条草案所述罪行不应受到任何时效限制。

7. 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.

7. 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，应考虑到其严重性，处以适当的惩罚。

8. 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.

8. 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 7 [6]

第7[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 covered by the present draft articles in the following cases:

1. 各国应采取必要措施，确立在下列情况下对本条款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) 被指控罪犯为该国国民，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 covered by the present draft articles 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，确立对本条款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 8 [7]

第8[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 9 [8]

第9[8]条

Preliminary measures when an alleged offender is present

当被指控罪犯在境内时应采取的初步措施

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 covered by the present draft articles is present shall take the person into custody or take other legal measures to ensure his or her presence.

1. 任何国家，如果被指控犯有本条款草案所述任何罪行的人在其管辖的领土内，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 7, paragraph 1, of the fact that such person is in custody and of the circumstances which warrant his or her detention.

3. 一国如果根据本条草案将某人拘押，应立即向第7条草案第1款所述国家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.

进行本条草案第2款所述初步调查的国家应立即向所述有关国家通报调查结果，并表明是否有意行使管辖权。

Article 10 [9]

第10[9]条

Aut dedere aut judicare

引渡或起诉

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领土内的国家，应将该案提交主管当局以便起诉，除非该国将该人引渡至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.

主管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 11 [10]

第11[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 covered by the present draft articles 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. 对于任何因本条款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. 在非本人国籍国被监禁、拘押或拘留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;

(b) 受到此类国家代表的探视；

and

以及

(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实现。

Article 12

第12条

Victims, witnesses and others

受害人、证人及其他人

1. Each State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that:

1. 各国应采取必要措施，确保：

(a) any person who alleges that acts constituting crimes against humanity have been or are being committed has the right to complain to the competent authorities;

(a) 声称有人实施了或正在实施构成危害人类罪的行为的任何人有权向主管当局提出申诉；

and

以及

(b) complainants, victims, witnesses, and their relatives and representatives, as well as other persons participating in any investigation, prosecution, extradition or other proceeding within the scope of the present draft articles, shall be protected against ill-treatment or intimidation as a consequence of any complaint, information, testimony or other evidence given.

(b) 申诉人、受害人、证人及其家属和代表以及在本条款草案范围内参加任何侦查、起诉、引渡或其他程序的其他人得到保护，不因提供任何申诉、资料、证词或其他证据而受到虐待或恐吓。

Protective measures shall be without prejudice to the rights of the alleged offender referred to in draft article 11.

这些措施应不妨害第11条草案所述被指控罪犯的权利。

2. Each State shall, in accordance with its national law, enable the views and concerns of victims of a crime against humanity to be presented and considered at appropriate stages of criminal proceedings against alleged offenders in a manner not prejudicial to the rights referred to in draft article 11.

2. 各国应在不违背本国法律的情况下，在对被指控罪犯提起刑事诉讼的适当阶段，以不妨害第11条草案所述权利的方式使危害人类罪受害人的意见和关切得到表达和考虑。

3. Each State shall take the necessary measures to ensure in its legal system that the victims of a crime against humanity have the right to obtain reparation for material and moral damages, on an individual or collective basis, consisting, as appropriate, of one or more of the following or other forms: restitution;

3. 各国应采取必要措施，在其法律体制内确保危害人类罪受害人有权就受到的物质和精神损害以个人或集体方式获得赔偿，这种赔偿酌情包括以下一种或多种形式：恢复原状；

compensation;

补偿；

satisfaction;

抵偿；

rehabilitation;

康复；

cessation and guarantees of non-repetition.

停止和保证不再发生。

Article 13

第13条

Extradition

引渡

1. Each of the offences covered by the present draft articles shall be deemed to be included as an extraditable offence in any extradition treaty existing between States.

1. 本条款草案所述各种犯罪应被视为属于国家间现有的任何引渡条约所列的可引渡罪行。

States undertake to include such offences as extraditable offences in every extradition treaty to be concluded between them.

各国保证将此种罪行作为可引渡罪行列入将来相互之间缔结的每项引渡条约。

2. For the purposes of extradition between States, an offence covered by the present draft articles shall not be regarded as a political offence or as an offence connected with a political offence or as an offence inspired by political motives.

2. 为了国家间引渡的目的，本条款草案所述犯罪不应视为政治犯罪、与政治犯罪有联系的犯罪或带有政治动机的犯罪。

Accordingly, a request for extradition based on such an offence may not be refused on these grounds alone.

因此，不得仅以这些理由拒绝对此种犯罪提出的引渡请求。

3. If a State that makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another State with which it has no extradition treaty, it may consider the present draft articles as the legal basis for extradition in respect of any offence covered by the present draft articles.

3. 以订有条约为引渡条件的国家如果收到另一个未与之签订引渡条约的国家提出的引渡请求，可将本条款草案视为对本条款草案所述犯罪给予引渡的法律依据。

4. A State that makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall, for any offence covered by the present draft articles:

4. 对于本条款草案所述的犯罪，以订有条约为引渡条件的国家应：

(a) inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations whether it will use the present draft articles as the legal basis for cooperation on extradition with other States;

(a) 通知联合国秘书长它是否将利用本条款草案作为与其他国家进行引渡合作的法律依据；

and (b) if it does not use the present draft articles as the legal basis for cooperation on extradition, seek, where appropriate, to conclude treaties on extradition with other States in order to implement this draft article.

(b) 如果不以本条款草案作为引渡合作的法律依据，则应在适当情况下寻求与其他国家缔结引渡条约，以执行本条草案规定。

5. States that do not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall recognize the offences covered by the present draft articles as extraditable offences between themselves.

5. 不以订有条约为引渡条件的国家，应承认本条款草案所述犯罪为彼此之间可引渡的犯罪。

6. Extradition shall be subject to the conditions provided for by the national law of the requested State or by applicable extradition treaties, including the grounds upon which the requested State may refuse extradition.

6. 引渡应遵从被请求国国内法或适用的引渡条约所规定的条件，包括遵从被请求国可能拒绝引渡的理由。

7. If necessary, the offences covered by the present draft articles shall be treated, for the purposes of extradition between States, as if they had been committed not only in the place in which they occurred but also in the territory of the States that have established jurisdiction in accordance with draft article 7, paragraph 1.

7. 为了国家间引渡的目的，必要时应将本条款草案所述罪行视为不仅在发生地实施，而且也在按照第7条草案第1款确立管辖权的国家领土内实施。

8. If extradition, sought for purposes of enforcing a sentence, is refused because the person sought is a national of the requested State, the requested State shall, if its national law so permits and in conformity with the requirements of such law, upon application of the requesting State, consider the enforcement of the sentence imposed under the national law of the requesting State or the remainder thereof.

8. 如为执行判决而提出的引渡请求由于被请求引渡人为被请求国的国民而遭到拒绝，被请求国应在其本国法律允许并且符合该法律的要求的情况下，根据请求国的申请，考虑执行按请求国本国法律作出的判刑或剩余刑期。

9. Nothing in the present draft articles shall be interpreted as imposing an obligation to extradite if the requested State has substantial grounds for believing that the request has been made for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing a person on account of that person’s gender, race, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, culture, membership of a particular social group, political opinions or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, or that compliance with the request would cause prejudice to that person’s position for any of these reasons.

9. 如果被请求国有充分理由认为，提出引渡请求的目的，是因某人的性别、种族、宗教、国籍、族裔、文化、属于某一特定社会群体或政治见解或因公认为国际法所不容的其他理由而对之进行起诉或惩罚，或同意引渡将因上述任一理由而对该人地位造成损害，则本条款草案的任何内容不得解释为硬性规定了引渡义务。

10. Before refusing extradition, the requested State shall, where appropriate, consult with the requesting State to provide it with ample opportunity to present its opinions and to provide information relevant to its allegation.

10. 被请求国在拒绝引渡前应在适当情况下与请求国磋商，以使请求国有充分机会陈述自己的意见和介绍与其指控有关的资料。

Article 14

第14条

Mutual legal assistance

司法协助

1. States shall afford one another the widest measure of mutual legal assistance in investigations, prosecutions and judicial proceedings in relation to the offences covered by the present draft articles in accordance with this draft article.

1. 各国应按照本条草案，在对本条款草案所述的犯罪进行的侦查、起诉和审判程序中相互提供最广泛的司法协助。

2. Mutual legal assistance shall be afforded to the fullest extent possible under relevant laws, treaties, agreements and arrangements of the requested State with respect to investigations, prosecutions, judicial and other proceedings in relation to the offences for which a legal person may be held liable in accordance with draft article 6, paragraph 8, in the requesting State.

2. 对于请求国依照第6条草案第8款可能追究法人责任的犯罪所进行的侦查、起诉、审判和其他程序，应根据被请求国有关的法律、条约、协定和安排，尽可能充分地提供司法协助。

3. Mutual legal assistance to be afforded in accordance with this draft article may be requested for any of the following purposes:

3. 可为下列任何目的请求按照本条草案给予司法协助：

(a) identifying and locating alleged offenders and, as appropriate, victims, witnesses or others;

(a) 查明被指控罪犯以及适当时受害人、证人或其他人的身份和所在地；

(b) taking evidence or statements from persons, including by video conference;

(b) 向个人获取证据或陈述，包括以视频会议方式；

(c) effecting service of judicial documents;

(c) 送达司法文书；

(d) executing searches and seizures;

(d) 执行搜查和扣押；

(e) examining objects and sites, including obtaining forensic evidence;

(e) 检查实物和现场，包括获取法医证据；

(f) providing information, evidentiary items and expert evaluations;

(f) 提供资料、物证以及专家评估；

(g) providing originals or certified copies of relevant documents and records;

(g) 提供有关文件和记录的原件或经核证的副本；

(h) identifying, tracing or freezing proceeds of crime, property, instrumentalities or other things for evidentiary or other purposes;

(h) 为取证目的或其他目的而查明、追查或冻结犯罪所得、财产、工具或其他物品；

(i) facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons in the requesting State;

(i) 为有关人员自愿在请求国出庭提供方便；

or

或

(j) any other type of assistance that is not contrary to the national law of the requested State.

(j) 不违反被请求国本国法律的任何其他形式的协助。

4. States shall not decline to render mutual legal assistance pursuant to this draft article on the ground of bank secrecy.

4. 各国不得以银行保密为理由拒绝提供本条草案所规定的司法协助。

5. States shall consider, as may be necessary, the possibility of concluding bilateral or multilateral agreements or arrangements that would serve the purposes of, give practical effect to, or enhance the provisions of this draft article.

5. 各国应视需要考虑缔结有助于实现本条草案目的、具体实施或者加强本条规定的双边或多边协定或者安排的可能性。

6. Without prejudice to its national law, the competent authorities of a State may, without prior request, transmit information relating to crimes against humanity to a competent authority in another State where they believe that such information could assist the authority in undertaking or successfully concluding investigations, prosecutions and judicial proceedings or could result in a request formulated by the latter State pursuant to the present draft articles.

6. 一国主管当局如果认为与危害人类罪有关的资料可能有助于另一国主管当局进行或顺利完成侦查、起诉和审判程序，或者可以促成其根据本条款草案提出请求，则在不妨碍本国法律的情况下，可以在没有事先请求的情况下，向该另一国主管当局提供此类资料。

7. The provisions of this draft article shall not affect the obligations under any other treaty, bilateral or multilateral, that governs or will govern, in whole or in part, mutual legal assistance, except that the provisions of this draft article shall apply to the extent that they provide for greater mutual legal assistance.

7. 本条草案各项规定概不影响任何其他规范或者将要规范整个或部分司法协助问题的双边或多边条约所规定的义务，但本条草案的各项规定在适用时只会促成更大程度的司法协助的情形不在此列。

8. The draft annex to the present draft articles shall apply to requests made pursuant to this draft article if the States in question are not bound by a treaty of mutual legal assistance.

8. 如果有关国家无司法协助条约的约束，则本条款草案的附件草案应适用于根据本条草案提出的请求。

If those States are bound by such a treaty, the corresponding provisions of that treaty shall apply, unless the States agree to apply the provisions of the draft annex in lieu thereof.

如果有关国家受此类条约的约束，则适用条约的相应规定，除非这些国家同意代之以适用附件草案的规定。

States are encouraged to apply the draft annex if it facilitates cooperation.

鼓励各国在附件草案有助于合作时适用附件草案。

Article 15

第15条

Settlement of disputes

争端的解决

1. States shall endeavour to settle disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the present draft articles through negotiations.

1. 各国应努力通过谈判解决与本条款草案的解释或适用有关的争端。

2. Any dispute between two or more States concerning the interpretation or application of the present draft articles that is not settled through negotiation shall, at the request of one of those States, be submitted to the International Court of Justice, unless those States agree to submit the dispute to arbitration.

2. 两个或两个以上国家对于本条款草案的解释或适用发生的任何争端不能通过谈判解决的，应按其中一方请求提交国际法院，除非这些国家同意将争端交付仲裁。

3. Each State may declare that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 2 of this draft article.

3. 各国可声明不受本条草案第2款的约束。

The other States shall not be bound by paragraph 2 of this draft article with respect to any State that has made such a declaration.

相对于作此声明的任何国家而言，其他国家也不受本条草案第2款的约束。

4. Any State that has made a declaration in accordance with paragraph 3 of this draft article may at any time withdraw that declaration.

4. 凡根据本条草案第3款作出声明的国家，均可随时撤销该项声明。

Annex

附件

1. This draft annex applies in accordance with draft article 14, paragraph 8.

1. 本附件草案按照第14条草案第8款适用。

Designation of a central authority

中央机关的指定

2. Each State shall designate a central authority that shall have the responsibility and power to receive requests for mutual legal assistance and either to execute them or to transmit them to the competent authorities for execution.

2. 各国应指定一个中央机关，使其负责和有权接收司法协助请求并执行请求或将请求转交主管当局执行。

Where a State has a special region or territory with a separate system of mutual legal assistance, it may designate a distinct central authority that shall have the same function for that region or territory.

一国如有实行单独司法协助制度的特区或领土，可另指定一个对该特区或者领土具有同样职能的中央机关。

Central authorities shall ensure the speedy and proper execution or transmission of the requests received.

中央机关应确保所收到的请求迅速而妥善地执行或者转交。

Where the central authority transmits the request to a competent authority for execution, it shall encourage the speedy and proper execution of the request by the competent authority.

中央机关在将请求转交某一主管当局执行时，应鼓励该主管当局迅速而妥善地执行请求。

The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall be notified by each State of the central authority designated for this purpose.

各国应将为此目的指定的中央机关通知联合国秘书长。

Requests for mutual legal assistance and any communication related thereto shall be transmitted to the central authorities designated by the States.

司法协助请求以及与之有关的任何联系文件均应送交各国指定的中央机关。

This requirement shall be without prejudice to the right of a State to require that such requests and communications be addressed to it through diplomatic channels and, in urgent circumstances, where the States agree, through the International Criminal Police Organization, if possible.

此项要求不得妨害一国要求通过外交渠道以及在紧急和可能的情况下经有关国家同意通过国际刑事警察组织向其传递这种请求和联系文件的权利。

Procedures for making a request

提出请求的程序

3. Requests shall be made in writing or, where possible, by any means capable of producing a written record, in a language acceptable to the requested State, under conditions allowing that State to establish authenticity.

3. 请求应以被请求国能够接受的语文以书面形式提出，或在可能的情况下以能够生成书面记录的任何形式提出，但须能够使该国鉴定其真伪。

The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall be notified by each State of the language or languages acceptable to that State.

各国应将其所能够接受的语文通知联合国秘书长。

In urgent circumstances and where agreed by the States, requests may be made orally, but shall be confirmed in writing forthwith.

在紧急情况下，如果经有关国家同意，请求可以口头方式提出，但应立即加以书面确认。

4. A request for mutual legal assistance shall contain:

4. 司法协助请求书应包括：

(a) the identity of the authority making the request;

(a) 提出请求的机关；

(b) the subject matter and nature of the investigation, prosecution or judicial proceeding to which the request relates and the name and functions of the authority conducting the investigation, prosecution or judicial proceeding;

(b) 请求所涉及的侦查、起诉或审判程序的事由和性质，以及进行该项侦查、起诉或审判程序的机关的名称和职能；

(c) a summary of the relevant facts, except in relation to requests for the purpose of service of judicial documents;

(c) 有关事实的概述，但为送达司法文书提出的请求除外；

(d) a description of the assistance sought and details of any particular procedure that the requesting State wishes to be followed;

(d) 对请求协助的事项和请求国希望得到遵循的特定程序细节的说明；

(e) where possible, the identity, location and nationality of any person concerned;

(e) 可能的话，任何有关人员的身份、所在地和国籍；

and

以及

(f) the purpose for which the evidence, information or action is sought.

(f) 索取证据、资料或要求采取行动的目的。

5. The requested State may request additional information when it appears necessary for the execution of the request in accordance with its national law or when it can facilitate such execution.

5. 被请求国可要求提供按照其本国法律执行该请求所必需或者有助于执行该请求的补充资料。

Response to the request by the requested State

被请求国对请求的答复

6. A request shall be executed in accordance with the national law of the requested State and, to the extent not contrary to the national law of the requested State and where possible, in accordance with the procedures specified in the request.

6. 请求应按照被请求国的本国法律执行。 在不违反被请求国本国法律的情况下，如有可能，应按照请求书中列明的程序执行。

7. The requested State shall execute the request for mutual legal assistance as soon as possible and shall take as full account as possible of any deadlines suggested by the requesting State and for which reasons are given, preferably in the request.

7. 被请求国应尽快执行司法协助请求，并应尽可能充分地考虑到请求国提出的、最好在请求中说明了理由的任何最后期限。

The requested State shall respond to reasonable requests by the requesting State on progress of its handling of the request.

被请求国应依请求国的合理要求，就其处理请求的进展情况作出答复。

The requesting State shall promptly inform the requested State when the assistance sought is no longer required.

请求国应在其不再需要被请求国提供所寻求的协助时迅速通知被请求国。

8. Mutual legal assistance may be refused:

8. 在下列情况下可拒绝提供司法协助：

(a) if the request is not made in conformity with the provisions of this draft annex;

(a) 如果请求未按本附件草案的规定提出；

(b) if the requested State considers that execution of the request is likely to prejudice its sovereignty, security, ordre public or other essential interests;

(b) 如果被请求国认为执行请求可能损害其主权、安全、公共秩序或其他基本利益；

(c) if the authorities of the requested State would be prohibited by its national law from carrying out the action requested with regard to any similar offence, had it been subject to investigation, prosecution or judicial proceedings under their own jurisdiction;

(c) 如果被请求国的机关依其管辖权对任何类似犯罪进行侦查、起诉或审判程序时，其本国法律已经规定禁止对此类犯罪采取被请求的行动；

(d) if it would be contrary to the legal system of the requested State relating to mutual legal assistance for the request to be granted.

(d) 如果同意这项请求将违反被请求国关于司法协助的法律制度。

9. Reasons shall be given for any refusal of mutual legal assistance.

9. 拒绝司法协助时应说明理由。

10. Mutual legal assistance may be postponed by the requested State on the ground that it interferes with an ongoing investigation, prosecution or judicial proceeding.

10. 被请求国可以司法协助妨碍正在进行的侦查、起诉或审判程序为理由而暂缓进行。

11. Before refusing a request pursuant to paragraph 8 of this draft annex or postponing its execution pursuant to paragraph 10 of this draft annex, the requested State shall consult with the requesting State to consider whether assistance may be granted subject to such terms and conditions as it deems necessary.

11. 被请求国在根据本附件草案第8款拒绝某项请求或者根据本附件草案第10款暂缓执行请求事项之前，应与请求国协商，以考虑是否可以在其认为必要的条款和条件下给予协助。

If the requesting State accepts assistance subject to those conditions, it shall comply with the conditions.

请求国如果接受附有条件限制的协助，则应遵守有关的条件。

12. The requested State:

12. 被请求国：

(a) shall provide to the requesting State copies of government records, documents or information in its possession that under its national law are available to the general public;

(a) 应向请求国提供其所拥有的根据其本国法律可向公众提供的政府记录、文件或资料；

and

并且

(b) may, at its discretion, provide to the requesting State in whole, in part or subject to such conditions as it deems appropriate, copies of any government records, documents or information in its possession that under its national law are not available to the general public.

(b) 可自行斟酌决定全部或部分地或者按其认为适当的条件向请求国提供其所拥有的根据其本国法律不向公众提供的任何政府记录、文件或资料。

Use of information by the requesting State

请求国对资料的使用

13. The requesting State shall not transmit or use information or evidence furnished by the requested State for investigations, prosecutions or judicial proceedings other than those stated in the request without the prior consent of the requested State.

13. 未经被请求国事先同意，请求国不得为了请求书所述以外的侦查、起诉或审判程序而发送或使用被请求国提供的资料或证据。

Nothing in this paragraph shall prevent the requesting State from disclosing in its proceedings information or evidence that is exculpatory to an accused person.

本款规定不得妨碍请求国在其诉讼中披露可证明被告人无罪的资料或证据。

In the latter case, the requesting State shall notify the requested State prior to the disclosure and, if so requested, consult with the requested State.

就后一种情形而言，请求国应在披露之前通知被请求国，并依请求与被请求国磋商。

If, in an exceptional case, advance notice is not possible, the requesting State shall inform the requested State of the disclosure without delay.

如果在特殊情况下不可能事先通知，请求国应毫不迟延地将披露一事告知被请求国。

14. The requesting State may require that the requested State keep confidential the fact and substance of the request, except to the extent necessary to execute the request.

14. 请求国可要求被请求国对其提出的请求及其内容保密，但为执行请求所必需的除外。

If the requested State cannot comply with the requirement of confidentiality, it shall promptly inform the requesting State.

如果被请求国不能遵守保密要求，应立即告知请求国。

Testimony of person from the requested State

被请求国人员作证

15. Without prejudice to the application of paragraph 19 of this draft annex, a witness, expert or other person who, at the request of the requesting State, consents to give evidence in a proceeding or to assist in an investigation, prosecution or judicial proceeding in territory under the jurisdiction of the requesting State shall not be prosecuted, detained, punished or subjected to any other restriction of his or her personal liberty in that territory in respect of acts, omissions or convictions prior to his or her departure from territory under the jurisdiction of the requested State.

15. 在不妨碍本附件草案第19款的适用的情况下，对于依请求国请求而同意到请求国所管辖领土就某项诉讼作证或者为某项侦查、起诉或审判程序提供协助的证人、专家或其他人员，不应因其离开被请求国所管辖领土之前的作为、不作为或者定罪而在请求国领土内对其起诉、羁押、处罚，或者使其人身自由受到任何其他限制。

Such safe conduct shall cease when the witness, expert or other person having had, for a period of fifteen consecutive days or for any period agreed upon by the States from the date on which he or she has been officially informed that his or her presence is no longer required by the judicial authorities, an opportunity of leaving, has nevertheless remained voluntarily in territory under the jurisdiction of the requesting State or, having left it, has returned of his or her own free will.

如该证人、专家或其他人员已经得到司法机关不再需要其到场的正式通知，在自通知之日起连续十五天内或者在有关国家所商定的任何期限内，有机会离开但仍自愿留在请求国所管辖领土内，或者在离境后又自愿返回，这种安全保障即不再有效。

16. Wherever possible and consistent with fundamental principles of national law, when an individual is in territory under the jurisdiction of a State and has to be heard as a witness or expert by the judicial authorities of another State, the first State may, at the request of the other, permit the hearing to take place by video conference if it is not possible or desirable for the individual in question to appear in person in territory under the jurisdiction of the requesting State.

16. 当在某一国所管辖领土内的某人须作为证人或专家接受另一国司法机关询问，而且该人不可能或不宜到请求国领土出庭时，被请求国可依该另一国的请求，在可能而且符合国内法基本原则的情况下，允许以视频会议方式进行询问。

States may agree that the hearing shall be conducted by a judicial authority of the requesting State and attended by a judicial authority of the requested State.

有关国家可商定由请求国司法机关进行询问，询问时应有被请求国司法机关人员在场。

Transfer for testimony of person detained in the requested State

被请求国被羁押人员为作证予以移送

17. A person who is being detained or is serving a sentence in the territory under the jurisdiction of one State whose presence in another State is requested for purposes of identification, testimony or otherwise providing assistance in obtaining evidence for investigations, prosecutions or judicial proceedings in relation to offences covered by the present draft articles, may be transferred if the following conditions are met:

17. 在一国领土内被羁押或服刑的人，如果被要求到另一国进行辨认、作证或提供其他协助，以便为就与本条款草案所述的犯罪有关的侦查、起诉或审判程序取得证据，在满足下列条件的情况下，可予以移送：

(a) the person freely gives his or her informed consent;

(a) 该人在知情后自由表示同意；

and

并且

(b) the competent authorities of both States agree, subject to such conditions as those States may deem appropriate.

(b) 在遵守两国认为适当的条件前提下，两国主管当局同意。

18. For the purposes of paragraph 17 of this draft annex:

18. 为本附件草案第17款的目的：

(a) the State to which the person is transferred shall have the authority and obligation to keep the person transferred in custody, unless otherwise requested or authorized by the State from which the person was transferred;

(a) 该人被移送前往的国家应有权力和义务羁押被移送人，除非移送国另有要求或授权；

(b) the State to which the person is transferred shall without delay implement its obligation to return the person to the custody of the State from which the person was transferred as agreed beforehand, or as otherwise agreed, by the competent authorities of both States;

(b) 该人被移送前往的国家应毫不迟延地履行义务，按照两国主管当局事先达成的协议或其他协议，将该人交还移送国羁押；

(c) the State to which the person is transferred shall not require the State from which the person was transferred to initiate extradition proceedings for the return of the person; and

(c) 该人被移送前往的国家不得要求移送国为该人的交还而启动引渡程序；

(d) the person transferred shall receive credit for service of the sentence being served from the State from which he or she was transferred for time spent in the custody of the State to which he or she was transferred.

(d) 该人在被移送前往的国家的羁押时间应当折抵在移送国执行的刑期。

19. Unless the State from which a person is to be transferred in accordance with paragraphs 17 and 18 of this draft annex so agrees, that person, whatever his or her nationality, shall not be prosecuted, detained, punished or subjected to any other restriction of his or her personal liberty in territory under the jurisdiction of the State to which that person is transferred in respect of acts, omissions or convictions prior to his or her departure from territory under the jurisdiction of the State from which he or she was transferred.

19. 除非依照本附件草案第17款和第18款的规定移送某人的国家同意，否则，不论该人国籍为何，均不得因其在离开移送国所管辖领土前的作为、不作为或定罪而在被移送前往的国家所管辖领土内使其受到起诉、羁押、处罚或对其人身自由进行任何其他限制。

Costs

费用

20. The ordinary costs of executing a request shall be borne by the requested State, unless otherwise agreed by the States concerned.

20. 除非有关国家另有协议，执行请求的一般费用应由被请求国承担。

If expenses of a substantial or extraordinary nature are or will be required to fulfil the request, the States shall consult to determine the terms and conditions under which the request will be executed, as well as the manner in which the costs shall be borne.

如果执行请求需要或将需要支付巨额或异常费用，则应由有关国家进行协商，以确定执行该请求的条款和条件以及承担费用的办法。

2. Text of the draft articles and commentaries thereto

2. 条款草案案文及其评注

46. The text of the draft articles and commentaries thereto adopted by the Commission on first reading at its sixty-ninth session is reproduced below.

46. 委员会第六十九届会议一读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

General commentary

总评注

(1) Three crimes typically have featured in the jurisdiction of international criminal tribunals: genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

(1) 有三种罪行通常属于国际刑事法庭的管辖范围：灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪和战争罪。

The crime of genocide and war crimes are the subject of global conventions that require States within their national law to prevent and punish such crimes, and to cooperate among themselves toward those ends.

灭绝种族罪 和战争罪 是一些全球公约的主题，这些公约要求各国在国内法中防止和惩治这些罪行，并为此目的开展合作。

By contrast, there is no global convention dedicated to preventing and punishing crimes against humanity and promoting inter-State cooperation in that regard, even though crimes against humanity are likely no less prevalent than genocide or war crimes.

相比之下，虽然危害人类罪的发生率可能并不低于灭绝种族罪或战争罪，却没有一项全球公约专门述及防止和惩治危害人类罪及促进这方面国家间合作的问题。

Unlike war crimes, crimes against humanity may occur in situations not involving armed conflict.

危害人类罪与战争罪不同，可能在不涉及武装冲突的情况下发生。

Further, crimes against humanity do not require the special intent that is necessary for establishing genocide.

此外，危害人类罪也不需要确立灭绝种族罪所需的特殊意图。

On the other hand, the view was expressed that neither the Genocide Convention nor the Geneva Conventions and related Protocols established detailed inter-State mechanisms for cooperation as provided for in the present draft articles.

另一方面，有一种意见认为，《灭绝种族罪公约》和日内瓦四公约以及有关议定书都没有像本条款草案这样，确立详细的国家间合作机制。

For that reason, it was considered that other core crimes could also have been addressed in the present draft articles.

基于这一理由，这种意见认为，本条款草案本来也是可以处理其他核心罪行的。

(2) Treaties focused on prevention, punishment and inter-State cooperation exist for many offences far less egregious than crimes against humanity, such as corruption and organized crime.

(2) 许多严重程度远远不及危害人类罪的罪行，如腐败犯罪 和有组织犯罪 都已订立了重在防止、惩治及国家间合作的条约。

Consequently, a global convention on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity might serve as an important additional piece in the current framework of international law, and in particular, international humanitarian law, international criminal law and international human rights law.

因此，关于防止和惩治危害人类罪的一项全球性公约可能是对现有的国际法框架，特别是国际人道主义法、国际刑法和国际人权法的重要补充。

Such a convention could draw further attention to the need for prevention and punishment and could help States to adopt and harmonize national laws relating to such conduct, thereby opening the door to more effective inter-State cooperation on the prevention, investigation and prosecution of such crimes.

这样的公约可推动进一步关注防止和惩治这种行为的必要性，并有助于各国通过和统一有关这种行为的国内法律，从而为防止、调查和起诉这种罪行开展更有效的国家间合作开辟途径。

In building a network of cooperation, as has been done with respect to other offences, sanctuary would be denied to offenders, thereby — it is hoped — helping both to deter such conduct ab initio and to ensure accountability ex post.

为应对其他犯罪行为，已经建立了合作网络。 如果在应对危害人类罪方面也这样做，罪犯将无藏身之地，从而有望防患于未然，并确保事发后即予追究责任。

(3) Hence, the proposal for this topic, as adopted by the Commission at its sixty-fifth session in 2013, states that the “objective of the International Law Commission on this topic … would be to draft articles for what would become a Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity”.

(3) 因此，委员会2013年第六十五届会议通过的关于这一专题的建议指出，“国际法委员会在此专题上的目标便是起草一套条款草案，使之成为一项《防止及惩治危害人类罪公约》”。

In accordance with the Commission’s practice, and in advance of a decision by States as to whether to use these draft articles as the basis for a convention, the Commission has not included technical language characteristic of treaties (for example, referring to “States Parties”) and has not drafted final clauses on matters such as ratification, reservations, entry into force or amendment.

按照委员会的惯例，在各国就是否将这些条款草案作为一项公约的基础做出决定之前，委员会没有采用条约的技术性措辞(例如提及“缔约国”)，也未起草关于批准、保留、生效或修正等事项的最后条款。

(4) The present draft articles avoid any conflicts with the obligations of States arising under the constituent instruments of international or “hybrid” (containing a mixture of international law and national law elements) criminal courts or tribunals, including the International Criminal Court.

(4) 本条款草案避免与在国际或“混合”(兼有国际法和国内法要素)刑事法庭或裁判庭――包括国际刑事法院――组织章程之下产生的国家义务发生冲突。

Whereas the 1998 Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court regulates relations between the International Criminal Court and its States parties (a “vertical” relationship), the focus of the present draft articles is on the adoption of national laws and on inter-State cooperation (a “horizontal” relationship).

设立国际刑事法院的1998年《罗马规约》规范国际刑事法院与缔约国的关系(“纵向”关系)，而本条款草案的着重点则是国内法的制定和国家间的合作(“横向”关系)。

Part IX of the 1998 Rome Statute on “International Cooperation and Judicial Assistance” assumes that inter-State cooperation on crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court will continue to exist without prejudice to the 1998 Rome Statute, but does not direct itself to the regulation of that cooperation.

1998年《罗马规约》关于“国际合作和司法协助”的第九编默示承认，在处理国际刑事法院管辖范围内的罪行问题上的国家间合作将继续存在，而不妨碍1998年《罗马规约》，但没有对这种合作作出规定。

The present draft articles address inter-State cooperation on the prevention of crimes against humanity, as well as on the investigation, apprehension, prosecution, extradition and punishment in national legal systems of persons who commit such crimes, an objective consistent with the 1998 Rome Statute.

本条款草案既涉及在防止危害人类罪方面的国家间合作，也涉及在国家法律系统内调查、缉捕、起诉、引渡和处罚这种罪行的行为人方面的国家间合作，这是与1998年《罗马规约》一致的目标。

In doing so, the present draft articles contribute to the implementation of the principle of complementarity under the 1998 Rome Statute.

通过这样做，本条款草案有助于实施1998年《罗马规约》规定的补充作用原则。

Finally, constituent instruments of international or hybrid criminal courts or tribunals address the prosecution of persons for the crimes within their jurisdiction, not steps that should be taken by States to prevent such crimes before they are committed or while they are being committed.

最后，国际或“混合”刑事法庭或裁判庭组织章程处理的是对其管辖内的犯罪人的起诉，不是国家为事先防止此类罪行或在此类罪行发生时而应采取的步骤。

Preamble

序言

Mindful that throughout history millions of children, women and men have been victims of crimes that deeply shock the conscience of humanity,

注意到有史以来，使全人类的良知深受震动的罪行残害了无数儿童、妇女和男子，

Recognizing that crimes against humanity threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world,

认识到这种危害人类罪危及世界的和平、安全与福祉，

Recognizing further that the prohibition of crimes against humanity is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens),

还认识到禁止危害人类罪是一般国际法的强制性规范(强行法)，

Affirming that crimes against humanity, which are among the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, must be prevented in conformity with international law,

申明危害人类罪是整个国际社会关切的最严重罪行之一，必须按照国际法予以预防，

Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes,

决心使这些罪行的犯罪者不再逍遥法外，从而有助于预防这种犯罪，

Recalling the definition of crimes against humanity as set forth in article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court,

忆及《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第七条所载的危害人类罪的定义，

Recalling also that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction with respect to crimes against humanity,

又忆及每个国家都有义务对危害人类罪行使刑事管辖权，

Considering that, because crimes against humanity must not go unpunished, the effective prosecution of such crimes must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, including with respect to extradition and mutual legal assistance,

认为对危害人类罪绝不能听之任之不予惩罚，为确保有效起诉这种罪行，必须在国家一级采取措施并加强国际合作，包括在引渡和司法协助方面加强合作，

Considering as well the rights of victims, witnesses and others in relation to crimes against humanity, as well as the right of alleged offenders to fair treatment,

也考虑到与危害人类罪相关的受害人、证人和其他人的权利以及被指控罪犯受到公平对待的权利，

Commentary

评注

(1) The preamble aims to provide a conceptual framework for the present draft articles on crimes against humanity, setting out the general context in which the topic was elaborated and the main purposes of the present draft articles.

(1) 序言旨在为关于危害人类罪的本条款草案提供一个概念框架，阐述讨论本专题的一般背景和本条款草案的主要目的。

In part, it draws inspiration from language used in the preambles of international treaties relating to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, including the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

其措辞在一定程度上受到与整个国际社会关切的最严重罪行有关的国际条约序言的启发，包括1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》和1998年《国际刑事法院罗马规约》。

(2) The first preambular paragraph recalls the fact that, over the course of history, millions of people have been victimized by acts that deeply shock the conscience of humanity.

(2) 序言部分第一段指出了一个事实，即在历史上，使全人类的良知深受震动的行为给无数人造成了伤害。

When such acts, because of their gravity, constitute egregious attacks on humankind itself, they are referred to as crimes against humanity.

当此类行为因其严重性而构成对人类自身的严重攻击时，就称为危害人类罪。

(3) The second preambular recognizes that such crimes endanger important contemporary values (“peace, security and well-being of the world”). In so doing, this paragraph echoes the purposes set forth in Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations, and stresses the link between the pursuit of criminal justice and the maintenance of peace and security.

(3) 序言部分第二段认识到这种罪行危及当代的重要价值观(“世界的和平、安全与福祉”)，从而就体现了《联合国宪章》第一条所载的宗旨，并强调了实现刑事司法同维护和平与安全之间的联系。

(4) The third preambular paragraph recognizes that the prohibition of crimes against humanity is not just a rule of international law; it is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens).

(4) 序言部分第三段认识到禁止危害人类罪不仅是一项国际法规则，而且是一般国际法的强制性规范(强行法)。

As such, this prohibition is accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character.

因此，这种禁止为各国组成的整个国际社会所接受，并承认为不许减损的规范，且只能由嗣后具有同样性质的一般国际法规范方可加以更改。

The Commission has previously indicated that the prohibition of crimes against humanity is “clearly accepted and recognized” as a peremptory norm of international law.

委员会以前曾指出，禁止危害人类罪“被明确接受和承认”为强制性国际法规范。

The International Court of Justice has indicated that the prohibition on certain acts, such as torture, has the character of jus cogens, which a fortiori suggests that a prohibition of the perpetration of that act on a widespread or systematic basis amounting to crimes against humanity would also have the character of jus cogens.

国际法院表示，禁止某些行为，例如酷刑， 具有强行法的性质， 这更加表明，禁止广泛或系统地实施上述行为的规定也将具有强行法性质。

(5) As indicated in draft article 1 below, the present draft articles have two overall objectives: the prevention and the punishment of crimes against humanity.

(5) 如下文第1条草案所示，本条款草案有两个总体目标：防止和惩治危害人类罪。

The fourth preambular paragraph focuses upon the first of these two objectives (prevention);

序言部分第四段侧重于这两个目标中的第一个(防止)；

it foreshadows obligations that appear in draft articles 2, 4 and 5 of the present draft articles by affirming that crimes against humanity must be prevented in conformity with international law.

它与本条款草案的第2、第4和第5条草案所载的义务相对应，申明必须按照国际法预防危害人类罪。

In doing so, this paragraph indicates that such crimes are among the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole.

因此这一段表明，此类罪行是整个国际社会关切的最严重罪行之一。

(6) The fifth preambular paragraph affirms the link between the first overall objective (prevention) and the second overall objective (punishment) of the present draft articles, by indicating that prevention is advanced by putting an end to impunity for the perpetrators of such crimes.

(6) 序言部分第五段申明了本条款草案第一个总体目标(防止)与第二个总体目标(惩治)之间的联系，指出使这些罪行的犯罪者不再逍遥法外，可推动这种犯罪的预防工作。

(7) The sixth through ninth preambular paragraphs focus upon the second of the two overall objectives (punishment).

(7) 序言部分第六至第九段的重点是两个总体目标中的第二个(惩治)。

The sixth preambular paragraph recalls, as a threshold matter, the definition of crimes against humanity set forth in article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

序言部分第六段忆及1998年《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第七条所载的危害人类罪的定义。

This definition is used in draft article 3 of the present draft articles and, in conjunction with draft articles 6 and 7, identifies the offences over which States must establish jurisdiction under their national criminal law.

本条款草案的第3条草案使用了这一定义，并与第6和第7条草案一起，确定了各国必须在国内刑法中确立管辖权的罪行。

(8) The seventh preambular paragraph recalls the duty of every State to exercise criminal jurisdiction with respect to crimes against humanity.

(8) 序言部分第七段忆及每个国家都有义务对危害人类罪行使刑事管辖权。

Among other things, this paragraph foreshadows draft articles 8 through 10 on the investigation of crimes against humanity, the taking of certain measures whenever an alleged offender is present, and the submission of the case to the prosecuting authorities unless the alleged offender is extradited or surrendered to another State or competent international tribunal.

除其他外，这一段与第8至10条草案相对应，它们分别涉及：调查危害人类罪，当被指控罪犯在境内时采取某些措施，以及将案件提交检察机关――除非被指控罪犯被引渡或移交给另一国家或主管国际法庭。

(9) The eighth preambular paragraph considers that the effective prosecution of crimes against humanity must be ensured, both by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation.

(9) 序言部分第八段认为，为确保有效起诉危害人类罪，必须在国家一级采取措施并加强国际合作。

Such cooperation includes cooperation with respect to extradition and mutual legal assistance, the focus of draft articles 13 and 14, as well as the draft annex.

这种合作包括引渡和司法协助方面的合作，即第13和第14条草案及附件草案的重点。

(10) The ninth preambular paragraph notes that attention must be paid to the rights of individuals when addressing crimes against humanity.

(10) 序言部分第九段指出，在处理危害人类罪时，必须注意个人的权利。

Reference to the rights of victims, witnesses and others anticipates the provisions set forth in draft article 12, including the right to complain to competent authorities, to participate in criminal proceedings, and to obtain reparation.

所提及的受害者、证人和其他人的权利以第12条草案的规定作为呼应，其中包括向主管当局提出申诉，参与刑事诉讼和获得赔偿的权利。

At the same time, the reference to the right of alleged offenders to fair treatment anticipates the provisions set forth in draft article 11, including the right to a fair trial and, when appropriate, access to consular authorities.

同时，所提及的被指控罪犯受到公平对待的权利则以第11条草案的规定作为呼应，其中包括公平审判权，以及酌情与领事机构联系的权利。

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。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft article 1 establishes the scope of the present draft articles by indicating that they apply both to the prevention and to the punishment of crimes against humanity.

(1) 第1条草案确定本条款草案的范围，即，写明本条款草案适用于防止和惩治危害人类罪。

Prevention of crimes against humanity is focused on precluding the commission of such offences, while punishment of crimes against humanity is focused on criminal proceedings against persons after such crimes have occurred or when they are in the process of being committed.

防止危害人类罪所侧重的是排除这种罪行的发生，惩治危害人类罪所侧重的是发生这种行为后或在这种行为发生过程中对行为人的刑事诉讼。

(2) The present draft articles focus solely on crimes against humanity, which are grave international crimes wherever they occur.

(2) 本条款草案全部侧重点就是惩治危害人类罪，这种罪行无论发生在何地都属严重国际罪行。

The present draft articles do not address other grave international crimes, such as genocide, war crimes or the crime of aggression.

本条款草案不处理其他严重国际罪行，诸如灭绝种族罪、战争罪或侵略罪。

Although a view was expressed that this topic might include those crimes as well, the Commission decided to focus on crimes against humanity.

虽然有一种意见认为本专题或许也可包括这些罪行，但委员会决定此处的焦点应是危害人类罪。

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。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft article 2 sets forth a general obligation of States to prevent and punish crimes against humanity.

(1) 第2条草案规定国家防止和惩治危害人类罪的一般义务。

The content of this general obligation is addressed through the various more specific obligations set forth in the draft articles that follow, beginning with draft article 4.

这个一般义务的内容通过在随后从第4条草案开始的若干条款草案中规定各种更为具体的义务加以处理。

Those specific obligations address steps that States are to take within their national legal systems, as well as their cooperation with other States, with relevant intergovernmental organizations and with, as appropriate, other organizations.

这些具体义务规定各国在自己国家法律系统内须采取的步骤，以及与其他国家合作、与有关政府间组织合作，并酌情与其他组织合作。

(2) In the course of stating this general obligation, draft article 2 recognizes crimes against humanity as “crimes under international law”.

(2) 第2条草案是陈述这项一般义务，承认危害人类罪是“国际法上的罪行”。

The Charter of the International Military Tribunal established at Nürnberg (hereinafter “Nürnberg Charter”) included “crimes against humanity” as a component of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

在纽伦堡设立的国际军事法庭的《组织法》 (下称《纽伦堡宪章》)将“危害人类罪”列为该法庭管辖的内容。

Among other things, the Tribunal noted that “individuals can be punished for violations of international law.

除其他外，该法庭指出，“个人可因违反国际法而受到惩治。

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”.

违反国际法的罪行是由人而不是由抽象实体实施的，只有惩处实施这些罪行的个人，国际法的规定才能得到执行。”

Crimes against humanity were also within the jurisdiction of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (hereinafter “Tokyo Tribunal”).

危害人类罪也在远东国际军事法庭(下称“东京法庭”)的管辖之内。

(3) The principles of international law recognized in the Nürnberg Charter were noted and reaffirmed in 1946 by the General Assembly.

(3) 大会在1946年提到并重申了《纽伦堡宪章》所确认的国际法原则。

The Assembly also directed the Commission to “formulate” the Nürnberg Charter principles and to prepare a draft code of offences.

大会还指示委员会“编订”《纽伦堡宪章》原则并拟订一个治罪法草案。

The Commission in 1950 produced the Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, which stated that crimes against humanity were “punishable as crimes under international law”.

委员会于1950年拟出了“纽伦堡法庭组织法及法庭判决中所确认之国际法原则”，说明危害人类罪为“违反国际法应受处罚的罪行”。

Further, the Commission completed in 1954 a draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind, which, in article 2, paragraph 11, included as an offence a series of inhuman acts that are today understood to be crimes against humanity, and which stated in article 1 that “[o]ffences against the peace and security of mankind, as defined in this Code, are crimes under international law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punished”.

此外，委员会于1954年完成了《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案，其第二条第11款中列出了视为罪行的一系列不人道行为，这些行为今天均视为危害人类罪。 该草案在第一条中写明：“本法所定之危害人类和平及安全的罪行系国际法上的罪行，其责任人应受惩罚”。

(4) The characterization of crimes against humanity as “crimes under international law” indicates that they exist as crimes whether or not the conduct has been criminalized under national law.

(4) 将危害人类罪定性为“国际法上的罪行”，表明这种罪行是自然成立的，不论相关行为在国内法之下是否被定为罪行。

The Nürnberg Charter defined crimes against humanity as the commission of certain acts “whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated” (art. 6 (c)).

《纽伦堡宪章》界定危害人类罪是实施某些行为“，不论是否违反此等行为所在地的国内法”(第6条(c)项)。

In 1996, the Commission completed a draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, which provided, inter alia, that crimes against humanity were “crimes under international law and punishable as such, whether or not they are punishable under national law”.

1996年，委员会完成了《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案，其中除其他外规定危害人类罪是“在国际法范围内、就此而论可予惩罚、而不论是否可依国内法予以惩罚的罪行”。

The gravity of such crimes is clear;

这种罪行的严重性是很清楚的；

the Commission has previously indicated that the prohibition of crimes against humanity is “clearly accepted and recognized” as a peremptory norm of international law.

委员会以前就指出过，禁止危害人类罪“被明确接受和承认”为强制性国际法规范。

(5) Draft article 2 also identifies crimes against humanity as crimes under international law “whether or not committed in time of armed conflict”.

(5) 第2条草案还确定危害人类罪“不论是否发生于武装冲突之时，”都是国际法上的罪行。

The reference to “armed conflict” should be read as including both international and non-international armed conflict.

提及“武装冲突”应理解为包括国际和非国际武装冲突。

The Nürnberg Charter definition of crimes against humanity, as amended by the Berlin Protocol, was linked to the existence of an international armed conflict; the acts only constituted crimes under international law if committed “in execution of or in connection with” any crime within the jurisdiction of the International Military Tribunal, meaning a crime against peace or a war crime.

经《柏林议定书》 修正的《纽伦堡宪章》关于危害人类罪的定义与国际武装冲突的存在相联系，所涉行为构成国际法上的罪行的条件是，其发生“系随实施”国际军事法庭管辖范围内“任何罪行”――即危害和平罪或战争罪――“而起或与之有关者”。

As such, the justification for dealing with matters that traditionally were within the national jurisdiction of a State was based on the crime’s connection to inter-State conflict.

在这个意义上，处理传统上属一国国内管辖范围的事项的依据在于罪行与国家间冲突的联系。

That connection, in turn, suggested heinous crimes occurring on a large-scale, perhaps as part of a pattern of conduct.

而这种联系又意味着大规模发生最严重罪行，或许作为某种行为形态的一部分。

The International Military Tribunal, charged with trying the senior political and military leaders of the Third Reich, convicted several defendants for crimes against humanity committed during the war, although in some instances the connection of those crimes with other crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Military Tribunal was tenuous.

负责审判第三帝国高级政治和军事领导人的国际军事法庭判定若干被告在战争期间犯危害人类罪，只是有些情况下这些罪行与国际军事法庭管辖范围内的其他罪行之间的关系不够明确。

(6) The Commission’s 1950 Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal also defined crimes against humanity in Principle VI (c) in a manner that required a connection to an armed conflict.

(6) 委员会1950年《纽伦堡法庭组织法及法庭判决中所确认之原则》在原则六(三)中界定危害人类罪时也要求存在与武装冲突的联系。

In its commentary to this principle, the Commission emphasized that the crime need not be committed during a war, but maintained that pre-war crimes must nevertheless be in connection with a crime against peace.

在该原则的评注中，委员会强调罪行并非必须是在战争期间所发生，但对于战前罪行则主张必须存在与危害和平罪的联系。

At the same time, the Commission maintained that “acts may be crimes against humanity even if they are committed by the perpetrator against his own population”.

与此同时，委员会主张“行为仍可属危害人类罪，即便该行为是行为人针对本国人口所为”。

The 1968 Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity referred, in article I (b), to “[c]rimes against humanity whether committed in time of war or in time of peace as they are defined in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, Nürnberg, of 8 August 1945 and confirmed by resolutions 3 (I) of 13 February 1946 and 95 (I) of 11 December 1946 of the General Assembly of the United Nations”.

1968年《战争罪及危害人类罪不适用法定时效公约》在第一条(乙)项中写明，“一九四五年八月八日纽伦堡国际军事法庭组织法明定并经联合国大会一九四六年二月十三日第3(I)号决议及一九四六年十二月十一日第95(I)号决议确认的危害人类罪，无论犯罪系在战时抑在平时。”

(7) The jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia included “crimes against humanity”.

(7) 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭的管辖范围内包括“危害人类罪”。

Article 5 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia provides that the Tribunal may prosecute persons responsible for a series of acts (such as murder, torture or rape) “when committed in armed conflict, whether international or internal in character, and directed against any civilian population”.

《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》第5条规定，该法庭可对“国际或国内武装冲突中犯下”一系列“针对平民的”行为(诸如谋杀、酷刑或强奸)负有责任的人提起诉讼。

Thus, the formulation used in article 5 retained a connection to armed conflict, but it is best understood contextually. The Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia was developed in 1993 with an understanding that armed conflict in fact existed in the former Yugoslavia;

所以，第5条所用的措词保留了与武装冲突的联系，但结合相关背景很容易理解：《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》是1993年拟订的，当时的理解是，前南斯拉夫境内实际存在着武装冲突；

the Security Council had already determined that the situation constituted a threat to international peace and security, leading to the exercise of the Security Council’s enforcement powers under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.

安全理事会已经确定局势构成对国际和平与安全的威胁，导致安全理事会行使《联合国宪章》第七章之下的行动权。

As such, the formulation used in article 5 (“armed conflict”) was designed principally to dispel the notion that crimes against humanity had to be linked to an “international armed conflict”.

就此而言，第5条所用的措词(“武装冲突”)主要是为了消除一种认为危害人类罪须与“国际武装冲突”存在联系的概念。

To the extent that this formulation might be read to suggest that customary international law requires a nexus to armed conflict, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia later clarified that there was “no logical or legal basis” for retaining a connection to armed conflict, since “it has been abandoned” in State practice since Nürnberg.

鉴于这种措词可能被解读为习惯国际法要求须存在与武装冲突的联系，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭上诉分庭后来澄清说，保留与武装冲突的联系“没有逻辑或法律基础”，因为自纽伦堡审判以来，在国家实践中这种联系“已被放弃”。

The Appeals Chamber also noted that the “obsolescence of the nexus requirement is evidenced by international conventions regarding genocide and apartheid, both of which prohibit particular types of crimes against humanity regardless of any connection to armed conflict”.

上诉分庭还指出，“关于种族灭绝和种族隔离的国际公约显示，联系要求已经过时，这两项公约都禁止某些种类的危害人类罪而不论是否与武装冲突有联系”。

Indeed, the Appeals Chamber later maintained that such a connection in the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia was simply circumscribing the subject-matter jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, not codifying customary international law.

事实上，上诉分庭此后还表示认为，《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》中的这种联系只是限定前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭的属事管辖，并非习惯国际法的编纂。

(8) In 1994, the Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and provided it with jurisdiction over “crimes against humanity”.

(8) 1994年，安全理事会设立了卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭并规定了它对“危害人类罪”的管辖权。

Although article 3 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda retained the same series of acts as appeared in the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the chapeau language did not retain the reference to armed conflict.

虽然《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》第3条保留了《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》中的同样一系列行为，但起首部分没有保留武装冲突的提法。

Likewise, article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute did not retain any reference to armed conflict.

同样，1998年《罗马规约》第七条也没有再提及武装冲突。

(9) As such, while early definitions of crimes against humanity required that the underlying acts be accomplished in connection with armed conflict, that connection has disappeared from the statutes of contemporary international criminal tribunals, including the 1998 Rome Statute.

(9) 就此而言，虽然危害人类罪的早期定义要求相关行为须与武装冲突有联系，但这种联系已不再见诸包括1998年《罗马规约》在内的当代国际刑事法庭规约。

In its place, as discussed in relation to draft article 3 below, are the “chapeau” requirements that the crime be committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack.

如以下关于第3条草案的讨论所述，取代这种联系的是“起首部分”要求，即须作为根据国家或组织的政策或为了推行这种政策，针对任何平民人口实施的广泛或有系统的攻击的一部分而发生的罪行。

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，或根据公认为国际法所不容的其他理由，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，或与灭绝种族罪或战争罪有关；

(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一款所述行为的行为过程；

(b) “extermination” includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life including, 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”是指对一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. 为了本条款草案的目的，“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。

Commentary

评注

(1) The first three paragraphs of draft article 3 establish, for the purpose of the present draft articles, a definition of “crime against humanity”.

(1) 第3条草案的头三款为了本条款草案的目的，确定了“危害人类罪”的定义。

The text of these three paragraphs is verbatim the text of article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute, except for three non-substantive changes (discussed below), which are necessary given the different context in which the definition is being used.

这三款的案文逐字采用了1998年《罗马规约》第七条的案文，只有三处非实质性改动(下文讨论)，鉴于有关定义的使用语境不同，这些改动是必要的。

Paragraph 4 of draft article 3 is a “without prejudice” clause which indicates that this definition does not affect any broader definitions provided for in international instruments or national laws.

第3条第4款草案是一项“不妨碍”条款，表明这一定义不影响国际文书和国内法规定的任何更为宽泛的定义。

Definitions in other instruments

其他文书中的定义

(2) Various definitions of “crimes against humanity” have been used since 1945, both in international instruments and in national laws that have codified the crime.

(2) 1945年以来使用的“危害人类罪”的定义有多种，既见于国际文书，也见于将该罪编纂入法的国内法。

The Nürnberg Charter, in article 6 (c), defined “crimes against humanity” as:

《纽伦堡宪章》第6条(c)项将“危害人类罪”定义为：

murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.

在战前或战时对任何一地平民之谋杀、灭绝、奴役、放逐及其他不人道之行为，或基于政治、人种或宗教原因之迫害，而此种行为之发生或迫害之实施，系随实施本法庭管辖范围内任何罪行而起或与之有关者。

(3) Principle VI (c) of the Commission’s 1950 Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal defined crimes against humanity as: “Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connexion with any crime against peace or any war crime”.

(3) 委员会1950年“纽伦堡法庭组织法及法庭判决中所确认之原则”原则六(三)对危害人类罪的界定是：“对任何一地平民之谋杀、灭绝、奴役、放逐及其他不人道之行为，基于政治、人种或宗教原因之迫害，而此种行为之发生或迫害之实施，系随实施任何危害和平罪或战争罪而起或与之有关者”。

(4) Furthermore, the Commission’s 1954 draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind identified as one of those offences: “Inhuman acts such as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation or persecutions, committed against any civilian population on social, political, racial, religious or cultural grounds by the authorities of a State or by private individuals acting at the instigation or with the toleration of such authorities”.

(4) 此外，委员会1954年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案其中确定的一项罪行是：“某国当局或个人在国家当局的唆使或容忍下，基于社会、政治、种族、宗教或文化理由，对任何平民人口犯下的谋杀、灭绝、奴役、放逐或迫害等不人道行为”。

(5) Article 5 of the 1993 Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia stated that the Tribunal “shall have the power to prosecute persons responsible” for a series of acts (such as murder, torture, and rape) “when committed in armed conflict, whether international or internal in character, and directed against any civilian population”.

(5) 1993年《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》第5条规定，法庭“应有权对国际或国内武装冲突中犯下针对平民的”(谋杀、酷刑和强奸等)一系列行为“负有责任的人予以起诉”。

Although the report of the Secretary-General of the United Nations proposing this article indicated that crimes against humanity “refer to inhumane acts of a very serious nature … committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against any civilian population on national, political, ethnic, racial or religious grounds”, that particular language was not included in the text of article 5.

虽然联合国秘书长在提出该条草案的报告中指出，危害人类罪“指非常严重的不人道行为…基于民族、政治、人种、种族或宗教原因在大规模或有计划的攻击平民中…”， 但这个特定的用语并未写入第5条的案文。

(6) By contrast, the 1994 Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, in article 3, retained the same series of acts, but the chapeau language introduced the formulation from the 1993 Secretary-General’s report of “crimes when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against any civilian population” and then continued with “on national, political, ethnic, racial or religious grounds”.

(6) 相反，1994年《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》第3条保留了上述的一系列行为，但起首语采用了1993年秘书长报告的用词“在广泛的或有计划的攻击平民中实施的罪行”，该条中还写明：“出于民族、政治、人种、种族或宗教原因”。

As such, the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda expressly provided that a discriminatory intent was required in order to establish the crime.

如此，《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》就明确规定了，只有具备歧视性意图，此罪方能成立。

The Commission’s 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind also defined “crimes against humanity” to be a series of specified acts “when committed in a systematic manner or on a large scale and instigated or directed by a Government or by any organization or group”, but did not include the discriminatory intent language.

委员会1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案还将“危害人类罪”定义为“有计划或大规模实行由某一政府或任何组织或团体唆使或指挥的”的一系列所指明的行为，但没有包括关于歧视性意图的表述。

Crimes against humanity have also been defined in the jurisdiction of hybrid criminal courts or tribunals.

混合刑事法院或法庭的判例也对危害人类罪下过定义。

(7) Article 5, paragraph 1 (b), of the 1998 Rome Statute lists crimes against humanity as being within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.

(7) 1998年《罗马规约》第五条第(一)款第2项将危害人类罪列入了国际刑事法院的管辖范围。

Article 7, paragraph 1, defines “crime against humanity” as any of a series of acts “when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack”.

第七条第(一)款将“危害人类罪”定义为“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”一系列行为中的任何一种。

Article 7, paragraph 2, contains a series of definitions which, inter alia, clarify that an 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” (para. 2 (a)).

第七条第(二)款载有一系列定义，除其他外，澄清了针对任何平民人口进行的攻击“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一款所述行为的行为过程(第(二)款第1项)。”

Article 7, paragraph 3, provides: “[I]t is understood that the term ‘gender’ refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society.

第七条第(三)款规定，“‘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。”

Article 7, paragraph 1 (h), does not retain the nexus to an armed conflict that characterized the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, nor (except with respect to acts of persecution) the discriminatory intent requirement that characterized the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

第七条第(一)款第8项并未保留《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》所下定义中特有的与武装冲突的联系，也未保留《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》特有的歧视性意图条件(关于迫害行为的规定除外)。

(8) The definition of “crime against humanity” in article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute has been accepted by the more than 120 States parties to the 1998 Rome Statute and is now being used by many States when adopting or amending their national laws.

(8) 1998年《罗马规约》第七条中“危害人类罪”的定义已被该规约的120多个缔约国所接受，其中许多国家在通过和修正国内法时，正在使用这一定义。

The Commission considered article 7 an appropriate basis for defining such crimes in paragraphs 1 to 3 of draft article 3.

委员会认为第七条是第3条第1至第3款草案定义此类罪行的适当基础。

Indeed, the text of article 7 is used verbatim except for three non-substantive changes, which are necessary given the different context in which the definition is being used.

事实上也确实逐字采用了第七条的案文，仅有三处非实质性改动。 鉴于有关定义的使用语境不同，这些改动是必要的。

First, the opening phrase of paragraph 1 reads “For the purpose of the present draft articles” rather than “For the purpose of this Statute”.

第一处是，第1款起首语改为“为了本条款草案目的”，而非“为了本规约的目的”。

Second, the same change has been made in the opening phrase of paragraph 3.

第二处是对第3款的起首语作了相同的改动。

Third, article 7, paragraph 1 (h), of the 1998 Rome Statute criminalizes acts of persecution when undertaken “in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court”.

第三处是，1998年《罗马规约》第七条第(一)款第8项规定属于犯罪的是“与任何一种本款提及的行为或任何一种本法院管辖权内的犯罪结合发生”的迫害行为。

Again, to adapt to the different context, this phrase reads in draft article 3 as “in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or in connection with the crime of genocide or war crimes”.

仍是为了适应不同语境，第3条草案中的这一短语改为“与本款提及的任何一种行为有关，或与灭绝种族或战争罪有关”。

In due course, the International Criminal Court may exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when the requirements established at the Review Conference of the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court are met, in which case this paragraph may need to be revisited.

在适当时候，当《国际刑事法院罗马规约》审查会议规定的条件得到满足时，国际刑事法院可能对侵略罪行使管辖权，在这种情况下，委员会可重新审定这一款措辞。

Paragraphs 1 to 3

第1至第3款

(9) The definition of “crimes against humanity” set forth in paragraphs 1 to 3 of draft article 3 contains three overall requirements that merit some discussion.

(9) 第3条第1至第3款草案所列“危害人类罪”的定义含有三项应予讨论的总体条件。

These requirements, all of which appear in paragraph 1, have been illuminated through the case law of the International Criminal Court and other international or hybrid courts and tribunals.

这些条件均出现于第1款，已经通过国际刑事法院和其他国际或混合法院和法庭的判例法得到了说明。

The definition also lists the underlying prohibited acts for crimes against humanity and defines several of the terms used within the definition (thus providing definitions within the definition).

定义还列出了危害人类罪项下禁止的各种行为，并界定了在这一定义之内使用的若干术语(亦即在定义内提供定义)。

No doubt the evolving jurisprudence of the International Criminal Court and other international or hybrid tribunals will continue to help inform national authorities, including courts, as to the meaning of this definition, and thereby will promote harmonized approaches at the national level.

无疑，国际刑事法院和其他国际或混合法院和法庭不断演变的判例将继续帮助包括法院在内的国内当局了解这一定义的含义，从而促进国家层面处理方法的协调。

The Commission notes that relevant case law continues to develop over time, such that the following discussion is meant simply to indicate some of the parameters of these terms as of July 2017.

委员会注意到，相关的判例法仍在随时间而发展，因此以下讨论仅是为了说明截至2017年7月这些术语的一些限制要素。

“Widespread or systematic attack”

“广泛或有系统的攻击”

(10) The first overall requirement is that the acts must be committed as part of a “widespread or systematic” attack.

(10) 第一项总体条件是，有关行为必须是在“广泛或有系统”的攻击中实施的。

This requirement first appeared in the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, although some decisions of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia maintained that the requirement was implicit even in the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, given the inclusion of such language in the Secretary-General’s report proposing that Statute.

这一条件最初出现于《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》， 不过前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭的一些裁决认为《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》也已隐含这一条件，因为秘书长提出该规约的报告中也包括了这一用语。

Jurisprudence of both the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda maintained that the conditions of “widespread” and “systematic” were disjunctive rather than conjunctive requirements;

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的判例均主张，“广泛”和“有系统”这两个条件是择一条件而非联合条件；

either condition could be met to establish the existence of the crime.

达到其中任意一个，即能认定犯罪成立。

This reading of the widespread/systematic requirement is also reflected in the Commission’s commentary to the 1996 draft Code, where it stated that “an act could constitute a crime against humanity if either of these conditions [of scale or systematicity] is met”.

对广泛/有系统条件的这一解读也反映在委员会对1996年《治罪法》草案的评注中，委员会在其中指出，“如果某一行为合乎其中[规模或系统性]任一条件，即构成危害人类罪行”。

(11) When this standard was considered for the 1998 Rome Statute, some States expressed the view that the conditions of “widespread” and “systematic” should be conjunctive requirements — that they both should be present to establish the existence of the crime — because otherwise the standard would be over-inclusive.

(11) 在为1998年《罗马规约》审议这一标准时，一些国家表示认为，“广泛”和“有系统”这两个条件应当是联合条件，只有二者皆达到，才能确认罪行存在，否则这一标准的覆盖面将过宽。

Indeed, if “widespread” commission of acts alone were sufficient, these States maintained that spontaneous waves of widespread, but unrelated, crimes would constitute crimes against humanity.

这些国家认为，如果仅仅“广泛”实施有关行为就足够，则同时发生的广泛但无关联的犯罪行为也会构成危害人类罪。

Owing to that concern, a compromise was developed that involved leaving these conditions in the disjunctive, but adding to article 7, paragraph 2 (a), of the 1998 Rome Statute a definition of “attack directed against any civilian population” which, as discussed below at paragraphs (17) to (27) of the commentary to the present draft article, contains a policy element.

出于这一关切，拟出的是折中的案文，将这些条件仍列为择一条件， 但在1998年《罗马规约》第七条第(二)款第1项中增加了“针对任何平民人口进行的攻击”的定义，正如下文本条款草案评注第(17)至第(27)段所讨论的，该定义中加入了一项政策要件。

(12) According to the Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Kunarac, “[t]he adjective ‘widespread’ connotes the large-scale nature of the attack and the number of its victims”.

(12) 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭审判分庭在Kunarac案中指出，“‘广泛’这一形容词说明了攻击的大规模性质及其受害者人数的众多”。

As such, this requirement refers to a “multiplicity of victims” and excludes isolated acts of violence, such as murder directed against individual victims by persons acting of their own volition rather than as part of a broader initiative.

因此，这一条件指“受害者人数的众多”， 并排除了孤立的暴力行为， 例如出于本人意志而非按照某更广泛的计划而谋杀个人受害者的行为。

Such an attack may be “massive, frequent, carried out collectively with considerable seriousness and directed against a multiplicity of victims”.

这种攻击可为“集体开展的大规模、频繁的行动，具有相当大的严重性，并针对众多的受害者”。

At the same time, a single act committed by an individual perpetrator can constitute a crime against humanity if it occurs within the context of a broader campaign.

与此同时，个人行为人实施的单一罪行，若发生在某个更广泛的运动的背景之下，也可构成危害人类罪。

There is no specific numerical threshold of victims that must be met for an attack to be “widespread”.

攻击行为不需受害者人数达到某具体下限即可属于“广泛”攻击。

(13) “Widespread” can also have a geographical dimension, with the attack occurring in different locations.

(13) “广泛”亦可有地域层面的意思，指攻击发生在不同地点。

Thus, in the Bemba case, the International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber found that there was sufficient evidence to establish that an attack was “widespread” based on reports of attacks in various locations over a large geographical area, including evidence of thousands of rapes, mass grave sites and a large number of victims.

因此，国际刑事法院预审分庭在Bemba案中，根据广大地域诸多地点的攻击报告，包括上千起强奸、群葬坑和大量受害者的证据，认定证据充分，足以确定有关攻击属于“广泛”攻击。

Yet a large geographic area is not required;

但所涉地域广大并不是必要条件；

the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has found that the attack can be in a small geographic area against a large number of civilians.

前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭认定，在一较小地域内针对大量平民的攻击也属于“广泛”攻击。

(14) In its Situation in the Republic of Kenya decision, the International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber indicated that “[t]he assessment is neither exclusively quantitative nor geographical, but must be carried out on the basis of the individual facts”.

(14) 国际刑事法院预审分庭在“肯尼亚共和国状况”案的决定中表示，“评估并非仅考察数量或地域，而是必须根据个体事实予以分析”。

An attack may be widespread due to the cumulative effect of multiple inhumane acts or the result of a single inhumane act of great magnitude.

若多起不人道行为造成累加影响，或单起不人道行为情节极为严重，有关攻击也可属于广泛攻击。

(15) Like “widespread”, the term “systematic” excludes isolated or unconnected acts of violence, and jurisprudence from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Criminal Court reflects a similar understanding of what is meant by the term.

(15) 与“广泛”一样，“有系统”一词也不包括孤立或没有联系的暴力行为， 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国际刑事法院的判例所反映的对这一术语含义的理解相似。

The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia defined “systematic” as “the organised nature of the acts of violence and the improbability of their random occurrence” and found that evidence of a pattern or methodical plan establishes that an attack was systematic.

前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭将“有系统”定义为“暴力行为是有组织的，且不是随机发生的” 并认定，只要有行为规律的证据或方法计划的证据，就可确定有关攻击是有系统的。

Thus, the Appeals Chamber in Kunarac confirmed that “patterns of crimes — that is the non-accidental repetition of similar criminal conduct on a regular basis — are a common expression of such systematic occurrence”.

因此，上诉分庭在Kunara案中确认，“犯罪的规律，即相似犯罪行为频频非意外地重复发生，是这种有系统攻击的一种常见表现”。

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda has taken a similar approach.

卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭也采用了类似的处理方法。

(16) Consistent with jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber in Harun found that “systematic” refers to “the organised nature of the acts of violence and improbability of their random occurrence”.

(16) 国际刑事法院一预审分庭与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判例保持一致，在Harun案中认定，“‘有系统’指‘暴力行为是有组织的，且不是随机发生的。’”

An International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber in Katanga found that the term “has been understood as either an organized plan in furtherance of a common policy, which follows a regular pattern and results in a continuous commission of acts or as ‘patterns of crimes’ such that the crimes constitute a ‘non-accidental repetition of similar criminal conduct on a regular basis’”.

国际刑事法院一预审分庭在Katanga案中认定，该术语“已被理解为推行某项共同政策的有组织计划，该计划遵循某种规律，并造成有关行为得到不断实施，或被理解为导致有关犯罪构成‘相似犯罪行为频频非意外的重复发生’的‘犯罪规律’”。

In applying the standard, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber in Ntaganda found an attack to be systematic since “the perpetrators employed similar means and methods to attack the different locations: they approached the targets simultaneously, in large numbers, and from different directions, they attacked villages with heavy weapons, and systematically chased the population by similar methods, hunting house by house and into the bushes, burning all properties and looting”.

国际刑事法院一预审分庭适用了这一标准，在Ntaganda案中认定有关攻击属于有系统攻击，因为“行为人采用了相似的方式和方法攻击不同地点：他们聚集许多人同时从不同方向逼近目标、用重武器攻击村庄，且有系统地用相似方法驱赶民众，逐户将民众驱入荒野，同时焚烧所有房地并劫掠财物”。

Additionally, in the Ntaganda confirmation of charges decision, a Pre-Trial Chamber held that the attack was systematic as it followed a “regular pattern” with a “recurrent modus operandi, including the erection of roadblocks, the laying of land mines, and coordinated the commission of the unlawful acts … in order to attack the non-Hema civilian population”.

此外，一预审分庭在Ntaganda案的确认指控决定中裁定，有关攻击是有系统攻击，因为攻击遵循某种“规律”，“反复采用同样的作案手法，包括设立路障、布设地雷，以及协同实施非法行为…以攻击非赫马族平民人口”。

In Gbagbo, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber found an attack to be systematic when “preparations for the attack were undertaken in advance” and the attack was planned and coordinated with acts of violence revealing a “clear pattern”.

在Gbagbo案中，国际刑事法院一预审分庭认定有关攻击属于有系统攻击，因为“攻击预先经过准备”且是有计划并协同实施的，暴力行为表现出了“明显的规律”。

“Directed against any civilian population”

“针对任何平民人口”

(17) The second overall requirement is that the act must be committed as part of an attack “directed against any civilian population”.

(17) 第二项总体条件是，有关行为必须是作为“针对任何平民人口”的攻击的一部分实施的。

Draft article 3, paragraph 2 (a), defines “attack directed against any civilian population” for the purpose of paragraph 1 as “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”.

第3条第2款(a)项草案为了第1款的目的，将“针对任何平民人口进行的攻击”定义为“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一款所述行为的行为过程”。

As discussed below, jurisprudence from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and the International Criminal Court has construed the meaning of each of these terms: “directed against”, “any”, “civilian”, “population”, “a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts” and “State or organizational policy”.

如下文所讨论的，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国际刑事法院的判例已经解释了以下这些术语的含义：“针对”、“任何”、“平民”、“人口”、“多次实施行为的行为过程”和“国家或组织的政策”。

(18) The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has found that the phrase “directed against” requires that civilians be the intended primary target of the attack, rather than incidental victims.

(18) 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭认定，“针对”一词要求平民是攻击的首要预定目标，而不是附带受害者。

The International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chambers subsequently adopted this interpretation in the Bemba case and the Situation in the Republic of Kenya decision, as did the International Criminal Court Trial Chambers in the Katanga and Bemba trial judgments.

之后，国际刑事法院预审分庭在Bemba案和“肯尼亚共和国状况”案的决定中采用了这一解释， 如国际刑事法院审判分庭在Katanga案和Bemba案的审判判决中所做的那样。

In the Bemba case, the International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber found that there was sufficient evidence showing the attack was “directed against” civilians of the Central African Republic.

在Bemba案中，国际刑事法院预审分庭认定有充分证据显示，有关攻击是“针对”中非共和国平民的。

The Chamber concluded that Mouvement de libération du Congo (MLC) soldiers were aware that their victims were civilians, based on direct evidence of civilians being attacked inside their houses or in their courtyards.

分庭根据平民在自己家中或院子里受到攻击的直接证据，断定刚果解放运动(“刚解运”)士兵知道受害者是平民。

The Chamber further found that MLC soldiers targeted primarily civilians, demonstrated by an attack at one locality where the MLC soldiers did not find any rebel troops that they claimed to be chasing.

分庭还认定，平民是刚解运士兵的首要目标，证据是刚解运士兵攻击了一处地点，却并未找到任何他们声称正在追捕的叛军部队。

The term “directed” places its emphasis on the intention of the attack rather than the physical result of the attack.

“针对”一词强调攻击者的意图而非攻击的实际结果。

It is the attack, not the acts of the individual perpetrator, which must be “directed against” the target population.

必须“针对”目标人口的是攻击本身，而非个别行为人的行为。

The Trial Chamber in Bemba later confirmed “that the civilian population was the primary, as opposed to incidental, target of the attack, and in turn, that the attack was directed against the civilian population in the [Central African Republic]”.

后来，审判分庭在Bemba案中确认，“平民人口是攻击的主要而不是附带目标，因此，攻击是针对[中非共和国]平民人口的。”

In doing so, it explained that “[w]here an attack is carried out in an area containing both civilians and non-civilians, factors relevant to determining whether an attack was directed against a civilian population include the means and methods used in the course of the attack, the status of the victims, their number, the discriminatory nature of the attack, the nature of the crimes committed in its course, the form of resistance to the assailants at the time of the attack, and the extent to which the attacking force complied with the precautionary requirements of the laws of war”.

对此，分庭解释说，“当攻击是在既有平民也有非平民的地区实施时，确定攻击是否针对平民人口的相关因素包括攻击过程中采用的方式方法、受害者的身份、人数、攻击的歧视性、攻击过程中实施的犯罪的性质、攻击时对攻击者的反抗形式、以及攻击部队在多大程度上遵守了战争法的预防要求等”。

(19) The word “any” indicates that “civilian population” is to have a wide definition and should be interpreted broadly.

(19) “任何”一词表明“平民人口”具有广泛的定义，也应予以广泛地解释。

An attack can be committed against any civilians, “regardless of their nationality, ethnicity or other distinguishing feature”, and can be committed against either nationals or foreigners.

实施攻击的对象可以是任何平民，“不论其属于哪个民族、族裔或具有其他特征”，而且攻击对象既可以是本国国民，也可以是外国人。

Those targeted may “include a group defined by its (perceived) political affiliation”.

攻击目标可“包括由(别人认为的)政治从属而划分的群体”。

In order to qualify as a “civilian population” during a time of armed conflict, those targeted must be “predominantly” civilian in nature;

攻击目标必须本质上“主要”是平民，才可算作武装冲突中的“平民人口”；

the presence of certain combatants within the population does not change its character.

人口中有一定数量的战斗人员并不改变人口性质。

This approach is in accordance with other rules arising under international humanitarian law.

这一处理方法符合国际人道主义法产生的其他规则。

For example, Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions states: “The presence within the civilian population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilians does not deprive the population of its civilian character”.

例如，《1949年日内瓦四公约第一附加议定书》写道：“在平民居民中存在有不属于平民的定义范围内的人，并不使该平民居民失去其平民的性质。”

The Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Kayishema found that during a time of peace, “civilian” shall include all persons except those individuals who have a duty to maintain public order and have legitimate means to exercise force to that end at the time they are being attacked.

卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭审判分庭在Kayishema案中认定，在和平时期，“平民”一词应包括所有人员，负责维护公共秩序并为此在遇袭时有合法手段行使武力的人员除外。

The status of any given victim must be assessed at the time the offence is committed;

分析任何给定受害者的法律身份时，必须结合罪行发生时的情况；

a person should be considered a civilian if there is any doubt as to his or her status.

若对某人的法律身份存在任何疑问，应将其视为平民。

(20) “Population” does not mean that the entire population of a given geographical location must be subject to the attack;

(20) “人口”一词并不意味着某给定地点的所有人口都要遭到袭击；

rather, the term implies the collective nature of the crime as an attack upon multiple victims.

而是隐示有关犯罪是对多名受害者的攻击，具有集体性。

As the Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia noted in Gotovina, the concept means that the attack is upon more than just “a limited and randomly selected number of individuals”.

正如前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭审判分庭在Gotovina案中提到的，这一概念指攻击的受害者不只是“人数有限的随机选择的个人”。

The International Criminal Court decisions in the Bemba case and the Situation in the Republic of Kenya case have adopted a similar approach, declaring that the Prosecutor must establish that the attack was directed against more than just a limited group of individuals.

国际刑事法院在Bemba案中的决定和“肯尼亚共和国状况”案的决定都采用了类似处理方法，宣称检察官必须证实有关攻击针对的对象不只是一群人数有限的个人。

(21) The first part of draft article 3, paragraph 2 (a), refers to “a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population”.

(21) 第3条第2款(a)项草案后半部分提到“针对任何平民人口多次实施第一款所述行为的行为过程。

Although no such language was contained in the statutory definition of crimes against humanity for the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, this language reflects jurisprudence from both these tribunals, and was expressly stated in article 7, paragraph 2 (a), of the 1998 Rome Statute.

”这种表述虽未载入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危害人类罪的法定定义，但反映了这两个法庭的判例， 并明确见于1998年《罗马规约》第七条第(二)款第1项。

The Elements of Crimes under the 1998 Rome Statute provides that the “acts” referred to in article 7, paragraph 2 (a), “need not constitute a military attack”.

1998年《罗马规约》之下的《犯罪要件》规定，第七条第(二)款第1项所述的“行为”“不需要构成军事攻击”。

The Trial Chamber in Katanga stated that “the attack need not necessarily be military in nature and it may involve any form of violence against a civilian population”.

审判分庭在Katanga案中表示“有关攻击不一定要具备军事攻击的本质，可包括任何形式的暴力侵害某平民人口的行为”。

(22) The second part of draft article 3, paragraph 2 (a), states that the attack must be “pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such an attack”.

(22) 第3条第2款(a)项草案前半部分指出，攻击必须是“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”实施的。

The requirement of a “policy” element did not appear as part of the definition of crimes against humanity in the statutes of international courts and tribunals until the adoption of the 1998 Rome Statute.

在1998年《罗马规约》得到通过之前，各国际法院规约对危害人类罪的定义中一直没有包括对“政策”要件的要求。

While the Statutes of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda contained no policy requirement in their definition of crimes against humanity, some early jurisprudence required it.

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规约的危害人类罪定义都不包括政策要件， 但一些早期的判例要求有这一要件。

Indeed, the Tadić Trial Chamber provided an important discussion of the policy element early in the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, one that would later influence the drafting of the 1998 Rome Statute.

事实上，Tadić案的审判分庭在前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭工作初期就对政策要件进行了重要的讨论，这一讨论后来影响了1998年《罗马规约》的草拟工作。

The Trial Chamber found that

审判分庭认定，

the reason that crimes against humanity so shock the conscience of mankind and warrant intervention by the international community is because they are not isolated, random acts of individuals but rather result from a deliberate attempt to target a civilian population.

危害人类罪之所以如此撼动人类的良知并要求国际社会予以干预，是因为它们不是个人孤立、随机的行为，而是蓄意试图针对某平民人口的结果。

Traditionally this requirement was understood to mean that there must be some form of policy to commit these acts …

传统上，将这一条件理解为必定存在实施这些行为的某种形式的政策…。

Importantly, however, such a policy need not be formalized and can be deduced from the way in which the acts occur.

然而，重要的是，这一政策不需要具有正式的形式，而是可以从有关行为的发生方式推导得出。

The Trial Chamber further noted that, because of the policy element, such crimes “cannot be the work of isolated individuals alone”.

该审判分庭还指出，因为存在政策要件，此类犯罪“不可能仅是单独的个人所造成的”。

Later jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, however, downplayed the policy element, regarding it as sufficient simply to prove the existence of a widespread or systematic attack.

不过，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭后来在判例中淡化了政策要件，认为只要证明存在广泛或有系统的攻击就已足够。

(23) Prior to the 1998 Rome Statute, the work of the Commission in its draft codes tended to require a policy element.

(23) 在1998年《罗马规约》之前，委员会在治罪法草案的工作中常常要求政策要件。

The Commission’s 1954 draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind defined crimes against humanity as: “Inhuman acts such as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation or persecutions, committed against any civilian population on social, political, racial or cultural grounds by the authorities of a State or by private individuals acting at the instigation or with the toleration of such authorities”.

委员会1954年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案将危害人类罪定义为：“某国当局或个人在国家当局的唆使或容忍下，基于社会、政治、种族、宗教或文化理由，对任何平民人口犯下的谋杀、灭绝、奴役、放逐或迫害等不人道行为。”

The Commission decided to include the State instigation or tolerance requirement in order to exclude inhumane acts committed by private persons on their own without any State involvement.

委员会决定加入国家唆使或容忍这一条件，以便排除个人在国家没有任何介入的情况下自行实施的不人道行为。

At the same time, the definition of crimes against humanity included in the 1954 draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind did not include any requirement of scale (“widespread”) or systematicity.

同时，1954年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案所载的危害人类罪的定义未包括任何规模(“广泛”)或系统性的条件。

(24) The Commission’s 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind also recognized a policy requirement, defining crimes against humanity as “any of the following acts, when committed in a systematic manner or on a large scale and instigated or directed by a Government or by an organization or group”.

(24) 委员会1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案也承认了政策条件，将危害人类罪定义为“有计划或大规模实行由某一政府或任何组织或团体唆使或指挥的任何下列行为”。

The Commission included this requirement to exclude inhumane acts committed by an individual “acting on his own initiative pursuant to his own criminal plan in the absence of any encouragement or direction from either a Government or a group or organization”.

委员会之所以加入这一条件，是为了排除个人“按其自己的犯罪计划，出于个人自己的动机，在没有任何政府或团体或组织的任何鼓励的情况下”实施的不人道行为。

In other words, the policy element sought to exclude “ordinary” crimes of individuals acting on their own initiative and without any connection to a State or organization.

换言之，该政策要件旨在排除个人出于自身动机，在与国家或组织无关的情况下实施的“普通”罪行。

(25) Draft article 3, paragraph 2 (a), contains the same policy element as set forth in article 7, paragraph 2 (a), of the 1998 Rome Statute.

(25) 第3条第2款(a)项草案载有与1998年《罗马规约》第七条第(二)款第1项所列的同样的政策要件。

The Elements of Crimes under the 1998 Rome Statute provide that a “‘policy to commit such attack’ requires that the State or organization actively promote or encourage such an attack against a civilian population”, and that “a policy may, in exceptional circumstances, be implemented by a deliberate failure to take action, which is consciously aimed at encouraging such attack”.

1998年《罗马规约》之下的《犯罪要件》规定，“攻击平民人口的政策”要求“国家或组织积极推动或鼓励这种攻击平民人口的行为”， 且“在特殊情况下，这种政策的实施方式可以是故意不采取行动，刻意以此助长这种攻击”。

(26) This “policy” element has been addressed in several cases at the International Criminal Court.

(26) 国际刑事法院的若干案件都涉及了这一“政策”要件。

In the 2014 judgment in Katanga, an International Criminal Court Trial Chamber stressed that the policy requirement is not synonymous with “systematic”, since that would contradict the disjunctive requirement in article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute of a “widespread” or “systematic” attack.

在Katanga案2014年的判决中，国际刑事法院审判分庭强调，政策条件与“有系统”条件的意义并不相同，若是相同就会违背1998年《罗马规约》第七条对攻击的“广泛”或“有系统”择一的要求。

Rather, while “systematic” requires high levels of organization and patterns of conduct or recurrence of violence, to “establish a ‘policy’, it need be demonstrated only that the State or organisation meant to commit an attack against a civilian population.

“有系统”要求的是高度的组织性和行为的规律或暴力的反复发生， 而要“确定存在‘政策’，则只需证明国家或组织有意对平民人口实施攻击。

An analysis of the systematic nature of the attack therefore goes beyond the existence of any policy seeking to eliminate, persecute or undermine a community”.

因此，分析有关攻击是否具有系统性，不仅是确定是否存在任何旨在消灭、迫害或损害某一社群的政策。”

Further, the “policy” requirement does not require formal designs or pre-established plans, can be implemented by action or inaction, and can be inferred from the circumstances.

此外，“政策”条件不要求有正式的设计或预先制定的计划，可以由作为或者不作为实现，也可从有关情况推导得出。

The Trial Chamber found that the policy need not be formally established or promulgated in advance of the attack and can be deduced from the repetition of acts, from preparatory activities, or from a collective mobilization.

审判分庭认定，政策不需要在攻击之前正式推行或颁布，可从有关行为的重复发生、从准备活动，或从集体动员中推导得出。

Moreover, the policy need not be concrete or precise, and it may evolve over time as circumstances unfold.

此外，政策不需要具体或精确，且可随着时间的推移根据情况的发展而变化。

Furthermore, the Trial Chamber in Bemba held that the requirement that the course of conduct was committed pursuant to or in furtherance of the State or organizational policy is satisfied not only where a perpetrator deliberately acts to further the policy, but also where a perpetrator has engaged in conduct envisaged by the policy, and with knowledge thereof.

另外，审判分庭在Bemba案中认为，根据国家和组织政策或为推行这种政策而实施行为过程的要求在下列情况下均得到满足：其一是行为者为推行政策而蓄意为之，其二是行为者在明知的情况下实施了政策所设想的行为。

(27) Similarly, in its decision confirming the indictment of Laurent Gbagbo, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber held that “policy” should not be conflated with “systematic”.

(27) 同样，国际刑事法院预审分庭在确认起诉Laurent Gbagbo的决定中裁定，“政策”不应与“有系统”混淆。

Specifically, the Trial Chamber stated that “evidence of planning, organisation or direction by a State or organisation may be relevant to prove both the policy and the systematic nature of the attack, although the two concepts should not be conflated as they serve different purposes and imply different thresholds under article 7 (1) and (2) (a) of the Statute”.

具体而言，审判分庭表示，“国家或组织计划、组织或指挥有关攻击的证据可能与证明攻击的政策性和系统性有关，但这两个概念目的不同，并且在《规约》第七条第(一)款和第(二)款第1项下分别指不同的界限，因此不应混淆”。

The policy element requires that the acts be “linked” to a State or organization, and it excludes “spontaneous or isolated acts of violence”, but a policy need not be formally adopted and proof of a particular rationale or motive is not required.

政策要件要求有关行为与国家和组织“有关”， 且排除了“自发或孤立的暴力行为”，但政策本身并不需要得到正式通过，且不需要证明存在具体的理由或动机。

In the Bemba case, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber found that the attack was pursuant to an organizational policy based on evidence establishing that the MLC troops “carried out attacks following the same pattern”.

在Bemba案中，国际刑事法院预审分庭根据刚解运部队“遵循同一规律实施攻击”的证据认定，有关攻击是按照组织政策实施的。

The Trial Chamber later found that the MLC troops knew that their individual acts were part of a broader attack directed against the civilian population in the Central African Republic.

审判分庭后来认为，刚解运部队知道他们的具体行为是对中非共和国平民人口实施的广泛攻击的一部分。

(28) The second part of draft article 3, paragraph 2 (a), refers to either a “State” or “organizational” policy to commit such an attack, as does article 7, paragraph 2 (a), of the 1998 Rome Statute.

(28) 第3条第2款(a)项草案前半部分提到“国家”或“组织”攻击平民人口的政策，与1998年《罗马规约》第七条第(二)款第1项相同。

In its Situation in the Republic of Kenya decision, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber suggested that the meaning of “State” in article 7, paragraph 2 (a), is “self-explanatory”.

国际刑事法院预审分庭在“肯尼亚共和国状况”案的决定中表示，第七条第(二)款第1项中“国家”的含义是“不言自明的”。

The Chamber went on to note that a policy adopted by regional or local organs of the State could satisfy the requirement of State policy.

该分庭随后指出，国家区域机关或地方机关通过的政策可以满足国家政策这一条件。

(29) Jurisprudence from the International Criminal Court suggests that “organizational” includes any organization or group with the capacity and resources to plan and carry out a widespread or systematic attack.

(29) 国际刑事法院的判例显示，“组织”包括任何有能力和资源计划和实施广泛或有系统攻击的组织或团体。

For example, a Pre-Trial Chamber in Katanga stated: “Such a policy may be made either by groups of persons who govern a specific territory or by any organisation with the capability to commit a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population”.

例如，一预审分庭在Katanga案中表示：“制定这种政策的，可以是管理某特定地区的人群，或任何有能力针对平民人口实施广泛或有系统攻击的组织”。

An International Criminal Court Trial Chamber in Katanga held that the organization must have “sufficient resources, means and capacity to bring about the course of conduct or the operation involving the multiple commission of acts” and “a set of structures or mechanisms, whatever those may be, that are sufficiently efficient to ensure the coordination necessary to carry out an attack directed against a civilian population”.

国际刑事法院一审判分庭在Katanga案中裁定，有关组织必须具有“充足的资源、手段和能力，能够实现涉及多次实施有关行为的行为或行动过程”和“一系列足够高效结构或机制，无论是哪种结构或机制，要能确保具备实施针对平民人口的攻击所需的协调”。

(30) In its Situation in the Republic of Kenya decision, a majority of an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber rejected the idea that “only State-like organizations may qualify” as organizations for the purpose of article 7, paragraph 2 (a), and further stated that “the formal nature of a group and the level of its organization should not be the defining criterion.

(30) 在“肯尼亚共和国状况”案的决定中，国际刑事法院一预审分庭的多数意见不同意“只有类似国家的组织才可算作”符合第七条第(二)款第1项的组织，并进而指出，“团体是否具有正式性质及其组织性的高低不应成为决定性标准。

Instead … a distinction should be drawn on whether a group has the capability to perform acts which infringe on basic human values”.

反之…应当区分有关团体是否有能力从事违反基本人道价值观的行为”。

In 2012, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber in Ruto stated that, when determining whether a particular group qualifies as an “organization” under article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute:

2012年，国际刑事法院一预审分庭在Ruto案中表示，在确定某团体是否属于1998年《罗马规约》第七条所指的“组织”时：

the Chamber may take into account a number of factors, inter alia: (i) whether the group is under a responsible command, or has an established hierarchy;

分庭可考虑若干因素，除其他外：(一) 有关团体是否由负责任的领导指挥，或具备既定的等级结构；

(ii) whether the group possesses, in fact, the means to carry out a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population;

(二) 有关团体事实上是否具备针对平民人口实施广泛或有系统攻击的手段；

(iii) whether the group exercises control over part of the territory of a State;

(三) 有关团体是否控制着一国的部分领土；

(iv) whether the group has criminal activities against the civilian population as a primary purpose;

(四) 有关团体是否将针对平民人口的犯罪活动作为首要目标；

(v) whether the group articulates, explicitly or implicitly, an intention to attack a civilian population;

(五) 有关团体是否明确或隐晦地表露了攻击平民人口的意图；

(vi) whether the group is part of a larger group, which fulfils some or all of the abovementioned criteria.

(六) 有关团体是否属于某符合上述部分或全部标准的更大团体。

(31) As a consequence of the “policy” potentially emanating from a non-State organization, the definition set forth in paragraphs 1 to 3 of draft article 3 does not require that the offender be a State official or agent.

(31) 由于“政策”也可出自非国家组织，第3条第1至3款草案所载的定义并不要求犯罪人是国家官员或代理人。

This approach is consistent with the development of crimes against humanity under international law.

这一处理方法与国际法之下危害人类罪的发展情况相符。

The Commission, commenting in 1991 on the draft provision on crimes against humanity for what would become the 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, stated “that the draft article does not confine possible perpetrators of the crimes to public officials or representatives alone” and that it “does not rule out the possibility that private individuals with de facto power or organized in criminal gangs or groups might also commit the kind of systematic or mass violations of human rights covered by the article; in that case, their acts would come under the draft Code”.

1991年，委员会在评论关于危害人类罪条文草案(最终形成1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》)时表示：“本条草案没有把可能犯此种罪行的人仅仅局限于政府官员或代表”，且“没有排除这样的可能性：具有实际权力或者加入犯罪团伙或集团的个人也能够犯下本条规定的那种有计划或大规模侵害人权的行为，遇此情况，他们的行为即属治罪法草案的范围”。

As discussed previously, the 1996 draft Code added the requirement that, to be crimes against humanity, the inhumane acts must be “instigated or directed by a Government or by any organization or group”.

如先前讨论的，1996年《治罪法草案》增加了一项条件，即不人道行为要构成危害人类罪，必须是“由某一政府或任何组织或团体唆使或指挥的”。

In its commentary to this requirement, the Commission noted: “The instigation or direction of a Government or any organization or group, which may or may not be affiliated with a Government, gives the act its great dimension and makes it a crime against humanity imputable to private persons or agents of a State”.

委员会在对这一条件的评注中指出：“政府或可能附属于政府或不附属于政府的任何组织或团体的唆使或指挥，使此种行为具有其重大份量，并使这种行为变成可归因于个人或国家代理人员的危害人类罪行”。

(32) Jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia accepted the possibility of non-State actors being prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

(32) 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭判例接受以危害人类罪起诉非国家行为方的可能性。

For example, a Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Tadić case stated that, “the law in relation to crimes against humanity has developed to take into account forces which, although not those of the legitimate government, have de facto control over, or are able to move freely within, defined territory”.

例如，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭一审判分庭在Tadić案中表示，“危害人类罪方面的法律已经有所发展，纳入了虽不隶属于合法政府但实际上控制着指定领土，或者可在该领土上自由行动的军事力量”。

That finding was echoed in the Limaj case, where the Trial Chamber viewed the defendant members of the Kosovo Liberation Army as prosecutable for crimes against humanity.

这一裁决在Limaj案中得到了响应，该案审判分庭认为能够以危害人类罪起诉科索沃解放军的被告成员。

(33) In the Ntaganda case at the International Criminal Court, charges were confirmed against a defendant associated with two paramilitary groups, the Union des patriotes congolais and the Forces patriotiques pour la libération du Congo in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

(33) 国际刑事法院在Ntaganda案中，确认了对一名与刚果民主共和国境内的刚果爱国者联盟和争取刚果自由爱国力量这两个准军事团体有关的被告的多项指控。

Similarly, in the Mbarushimana case, the prosecutor pursued charges against a defendant associated with the Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda, described, according to its statute, as an “armed group seeking to ‘reconquérir et défendre la souveraineté nationale’ of Rwanda”.

同样，在Mbarushimana案中，检察官对一名与解放卢旺达民主力量有关的被告提出了多项指控，根据该组织条例的描述，这一组织是“旨在‘收回和保卫’卢旺达‘国家主权’的武装团体”。

In the case against Joseph Kony relating to the situation in Uganda, the defendant is allegedly associated with the Lord’s Resistance Army, “an armed group carrying out an insurgency against the Government of Uganda and the Ugandan Army” which “is organised in a military-type hierarchy and operates as an army”.

在与乌干达状况有关的诉Joseph Kony案中，被告据称与圣灵抵抗军这一“对乌干达政府和乌干达军队实施叛乱的武装团体” 有关，该团体“组织结构采用军事化的等级划分并作为军队从事活动”。

With respect to the situation in Kenya, a Pre-Trial Chamber confirmed charges of crimes against humanity against defendants due to their association in a “network” of perpetrators “comprised of eminent [Orange Democratic Movement Party (ODM)] political representatives, representatives of the media, former members of the Kenyan police and army, Kalenjin elders and local leaders”.

关于肯尼亚的状况，一预审分庭确认了对多名被告的危害人类罪指控，因为他们与一“系列”行为人有关，“包括知名的[橙色民主运动(橙民运)]政党代表、媒体代表、肯尼亚前警员和军人、卡伦金长老和地方领袖”。

Likewise, charges were confirmed with respect to other defendants associated with “coordinated attacks that were perpetrated by the Mungiki and pro-Party of National Unity (‘PNU’) youth in different parts of Nakuru and Naivasha” that “were targeted at perceived (ODM) supporters using a variety of means of identification such as lists, physical attributes, roadblocks and language”.

同样，对其他被告的指控也得到了确认，这些被告涉嫌参与“群众帮与民族团结党青年在纳库鲁和奈瓦沙不同地区使用查询名单、辨别外貌、设置路障和辨识语言等多种识别手段，针对其认为的[橙民运]支持者的协同攻击”。

“With knowledge of the attack”

“在明知这一攻击的情况下”

(34) The third overall requirement is that the perpetrator must commit the act “with knowledge of the attack”.

(34) 第三项总体条件是，行为人必须是“在明知这一攻击的情况下”实施有关行为。

Jurisprudence from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda has concluded that the perpetrator must have knowledge that there is an attack on the civilian population and, further, that his or her act is a part of that attack.

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的判例断定，行为人必须对攻击平民人口一事知情，且自身的行为就是该攻击的一部分。

This two-part approach is reflected in the Elements of Crimes under the 1998 Rome Statute, which for each of the proscribed acts requires as that act’s last element: “The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population”.

1998年《罗马规约》之下的《犯罪要件》反映了这一“两部分”处理方法，规定每项禁止的行为的最后一项要件均为：“行为人知晓有关行为是对平民人口广泛或有系统的攻击的一部分，或有意让有关行为成为上述攻击的一部分”。

Even so,

即便如此，

the last element should not be interpreted as requiring proof that the perpetrator had knowledge of all characteristics of the attack or the precise details of the plan or policy of the State or organization.

最后一项要件不应被解释为必须证明行为人知道攻击的所有特性，或国家或组织的计划或政策的详情。

In the case of an emerging widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population, the intent clause of the last element indicates that this mental element is satisfied if the perpetrator intended to further such an attack.

如果广泛或有系统地针对平民人口进行攻击为新出现的情况，最后一项要件的故意要素是指，行为人如果有意推行这种攻击，即具备这一心理要件。

(35) In its decision confirming the charges against Laurent Gbagbo, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber found that “it is only necessary to establish that the person had knowledge of the attack in general terms”.

(35) 国际刑事法院一预审分庭在确认对Laurent Gbagbo的指控的决定中认定，“仅需确证该人大体上知道攻击之事”。

Indeed, it need not be proven that the perpetrator knew the specific details of the attack;

实际上，不需要证明行为人知悉攻击的具体细节；

rather, the perpetrator’s knowledge may be inferred from circumstantial evidence.

相反，行为人知情与否可以从间接证据推导得出。

Thus, when finding in the Bemba case that the MLC troops acted with knowledge of the attack, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber stated that the troops’ knowledge could be “inferred from the methods of the attack they followed”, which reflected a clear pattern.

因此，国际刑事法院一预审分庭在Bemba案中认定刚解运部队在行事时对攻击知情，同时指出部队的知情可从“他们采取的攻击方法中推导得出”，这些攻击方法反映出了明确的规律。

In the Katanga case, an International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chamber found that

在Katanga案中，国际刑事法院一预审分庭认定：

knowledge of the attack and the perpetrator’s awareness that his conduct was part of such attack may be inferred from circumstantial evidence, such as: the accused’s position in the military hierarchy;

对攻击知情与否，以及行为人是否意识到自己的行为是此种攻击的一部分，可从间接证据推导得出，例如：被告在军队等级中的位置；

his assuming an important role in the broader criminal campaign;

他在更广泛的犯罪活动中是否发挥重要作用；

his presence at the scene of the crimes;

他是否出现在犯罪现场；

his references to the superiority of his group over the enemy group;

他是否提到本人所属团体比敌对团体优越；

and the general historical and political environment in which the acts occurred.

以及发生有关行为的总体历史和政治环境。

(36) Furthermore, the personal motive of the perpetrator for taking part in the attack is irrelevant;

(36) 此外，行为人参与攻击的个人动机无关紧要；

the perpetrator does not need to share the purpose or goal of the broader attack.

行为人不需要拥有与更广泛攻击相同的目的或目标。

According to the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Kunarac, evidence that the perpetrator committed the prohibited acts for personal reasons could at most “be indicative of a rebuttable assumption that he was not aware that his acts were part of that attack”.

前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭上诉分庭在Kunarac案中指出，证明行为人是出于个人原因实施违禁行为的证据最多可以“表示存在一种可反驳的假定，即他没有意识到自己的行为是有关攻击的一部分”。

It is the perpetrator’s knowledge or intent that his or her act is part of the attack that is relevant to satisfying this requirement.

行为人知道自己的行为是攻击的一部分或有意让自己的行为成为攻击的一部分，这才是与满足这一条件有关的问题。

Additionally, this element will be satisfied where it can be proven that the underlying offence was committed by directly taking advantage of the broader attack, or where the commission of the underlying offence had the effect of perpetuating the broader attack.

此外，若能证明所涉罪行是直接利用更广泛攻击实施的，或其实施有延长更广泛攻击的效果，亦能满足这一要件。

For example, in the Kunarac case, the perpetrators were accused of various forms of sexual violence, acts of torture, and enslavement in regard to Muslim women and girls.

例如，在Kunarac案中，行为人被指控犯下各种形式的针对穆斯林妇女和女童的性暴力、酷刑行为和奴役。

A Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia found that the accused had the requisite knowledge because they not only knew of the attack against the Muslim civilian population, but also perpetuated the attack “by directly taking advantage of the situation created” and “fully embraced the ethnicity-based aggression”.

前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭一审判分庭认定，被告满足知情这一要件，因为他们不仅了解对穆斯林平民人口的攻击，还“直接利用攻击所创造的局面”延长了攻击，并“充分接受这一基于族裔的侵略行为”。

Likewise, an International Criminal Court Trial Chamber has held that the perpetrator must know that the act is part of the widespread or systematic attack against the civilian population, but the perpetrator’s motive is irrelevant for the act to be characterized as a crime against humanity.

同样，国际刑事法院某审判分庭认定，行为人一定知道有关行为是针对平民人口的广泛或有系统攻击的一部分，行为人的动机与是否将有关行为定为危害人类罪无关。

It is not necessary for the perpetrator to have knowledge of all the characteristics or details of the attack, nor is it required for the perpetrator to subscribe to the “State or the organisation’s criminal design”.

行为人不需要了解攻击的所有特点或详情，也不需要赞同“国家或组织的犯罪设想”。

Prohibited acts

禁止的行为

(37) Like article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute, draft article 3, paragraph 1, at subparagraphs (a)-(k), lists the prohibited acts for crimes against humanity.

(37) 与1998年《罗马规约》第七条相同，第3条第1款(a)项至(k)项草案列出了危害人类罪项下禁止的行为。

These prohibited acts also appear as part of the definition of crimes against humanity contained in article 18 of the Commission’s 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, although the language differs slightly.

这些禁止的行为也出现在委员会1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案第18条所载的危害人类罪的定义中，但用语略有不同。

An individual who commits one of these acts can commit a crime against humanity;

个人实施这些行为之一，即可构成犯危害人类罪；

the individual need not have committed multiple acts, but the individual’s act must be “part of” a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population.

该人的行为不必是多项行为，但行为必须是针对任何平民人口的广泛或有系统攻击的“一部分”。

Determining whether the requisite nexus exists requires making “an objective assessment, considering, in particular, the characteristics, aims, nature and/or consequences of the act.

要确定是否存在必要的联系，需要开展“客观的评估，特别是要考虑行为的特点、目的、性质和/或后果。

Isolated acts that clearly differ in their context and circumstances from other acts that occur during an attack fall outside the scope of” draft article 3, paragraph 1.

孤立行为所处的背景和情形明显不同于攻击期间发生的其他行为，不属于第3条草案第1款的范围”。

The offence does not need to be committed in the heat of the attack against the civilian population to satisfy this requirement;

要满足这一条件，所涉罪行并不需要是在对平民人口的攻击最激烈时实施的；

the offence can be part of the attack if it can be sufficiently connected to the attack.

只要可以充分将其与攻击联系起来，就可以是攻击的一部分。

Definitions within the definition

定义内的定义

(38) As noted above, draft article 3, paragraph 2 (a), defines “attack directed against any civilian population” for the purpose of draft article 3, paragraph 1.

(38) 如上文所述，为了第3条草案第1款的目的，第3条第2款(a)项草案界定了“针对任何平民人口进行的攻击”。

The remaining subparagraphs (b)-(i) of draft article 3, paragraph 2, define further terms that appear in paragraph 1, specifically: “extermination”;

第3条第2款草案余下的(b)项至(i)项界定了第1款中出现的其他术语，具体是：“灭绝”、

“enslavement”;

“奴役”、

“deportation or forcible transfer of population”;

“驱逐出境或强行迁移人口”、

“torture”;

“酷刑”、

“forced pregnancy”;

“强迫怀孕”、

“persecution”;

“迫害”、

“the crime of apartheid”;

“种族隔离罪”，

and “enforced disappearance of persons”.

以及“强迫人员失踪”。

Further, draft article 3, paragraph 3, provides a definition for the term “gender”.

此外，第3条草案第3款提供了“性别”这一术语的定义。

These definitions also appear in article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute and were viewed by the Commission as relevant for retention in draft article 3.

这些定义也见于1998年《罗马规约》第七条，委员会认为有必要在第3条草案中予以保留。

Paragraph 4

第4款

(39) Paragraph 4 of draft article 3 provides: “This draft article is without prejudice to any broader definition provided for in any international instrument or national law”.

(39) 第3条第4款草案规定：“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。”

This provision is similar to article 1, paragraph 2, of the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which provides: “This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application”.

这一条款与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》第1条第2款类似，该款规定：“本条规定并不妨碍载有或可能载有适用范围较广的规定的任何国际文书或国家法律”。

Article 10 of the 1998 Rome Statute (appearing in Part II on “Jurisdiction, admissibility, and applicable law”) also contains a “without prejudice clause”, which reads: “Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute”.

1998年《罗马规约》第十条(见于第二编“管辖权、可受理性和适用的法律”)也包含一项“不妨碍条款”，内容是：“除为了本规约的目的以外，本编的任何规定不得解释为限制或损害现有或发展中的国际法规则”。

(40) Paragraph 4 is meant to ensure that the definition of “crimes against humanity” set forth in draft article 3 does not call into question any broader definitions that may exist in other international instruments or national legislation.

(40) 第4款旨在确保第3条草案所载“危害人类罪”的定义不会使其他国际文书或国内法中可能存在的更为宽泛的定义发生疑问。

“International instrument” is to be understood in the broad sense and not only in the sense of being a binding international agreement.

“国际文书”须宽泛地理解，不单指具有约束力的国际文书。

For example, the definition of “enforced disappearance of persons” as contained in draft article 3 follows article 7 of the 1998 Rome Statute but differs from the definition contained in the 1992 Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the 1994 Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons and in the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons against Enforced Disappearance.

例如，第3条草案所载的“强迫人员失踪”的定义沿用1998年《罗马规约》第七条，但与1992年《保护所有人不遭受强迫失踪宣言》、1994年《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》 以及2006年《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》 所载的定义不同。

Those differences principally are that the latter instruments do not include the element “with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law”, do not include the words “for a prolonged period of time” and do not refer to organizations as potential perpetrators of the crime when they act without State participation.

区别主要是后面的三项文书没有包括“目的是将其…置于法律保护之外”这一要件，不包括“长期”这一词语，以及没有提到组织也可在国家没有参与的情况下成为这一犯罪的潜在行为人。

(41) In the light of such differences, the Commission thought it prudent to include draft article 3, paragraph 4.

(41) 鉴于上述区别，委员会认为加入第3条第4款草案是审慎的。

In essence, while the first three paragraphs of draft article 3 define crimes against humanity for the purpose of the draft articles, this is without prejudice to broader definitions in international instruments or national laws.

实质上，第3条草案前三款虽然为了本条款草案的目的定义了危害人类罪，但不妨碍国际文书或国内法中规定的更为宽泛的定义。

Thus, if a State wishes to adopt a broader definition in its national law, the present draft articles do not preclude it from doing so.

因此，如果某国希望在国内法中采用更为宽泛的定义，本条款草案并不妨碍它这么做。

At the same time, an important objective of the draft articles is the harmonization of national laws, so that they may serve as the basis for robust inter-State cooperation.

同时，本条款草案的一项重要目的是协调国内法，以便国内法成为各国间扎实合作的基础。

Any elements adopted in a national law, which would not fall within the scope of the present draft articles, would not benefit from the provisions set forth within them, including on extradition and mutual legal assistance.

国内法中采用的任何要件不属于本条款草案的范围，因此无法从其中所载的规定获益，包括引渡和法律互助。

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. 各国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; and

(a) 在其管辖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、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。

Commentary

评注

(1) Draft article 4 sets forth an obligation of prevention with respect to crimes against humanity.

(1) 第4条草案提出防止危害人类罪的义务。

In considering such an obligation, the Commission viewed it as pertinent to survey existing treaty practice concerning the prevention of crimes and other acts.

委员会在审议这一义务时认为，与此相关的工作是考察防止犯罪和其他行为的现有条约实践。

In many instances, those treaties address acts that, when committed under certain circumstances, can constitute crimes against humanity (for example, genocide, torture, apartheid, or enforced disappearance).

很多情况下，这些条约处理的是在一定情形下可能构成危害人类罪的行为(例如种族灭绝、酷刑、种族隔离或强迫失踪)。

As such, the obligation of prevention set forth in those treaties extends as well to prevention of the acts in question when they also qualify as crimes against humanity.

因此，当有关行为也构成危害人类罪时，这些条约规定的预防义务也延伸到对这些行为的预防。

(2) An early significant example of an obligation of prevention may be found in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which provides in article I: “The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish”.

(2) 早先的一个重要的预防义务例子可见于1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》，该公约第一条规定：“缔约国确认灭绝种族行为，不论发生于平时或战时，均系国际法上的一种罪行，承允防止并惩治之”。

Further, article V provides: “The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III”.

此外，第五条规定：“缔约国承允各依照其本国宪法制定必要的法律，以实施本公约各项规定，而对于犯灭绝种族罪或有第三条所列其他行为之一者尤应规定有效的惩治”。

Article VIII provides: “Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III”.

第八条规定：“任何缔约国得提请联合国的主管机关遵照联合国宪章，采取其认为适当的行动，以防止及惩治灭绝种族的行为或第三条所列任何其他行为”。

As such, the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide contains within it several elements relating to prevention: a general obligation to prevent genocide; an obligation to enact national measures to give effect to the provisions of the Convention; and a provision on cooperation of States parties with the United Nations for the prevention of genocide.

因此，1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》中包含了几个与预防相关的要素：防止种族灭绝的总体义务，制定国家措施以实施《公约》规定的义务，以及缔约国与联合国合作防止种族灭绝的规定。

(3) Such an obligation of prevention is a feature of most multilateral treaties addressing crimes since the 1960s.

(3) 这一预防义务是1960年代以来处理犯罪问题的多数多边条约的一个特征。

Examples include: the 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation;

例如：1971年《关于制止危害民用航空安全的非法行为的公约》、

the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents;

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》、

the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid;

1973年《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》、

the 1979 International Convention against the Taking of Hostages;

1979年《反对劫持人质国际公约》、

the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;

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》、

the 1985 Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture;

1985年《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》、

the 1994 Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons;

1994年《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》、

the 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel;

1994年《联合国人员和有关人员安全公约》、

the 1997 International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings;

1997年《制止恐怖主义爆炸事件的国际公约》、

the 2000 United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime;

2000年《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》、

the 2000 Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime;

2000年《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》、

the 2002 Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;

2002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任择议定书》、

and the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

和2006年《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》。

(4) Some multilateral human rights treaties, even though not focused on the prevention and punishment of crimes as such, contain obligations to prevent and suppress human rights violations.

(4) 一些多边人权条约虽然不侧重于防止和惩治此类罪行，但载有与防止和制止侵犯人权行为相关的义务。

Examples include: the 1966 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination;

例如：1966年《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》、

the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women;

1979年《消除对妇女一切形式歧视公约》

and the 2011 Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence.

和2011年《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》。

Some treaties do not refer expressly to “prevention” or “elimination” of the act but, rather, focus on an obligation to take appropriate legislative, administrative, and other measures to “give effect” to or to “implement” the treaty, which may be seen as encompassing necessary or appropriate measures to prevent the act.

一些条约没有明确提到“防止”或“消除”此种行为，而是把重点放在采取适当的立法、行政和其他措施的义务上，从而“实施”或“执行”条约；可以将此视为包含了防止此类行为的必要或适当措施。

Examples include the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child.

例如1966年《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》 和1989年《儿童权利公约》。

(5) International courts and tribunals have addressed these obligations of prevention.

(5) 各国际法院和法庭处理过这类预防义务的问题。

The International Court of Justice in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) noted that the duty to punish in the context of that convention is connected to but distinct from the duty to prevent.

国际法院在《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)案中指出，该《公约》语境下的惩治职责与预防职责有联系，但有区别。

While “one of the most effective ways of preventing criminal acts, in general, is to provide penalties for persons committing such acts, and to impose those penalties effectively on those who commit the acts one is trying to prevent”, the Court found that “the duty to prevent genocide and the duty to punish its perpetrators … are … two distinct yet connected obligations”.

虽然“总体上，预防犯罪的一个最有效的办法是规定对实施此类行为的人的刑罚，并对实施所要预防的行为的人切实处以此类刑罚，”，但法院认定“防止灭绝种族的责任与惩治行为人的责任…是…两项截然不同但彼此联系的义务。”

Indeed, the “obligation on each contracting State to prevent genocide is both normative and compelling. It is not merged in the duty to punish, nor can it be regarded as simply a component of that duty”.

实际上，“每一缔约国防止种族灭绝的义务是规范性和强制性的。 这个义务没有并入惩治的职责，也不能被视为只是惩治职责的一个组成部分”。

(6) Such treaty practice, jurisprudence, and the well-settled acceptance by States that crimes against humanity are crimes under international law that should be punished whether or not committed in time of armed conflict, and whether or not criminalized under national law, imply that States have undertaken an obligation to prevent crimes against humanity.

(6) 这种条约实践、判例以及深为各国接受的观点――危害人类罪无论是否在武装冲突时发生，也无论是否被国内法定为犯罪，都是国际法上应受到惩治的罪行，意味着国家已经承担起防止危害人类罪的义务。

Paragraph 1 of draft article 4, therefore, formulates an obligation of prevention in a manner similar to that set forth in article I of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, by beginning: “Each State undertakes to   prevent crimes against humanity … ”.

因此，第4条第1款草案以“各国承诺按照国际法防止危害人类罪…”为开头，采用与1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》第一条类似的方式制定了一项预防的义务。

(7) In the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), the International Court of Justice analysed the meaning of “undertake to prevent” as contained in article I of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

(7) 国际法院在《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)案中分析了1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》第一条所载“承允防止”的含义。 在临时措施阶段，法院判定这种承允对缔约国施加了“尽其所能防止将来发生此种行为”的“一项明确义务”。

At the provisional measures phase, the Court determined that such an undertaking imposes “a clear obligation” on the parties “to do all in their power to prevent the commission of any such acts in the future”.

在审理案情实质阶段，法院对“承允”一词在该语境下的通常含义描述如下：

At the merits phase, the Court described the ordinary meaning of the word “undertake” in that context as

做出正式承诺，使自身负有义务或允诺，做出保证或承诺，同意，接受义务。

to give a formal promise, to bind or engage oneself, to give a pledge or promise, to agree, to accept an obligation. It is a word regularly used in treaties setting out the obligations of the Contracting Parties …

该词通常用于规定缔约国义务的条约中…它不仅是为了进行督促或阐明目的。

It is not merely hortatory or purposive.

承允是不受条件限制的…；

The undertaking is unqualified … and it is not to be read merely as an introduction to later express references to legislation, prosecution and extradition.

不应把它仅解读为后文明确提到立法、起诉和引渡之处的引言。

Those features support the conclusion that Article I, in particular its undertaking to prevent, creates obligations distinct from those which appear in the subsequent Articles.

这些特征支持的是这样一个结论：第一条(尤其是承允防止部分)产生了与后续条款中出现的义务明显不同的义务。

The undertaking to prevent crimes against humanity, as formulated in paragraph 1 of draft article 4, is intended to express the same kind of legally binding effect upon States;

第4条第1款草案制定的对防止危害人类罪的承诺，意在表达对各国同样的法律约束力；

it, too, is not merely hortatory or purposive, and is not merely an introduction to later draft articles.

它也不仅是为了进行督促或阐明目的，并且不仅仅是对之后各条草案的引言。

(8) In the same case, the International Court of Justice further noted that, when engaging in measures of prevention, “it is clear that every State may only act within the limits permitted by international law”.

(8) 国际法院在同案中指出，在采取预防措施时，“各国明显只能在国际法允许的限度内行事”。

The Commission deemed it important to express that requirement explicitly in paragraph 1 of draft article 4, and therefore has included a clause indicating that any measures of prevention must be “in conformity with international law”.

委员会认为，应该在第4条第1款草案中把这个要求明确表述出来，因而加入了任何防止措施都必须“按照国际法”的字句。

Thus, the measures undertaken by a State to fulfil this obligation must be consistent with the rules of international law, including rules on the use of force set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, international humanitarian law, and human rights law.

因此，国家为履行本项义务而采取的措施必须符合国际法规则，包括《联合国宪章》、国际人道主义法和人权法中规定的关于使用武力的规则。

The State is only expected to take such measures as it legally can take under international law to prevent crimes against humanity.

国家仅有义务根据国际法为防止危害人类罪采取法律允许的措施。

(9) As set forth in paragraph 1 of draft article 4, this obligation of prevention either expressly or implicitly contains four elements.

(9) 如第4条第1款草案所规定，这一预防义务明示或隐示包含四个要素。

First, by this undertaking, States have an obligation not “to commit such acts through their own organs, or persons over whom they have such firm control that their conduct is attributable to the State concerned under international law”.

第一，国家做出这一承诺，便有义务不“通过本国的机关或者本国能够稳固控制、因而根据国际法其行为可归属于相关国家的人，实施此类行为”。

According to the International Court of Justice, when considering the analogous obligation of prevention contained in article I of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide:

国际法院认为，在考虑1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》第一条所载的类似的预防义务时：

Under Article I the States parties are bound to prevent such an act, which it describes as ‘a crime under international law’, being committed.

根据第一条，各缔约国有义务防止实施此类行为，该条将此类行为称为‘国际法认定的犯罪行为’。

The Article does not expressis verbis require States to refrain from themselves committing genocide.

该条没有明文规定各国自己不要实施灭绝种族。

However, in the view of the Court, taking into account the established purpose of the Convention, the effect of Article I is to prohibit States from themselves committing genocide.

不过，法院认为，考虑到该《公约》的既定目的，第一条的含义就是要禁止各国自己实施灭绝种族。

Such a prohibition follows, first, from the fact that the Article categorizes genocide as ‘a crime under international law’: by agreeing to such a categorization, the States parties must logically be undertaking not to commit the act so described.

推定这一禁止含义的第一个依据是，该条将灭绝种族归为‘国际法认定的罪行’：而缔约国要是同意这一归类，在逻辑上就必须保证不实施所述行为。

Secondly, it follows from the expressly stated obligation to prevent the commission of acts of genocide.

第二个依据是，明确规定有义务防止实施灭绝种族行为。

That obligation requires the States parties, inter alia, to employ the means at their disposal, in circumstances to be described more specifically later in this Judgment, to prevent persons or groups not directly under their authority from committing an act of genocide or any of the other acts mentioned in Article III. It would be paradoxical if States were thus under an obligation to prevent, so far as within their power, commission of genocide by persons over whom they have a certain influence, but were not forbidden to commit such acts through their own organs, or persons over whom they have such firm control that their conduct is attributable to the State concerned under international law.

这一义务要求缔约国在该判决书后文具体说明的情况下，利用所掌握的手段，防止不直接受其权力支配的个人或群体实施灭绝种族行为或第三条所述的任何其他行为。 因此，如果说一方面规定国家有义务在其权力范围内防止它们能施加一定影响力的个人实施犯灭绝种族行为，另一方面却又不禁止各国通过自身的机关或通过受其严密控制因而根据国际法其行为被归为国家行为的个人实施此类行为，那将是自相矛盾的。

In short, the obligation to prevent genocide necessarily implies the prohibition of the commission of genocide.

简言之，防止灭绝种族的义务必然意味着禁止实施灭绝种族。

(10) The Court also decided that the substantive obligation reflected in article I was not, on its face, limited by territory but, rather, applied “to a State wherever it may be acting or may be able to act in ways appropriate to meeting the obligation […] in question”.

(10) 法院还裁决，第一条所反映的实质性义务表面上并非受地域限制，而是适用于“可能正在或也许能以与履行有关义务[…]相适合的方式行事的国家”。

(11) A breach of this obligation not to commit directly such acts implicates the responsibility of the State if the conduct at issue is attributable to the State pursuant to the rules on State responsibility.

(11) 如果所涉行为根据国家责任规则归属于国家，则违反不直接实施此类行为的义务意味着国家要承担责任。

Indeed, in the context of disputes that may arise under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, article IX refers, inter alia, to disputes “relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide”.

实际上，就可能出现的关于1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的争端而言，第九条除其他外提到“关于某一国家对于灭绝种族罪…的责任的”争端。

Although much of the focus of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is upon prosecuting individuals for the crime of genocide, the International Court of Justice stressed that the breach of the obligation to prevent is not a criminal violation by the State but, rather, concerns a breach of international law that engages State responsibility.

虽然1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的重点主要是起诉犯有灭绝种族罪的个人，但是国际法院强调，违反防止义务不是国家实施的属于刑事犯罪的违反行为，而是一种涉及国家责任的违反国际法行为。

The Court’s approach is consistent with views previously expressed by the Commission, including in the commentary to the 2001 articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts: “Where crimes against international law are committed by State officials, it will often be the case that the State itself is responsible for the acts in question or for failure to prevent or punish them”.

法院的做法同委员会曾经表达过的意见一致， 包括关于2001年“国家对国际不法行为的责任条款”的评注：“当国家官员实施违反国际法罪行时，经常是国家对此行为负责或对没有预防或惩罚这种行为的结果负责”。

(12) Second, by the undertaking set forth in paragraph 1 of draft article 4, States have an obligation “to employ the means at their disposal … to prevent persons or groups not directly under their authority from committing” such acts.

(12) 第二，国家做出第4条第1款规定的承诺，即有义务“采取能够动用的各种手段，…防止不属于本国直接管辖的人或团体实施”此类行为。

In this instance, the State party is expected to use its best efforts (a due diligence standard) when it has a “capacity to influence effectively the action of persons likely to commit, or already committing, genocide”, which in turn depends on the State party’s geographic, political and other links to the persons or groups at issue.

在这种情况下，当缔约国在“有能力对很可能实施、或者已经在实施灭绝种族行为的人的行动产生有效影响的情况下”尽最大努力(尽责标准)，而这种能力反过来又取决于缔约国同所涉个人或团体的地域、政治和其他联系。

Such a standard with respect to the obligation of prevention in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was analysed by the International Court of Justice as follows:

国际法院对1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》中的预防义务的标准做出了如下分析：

[I]t is clear that the obligation in question is one of conduct and not one of result, in the sense that a State cannot be under an obligation to succeed, whatever the circumstances, in preventing the commission of genocide: the obligation of States parties is rather to employ all means reasonably available to them, so as to prevent genocide so far as possible.

显然，有关义务是行为义务，而不是结果义务，也就是不能说一国有义务在无论何种情况下成功防止实施灭绝种族：缔约国的义务是采取它们可合理掌握的一切手段，尽可能防止实施灭绝种族。

A State does not incur responsibility simply because the desired result is not achieved;

一国并不仅仅因为所希望的结果没有实现而承担责任；

responsibility is however incurred if the State manifestly failed to take all measures to prevent genocide which were within its power, and which might have contributed to preventing the genocide.

不过，一国如未明确采取其权力范围内的一切或可有助于防止灭绝种族的措施来防止灭绝种族，则就要承担责任。

In this area the notion of ‘due diligence,’ which calls for an assessment in concreto, is of critical importance.

在这一方面，要求进行具体评估的‘尽责’概念至关重要。

Various parameters operate when assessing whether a State has duly discharged the obligation concerned.

在评估一国是否已尽责地履行相关义务时要考虑到各种参数。

The first, which varies greatly from one State to another, is clearly the capacity to influence effectively the action of persons likely to commit, or already committing, genocide.

第一项显然是能否有成效地影响有可能实施或正在实施灭绝种族行为的个人的行动，这一项在国与国之间差别很大。

This capacity itself depends, among other things, on the geographical distance of the State concerned from the scene of the events, and on the strength of the political links, as well as links of all other kinds, between the authorities of that State and the main actors in the events.

该能力本身取决于有关国家机关至事发现场的地理距离、该国当局与事件中的主要行为者之间的政治联系和所有其他联系的力度等等。

The State’s capacity to influence must also be assessed by legal criteria, since it is clear that every State may only act within the limits permitted by international law;

还必须以法律标准来评估国家施加影响的能力，因为很明显，每个国家仅可在国际法允许的限度内采取行动。

seen thus, a State’s capacity to influence may vary depending on its particular legal position vis-à-vis the situations and persons facing the danger, or the reality, of genocide.

例如，一国施加影响的能力，可能视其对面临灭绝种族危险的境况和个人或灭绝种族的现实情况所持的具体法律立场而不同。

On the other hand, it is irrelevant whether the State whose responsibility is in issue claims, or even proves, that even if it had employed all means reasonably at its disposal, they would not have sufficed to prevent the commission of genocide.

另一方面，涉及这种责任的国家会称，即便它采用了合理掌握的一切手段，也不足以防止灭绝种族罪的实施，但是否作出这种声称、甚至作出这种证明，都是不相干的。

As well as being generally difficult to prove, this is irrelevant to the breach of the obligation of conduct in question, the more so since the possibility remains that the combined efforts of several States, each complying with its obligation to prevent, might have achieved the result — averting the commission of genocide — which the efforts of only one State were insufficient to produce.

这一点除了通常难以证明外，对是否违反有关的行为义务来说是无关紧要的。 而且如果若干国家联合作出努力，每个国家都履行防止的义务，就可能达到仅凭一国之力难以产生的效果，也就是避免灭绝种族的发生。 要是考虑到这种可能性，有关国家是否如此声称就更是无关紧要。

At the same time, the Court maintained that “a State can be held responsible for breaching the obligation to prevent genocide only if genocide was actually committed”.

同时，法院认为，“只有灭绝种族实际发生时，才能追究有关国家违反防止灭绝种族义务的责任”。

(13) Third, and following from the above, the undertaking set forth in paragraph 1 of draft article 4 obliges States to pursue actively and in advance measures designed to help prevent the offence from occurring, such as by taking “effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other preventive measures in any territory under its jurisdiction”, as indicated in subparagraph (a).

(13) 第三，承上所述，第4条第1款草案规定的承诺使缔约国有义务积极推进并事先采取旨在帮助防止该罪行发生的措施，办法包括采取(a)项所述的“在其管辖的任何领土内采取有效的立法、行政、司法或其他预防措施”。

This text is inspired by article 2, paragraph 1, of the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which provides: “Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction”.

这一条文受到了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》第2条第1款的启发，该条款规定：“每一缔约国应采取有效的立法、行政、司法或其他措施，防止在其管辖的任何领土内出现酷刑的行为”。

(14) The term “other preventive measures” rather than just “other measures” is used to reinforce the point that the measures at issue in this clause relate solely to prevention.

(14) 使用“其他预防措施”这一用语，而不是仅仅用“其他措施”，是为了强化本条款的相关措施仅仅是为了预防这一点。

The term “effective” implies that the State is expected to keep the measures that it has taken under review and, if they are deficient, to improve them through more effective measures.

“有效”一词意味着国家应保持其已经采取的相关措施，并在这些措施有缺陷的情况下应通过更有效的措施加以改进。

In commenting on the analogous provision in the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Committee against Torture has stated:

禁止酷刑委员会在关于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》所载类似条款的意见中说：

States parties are obligated to eliminate any legal or other obstacles that impede the eradication of torture and ill-treatment; and to take positive effective measures to ensure that such conduct and any recurrences thereof are effectively prevented.

缔约国有义务消除任何阻碍根除酷刑和虐待的法律或其他障碍，并有义务采取积极有效措施，确保有效防止此类行为的发生和重演。

States parties also have the obligation continually to keep under review and improve their national laws and performance under the Convention in accordance with the Committee’s concluding observations and views adopted on individual communications.

缔约国还有义务不断审查其本国法律和执行《公约》的情况，并按照委员会就个别来文通过的意见和结论性意见加以改进。

If the measures adopted by the State Party fail to accomplish the purpose of eradicating acts of torture, the Convention requires that they be revised and/or that new, more effective measures be adopted.

如果缔约国采取的措施未能实现杜绝酷刑行为这一目标，则按照《公约》的要求，缔约国须作出改进和/或采取新的、更为有效的措施。

(15) As to the specific types of measures that shall be pursued by a State, in 2015 the Human Rights Council adopted a resolution on the prevention of genocide that provides some insights into the kinds of measures that are expected in fulfilment of article I of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

(15) 至于国家应努力采取哪些具体类别的措施，人权理事会于2015年通过了一份关于防止种族灭绝的决议，使得人们能够有所了解为履行1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》第一条而应采取何种措施。

Among other things, the resolution: (a) reiterated “the responsibility of each individual State to protect its population from genocide, which entails the prevention of such a crime, including incitement to it, through appropriate and necessary means”;

该决议：(a) 重申“每个国家都有责任通过适当和必要的手段保护其人民免遭种族灭绝，这意味着要防止此种罪行，包括防止煽动灭绝种族”；

(b) encouraged “Member States to build their capacity to prevent genocide through the development of individual expertise and the creation of appropriate offices within Governments to strengthen the work on prevention”;

(b) 鼓励“会员国通过培养个人专门技能和在政府内部设立适当单位加强预防工作，建立防止灭绝种族罪的能力”；

and (c) encouraged “States to consider the appointment of focal points on the prevention of genocide, who could cooperate and exchange information and best practices among themselves and with the Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide, relevant United Nations bodies and with regional and subregional mechanisms”.

(c) 鼓励“各国考虑指定关于防止灭绝种族罪的协调中心，以便在相互间并与秘书长防止灭绝种族问题特别顾问、联合国有关机构及区域和次区域机制进行合作并交流信息和最佳做法”。

(16) In the regional context, the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms contains no express obligation to “prevent” violations of the Convention, but the European Court of Human Rights has construed article 2, paragraph 1 (on the right to life), to contain such an obligation and to require that appropriate measures of prevention be taken, such as “putting in place an appropriate legal and administrative framework to deter the commission of offences against the person, backed up by law-enforcement machinery for the prevention, suppression and punishment of breaches of such provisions”.

(16) 从区域方面看，1950年《欧洲保护人权与基本自由公约》 没有规定“防止”违反该《公约》的行为的明确义务，但欧洲人权法院将已作出解释，(关于生命权的)第2条第1款含有这一义务，并要求采取适当的防止措施，例如“订立适当的法律和行政框架来阻遏危害人身的罪行的发生，通过执法机关预防、打击及处罚违反此类条款的行为”。

At the same time, the Court has recognized that the State party’s obligation in this regard is limited.

同时，法院确认缔约国在这方面的义务是有限的。

Likewise, although the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights contains no express obligation to “prevent” violations of the Convention, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, when construing the obligation of the States parties to “ensure” the free and full exercise of the rights recognized by the Convention, has found that this obligation implies a “duty to prevent”, which in turn requires the State party to pursue certain steps.

同样，虽然1969年《美洲人权公约》 未载有“防止”违反该《公约》的明确义务，但美洲人权法院在解释缔约国应“确保”该《公约》认可的各项权利得到自由且充分的行使的义务 时认定，这一义务意味着缔约国有“预防的职责”，而这又要求缔约国采取某些步骤。

The Court has said:

法院说：

This duty to prevent includes all those means of a legal, political, administrative and cultural nature that promote the protection of human rights and ensure that any violations are considered and treated as illegal acts, which, as such, may lead to the punishment of those responsible and the obligation to indemnify the victims for damages.

这一预防职责包括采取一切法律、政治、行政和文化手段，促进保护人权，确保任何侵犯行为均被视为非法行为，并当作非法行为来处理，因而可能导致对负责任者加以处罚，并产生对损害的受害者提供补偿的义务。

It is not possible to make a detailed list of all such measures, since they vary with the law and the conditions of each State Party.

此类措施不可能详细列出，因为它们因每个缔约国的法律和情况的不同而存在差异。

Similar reasoning has animated the Court’s approach to interpretation of article 6 of the 1985 Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture.

法院也是依据类似的推理对1985年《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》第6条作出了解释。

(17) Thus, the specific preventive measures that any given State shall pursue with respect to crimes against humanity will depend on the context and risks at issue for that State with respect to these offenses.

(17) 因此，任何具体国家对危害人类罪应采取的具体预防措施取决于这些犯罪行为对该国构成的相关背景和风险。

Such an obligation usually would oblige the State at least to: (a) adopt national laws and policies as necessary to establish awareness of the criminality of the act and to promote early detection of any risk of its commission;

这一义务通常要求国家至少：(a) 制定必要的国家法律和政策，培养人们对此类行为犯罪性质的认识，促使提早发现此类行为发生的风险；

(b) continually to keep those laws and policies under review and as necessary improve them;

(b) 不断审查这些法律和政策并作出必要改进；

(c) pursue initiatives that educate governmental officials as to the State’s obligations under the draft articles;

(c) 就相关条约制度下国家的义务对政府官员进行教育；

(d) implement training programmes for police, military, militia and other relevant personnel as necessary to help prevent the commission of crimes against humanity;

(d) 对警察、军队、民兵和其他相关人员开展必要的培训项目，从而帮助预防危害人类罪的发生；

and (e) once the proscribed act is committed, fulfil in good faith any other obligations to investigate and either prosecute or extradite offenders, since doing so serves, in part, to deter future acts by others.

(e) 一旦违禁行为发生，即本着诚意履行关于调查并起诉或引渡行为人的其他义务，因为这样做在一定程度上可以遏制他人今后的行为。

Some measures, such as training programmes, may already exist in the State to help prevent wrongful acts (such as murder, torture or rape) that relate to crimes against humanity.

某些措施，例如培训计划等，可能在该国已经存在，用以防止与危害人类罪有关的不法行为(诸如谋杀、酷刑、强奸等)。

The State is obligated to supplement those measures, as necessary, specifically to prevent crimes against humanity.

该国有义务视必要对那些措施加以补充，专门防止危害人类罪的发生。

Here, too, international responsibility of the State arises if the State has failed to use its best efforts to organize the governmental and administrative apparatus, as necessary and appropriate, in order to prevent as far as possible crimes against humanity.

在这里，如果缔约国没有视需要和情况尽最大努力动用政府和行政机器尽量防止危害人类罪的发生，也会产生国家的国际责任。

(18) Subparagraph (a) of paragraph 1 of draft article 4, refers to a State pursuing effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other preventive measures “in any territory under its jurisdiction”.

(18) 第4条第1款(a)项草案提到国家应“在其管辖的任何领土内”采取有效的立法、行政、司法或其他预防措施。

Such a formulation covers the territory of a State, but also covers activities carried out in other territory under the State’s jurisdiction.

这种表述方式不仅涵盖一国的领土，也涵盖在该国管辖下的其他领土上开展的活动。

As the Commission has previously explained,

委员会以前是这样解释的：

it covers situations in which a State is exercising de facto jurisdiction, even though it lacks jurisdiction de jure, such as in cases of unlawful intervention, occupation and unlawful annexation.

这涵盖一国即便没有法律上的管辖权但却行使事实上的管辖权的情况，例如非法干涉、占领和非法吞并。

Reference may be made, in this respect, to the advisory opinion by [the International Court of Justice] in the Namibia case.

在这一方面可以参照国际法院在纳米比亚案中提出的咨询意见。

In that advisory opinion, the Court, after holding South Africa responsible for having created and maintained a situation which the Court declared illegal and finding South Africa under an obligation to withdraw its administration from Namibia, nevertheless attached certain legal consequences to the de facto control of South Africa over Namibia.

在这份咨询意见中，法院判定南非对于产生并维持被法院宣布为非法的一种状况应负责任，并认定南非有义务从纳米比亚撤销其政府，但仍认为南非对纳米比亚的事实上的控制产生了某些法律后果。

(19) Fourth, by the undertaking set forth in paragraph 1 of draft article 4, States have an obligation to pursue certain forms of cooperation, not just with each other but also with organizations, such as the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

(19) 第四，国家做出第4条第1款草案规定的承诺，便有义务彼此间以及与联合国、红十字国际委员会和红十字会与红新月会国际联合会等组织开展某些形式的合作。

The duty of States to cooperate in the prevention of crimes against humanity arises, in the first instance, from Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, which indicates that one of the purposes of the Charter is to “achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of … [a] humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all”.

各国合作防止危害人类罪的义务第一次出现在《联合国宪章》第一条第三款中：《宪章》的宗旨之一是“促成国际合作，以解决国际间属于…人类福利性质之国际问题，且增进并激励对于全体人类之人权及基本自由之尊重”。

Further, in Articles 55 and 56 of the Charter, all Members of the United Nations pledge “to take joint and separate action in cooperation with the Organization for the achievement of” certain purposes, including “universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all”.

此外，在《宪章》第五十五和第五十六条中，联合国所有会员国担允“采取共同及个别行动与本组织合作，以达成”某些宗旨，包括“全体人类之人权及基本自由之普遍尊重与遵守”。

Specifically with respect to preventing crimes against humanity, the General Assembly of the United Nations recognized in its 1973 Principles of International Cooperation in the Detection, Arrest, Extradition and Punishment of Persons Guilty of War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity a general responsibility for inter-State cooperation and intra-State action to prevent the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

在具体防止危害人类罪的方面，联合国大会在1973年《关于侦察、逮捕、引渡和惩治战争罪犯和危害人类罪犯的国际合作原则》中承认，为了防止实施战争罪和危害人类罪而应开展国家间合作、采取国家间行动的一般义务。

Among other things, the Assembly declared that “States shall co-operate with each other on a bilateral and multilateral basis with a view to halting and preventing war crimes and crimes against humanity, and shall take the domestic and international measures necessary for that purpose”.

除其他事项外，大会宣布“各国应在双边和多边基础上相互合作，以期制止并防止战争罪和危害人类罪，并为此目的，采取必要的国内和国际措施”。

(20) Consequently, subparagraph (b) of paragraph 1 of draft article 4 indicates that States shall cooperate with each other to prevent crimes against humanity and cooperate with relevant intergovernmental organizations.

(20) 因此，第4条第1款(b)项草案写明各国应互相合作防止危害人类罪，并与有关政府间组织合作。

The term “relevant” is intended to indicate that cooperation with any particular intergovernmental organization will depend, among other things, on the organization’s functions, on the relationship of the State to that organization, and on the context in which the need for cooperation arises.

“有关”一词意在表明与任何特定政府间组织的合作将取决于该组织的职能、国家与该组织的关系、需要开展合作的背景，等等。

Further, subparagraph (b) provides that States shall cooperate, as appropriate, with other organizations.

(b)项还规定各国应酌情与其他组织合作。

These organizations include non-governmental organizations that could play an important role in the prevention of crimes against humanity in specific countries.

这些组织包括可以在具体国家防止危害人类罪中发挥重要作用的非政府组织。

The term “as appropriate” is used to indicate that the obligation of cooperation, in addition to being contextual in nature, does not extend to these organizations to the same extent as it does to States and relevant intergovernmental organizations.

使用“酌情”一词是为了表明合作义务在本质上取决于具体情况，而且对这些组织的适用程度不同于对国家和相关政府间组织的适用程度。

(21) Draft article 4, paragraph 2, indicates that no exceptional circumstances may be invoked as a justification for the offence.

(21) 第4条第2款草案写明，任何情况均不得用来作为危害人类罪的辩护理由。

This text is inspired by article 2, paragraph 2, of the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, but has been refined to fit better in the context of crimes against humanity.

这段文字受到了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》第2条第2款的启发， 但有所微调，以便更好地切合危害人类罪的上下文。

The expression “state of war or threat of war” has been replaced by the expression “armed conflict,” as was done in draft article 2.

如第2条草案一样，用“武装冲突”一语取代了“战争状态或战争威胁”的表述。

In addition, the words “such as” are used to stress that the examples given are not meant to be exhaustive.

另外，用“诸如”一词是为了强调所举例子并非详尽无遗。

(22) Comparable language may be found in other treaties addressing serious crimes at the global or regional level.

(22) 在全球或区域层面处理严重罪行的其他条约中可以找到相似的语言。

For example, article 1, paragraph 2, of the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance contains similar language, as does article 5 of the 1985 Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture.

例如，2006年《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》第一条第二款，以及1985年《美洲防止和惩处酷刑公约》第5条 都载有类似语言。

(23) One advantage of this formulation with respect to crimes against humanity is that it is drafted in a manner that can speak to the conduct of either State or non-State actors.

(23) 在危害人类罪方面用这种表述方式的好处之一是，这种写法既可以指向国家行为方的行为，也可以指向非国家行为方的行为。

At the same time, the paragraph is addressing this issue only in the context of the obligation of prevention and not, for example, in the context of possible defences by an individual in a criminal proceeding or other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility.

同时，本款处理这一问题所联系的仅是预防的义务，而不是刑事诉讼中个人可用的辩护理由或是其他排除刑事责任的理由等。

Article 5

第5条

Non-refoulement

不推回

1. No State shall expel, return (refouler), surrender or extradite a person to territory under the jurisdiction of another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to a crime against humanity.

1. 如有充分理由相信任何人在另一国管辖领土内将有遭受危害人类罪的危险，则任何国家不得将该人驱逐、遣返(推回)、移交或引渡至该国。

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations, including, where applicable, the existence in the territory under the jurisdiction of the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights or of serious violations of international humanitarian law.

2. 为了确定这种理由是否存在，主管当局应考虑到所有有关因素，包括在适当情况下考虑到在有关国家管辖的领土内是否存在一贯严重、公然或大规模侵犯人权行为或严重违反国际人道主义法的情况。

Commentary

评注

(1) Consistent with the broad objective of prevention addressed in draft article 4, draft article 5, paragraph 1, provides that no State shall send a person to territory under the jurisdiction of another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that such person would be in danger of being subjected to a crime against humanity.

(1) 根据第4条草案所述的广泛预防目标，第5条草案第1款规定，如有充分理由相信任何人在另一国管辖领土内将有遭受危害人类罪的危险，则任何国家不得将该人送至该国。

Thus, this provision uses the principle of non-refoulement to prevent persons in certain circumstances from being exposed to crimes against humanity.

因此，这一规定利用不推回原则来防止个人在某些情形下遭受危害人类罪。

(2) As a general matter, the principle of non-refoulement obligates a State not to return a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she will be in danger of persecution or some other specified harm.

(2) 总的来说，不推回原则要求一国在有充分理由相信任何人在另一国将有可能遭到迫害或其他特定伤害的情况下，不得将该人遣返至该国。

The principle was incorporated in various treaties during the twentieth century, including the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, but is most commonly associated with international refugee law and, in particular, article 33 of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.

此项原则在二十世纪已写入多项条约，包括1949年《日内瓦第四公约》， 但在大多数情况下则列入了国际难民法，特别是1951年《关于难民地位的公约》第三十三条。

Other conventions and instruments addressing refugees have also incorporated the principle, such as the 1969 Organization of African Unity Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa.

其他涉及难民的公约和文书 也列入了这项原则，如1969年《非洲统一组织关于非洲难民问题特定方面的公约》。

(3) The principle also has been applied with respect to all aliens (not just refugees) in various instruments and treaties, such as the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights and the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

(3) 在各种文书 和条约中，这项原则也被适用于所有外国人(不仅是难民)，如1969年《美洲人权公约》 和1981年《非洲人权和人民权利宪章》。

Indeed, the principle was addressed in this broader sense in the Commission’s 2014 draft articles on the expulsion of aliens.

事实上，委员会2014年关于驱逐外国人的条款草案就在这种更广泛的意义上述及该原则。

The Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights have construed the prohibition against torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, contained in article 7 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 3 of the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms respectively, as implicitly imposing an obligation of non-refoulement even though these conventions contain no such express obligation.

人权事务委员会和欧洲人权法院将分别载于1966年《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第七条 和1950年《欧洲保护人权与基本自由公约》第3条 的禁止酷刑和残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇的规定解释为含蓄地提到不推回义务，尽管这两个公约未并明确规定此项义务。

Further, the principle of non-refoulement is often reflected in extradition treaties, by stating that nothing in the treaty shall be interpreted as imposing an obligation to extradite an alleged offender if the requested State party has substantial grounds for believing the request has been made to persecute the alleged offender on specified grounds.

此外，不推回原则还经常被列入引渡条约，其中指出，如果被请求缔约国有充分理由认为提出引渡请求的目的是以特定理由对被指控罪犯实施迫害，则条约中的任何内容均不得理解为规定了引渡被指控罪犯的义务。

Draft article 13, paragraph 9, of the present draft articles is a provision of this type.

本条款草案的第13条草案第9款就属于这类规定。

(4) Of particular relevance for the present draft articles, the principle has been incorporated in treaties addressing particular crimes, such as torture and enforced disappearance.

(4) 与本条款草案特别相关的是，这项原则载于涉及特定罪行，如酷刑和强迫失踪的条约。

For example, article 3 of the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment provides:

例如，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》第3条规定：

1. No State Party shall expel, return (refouler) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

1. 如有充分理由相信任何人在另一国家将有遭受酷刑的危险，任何缔约国不得将该人驱逐、遣返(推回)或引渡至该国。

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations, including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

2. 为了确定这种理由是否存在，有关当局应考虑到所有有关的因素，包括在适当情况下，考虑到在有关国家境内是否存在一贯严重、公然或大规模侵犯人权的情况。

(5) This provision was modelled on the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, but added the additional element of “extradition” to cover another possible means by which a person is physically transferred to another State.

(5) 该条款仿照了1951年《关于难民地位的公约》，但增加了“引渡”内容，以涵盖将某人移送至另一国家的另一可能方式。

Similarly, article 16 of the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance provides that:

同样，2006年《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》第十六条规定：

1. No State Party shall expel, return (“refouler”), surrender or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to enforced disappearance.

一、如果有充分理由相信，将某人驱逐、送返(“驱回”)、移交或引渡到另一国家，有造成此人遭受强迫失踪的危险，任何缔约国均不得采取上述行动。

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations, including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights or of serious violations of international humanitarian law.

二、为确定是否存在这种理由，主管当局应斟酌一切有关因素，包括在适用的情况下，考虑有关国家是否存在一贯严重、公然或大规模侵犯人权或严重违反国际人道主义法的情况。

(6) The Commission deemed it appropriate to model draft article 5 after this latter provision.

(6) 委员会认为第5条草案宜仿照后一条款。

While, as in earlier conventions, the State’s obligation under draft article 5, paragraph 1, is focused on avoiding exposure of a person to crimes against humanity, this provision is without prejudice to other obligations of non-refoulement upon the State arising from treaties or customary international law.

尽管如以前的公约那样，第5条草案第1款规定的国家义务重在使个人免遭危害人类罪，但这一规定不妨碍该国根据条约或习惯国际法承担的其他不推回义务。

(7) Draft article 5, paragraph 1, provides that the State shall not send the person to another State “where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger” of being subjected to a crime against humanity.

(7) 第5条草案第1款规定，“如有充分理由相信任何人将有”遭受危害人类罪的“危险”，则该国不得将该人送往另一国。

This standard has been addressed by various expert treaty bodies and by international courts.

许多专家条约机构和国际法院都讨论过这一标准。

For example, the Committee against Torture, in considering communications alleging that a State has violated article 3 of the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, has stated that “substantial grounds” exist whenever the risk of torture is personal, present, foreseeable and real.

例如，禁止酷刑委员会在审议指称一国违反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》第3条的来文时指出，只要遭受酷刑的风险是针对个人的、现实存在的、可预见的和真实的，即有“充分理由”。

In determining whether such a risk exists, the risk of torture must be assessed on grounds that “go beyond mere theory or suspicion”, although “the risk does not have to meet the test of being highly probable”.

在确定是否有这种风险时，对酷刑风险的评估“必须基于超越理论或怀疑”的依据，尽管“风险并不需要有很大可能”。

(8) In guidance to States, the Human Rights Committee has indicated that a State has an obligation “not to extradite, deport, expel or otherwise remove a person from their territory, where there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk of irreparable harm, such as that contemplated by articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant, either in the country to which removal is to be effected or in any country to which the person may subsequently be removed”.

(8) 人权事务委员会在对各国的指导意见中指出，“如果有重大理由相信，在实施驱赶的国家或者有关人士可能最终被赶往的国家之中确实存在《公约》第六条和第七条所设想的那种会造成不可弥补伤害的风险”，一国“有义务不采取引渡、驱逐出境或者其他手段将有关人士逐出其国境。

In interpreting this standard, the Human Rights Committee has concluded that States must refrain from exposing individuals to a real risk of violations of their rights under the Covenant, as a “necessary and foreseeable consequence” of expulsion.

” 在解释这一标准时，人权事务委员会认为，各国不得因驱逐的“必然和可预见的后果”而给个人造成其根据《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》享有的权利可能受到侵犯的实际风险。

It has further maintained that the existence of such a real risk must be decided “in the light of the information that was known, or ought to have been known” to the State party’s authorities at the time and does not require “proof of actual torture having subsequently occurred although information as to subsequent events is relevant to the assessment of initial risk”.

委员会还认为，必须“参考缔约国当局在引渡时已知或应知资料”，判定是否存在这种实际风险，但不需要“提供证据证明随后发生的实际酷刑，尽管关于随后事件的资料关系到初始风险评估。”

(9) The European Court of Human Rights has found that a State’s obligation is engaged where there are substantial grounds for believing that an individual would face a real risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to article 3 of the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

(9) 欧洲人权法院认定，如果有充分理由相信一个人将面临有违1950年《欧洲保护人权与基本自由公约》第3条的待遇的实际风险，则国家有义务不予推回。

In applying this legal test, States must examine the “foreseeable consequences” of sending an individual to the receiving country.

在适用这种法律标准时，各国必须审查将个人送到接受国的“可预见的后果”。

While a “mere possibility” of ill-treatment is not sufficient, it is not necessary to show that subjection to ill-treatment is “more likely than not”.

虽然“仅有”虐待的“可能性”还不够，但无需证明虐待达到“很有可能”的程度。

The European Court of Human Rights has stressed that the examination of evidence of a real risk must be “rigorous”.

欧洲人权法院强调指出，必须“严格”审查实际风险的证据。

Further, and similarly to the Human Rights Committee, the evidence of the risk “must be assessed primarily with reference to those facts which were known or ought to have been known to the Contracting State at the time of the expulsion”, though regard can be had to information that comes to light subsequently.

此外，与人权事务委员会的观点相类似，该法院认为在“评估”相关风险的证据时“必须主要看缔约国在驱逐出境时已知或应该已知的事实”， 但也要顾及此后了解到的情况。

(10) Draft article 5, paragraph 2, provides that States shall take into account “all relevant considerations” when determining whether there are substantial grounds for the purposes of paragraph 1.

(10) 第5条草案第2款规定，在为第1款的目的确定是否有充足理由时，各国应考虑到“所有有关因素”。

Such considerations include, but are not limited to, “the existence in the territory under the jurisdiction of the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights or of serious violations of international humanitarian law”.

这些因素包括但不限于“在有关国家境内是否存在一贯严重、公然或大规模侵犯人权行为或严重违反国际人道主义法的情况”。

Indeed, various considerations may be relevant.

事实上，很多因素可能都具有相关性。

When interpreting the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Human Rights Committee has stated that all relevant factors should be considered, and that “[t]he existence of assurances, their content and the existence and implementation of enforcement mechanisms are all elements which are relevant to the overall determination of whether, in fact, a real risk of proscribed ill-treatment existed”.

人权事务委员会在解释1966年《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》时指出，“保证的存在和内容以及执行机制的存在和实施都是相关因素，关系到总体判定事实上是否存在发生被禁止的虐待行为的切实风险”。

The Committee against Torture has developed, for the purposes of the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, a non-exhaustive list of seven elements that need to be assessed in each individual case by a State party when determining if return is permissible.

为了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》的目的，禁止酷刑委员会列出了缔约国在判断可否遣返时需逐案分别考虑的非详尽无遗的清单，其中包含七项内容。

(11) The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees contains exceptions to the non-refoulement obligation to allow return where the person has committed a crime or presented a serious security risk.

(11) 1951年《关于难民地位的公约》载有不推回义务的例外情况，以允许遣返实施犯罪或造成严重安全风险的个人。

Treaties since that time, however, have not included such exceptions, treating the obligation as absolute in nature.

但此后订立的条约并不包含此类例外情况，从而将不推回义务视为一项绝对义务。

The Commission deemed it appropriate for draft article 5 to contain no such exception.

委员会认为第5条草案不包含这种例外是适当的。

Article 6

第6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，如果未对在其实际指挥和控制下的部队，或在其实际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;

(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；

and (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：